If the Invesvestigation of Trump was so expansive because of Papadopolus, it is a disgrace

Now with the memo coming out, Democrats have seized on the portion that shows that the FBI was looking in to George Papdopolous before the dossier was used to get a fisa warrant to spy on Carter Page.

This is being touted as busting the narrative the dossier was used as the start of the investigation, and therefore the memo is a non issue.

First I will say that regardless of what started the investigation, if the fbi engaged in wrong doing to spy on people that were in trumps team, it is an enormous scandal as I have outlined here.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But lets forget about that.

I want to focus on how I think it is also scandalous that the massive investigation into trump/russia, that has spanned well over a year, and been used to smear trump nearly 24/7 on most Main stream news outlets, and lead to calls of his impeachment and other serious suggestions, was started based of a a periphery guy like Papadololous getting drunk and telling an Australian that a Russian said the had dirty emails on Hillary.

I will also then try to show that in fact despite the investigation into Papdopolous occuring beforre the dossier, due to the fact that nothing in that story accused trump of any quid pro quo to release these emails, or any trump illegal dealings at all with Russia, that it was not the impetus for all of the trump russia hysteria, and instead it was the dossier that led to the first known claims of trump stealing the election with russia that has lead to all of the outrage.

PAPADOPOLOUS, THE STORY

For starters, let me link the NYT story that first broke the story of George Papadopolous (GP).

www.nytimes.com... &action=keypress®ion=FixedLeft&pgtype=article

I encourage everyone ot read it to make sure I am not misrepresenting it.

Here is the story in a nut shell.

GP was a young guy on trumps team for a couple of months. He goes to italy, meets some Maltese professor that says he will put him on contact with russians.

He gets in contact with them, they say they are glad trump appears softer on russia. GP lets trumps team know russia wants to contact him. Trump lets sessions deal with it, sessions says he doesnt want GP doing it because basically he is a lightweight.

GP still contacts russians. Eventually Stephen Miller has GP write stories of trumps positions, but he makes a fool of himself and is looked down upon by the Trump team.

Now here is the important part.

In April 2016, GP meets with the original professor, who tells him that " he had just learned from high-level Russian officials in Moscow that the Russians had “dirt” on Mrs. Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails,”.

The next month, GP gets drunk with an Australian diplomat, tells him about these emails.

Two months later, wikileaks releases the hacked Podesta emails. At some point after this, the Australians reach ot to the FBI and tell them about the drunken conversation, and the investigation is opened.

...continued below...

OK thats the story.

Now here is why using this for the vast trump russia investigation is absurd.

#1 as even the times admits,

The emails obtained by The Times show no evidence that Mr. Papadopoulos discussed the stolen messages with the campaign.

In other words, there is no proof yet shown that anyone else in trumps campaign even knew about this conversation about emails.

#2 There is no indication given whatsoever that there was ever a suggestion of a quid pro quo. In order for a crime to have been committed by trumps team, they would have had to encouraged the russians to release the hacked emails, or paid the for it, etc.

In fact, there is not even the suggestion that GP ever even met with any russian claiming to have emails; just a Professor in italy that didnt work for the russians spreading gossip.

If GP hearing about the Russians having dirt on Hillary warrants such a massive investigation, then Steele relaying that the Russians had dirt on Trump to the DNC and Hillary team should also warrant an investigation.

#3 The Times makes a big deal out of the fact that GP heard about tthese emails BEFORE the wikileaks leaks of Podestas and the DNC's emails. To them, this shows Russia did hack those, and these were the same emails being discussed with GP.

However, notice the professor doesnt mention Podestas or the DNC's emails. He merely says that have dirty emails on hillary.

Now keep in mind, ever since Hillary having the server in her house came public, people were theorizing that it may have been compromised by foriegn governments.

If a person was trying to sound important and make up claims about having dirt in hillary, the first thing they would say is they had incriminating emails, because everyone knew of Hillarys insecure server.

Are we really to believe that an Italian professor talking to a periphery guy on trumps campaign about nebulous emails warranted the massive year and a half and still going investigation that has dominated Trumps Presidency thus far?

It is ludicrous.

#4 This is a far less important point. But keep in mind, the agent that started the investigation into GP and trump russia was Strzok, the same guy that wanted an insurance policy against Trump, who later admitted he didnt think there was any there there of trump russia collusion.


