House intel shows clapper leaked dossier details to cnn, comey briefing to trump was setup

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: luthier

If only thread was about the player and not the ball.....

Balls like guns require a player

So talking about one without the other is disengenuous.

Except for those pesky T&C's.

a reply to: Grambler

I apologize. My hatred for nunes comes from his passing of surveillance laws time and time again. He is of course on the Intel committee. Silly me assumed that meant he provides over sight not a rubber stamp.

So when he talks about these abuses by the deep state. I am very careful to give the guy credit.

He is literally over many years one of the reasons the Intel community is emboldened and robust in terms of its power over us citizens.

The man voted all the way through Obama for more and power to the Brennan's, which makes them feel like gods.


Anyhow. That is my point. If that makes sense I am done arguing. If not let me explain why you may want to question intent.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Grambler

I apologize. My hatred for nunes comes from his passing of surveillance laws time and time again. He is of course on the Intel committee. Silly me assumed that meant he provides over sight not a rubber stamp.

So when he talks about these abuses by the deep state. I am very careful to give the guy credit.

He is literally over many years one of the reasons the Intel community is emboldened and robust in terms of its power over us citizens.

The man voted all the way through Obama for more and power to the Brennan's, which makes them feel like gods.


Anyhow. That is my point. If that makes sense I am done arguing. If not let me explain why you may want to question intent.

Your hatred for nunes should extend to quite a few folks. Amd i support your reason 100%

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: luthier

If only thread was about the player and not the ball.....

Balls like guns require a player

So talking about one without the other is disengenuous.

Except for those pesky T&C's.

Ahh..

I see..


Power corrupts absolutely I guess.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Grambler

I apologize. My hatred for nunes comes from his passing of surveillance laws time and time again. He is of course on the Intel committee. Silly me assumed that meant he provides over sight not a rubber stamp.

So when he talks about these abuses by the deep state. I am very careful to give the guy credit.

He is literally over many years one of the reasons the Intel community is emboldened and robust in terms of its power over us citizens.

The man voted all the way through Obama for more and power to the Brennan's, which makes them feel like gods.


Anyhow. That is my point. If that makes sense I am done arguing. If not let me explain why you may want to question intent.

Your hatred for nunes should extend to quite a few folks. Amd i support your reason 100%

It does. However I thought I was supposed to stay on topic. This post was about his committee release and questioning that intent. We all know what the Intel communities do. They killed a guy in the 60's, it didn't get better....but to focus on names alone is pointless. It's how they vote. And how we vote.

They don't line up. They vote for things we don't ask them to.

originally posted by: GuidedKill
a reply to: Grambler

a reply to: Grambler

First off glad of you to finally admit comey said clapper told him to brief trump. I mean, you have been commenting on this story for a week and had no idea of that, so good job!

To be fair, I only posted in that thread once, it was 4/20 (and that's all I'm saying about that) and as you might be able to tell from my post, I thought the thread was about Comey leaking his memos to get a SC appointed.

I didn't do an exhaustive search but a cursory one didn't turn up any other sources for Clapper suggesting (Clapper couldn't *tell* Comey to do anything) the briefing of Trump on the dossier except the video.

I'm a little burned out on this topic already and I'm abandoning the point-by-point (and skipping a post) but while I was feasting on cheap tacos, I had a had a few minutes to mull this over.

It seems to me that there's really no way for anyone to win this debate given the facts. Before I explain, I can't help but address this from your next post:

The details are not important to the OP, the fact that he discussed it and lied about it is.

Again, by your own standards here, a lot of Team Trump is guilty af.

Anyway, as I was saying, there's no definitively proving anything either way unless we use your standard of "he reportedly lied therefore he's guilty of anything and everything, case closed."

As Comey said in another of his memos (Jan 28th):

At about this point, he turned to what he called the "golden showers thing" and recounted much of what he had said previously on that topic. He repeated that it was a complete fabrication and "fake news." I explained again why I had thought it important that he know about it. I also explained that one of the reasons we told him was that the media, CNN in particular, was telling as they were about to run with it. He said it bothered him if his wife thought there was even a one percent chance it was true in any respect.

This matches what I've heard from Comey in other interviews — he told Trump because he knew that that the media was going to start publishing about the dossier. He does himself mention CNN in particular. It's even possible that Clapper told him that CNN was just looking for something substantial as a "news hook" or something along those lines.

