The Memo Release Thread

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: introvert

It was stated that the Dossier was not used in the application for warrants.

I think you misunderstood... or please explain what I'm misunderstanding.

The article states that the dossier "formed an essential part" of all the FISA applications, but its political origins were "excluded" from the FISA applications.

Can you quote the exact part you are referring to?

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: introvert

It was stated that the Dossier was not used in the application for warrants.

I think you misunderstood... or please explain what I'm misunderstanding.

The article states that the dossier "formed an essential part" of all the FISA applications, but its political origins were "excluded" from the FISA applications.

Can you quote the exact part you are referring to?

application that is known by the government. In the case of Carter Page, the government had at least four independent opportunities before the FISC to accurately provide an accounting of the relevant facts. However, our findings indicate that, as described below, material and relevant information was omitted.
1) The "dossier" compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application. Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign, via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS, to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump's ties to Russia.
a) Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role Of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele' s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.
b) The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a U.S. law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOJ at the time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier). The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of—and paid by—the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.
2) The Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016, Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff, which focuses on Page's July 2016 trip to Moscow.

This article does corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information

leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News. The Page FISA application incorrectly assesses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News. Steele has admitted in British court filings that he met with Yahoo News—and several other outlets—in September 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS. Perkins Coie was aware of Steele's initial media contacts because they hosted at least one meeting in Washington D.C. in 2016 with Steele and Fusion GPS where this matter was discussed.
a) Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations—an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jones article by David Corn. Steele should have been terminated for his previous undisclosed contacts with
Yahoo and Other outlets in September—before the Page application was submitted to
UNCLASSIFIED
PROPERTY OF THE U. s. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Maybe that part???

a reply to: introvert

Can you quote the exact part you are referring to?

Sure. From the article, the first asterisk:

The Steele dossier formed an essential part of the initial and all three renewal FISA applications against Carter Page.

And the fifth asterisk:

The political origins of the Steele dossier were known to senior DOJ and FBI officials, but excluded from the FISA applications.

From the memo itself, point number 1, first sentence:

The "dossier" compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application.

And point 1.a:

Neither the initial application of October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton Campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele's efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.

(Bolding by me)

a reply to: DBCowboy


Nope, but it looks baaaaad for Page. After all, they reauthorized three times and each time the FBI would have been forced to show his wire was producing intelligence.

a reply to: GuidedKill


Here's a handful of crazy for you.

They renewed his FISA warrant three times. In order to do that they have to demonstrate that the wire is producing something actionable under FISA.

If they weren't getting actionable intelligence from Page's wire, why did the judge authorize a three renewals?

And why would a GOP controlled congress just reauthorize FISA in December with ZERO substantitive changes to the legislation?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Democrats were saying that the memo would damage national security.

Anyone see how yet?

It puts the FISA warrant process under the microscope and exposes it for what it is and how it's abused? It does not put national security at risk, it puts politicians and their cronies at risk.

The other side will just claim it's lies and replace it with lies of their own. The dog and pony show continues on the nightly news. Nothing will ever come of this. It's permanent election season.

a reply to: Blaine91555


We got to see how Soylent Green was made, but many are still saying it's not made from people.


I hope like hell that careers are ruined. I hope like hell that the elite bastards that play these games and try to BS us get hurt.

Is it wrong of me to think that way?

Probably. But I don't care.

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
a reply to: GuidedKill


Here's a handful of crazy for you.

They renewed his FISA warrant three times. In order to do that they have to demonstrate that the wire is producing something actionable under FISA.

If they weren't getting actionable intelligence from Page's wire, why did the judge authorize a three renewals?

And why would a GOP controlled congress just reauthorize FISA in December with ZERO substantitive changes to the legislation?

Very interesting and relevant questions.

a reply to: Boadicea

The memo does not state specifically that the dossier was used to get the warrants. It says it played an "essential part", but it does not state how.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Boadicea

The memo does not state specifically that the dossier was used to get the warrants. It says it played an "essential part", but it does not state how.

