FISA Memo

[critter]

I'm of the opinion that a secret court, doing secret shit in secret is highly illegal to begin with. I can't believe more people weren't in pitchfork toting uproar beginning with the Patriot Act. I really don't care as much about the memo as I would the underlying information. All of this "you regular people can't read it; it's classified" is a bunch of bull shit. "Classified" seems to be a vast category with too much potential for being used to cover up wrongdoing. Same with redactions.


Anyone care to speculate in advance on what you think will be uncovered? Personally I doubt anything we don't already suspect.

[JHC]

IF it really gets aired out I predict the FISA warrant will have been properly predicated from multiple sources to conduct a counter-intelligence investigation to see if the Russians may have dangerous influence with Trump or those close to him.

All just what we expect the FBI to do.

The rest is just politicians gaslighting America.

[blues]

FWIW, I will tell you that despite my years of federal service working cases which, (sometimes), included the use of classified material, when the Patriot Act was signed into law I sent a letter to then President Bush (as a private citizen) detailing my concerns regarding the potential pitfalls of the legislation as well as decrying equating something which endangered constitutional freedoms as "patriotic". (Orwell would have loved the new-speak.)

I've had occasion to require a FISA court ruling on a case of mine and I can't even begin to tell you the number and level of hoops involved.
It's a major headache.

Using these tools requires a judicious hand and an ability to walk the tightrope, imho.

[FNFAN]

I think it comes down to whether the FBI/Clinton dossier was used in drafting FISA applications for intercepting information or communication of American citizen AND whether it was known fictitious info at the time of the application(s).

[TGS]

I'm of the opinion that a secret court, doing secret shit in secret is highly illegal to begin with. I can't believe more people weren't in pitchfork toting uproar beginning with the Patriot Act. I really don't care as much about the memo as I would the underlying information. All of this "you regular people can't read it; it's classified" is a bunch of bull shit. "Classified" seems to be a vast category with too much potential for being used to cover up wrongdoing. Same with redactions.


The FISA court was established in 1978, way before the Patriot Act....so I'm not sure what that has to do with it.

There's lots of other classified material that you're not privy to, for good reason. You're also not privy to sealed court documents, either.

None of that means it's bullshit. There's good cause to have a classification system in place to limit the audience of certain information....that doesn't mean just the collected information itself, but also includes the collection methods, organizations, persons, and operations. I'm going to say something that I think is self-evident.......it'd be mighty hard to conduct a intelligence/CI operation without such information subject to classification.

[blues]

I think it comes down to whether the FBI/Clinton dossier was used in drafting FISA applications for intercepting information or communication of American citize AND whether it was known fictitious info at the time of the application(s).

If such turns out to be the case, heads will and should justifiably roll. There is no justification for the swearing of a false oath under the circumstances.

[critter]

FWIW, I will tell you that despite my years of federal service working cases which, (sometimes), included the use of classified material, when the Patriot Act was signed into law I sent a letter to then President Bush (as a private citizen) detailing my concerns regarding the potential pitfalls of the legislation as well as decrying equating something which endangered constitutional freedoms as "patriotic". (Orwell would have loved the new-speak.)

I've had occasion to require a FISA court ruling on a case of mine and I can't even begin to tell you the number and level of hoops involved.
It's a major headache.

Using these tools requires a judicious hand and an ability to walk the tightrope, imho.

Orwellian is an apt description... as are some others, e.g., "Liberty Act".. digressing. That's good to know - that it's not the rubber stamp as sometimes portrayed. Therein lies the problem with secret .. "shut up, citizen peon, we know what we're doing and of course, you don't need to know about it" doesn't really cut it in a free society with accountable government. Concerning the Patriot Act, I did the same... quite adamantly. I never heard back from anyone at any level.

[critter]

The FISA court was established in 1978, way before the Patriot Act....so I'm not sure what that has to do with it.

There's lots of other classified material that you're not privy to, for good reason. You're also not privy to sealed court documents, either.

None of that means it's bullshit. There's good cause to have a classification system in place to limit the audience of certain information....that doesn't mean just the collected information itself, but also includes the collection methods, organizations, persons, and operations. I'm going to say something that I think is self-evident.......it'd be mighty hard to conduct a intelligence/CI operation without such information subject to classification.

Well, I was oblivious in 1978 as most teens are. I lived under assumptions at that time. Hell, I didn't understand how money was created until I was almost 30. I mention the Patriot Act because it is something that was written ahead of time, just lying in wait for the "new Pearl Harbor" as detailed in the Northwoods document (if memory serves edit: memory doesn't serve. Northwoods was the document from the 60's detailing possible false flag attacks.. I'll have to re-search to find the "new Pearl Harbor" reference). That was my "hoooooly hellll" moment where any trust without verification of federal government went out the window and basically the beginning of the government spying on its citizens era with, so we're told, an exponential upswing in FISA warrant applications.