Aside from the fact that it cannot be proven who leaked to CNN about the briefing (a significant blank spot), without knowing what was said between Clapper and Tapper and Clapper and Comey, it's impossible to know anything about motivation, intention or forethought.

You assume that Clapper planned this all out. In that scenario, he either nudges Comey to brief Trump or recruits him into his plot, intending to later leak to Clapper that the briefing had occurred so that CNN would have a "hook" on which to be break the news about the dossier to the general public. You furthermore conclude (with prodding from two authors from DC and The Federalist I imagine) that the ultimate goal of this dastardly plot was to take down Trump.

I can't imagine that Clapper seriously believed that publishing the dossier would tank Trump. So I don't think that's a likely motivation. He just disliked Trump? Maybe. He was trying to get a job with CNN? Again, doesn't seem terribly likely. If you're the ex-DNI, any network would be more than happy to pay you as an "analyst." He didn't need to do *anything* to get that gig.

And how did that conversation go between Clapper and Tapper? "Jimmy, it's Jake. Yeah, just chillin' bro... but listen, I need you to do me a solid — as a fellow super anti-Trumper — I totally want to publish this story but I need a hook bro. Can you make that happen so we can carry out our evil agenda?" "Totes Jake, I'm on that #. Yo, can you get me a job?"

I'm being sarcastic (and this post is waaaay too long) but you get the drift I hope. Tapper would have had to make it clear to Clapper that he needed something additional to break the story with which seems like a serious ask for a reporter. I think it's easier to imagine for you because you assume that they are both motivated by wanting to "hurt Trump" (which is literally the goal of every conspiracy offered up by Trump supporters because "hurt Trump" is a generic, vague result).

Then Clapper would have to come up with leaking the briefing as being the perfect "news hook" for the job or did he plot that out with Tapper? If you were in that position is that the sort of thing that would occur to you to scheme up? Aren't there simpler means to the same ends with less moving parts? Here you just assume that "well if they briefed Trump, it must be legit" is something that "anti-Trumpers" would embrace to lend credibility to the dossier.

As a standalone story, it's certainly not overly sensational (Trump being briefed), I'm sure it wasn't in the top 200 of stories last year. Have ya seen the news cycle? Lol.

Now here's my scenario:

Jake Tapper and maybe a few others who have good sources, call up Clapper and whoever else they can and try to pry from them whatever information they can about whether the dossier is being verified, taken seriously — whatever.

At that point, Comey was still on good terms with Trump and probably expecting to continue serving. At that point, Dems are more pissed at him than Republicans and Trump has shown no signs of replacing him.

Clapper and Comey are talking before or after the briefing they had with Trump earlier with Rogers and Brennan. Probably afterwards because otherwise he could have briefed Trump right then with everyone there and made attributing the leak that much harder.

They're talking about how they're getting calls about the dossier and laughing about Moscow hookers and golden showers. Clapper says, "Jake Tapper has been blowing me up." Comey says,"ME TOO! OMG that guy." Clapper then says, "Maybe you should tell Trump before this # breaks and he replaces you because you let him get blindsided?"

Comey briefs Trump. Comey memorializes the details of the meetings in memos and tells a few of the FBI leadership about them. Does Comey tell other people at the FBI that he just briefed Trump? Does he confirm to Clapper that he did? If Comey was part of a plot to have this briefing for the purpose of leaking it to CNN, would he actually put a line like this in his memo?

"I also explained that one of the reasons we told him was that the media, CNN in particular, was telling as they were about to run with it."

If it weren't for the "news hook" bit in the first memo and this line, would this even be a theory? Back to the scenario:

Maybe Trump tells Bannon about the dossier briefing. Maybe he tells a couple other members of the inner circle. Like I said earlier, this administration is one of the leakiest ever. Trump takes phone calls with Fox News personalities on the line like Lou Dobbs.

Tapper is making his inquiries and somebody says, "I heard they told Trump about the dossier." Yadda yadda, they publish the story. Then BuzzFeed sees that it's starting to break and just drops a bomb to be the ones who did it.

How is that scenario not more plausible? What you're doing is letting confirmation bias keep you from considering equally likely and in fact, more plausible alternatives to the scenario that you are emotionally invested in believing.

continued in next post.

a reply to: luthier

No apology needed I took no offense

Plus I got to call you woke which is fun!

Yeah I too have called out all the resound like nunes that voted for surveillance powers

a reply to: luthier

i was contemplating the other day...