Here's another reference to Steele as a source, from item 1.b in the memo:

...The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person...

Obviously, the information being provided by Steele -- ultimately dubbed the "Steele dossier" but not officially called that in the FISA applications -- was in fact used to get the warrants.

If you cannot read the text of the memo for some reason, I understand your confusion based on media reports. But I really hope you're not just playing semantics and other games...

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Boadicea

The memo does not state specifically that the dossier was used to get the warrants. It says it played an "essential part", but it does not state how.

So essential that they were denied the warrant until they used the dossier.

originally posted by: Boadicea
"...The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person...".

Not to digress from your point...but I wonder if this "named U.S. person" was the name that was edited out...

Anyone know whose name should be there?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Boadicea

The memo does not state specifically that the dossier was used to get the warrants. It says it played an "essential part", but it does not state how.

And per the usual...we get vague words that anyone can seize on:

essential (adjective): absolutely necessary; extremely important

Was it absolutely necessary or just extremely important? They know they are playing games with us...acting like they are giving us something but giving us nothing at all.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I know I've had my fill of the propaganda from both sides. The corruption on both sides is so deep it's reached the Earth's Core.

This memo and the counter memo will lead to nothing. It's just more sleight of hand. Look at the memo and please don't notice it has no substance and just keep hating each other for our political futures benefit. ...and so we don't have to actually fix anything

The American Civil Liberties Union, a critic of the FISA court’s lack of transparency, charged that Nunes was wrapping a political argument in claims of civil liberties abuse. “The completeness and accuracy of government representations to the FISA court are longstanding concerns,” Christopher Anders, deputy director of ACLU’s Washington Legislative Office, said in a statement. “The Nunes memo makes serious charges of FBI and Justice Department misconduct in obtaining a warrant to surveil an American citizen, but on its own, does not contain the facts needed to substantiate its charges.”

Anders added: “Rather than one side or the other cherry-picking facts, all Americans deserve to see all of the facts, including both the minority report and the underlying documents. The goal should be more transparency, not less, particularly when a congressional committee chairman makes serious charges of abuse but does not provide the facts to either prove the charges or allow Americans to make up our own minds.”

Trump has not induced trust to any reasonable degree in anything he has ever done or said or attached himself to.

Therefore, it was not hard to predict the dud that this memo was.

source

a reply to: Boadicea

Obviously, the information being provided by Steele -- ultimately dubbed the "Steele dossier" but not officially called that in the FISA applications -- was in fact used to get the warrants.

That sourced quote does not prove the dossier was used to get the warrant.

If you cannot read the text of the memo for some reason, I understand your confusion based on media reports. But I really hope you're not just playing semantics and other games...

I can read it just fine. The problem, as I stated earlier, is that it does not say what many think it says. It only creates more questions than answers.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Boadicea

The memo does not state specifically that the dossier was used to get the warrants. It says it played an "essential part", but it does not state how.

So essential that they were denied the warrant until they used the dossier.

That is not what I take from it.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Boadicea

The memo does not state specifically that the dossier was used to get the warrants. It says it played an "essential part", but it does not state how.

And per the usual...we get vague words that anyone can seize on:

essential (adjective): absolutely necessary; extremely important

Was it absolutely necessary or just extremely important? They know they are playing games with us...acting like they are giving us something but giving us nothing at all.

As I said, more questions than answers. This memo is a dud, other than the GOP had the opportunity to make several points crystal clear, but they did not.

I wonder why.

a reply to: Blaine91555

Do you know what this whole process has done?

It has made me distrust everything from the FBI, Justice Department, even the White House.

I will never look at the FBI the same way again.

They are just a political arm of government. They are no different than any other political department.



All of this just shows me that we've lived with the American version of the Gestapo/KGB for quite some time and that it's not going to ever change.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Sometimes it feels that way.

I don't think confidence, trust, respect, whatever you want to call it will ever be restored back into the American psyche until we see someone BIG in handcuffs doing a perp walk beside someone in a jacket with F B I letters on it.

BHO, HRC, JC, SR, JC, JB, LL, (I can think of several more).