Now think about the implications of this for a moment.

Are we really ready to grind every presidency to a halt for FBI investigations anytime some random guy tells a cmapaign employee that another country has dirt on their opponent, and then some dirt gets released?

The implications of this are astounding.

Should there also be an investigation into alex jones many, many others that claimed well before wikileaks that russia probably hacked Hillarys unsecure server?

...continued below (please wait for me to finish before responding)...

a reply to: Grambler

There needs to be large scale investigation into the entire Dem party and RINOs

Once that's done we'll really start to get into the interesting stuff as to who this secret society is that essentially owns all these politicians

On to pushing the next BS theory since your memo meme lost it's traction eh.
So sad!
First it was "unlawful unmasking" then the "dossier" lately the "memo" now we're on to "Papadumbass".

The FISA Warrants (there were multiple) were granted on evidence obtained from multiple sources.

Papadumbass+Dossier+SIGINT intercepts =Legal FISA Warrants

K~

I think this sums up the past year pretty nicely. Nowhere closer to the carrot but we keep chasing it for some reason. Every time a new development comes up another one knocks it down again. Wash, rinse and repeat.

I'm almost positive this memo ordeal will be no different. I'll gladly eat those words if something is done that changes anything.

Now here is what is relevant in regards to the memo.

Many people, including many dems, are saying that because GP was used to start the investigation, it shows the dossier was not a big deal.

But this is ridiculous.

First as said on my first post, even if that is the case, it does not excuse potential wrong doing by the FBI using the dossier to get warrants to spy on people that were on trumps team.

But more importantly than that, the hysteria about trump is that he colluded with russia to steal the election.

No where in the GP story is that mentioned.

In fact, the first mentioning of that we see is, you guessed it, in the dossier!

So in fact it was the dossier, and its release to the press, that has lead to all of the hysteria about trump that has dominated his Presidency.

It was the dossier that apparently was used in the FBI wiretapping and spying of people on trumps team, not the GP story.

The GP story wasnt enough to gin up the anger that was necessary to stymie the trump campaign, and wasnt made public.

But the dossier, it was given to the media, details of trump being briefed on it were leaked by the intel community, and so forth.

And that was all that was needed to get the media and dems in a frenzy that trumped worked with russia to steal the election.

The GP story achieved ABSOLUTELY NONE OF THIS!

... continued below...

So in conclusion.

The russia investigation expanding to the massive size that it has based on the GP story is ridiculous.

Further more, the objection to the memo that the dossier and fisa warrant into page are not important, because the investigation was under way with GP is not an answer.

The dossier and fisa warrant not page was the impetus for not only spying on people that were trump team members, but also the public outrage about trump russia collusion, and therefore it is an enormous deal if that warrant was obtained by shady means.

In addition, there is a good chance that seeing as how the GP investigation had not lead to a public outcry, that the page fisa warrant dossier debacle was in fact the start of trump being accused of working with russia to steal the election.

Therefore it is of the upmost importance that any wrong doing by the FBI regarding the fisa application for Page or the use of the dossier be made public and investigated.

originally posted by: aethertek
On to pushing the next BS theory since your memo meme lost it's traction eh.
So sad!
First it was "unlawful unmasking" then the "dossier" lately the "memo" now we're on to "Papadumbass".

The FISA Warrants (there were multiple) were granted on evidence obtained from multiple sources.

Papadumbass+Dossier+SIGINT intercepts =Legal FISA Warrants

K~

I am not pushing a new theory.

In attempts to downplay the memo, people have brought up that the GP situation started the trump russia investigation, therefore the memo is not a big deal.

This thread is answering that.

originally posted by: TritonTaranis
a reply to: Grambler
Once that's done we'll really start to get into the interesting stuff as to who this secret society is that essentially owns all these politicians

I can give you some hints, who this secret societ is.

Hint #1) 13 of the 39 signatures on the U.S. Constitution belong to members of this "Secret Society".
Hint #2) They are organized geographically with the same borders as each and every state, aligned with political borders.
Hint #3) They planned and designed the whole of Washington D.C. buildings, roads, etc..
Hint #4) They have "Constitutions" just like the U.S. and states have "Constitutions" that lay out their law and order.
Hint #5) They have a "Grand Lodge" in every state, where all secret activities are planned.
Hint #6) Everybody knows who they are, but nobody can prove they are involved in anything but "Charities".
Hint #7) They pledge allegiance to each other and the goals of their order come first.
Hint #8) Any member revealing their secrets will have his tongue cut out, heart ripped from chest, and be disemboweled.