....nunes being the way he is about this...

...and the slush fund....

...it appears to me that the only thing that got any congressional movement was the need to bury the slush fund under a different scandal. And this whole farce has certainly done that.

a reply to: Grambler

At this point I was going to say, "Only Jake Tapper knows who told Jake Tapper about the briefing," but then I read the article in question. Have you by any chance read it?

First off, there are four reporters on the byline and Jake Tapper is last of 4 (By Evan Perez, Jim Sciutto, Jake Tapper and Carl Bernstein).

Are they all in on it or just Tapper? Worse yet, not only do we not actually know who leaked that the briefing had occurred — we don't know who that person leaked it to. Holy # for your "this is proof" if it turns out that it was some random blabbing to Evan Perez.

Then what would you make of all the rest of it? You'd have to see that at every junction, you made assumptions out of an abundance of bias that allowed you to string together a theory that was wrong.

Secondly, the reporting isn't exactly accurate:

The allegations were presented in a two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Well no, Brett Baier asked that directly and unless Comey flatly lied, there was no two-page synopsis.

Take notice that right after that, CNN straight up says that the dossier is not verified which doesn't seem to support the theory that CNN was trying to "hurt Trump" with the dossier.

The FBI is investigating the credibility and accuracy of these allegations, which are based primarily on information from Russian sources, but has not confirmed many essential details in the memos about Mr. Trump.

That's actually pretty straight reporting. The next part that is wrong is here:

The classified briefings last week were presented by four of the senior-most US intelligence chiefs

One reason the nation's intelligence chiefs took the extraordinary step of including the synopsis in the briefing documents was to make the President-elect aware that such allegations involving him are circulating among intelligence agencies, senior members of Congress and other government officials in Washington, multiple sources tell CNN.

Here they bring up this synopsis again and furthermore, they state that the dossier was included in briefings conducted by all four (Comey, Clapper, Rodgers, Brennan). That's entirely inaccurate. Trump was briefed by Comey alone with no document involved. Also note that the paragraph ends with "multiple sources tell CNN."

It's not just that they got it all wrong about this synopsis, they keep talking about it:

These senior intelligence officials also included the synopsis to demonstrate that Russia had compiled information potentially harmful to both political parties, but only released information damaging to Hillary Clinton and Democrats. This synopsis was not an official part of the report from the intelligence community case about Russian hacks, but some officials said it augmented the evidence that Moscow intended to harm Clinton's candidacy and help Trump's, several officials with knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.

Several officials knew about it? Then immediately after:

The two-page synopsis also included allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, according to two national security officials.

Two national security officials who were apparently wrong or lying. Either that or Comey is lying about the briefing and has been since immediately after it happened.

Notice that *nowhere* is it mentioned that the briefing was specifically about the "salacious details."

So the article gets all this wrong: who did the briefing, this two-page summary (why does the Majority memo point to this as a detail as something that points the leaking at Clapper?), and the entire content of the briefing.

In fact, this article doesn't actually indicate ANY knowledge of the actual briefing Comey did of Trump at all. From what's reported, they're saying the dossier briefing occurred as part of the earlier briefing conducted by the four IC chiefs and included a 2-page synopsis. The only reason this is getting tied to Comey is because it's known from his memos that he gave Trump a private briefing and discussed the pee pee tape.

Don't you find that strange? Still think it must have been Clapper?

Anyway, wrapping it all up:

You can't know motivation, intent or whether or not there was forethought unless you know what was communicated and you can't know what was communicated unless somebody tells you or there was some record of it. Absence this information, it's impossible to say which of the many possible scenarios is correct.

I think the scenario you favor is less probable than others that I can easily imagine.

You've also got the fact that the the CNN article doesn't line up well (at all) with your theory to contend with.

originally posted by: Grambler

Buried within a newly declassified congressional report on Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. elections is a shocking revelation: former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper not only leaked information about the infamous Steele dossier and high-level government briefings about it to CNN, he also may have lied to Congress about the matter.

In one of the findings within the 253-page report, the House intelligence committee wrote that Clapper leaked details of a dossier briefing given to then-President-elect Donald Trump to CNN’s Jake Tapper, lied to Congress about the leak, and was rewarded with a CNN contract a few months later.

“Clapper flatly denied ‘discussing[ing] the dossier [compiled by Steele] or any other intelligence related to Russia hacking of the 2016 election with journalists,'” the committee found.

...