Granted some things are self evident. One of those is -- a government maintaining secrets at its whim, which FOIA requests - hurdles, problems, rejections, conveniently "lost information" - have shown to actually be the case, is dangerous and the explanations given by that government to be utter bull shit. I don't want anyone to die from exposure, or the threaten *real* national security. It's just too big of a blanket in its current form.



Still, we purportedly have government agencies that their very existence is still unknown.

[HCM]

Well, I was oblivious in 1978 as most teens are. I lived under assumptions at that time. Hell, I didn't understand how money was created until I was almost 30. I mention the Patriot Act because it is something that was written ahead of time, just lying in wait for the "new Pearl Harbor" as detailed in the Northwoods document (if memory serves edit: memory doesn't serve. Northwoods was the document from the 60's detailing possible false flag attacks.. I'll have to re-search to find the "new Pearl Harbor" reference). That was my "hoooooly hellll" moment where any trust without verification of federal government went out the window and basically the beginning of the government spying on its citizens era with, so we're told, an exponential upswing in FISA warrant applications.

Granted some things are self evident. One of those is -- a government maintaining secrets at its whim, which FOIA requests - hurdles, problems, rejections, conveniently "lost information" - have shown to actually be the case, is dangerous and the explanations given by that government to be utter bull shit. I don't want anyone to die from exposure, or the threaten *real* national security. It's just too big of a blanket in its current form.



Still, we purportedly have government agencies that their very existence is still unknown.

Critter,

You are posting about something you admit you are not knowledgeable about.

Before you go further down this road here are some open source resources with facts about what FISA is, is not, where it came from and why it exists:

I recommend you start here - It's a paper by the FLETC legal division which gives the best plain language explanation I have seen of the Why / What / How of FISA.

https://www.fletc.gov/sites/default/files/imported_files/training/programs/legal-division/downloads-articles-and-faqs/research-by-subject/miscellaneous/ForeignIntelligenceSurveillanceAct.pdf

Further info on FISA:

https://it.ojp.gov/PrivacyLiberty/authorities/statutes/1286

https://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/

Here is some good background material on Government secrecy:

https://fas.org/issues/government-secrecy/

[blues]

Before you go further down this road here are some open source resources with facts about what FISA is, is not, where it came from and why it exists:

I recommend you start here - It's a paper by the FLETC legal division which gives the best plain language explanation I have seen of the Why / What / How of FISA.

https://www.fletc.gov/sites/default/files/imported_files/training/programs/legal-division/downloads-articles-and-faqs/research-by-subject/miscellaneous/ForeignIntelligenceSurveillanceAct.pdf

The author of your first link, Jim McAdams is someone I had occasion to work with back in the Southern District of FL. In fact, as I recall, he assisted in our FISA matter back in the middle to late 90's.

[JTQ]

I worked in a government office and personally reviewed a bunch of FOIA requests. I had a big black marker and "redacted" all kinds of stuff from documents going back as far as the 1940's. The reason, they still covered stuff that we still did, so it was still classified. It wasn't on a "whim".

Edit to add: None of this "stuff" was FISA related.

[critter]

Critter,

You are posting about something you admit you are not knowledgeable about.

Before you go further down this road here are some open source resources with facts about what FISA is, is not, where it came from and why it exists:

I recommend you start here - It's a paper by the FLETC legal division which gives the best plain language explanation I have seen of the Why / What / How of FISA.

https://www.fletc.gov/sites/default/files/imported_files/training/programs/legal-division/downloads-articles-and-faqs/research-by-subject/miscellaneous/ForeignIntelligenceSurveillanceAct.pdf

Further info on FISA:

https://it.ojp.gov/PrivacyLiberty/authorities/statutes/1286

https://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/

Here is some good background material on Government secrecy:

https://fas.org/issues/government-secrecy/

I appreciate the links.. I'll read up on it.. It actually wan't my intention to derail my own thread down the rabbit hole...


Getting back to the Memo...

From what I've gathered, it's purportedly a summary of the Inspector General's more in depth report.

I think there's some fire behind the smoke (and probably a few mirrors as well). There will be some disciplinary action which may have ended with McCabe leaving. Or it could go up/down the chain a few levels. It's called the Nunez memo, but Trey Gowdy either actually wrote it or had a large hand in it's creation. Gowdy did state in an interview that he had viewed the full IG report. I like Gowdy. Of course, he's a politician, but his involvement lends a bit more credence to the memo, IMO.