I could give more hints, but it wouldn't matter anyway.

They are the "untouchables" of the land.

Also of note, remember that wikileaks released an internal poll in June 26, 2015 form hillarys team by Pete Brodnitz that showed Hillarys biggest vulnerability was her signing off on the Uranium One deal with russians and her foundation getting money from russians.

Start at 21:12.



The video also shows that the hilllary team decided in a wikileak emailed on 12/21/2015 that there best strategy was to smear trump for his bromance with Putin.

The we have the book "shattered", which shows within a dat of hillary losing the election, her team decided to push the trump russia collusion story.

Exhibit A is the book “Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign,” by Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes. In light of this week’s revelation that Hillary’s campaign funded the dirty anti-Trump “Steele” dossier, the book takes on a new significance. It reveals:

“Within 24 hours of her concession speech, [campaign chair John Podesta and manager Robby Mook] assembled her communications team at the Brooklyn headquarters to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up. For a couple of hours, with Shake Shack containers littering the room, they went over the script they would pitch to the press and the public. Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.”

The plan, according to the book, was to push journalists to cover how “Russian hacking was the major unreported story of the campaign,” and it succeeded to a fare-thee-well. After the election, coverage of the Russian “collusion” story was relentless, and it helped pressure investigations and hearings on Capitol Hill and even the naming of a special counsel, which in turn has triggered virtually nonstop coverage.

A new Media Research Center study finds that, since the inauguration, major TV news networks have devoted an astonishing 1,000 minutes out of a total 5,015 minutes of Trump administration coverage discussing speculation that the Trump campaign may have colluded with Moscow in hacking Clinton campaign emails, “which means the Russia story alone has comprised almost one-fifth of all Trump news this year.” In contrast, they so far have devoted just 20 seconds to the more substantive scandal of Hillary and her husband possibly trading US uranium rights for Russian cash.

nypost.com...

Isnt it odd then that the same MSM that were her cheerleader, that helped her steal the election from Bernie, ended up following her plan to the T?

Isnt it odd, that the same agents that praised hillary, that gave out immunity deals like candy to her team, that didnt charge mills and Abedin for lying to the FBI, that smashed computers of hillary team at her request, that was sending texts praising her and discussing insurance policies against a Trump presidency, that were paying the very same contractor hillarys team was to get dirt on trump, that was leaking details of their investigation of trump, followed hillarys teams plan to a T?

The investigation is, and always has been, nothing but a fishing expedition to try and "catch" someone in Trump's orbit on some sort of technicality, and by extension, try to discredit Trump himself. It's a sad state of affairs when you stop and think about it.

a reply to: Grambler

But more importantly than that, the hysteria about trump is that he colluded with russia to steal the election.

No where in the GP story is that mentioned.

In fact, the first mentioning of that we see is, you guessed it, in the dossier!

That's not correct. First off, the "hysteria about Trump is that he colluded with Russia" statement is inaccurate. I've probably posted more about both Trump and the Russian interference in the election than anyone else on ATS. As you know, I have repeatedly expressed the opinion that I don't believe Trump personally colluded with the Russians.

You're wrong about when the speculation about the possibility of collusion began too. It wasn't an instantaneous thing, it was people choking on all the smoke and noticing Trump's behavior regarding Putin, his policy positions regarding Russia, his campaign forcing the RNC to change its platform, the DNC and DCCC hacks, the Podesta phishing, etc.

The questions have been being asked pretty much since Manafort took over and everything went all Russian-y with the election.


Trump's opposition research firm: Russia's intelligence agencies (LA Times - July 25, 2016)

The Russians have every reason to sabotage the Democratic candidate. Her opponent, Donald Trump, is more pro-Russia than any previous presidential candidate. As far back as 2007, Trump was telling CNN that Russian President Vladimir Putin was doing a "great job." In 2013, Trump tweeted: "Do you think Putin will be going to The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow - if so, will he become my new best friend?" In 2015, Trump told MSNBC that Putin was a real leader, "unlike what we have in this country," and that reports of Putin killing political opponents didn't bother him — "Well, I think our country does plenty of killing also," he said.