The former DNI later changed his story after he was confronted specifically about his communications with Jake Tapper of CNN.

“Clapper subsequently acknowledged discussing the ‘dossier with CNN journalist Jake Tapper,’ and admitted that he might have spoken with other journalists about the same topic,” the report continued. “Clapper’s discussion with Tapper took place in early January 2017, around the time IC leaders briefed President Obama and President-elect Trump, on ‘the Christopher Steele information,’ a two-page summary of which was ‘enclosed in’ the highly-classified version of the ICA,” or intelligence community assessment.

...

The revelation that Clapper was responsible for leaking details of both the dossier and briefings to two presidents on the matter is significant, because former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) director James Comey wrote in one of four memos that he leaked that the briefing of Trump on salacious and unverified allegations from the dossier was necessary because “CNN had them and were looking for a news hook.”

The congressional report on Russian interference noted that it was this very briefing of Trump that multiple media organizations used as an excuse to publish the unverified dossier.

“The Committee assesses that leaks to CNN about the dossier were especially significant, since CNN’s report ‘ that a two-page synopsis of the report was given to President Obama and Trump’ was the proximate cause of BuzzFeed News’ decision to publish the dossier for the first time just a few hours later,” the report stated. “Until that point, the dossier had been ‘circulating among elected official, intelligence agents, and journalists,’ but remained unpublished. As the accompanying article explained, ‘[n]ow BuzzFeed News is publishing the full document so that Americans can make up their own minds about allegations about the president-elect that have circulated at the highest levels of government.”

thefederalist.com...

Uh ooh!!!!!!!!!!!!

Turns out clapper again lied to congress!

turns out that it seems that the entire briefing of trump by comey on the dossier was a setup to get the info out to outlets like CNN.

Start with this thread (that for some reason the anti trumpers seemed to ignore)

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So clapper tells cnn about the dossier and wants cnn to run the story on the dossier, he tells comey to brief trump on it, comey tells trump that cnn has the story but is just looking for a reason to run it, details of comeys breifing are leaked to cnn (no doubt by clapper), cnn then runs the story that clapper wanted all along using the fact the trump was briefed on it to give them legitimacy in running it.

This is proof that people at the highest level of the intel community were actively trying to bring down trump.

I am sure there will be silence again from the same people that ignored this story last week, even though we now have PROOF that clapper lied to congress, and did leak details of the dossier to Jake tapper.

And to read it yourself, here is the house intel document, the relevant part is on page 107 (117 of the pdf)

docs.house.gov...

I realize I'm late to this...but, damn, if it's not apparent that the idea of "Russian Collusion" was a nothing-burger from the beginning (beginning is relative -- if we are to assume that most of the facts that become public were well-known 3-6 weeks before by the investigators), it's more apparent that Trump et. al likely covered their asses (can't blame them, this was a vile, poisonous campaign) preemptively, and got caught up in some lies (read: their last arrow in 'obstruction'), which will be much like *'Slick Willy's' "what is, is..." equivocation. It's so sad because it's completely partisan. Ugh. GD, we -- as a nation -- can do so much better.

*A complete waste and an utter failure that was predicated on partisanship and several bad actors (e.g. Tom Delay [then], Adam Schiff [now]).

originally posted by: Fools
I am beginning to think that all of these individuals were so high on their power that they just totally let their guard down. If they are this dumb about this situation, how dumb are they about multitudes of others?

Very frightening.

As Q has said, they never expected her to lose...meaning they weren't covering their tracks while they committed crimes, even treason.

a reply to: shooterbrody

This has actually reached RICO territory if not worse...

Here's the thing though, no one is going to be prosecuted for this and we all know this.

Even if you're a Democrat I implore you to really take some time to think long and hard if you're really ok with what we're seeing happening here.

How cool would it be if someone did it to your guy?

This isn't about teams or party lines anymore people, really THINK about what you're seeing!

THIS IS NOT OK

It's about time that we show them that we are not amused... this or we can just lose this country to the rot.

It's really our choice.

originally posted by: Grambler
Here is another link on this story.

www.zerohedge.com...

Notice how clapper again denied this on a cnn interview with don lemon.

SO cnn not only did not disclsoe that clapper was their source, but then gave him a platform to spread what they knew were lies without questioning him.

And notice how at the bottom of this source it shows Jake tapper commenting on Clapprers claims baout the dossier, all the while ignoring that Tapper knew that it was clapper who leaked details of the dossier to him.