If Rosenstein is involved, then his letter recommending the firing of Comey makes much more sense as a set up for the 'obstruction' aspect of the investigation. Is it? I wouldn't be surprised in the least at this point. Too many cross over connections.

The Clinton investigation reeked, and so does the Trump investigation.

[critter]

I worked in a government office and personally reviewed a bunch of FOIA requests. I had a big black marker and "redacted" all kinds of stuff from documents going back as far as the 1940's. The reason, they still covered stuff that we still did, so it was still classified. It wasn't on a "whim".

Edit to add: None of this "stuff" was FISA related.

Ahhhh HA! that's aidin' and abbetin' government sneakiness... You're goin' in my Memo JTQ.

[HCM]

I worked in a government office and personally reviewed a bunch of FOIA requests. I had a big black marker and "redacted" all kinds of stuff from documents going back as far as the 1940's. The reason, they still covered stuff that we still did, so it was still classified. It wasn't on a "whim".

Edit to add: None of this "stuff" was FISA related.

Just to flesh out your response, there are 9 exceptions to FOIA and 3 exclusions :

https://www.foia.gov/faq.html

The most common thing redacted in FOIA materials is actually personally identifiable information (PII) which must be protected pursuant to the Privacy Act Of 1974.

[HCM]

The author of your first link, Jim McAdams is someone I had occasion to work with back in the Southern District of FL. In fact, as I recall, he assisted in our FISA matter back in the middle to late 90's.

IME the FLETC Legal staff and the materials they put out have always been top notch. They are used to teaching and supporting cops so they are adept at breaking down sometimes complex legal material into plain, practical language.

On an unrelated note all the legal staff at some point attend the FLETC Use Of Force Instructor class (UOFITP). It’s a 4th amendment class with simmunitions. Normally half a day classroom and half a a day of practical exercises with simmunitions, inert pepper spray and foam batons. The hands on is new for some of the legal staff. I attended with a couple who were both career prosecutors in the Atlanta area before moving down to their “retirement job” at FLETC. Niether had ever fired a gun before but they took to it with gusto.

[Dagga Boy]

I put this in the “this is why we can’t have nice things”. Take a legitimate LE/Inteligence tool and use it for political gain. Saw it all to often with everything from Asset Seizure to use of surveillance equipment supplied by the government for counter drug operations used for internal counter union and employee operations. From the IRS to a bunch of stuff during the political campaigns of the last decade government agency are being weaponized for political purposes, checks and balances looped around, and an amazing level of hypocrisy and entitlement at high levels.
I am fairly disgusted by the whole thing, and the lower level working dogs of the LE/Intel communities should be pissed off that executive management are misusing tools that are essential for those actually doing their jobs by the book.

[JodyH]

Weaponized intelligence agencies = all powerful shadow government.
With enough inside info you can pretty much blackmail anybody at anytime.
Who needs to win an election when you can "own" everyone from SCOTUS judges to state DMV employees...

[Eastex]

I’m just a civilian and I consider myself a law and order kind of guy but this crap is getting out of hand. Now I’m seeing where “if” it’s released names are going to be redacted and that Wray may resign if he doesn’t get his way all in the name of protecting the agencies image. I hate to tell them but that horse has already left the barn with the Stroczk / Page texts and McCabe being dropped like a hot potato.
The only thing that can help restore their image in my eyes is sunlight, open it all up and let us see what happened. If the memo is sooo over the top and bad then why are the Democrats and the rest of the swamp fighting it so hard?
I guess I’m just tired of seeing the FBI act like it’s some branch of government enshrined in the Constitution that’s above all the others. I don’t remember seeing Director of the FBI on any ballot I’ve ever voted on. We got along for a pretty long time without one and if this is how it’s going to be run then maybe we need to reshuffle the whole damn thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[critter]

I’m just a civilian and I consider myself a law and order kind of guy but this crap is getting out of hand. Now I’m seeing where “if” it’s released names are going to be redacted and that Wray may resign if he doesn’t get his way all in the name of protecting the agencies image. I hate to tell them but that horse has already left the barn with the Stroczk / Page texts and McCabe being dropped like a hot potato.
The only thing that can help restore their image in my eyes is sunlight, open it all up and let us see what happened. If the memo is sooo over the top and bad then why are the Democrats and the rest of the swamp fighting it so hard?
I guess I’m just tired of seeing the FBI act like it’s some branch of government enshrined in the Constitution that’s above all the others. I don’t remember seeing Director of the FBI on any ballot I’ve ever voted on. We got along for a pretty long time without one and if this is how it’s going to be run then maybe we need to reshuffle the whole damn thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely. If there's a there there, expose it. The upper echelon of the FBI already has lost face and faith. Rebuilding that begins with coming clean. I really don't give a rat's ass if Wray or anyone else resigns over it. Good riddance. There are quite a number of noble Patriots who happen also to be clean and clear FBI agents ready, willing, and able to rebuild that trust in the agency and do their jobs above reproach.