Trump repeatedly says he would "get along very well with" Putin. In return Putin has praised Trump as "bright and talented." Trump positively glows as he repeats reports that "Putin likes me."

The Trump-Russia links beneath the surface are even more extensive, as Franklin Foer has shown in Slate. Trump has sought and received funding from Russian investors for his business ventures, especially after most American banks stopped lending to him following his multiple bankruptcies. Trump's de facto campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was a longtime consultant to Viktor Yanukovich, the Russian-backed president of Ukraine who was overthrown in 2014. Manafort also has done multimillion-dollar business deals with Russian oligarchs.

Trump's foreign policy advisor Carter Page has his own business ties to the state-controlled Russian oil giant Gazprom. He recently delivered a speech in Moscow slamming the United States for its "hypocritical focus on ideas such as democratization" and praising Russia for a foreign policy supposedly built on "noninterference," "tolerance" and "respect." (Try telling that to Ukraine.) Another Trump foreign policy advisor, retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, flew to Moscow last year to attend a gala banquet celebrating Russia Today, the Kremlin's propaganda channel, and was seated at the head table near Putin. Flynn is a regular guest on Russia Today; he refuses to say whether he gets paid.

Donald Trump and Russia: a web that grows more tangled all the time (Guardian - July 30, 2016)

Mermoud has longstanding ties to Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, who in 2010 helped pro-Russia Viktor Yanukovych refashion his image and win a presidential election in Ukraine. Manafort was brought in earlier this year to oversee the convention operations and its staffing.

Three sources at the convention also told the Guardian that they saw Philip Griffin, a long-time aide to Manafort in Kiev, working with the foreign dignitaries programme.

“After years of working in the Ukraine for Paul and others, it was surprising to run into Phil working at the convention,” one said.

In fact, questions about what might be up were using the term "collusion" in July:

Jim Lewis, a senior vice-president and programme director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, noted that Russians had hacked into the DNC and its Republican counterpart in 2008 and 2012, but those hacks were not leaked.

“The difference this time is the leak,” he said. “We can say with some certainty that it’s Russian hacking, but we should be cautious about saying they were behind the leak.”

Direct collusion with the Trump campaign is probably not happening, Lewis said. “Let’s say you’re working with someone in the Trump campaign. How do you communicate with them? I think it’s unlikely given the practical difficulties.”

Joseph Schmitz, a foreign policy adviser to Trump, denied there was any direct relationship between the campaign and the Kremlin.

“We had to negotiate with Joseph Stalin when we had a common enemy called Hitler,” he said. “Bill Clinton went on vacation in Russia when he was a Rhodes scholar. That’s a fact. If anyone is in bed with Russia, it’s the Clintons.”

a reply to: AMPTAH

I hate to be "that guy", but the roots of this go much deeper than freemasonry.

The Rothschilds themselves pull more strings than freemasonry ever could. And clearly they were behind at least the Clintons, if not many more of the corrupt chitheads involved with this attempted coup.

a reply to: theantediluvian

But as you know, the claims that Trump himself worked with russia to steal the election did not really surface until after the election, or at least the week of it, when the mother jones story about the dossier broke.

That is also when leaks from the intel community about the investigation began to take off.

There is no doubt that at the very least the GP story was not responsible at all for the the media and public outcry of Trump russia collusion.

So the implication that the emmo shows that the GP story started the investigation therefore the dossier isnt important is absurd.

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: TritonTaranis
a reply to: Grambler
Once that's done we'll really start to get into the interesting stuff as to who this secret society is that essentially owns all these politicians

I can give you some hints, who this secret societ is.

Hint #1) 13 of the 39 signatures on the U.S. Constitution belong to members of this "Secret Society".
Hint #2) They are organized geographically with the same borders as each and every state, aligned with political borders.
Hint #3) They planned and designed the whole of Washington D.C. buildings, roads, etc..
Hint #4) They have "Constitutions" just like the U.S. and states have "Constitutions" that lay out their law and order.
Hint #5) They have a "Grand Lodge" in every state, where all secret activities are planned.
Hint #6) Everybody knows who they are, but nobody can prove they are involved in anything but "Charities".
Hint #7) They pledge allegiance to each other and the goals of their order come first.
Hint #8) Any member revealing their secrets will have his tongue cut out, heart ripped from chest, and be disemboweled.

I could give more hints, but it wouldn't matter anyway.

They are the "untouchables" of the land.