So the CNN and the higest levels of the of the intel community lying to take down the president.

where are all of the anti trumpers screaming for a special investigator into the itnel community now? When will clappers lawyer be raided?

If CNN makes a claim, however bizarre it may be, it is GOSPEL to the naive and easily distracted. They don't have the smarts or the will to do a bit of fact checking, that's why they watch CNN.

a reply to: Grambler

Of course they were trying to find anything they could on Trump, while the other side was doing it to HRC. US politics at its finest. A pile of steaming crap.

originally posted by: roguetechie
a reply to: shooterbrody

This has actually reached RICO territory if not worse...

Here's the thing though, no one is going to be prosecuted for this and we all know this.

Even if you're a Democrat I implore you to really take some time to think long and hard if you're really ok with what we're seeing happening here.

How cool would it be if someone did it to your guy?

This isn't about teams or party lines anymore people, really THINK about what you're seeing!

THIS IS NOT OK

It's about time that we show them that we are not amused... this or we can just lose this country to the rot.

It's really our choice.

i agree it is why i posted what i did

rico for all involved with "the insurance policy"

i couldnt make up the depths of corruption of the #resist #nevertrump people went to with tbe only justification being "its her turn".

if this is not stopped NOW it will be much much worse in 20
and it wont be the dems doing it
they can crap or get off the pot forever

a reply to: Grambler

If only the GOP owned all three branches of government. Then they could prosecute those who leak.

Now seriously, what will Trump do when the House and Senate go to the Democrats? Is it possible for one man to tweet and whine on Fox than Spanky does now?

a reply to: Grambler

Using that train of logic:

Unelected intel personnel work vigorously to sabotage an elected President because THEY feel he/she is a bad person.

StevenJames15, you would then be 100% ok with this exact scenario playing out if Clinton were president.

a reply to: Grambler

"House intel shows clapper leaked dossier details to cnn, comey briefing to trump was setup"

Crap like that has been going on since the dawn of the USA (Second Continental Congress on July 4, 1776). Every party in power did it and continues to do it. It's just that with Trump as POTUS the dirty little secrets are now being exposed to anyone that knows how to read, but more importantly cares about it. There is a certain segment of the population however that by only getting its news from that giant of truth CNN and other like minded news providers, negates the systems desire/need to cleanse itself.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks


I guess the opposite of that would be an unelected intel community giving someone they know is a criminal a pass.

Is that what you’re supporting? Or should they investigate the Trump admin if certain people are known to be dirty? Should everyone just pledge allegiance to Trump first and foremost?

Hahahaha!

Yeah if I am against the intel community acting to slander and remove an elected president, then clearly I must be for the intel community covering up for an elected official.

well clearly that is not the case.

Ironically it turns out that the same people cheering for intel community to leak and lie to congress and to smear a president are the same ones that cheered for them looking the other way in investogations into hillary.

Oh and anything to say on the OP?

You ok with clapper lying to congress and with him setting up thr briefing with trump to leak it to cnn to smear him?

I assume you are very angry about this, so I figure this will give you a chance to voice that.

Not a lot to be angry over. Lmao.

I just find it funny you obviously want to let unelected intel people give someone a pass on criminality because they’re the president. Or are you now saying that Trump should be investigated if the intelligence community knew something?

Just trying to get your views straight.

And here we have it folks!

I hope that everyone can see this.

No questions about the op, no denying that the sitting director of national intelligence and the sitting head of the fbi worked to set up trump to leak a classified briefing and details of the dossier to cnn to smear trump.

Just a claim that if I am somehow against this, then I must be for wanting the intel community to ignore crimes by trump.

This is the type of people that are anti trumpers.

They will totally cheer ignore or make excuses for the higher ups at the intel community trying to sabotage trump, because they dont like trump.

To respond to your accusation underwerks;

I would like the intel community and investigators to do their jobs no matter who is preisdent. That means if they are worried crimes are committed, they investigate them, not leak to cnn, then setup a breifing, then leak the detaikls of that briefing to cnn to smear trump, and then get a job at cnn and lie about it to congress.

I know that that must seem strange to you; what do you mean there are people that want the intel community to act legally and impartially no matter who is president?

But yes, there are those of us that dont want to weaponized the intel community to help our people and sabotage the others.

Such a radical opinion to an anti trumper!

This post should be stickied to the top of the forum, it's sad and so true.