Good post, I agree completely. Unfortunately this line of thinking is typically downplayed on ATS, if not outright ridiculed. Seems curious, no?

a reply to: Grambler

Here's some more. As you can see, the term "collusion" and the possibility of collusion were being discussed while Manafort was still running the campaign:

Clinton aide claims Russians hacked DNC to help Trump (Washington Examiner - Jul 24, 2016)

"I think that what's troubling is how he praised Vladimir Putin," Mook said about Trump's remarks during his convention speech Thursday night. "It's troubling how last week he said NATO should not protect Eastern Europe allies."

Trump Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort and Donald Trump jr. vigorously denied any kind of collusion between Trump Sr. and the Russian president.

Right in the titles of news stories:

'It's absurd': Trump campaign manager dismisses suggestions Trump colluded with Putin on DNC hack (Business Insider - July 24, 2016)

Donald Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort said Sunday morning that suggestions the Manhattan billionaire colluded with Russian President Vladimir Putin in the hack of Democratic National Committee emails were baseless.

“No,” Manafort said on ABC’s “This Week," when asked if the campaign had ties to Putin.

He added: “It’s absurd. There’s no basis for it.”

In fact, if I'm not mistaken it was in response to the initially speculation that Trump asked the Russians to "find" HRC's missing emails and publish them.

rump Asks Russia to Dig Up Hillary’s Emails in Unprecedented Remarks (Wired - July 27, 2016)

Donald Trump's schadenfreude in the DNC's embarrassing email leak is standard practice in America's messy electoral politics. Today, though, his casual request that Russian hackers dig up Hillary Clinton's emails—sent while she was U.S. Secretary of State—for his own political gain has sparked a new level of outrage among cybersecurity experts.

As the controversy continues to swirl around a likely-Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee, Trump responded to a reporter's question at a press conference Wednesday by inviting Russia to do him another favor: collect and leak the emails that Clinton deleted from the private server she ran during her time as Secretary of State. "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you'll be rewarded mightily by our press," he said. He later circled back to the same theme, telling reporters that "If Russia or China or any other country has those emails, to be honest with you, I’d love to see them."

This was all later in July, weeks after Carter Page's much-publicized trip to Moscow. Here's one from the Free Beacon who was you'll recall was Fusion GPS's original client.

Trump Adviser’s Links to Russia on Display During Moscow Trip (Free Beacon - July 11, 2016)

Page is not the only Trump adviser who has been scrutinized for his friendliness toward Russia. Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign manager, has extensive ties to Russian interests. Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, a former Defense Intelligence Agency chief who favors closer U.S.-Russia relations, is also advising Trump on foreign policy.

Flynn has emerged as a possible vice presidential pick for Trump, Politico reported Friday.

And as you can see, there's Manafort's name again. There's Flynn too.

George Will raises possible Trump link to Russian oligarchs (The Hill - July 26, 2016)

Fox News contributor George Will says GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump will not release his tax returns because they may show "he is deeply involved in dealing with Russia oligarchs."

How Vladimir Putin Is Using Donald Trump to Advance Russia's Goals (Newsweek - August 29, 2016)

Not since the beginning of the Cold War has a U.S. politician been as fervently pro-Russian as Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Here's a rather lengthy article about Carter Page from the August.

Trump adviser’s public comments, ties to Moscow stir unease in both parties (WaPo - August 5, 2016)

In early June, a little-known adviser to Donald Trump stunned a gathering of high-powered Washington foreign policy experts meeting with the visiting prime minister of India, going off topic with effusive praise for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Trump.

The adviser, Carter Page, hailed Putin as stronger and more reliable than President Obama, according to three people who were present at the closed-door meeting at Blair House — and then touted the positive effect a Trump presidency would have on U.S.-Russia relations.

A month later, Page dumbfounded foreign policy experts again by giving another speech harshly critical of U.S. policy — this time in Moscow.

Things really heated up after the DNC hack, particularly with Trump's behavior and statements making people say, "wtf" and Carter Pages trip to Moscow and the fact that Manafort was running things. But it's been a thing on off going back to the end of 2015 when Putin started talking flatteringly of Trump.

Putin praises 'bright and talented' Trump (CNN - Dec 17, 2015)

Donald Trump has said that he would "get along very well" with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The feeling is apparently mutual.

Putin offered high praise for the billionaire businessman-turned-Republican presidential front-runner on Thursday during an annual news conference with reporters.

"He is a bright and talented person without any doubt," Putin said, adding that Trump is "an outstanding and talented personality."

And in remarks closely mirroring Trump's assessment of the campaign, the Russian leader called Trump "the absolute leader of the presidential race," according to the Russian TASS news agency.

Putin Endorses Donald Trump For President (BuzzFeed - Dec 17, 2015)

a reply to: theantediluvian

But again, none of this has anything to do with GP, and the talk of an investigation into trump about russia collusion wasnt until the dossier stories came out.

That is why Hillary supporters screamed that the fbi didnt announce and investigation of Trump before the election.

The dossier was the lynch pin for the original public outcry about the fbi investigation into trump, as the GP story wasn't even public knowledge until basically the Mueller indictment of him was released.

Again, my point is merely that the claims downplaying the memo that the GP story was the start of the investigation is irrelevant, as even your posts are showing.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: theantediluvian

But again, none of this has anything to do with GP, and the talk of an investigation into trump about russia collusion wasnt until the dossier stories came out.

That is why Hillary supporters screamed that the fbi didnt announce and investigation of Trump before the election.

The dossier was the lynch pin for the original public outcry about the fbi investigation into trump, as the GP story wasn't even public knowledge until basically the Mueller indictment of him was released.

Again, my point is merely that the claims downplaying the memo that the GP story was the start of the investigation is irrelevant, as even your posts are showing.

What judge would issue a warrant on 3rd hand rumors?

Maybe that's why they were turned down the first time.

a reply to: Grambler

But again, none of this has anything to do with GP, and the talk of an investigation into trump about russia collusion wasnt until the dossier stories came out.

I'm not really sure what you're getting at. The links show that lots of people were speculating about the possibility of collusion between Trump/his team and Russia as far back as July, using the word "collusion."

That doesn't have anything to do with the either Papadopoulos or the dossier which didn't exist yet and the media wouldn't see for a few more months. So if you're trying to claim that the dossier is responsible for people asking about/accusing Trump/his campaign of collusion, that's impossible unless there's a time machine in the mix.

There were two articles following the Simpson/Steele meeting with the media that resulted in stories. The David Korn story in Mother Jones on October 31st and a Michael Isikoff article in Yahoo News about a month earlier. They were the first indication that there was an FBI investigation though the Isikoff article wasn't really about the contents of the dossier.

U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump adviser and Kremlin

U.S. intelligence officials are seeking to determine whether an American businessman identified by Donald Trump as one of his foreign policy advisers has opened up private communications with senior Russian officials — including talks about the possible lifting of economic sanctions if the Republican nominee becomes president, according to multiple sources who have been briefed on the issue.

The activities of Trump adviser Carter Page, who has extensive business interests in Russia, have been discussed with senior members of Congress during recent briefings about suspected efforts by Moscow to influence the presidential election, the sources said. After one of those briefings, Senate minority leader Harry Reid wrote FBI Director James Comey, citing reports of meetings between a Trump adviser (a reference to Page) and “high ranking sanctioned individuals” in Moscow over the summer as evidence of “significant and disturbing ties” between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin that needed to be investigated by the bureau.

A senior U.S. law enforcement official did not dispute that characterization when asked for comment by Yahoo News. “It’s on our radar screen,” said the official about Page’s contacts with Russian officials. “It’s being looked at.”

The claim in the memo is that the above article was extensively cited in the FISA app to corroborate the dossier. I don't even see how that makes sense. It's literally an article about how Carter Page's name is coming up in congressional briefings about the dossier.

Again, the claim is that the Isikoff article is based on the dossier and that the FISA app extensively cites it to corroborate the dossier. You'd think the article would be discussing the contents of the dossier but it's not really. It's about how they're looking into Page and how Harry Reid wrote James Comey and is asking that the FBI look into it. I don't see anything in here that could be cited to corroborate the contents of the dossier.

I'm wondering if Nunes didn't mischaracterize how it was cited. I dunno. That's another thread. Maybe the minority memo will shed light on that.

Anyway, back to the topic. I was just about to post a big NY Times piece from August about Manafort, questioning his continued ties to the Kremlin but I think I see what you're getting at so I don't think I need to.

You're basically saying that the dossier directly led to calls for investigations from Dem politicians. This is actually something that has been brought up before. I read about it a couple months ago on some right-wing media site or another. I can maybe track down the link.

What it boils down to though is actually mentioned in the Isikoff article. Harry Reid sent a letter to Comey on Aug 27th which you can read here.

After a preamble, it first mentions Roger Stone's yammering about having connections to WikiLeaks. I missed it at the time but I wrote a thread in October when he said it again. (in between is when he made his "Podestas time in the barrel" comment on Twitter) This was published Aug 9:

Roger Stone Claims He’s In Touch With Wikileaks’ Assange About Clinton Emails

During a Monday speech to the Southwest Broward Republican Organization, Stone was asked for his “forecast” on what the “October surprise” Wikileaks founder Julian Assange had promised to reveal about Clinton may be.

“Well, it could be any number of things,” Stone said, according to video of his remarks obtained by Media Matters. “I actually have communicated with Assange. I believe the next tranche of his documents pertain to the Clinton Foundation but there’s no telling what the October surprise may be.”

Roger Stone has a big f'ing mouth. (an he just met with Assange in the last week btw)

Then in the last paragraph, it does make reference to Page (not by name). This line is what is pointed to make your point:

"For example, questions have been raised about whether a Trump advisor who has been highly critical of U.S. and European economic sanctions on Russia, and who has conflicts of interest due to investments in Russian energy conglomerate Gazprom, met with high-ranking sanctioned individuals while in Moscow in July of 2016"

This *could* be a reference to something that originated with Steele. The relevant memo from Steele is dated July 25th or 26th. Did this turn up in an intelligence briefing of congressmen between? However, I actually made a similar statement in a thread in September. And I certainly didn't get a congressional briefing.

Who Is Carter Page And How Did He Come To Work For Trump's Campaign?

Some of you will have no doubt heard of Carter Page by now. He is the Trump advisor who has been flying to Moscow to have meetings with sanctioned Russian officials. These officials that he's been meeting with are sanctioned by the US and EU over the Russia/Ukraine "dispute."

So what was *my* source? It was a Heat Street article. Heat Street was a Rupert Murdoch thing and it has been closed down since the but here's the archived copy of the article on Archive.is (next post)

a reply to: Grambler

So here's where I read about it first.

EXCLUSIVE: Trump Aide Carter Page Slammed America During A Moscow Speech (
By Masha Froliak, August 3, 2016)

After his lecture, many journalists questioned Page over whether Donald Trump would lift the sanctions if elected President, but Page refused to answer– claiming he came to Russia as a “private person.”

But when asked by one of the journalists whether he was planning to see any “private persons” in the Kremlin, Donald Trump’s adviser said “no comment.”

However, it is known that Trump’s official met with the Deputy Prime Minister of Russia, Arkady Dvorkovich. Many Russian media sources speculated that other meetings must have taken place behind the closed doors.

It is for Donald Trump to answer about shady meetings with Russia’s government–and why his close adviser was slamming America and democracy, while praising Putin, in Russia last month, before the Russian-sponsored hack of the DNC files to hurt Hillary Clinton.

This has a link to a Russian media site which got me checking Russian language sites for more. I can't find the link, but there was one that seemed to be a fairly anti-Putin outlet and it basically said that there were rumors that he'd met with sanctioned individuals while in Moscow. This would have been around the same time the Heat St article was written and the article as I remember was written within a day or two of the Moscow speech. It was definitely contemporaneous. It may have been Aleksandr Dugin who was responsible for Page's Moscow speech being broadcast on TV and is a fan of Page. He's sanctioned.

At any rate, it couldn't have referenced the Reid letter because that was 3-4 weeks later. So there was speculation.

Another real possibility is that there was intel from some other source that Page had met with sanctioned individuals. It's anyone's guess. It doesn't really match up with the claims to the dossier in any specificity though. Gut feeling? Probably not Steele-related but it's not impossible.

The letter is certainly worth a read. It never actually mentions Trump himself. In fact, it reads as though Reid is implying that Trump's campaign has possibly been hijacked by new staffers who are in league with the Kremlin. Which is kinda true when you think about the period between Manafort's entrance and Page's exit.

So in summation. We know the Dems started calling for an investigation into potential ties between the Trump campaign and the Russians in late August. So your initial hypothesis about October is invalid on that point.

It is at least possible that intel that later ended up in the dossier played a role in Dems calling for the investigations in August.