I'm also very interested whether there is a connection between Strzok and the massive leaking which occurred early on. He certainly had motive, means and opportunity. And, I still don't understand why Rice isn't under a damn prison for unmasking the names -- wtf?

[SeriousStudent]

Weaponized intelligence agencies = all powerful shadow government.
With enough inside info you can pretty much blackmail anybody at anytime.
Who needs to win an election when you can "own" everyone from SCOTUS judges to state DMV employees...

That does ring a bell.

https://i.imgur.com/0Ebg3eG.jpg

[Dagga Boy]

That does ring a bell.

https://i.imgur.com/0Ebg3eG.jpg

I guess it is becoming a tradition rather than a single period of history.

[JHC]

Will the memo fizzle?

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/02/report-kelly-warned-trump-memo-isnt-compelling-cracked/

Even more so if the FISA authorized investigation kicked off based on other evidence well before the Steele dossier came into the picture (which I have seen widely reported it did). That would be narrative awkward.

[LittleLebowski]

I have a feeling it's not going to be very justified sans political bias.

[LittleLebowski]

I have a feeling it's not going to be very justified sans political bias.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/house-intel-memo-released-what-it-says/article/2647937


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

* Andrew McCabe confirmed that no FISA warrant would have been sought from the FISA Court without the Steele dossier information.

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

* DOJ official Bruce Ohr met with Steele beginning in the summer of 2016 and relayed to DOJ information about Steele's bias. Steele told Ohr that he, Steele, was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected president and was passionate about him not becoming president.

[JodyH]

The memo will "fizzle" because all it will do is prove one side was right and the other side won't give a shit.
The memo will not change anyones mind one way or another.
Nobody in FedGov is going to throw stones inside their big glass commune.

Sides were chosen back in 2000.
Battle lines were formed in 2012.
Trenches were dug and fortified in 2016.
MAD here we come 2020.

[LittleLebowski]

The FBI and Justice Department mounted a months-long effort to keep the information outlined in the memo out of the House Intelligence Committee's hands. Only the threat of contempt charges and other forms of pressure forced the FBI and Justice to give up the material.

[critter]

Will the memo fizzle?

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/02/report-kelly-warned-trump-memo-isnt-compelling-cracked/

Even more so if the FISA authorized investigation kicked off based on other evidence well before the Steele dossier came into the picture (which I have seen widely reported it did). That would be narrative awkward.

Well the link indicates that this is Trump's way of settling a score with Rosenstein. That could be true considering that Rosenstein is the one who wrote the scathing letter telling Trump to fire Comey -- which sent everything spinning off. Were it me, I'd definitely suspect that I had most likely been setup - especially with all the leaking and unmasking during the transition. Then Rosenstein appoints Mueller immediately after the firing who is, purportedly, best friends with Comey (wtf?), and Mueller brings in the the same players from the Hillary investigation where, if any of the buzz is correct, was really just a staged act with a predetermined conclusion (with the FBI destroying evidence - the two laptops - and Strzok interviewing Hillary off the record, and changing/editing "gross negligence" to "extremely careless" not to mention all the bizarre texts. This whole Mueller investigation and events surrounding just doesn't pass the smell test. I'm not saying the Mueller investigation is a complete sham, but I'm not buying it as legit either.

[LittleLebowski]

Well the link indicates that this is Trump's way of settling a score with Rosenstein. That could be true considering that Rosenstein is the one who wrote the scathing letter telling Trump to fire Comey -- which sent everything spinning off. Were it me, I'd definitely suspect that I had most likely been setup - especially with all the leaking and unmasking during the transition. Then Rosenstein appoints Mueller immediately after the firing who is, purportedly, best friends with Comey (wtf?), and Mueller brings in the the same players from the Hillary investigation where, if any of the buzz is correct, was really just a staged act with a predetermined conclusion (with the FBI destroying evidence - the two laptops - and Strzok interviewing Hillary off the record, and changing/editing "gross negligence" to "extremely careless" not to mention all the bizarre texts. This whole Mueller investigation and events surrounding just doesn't pass the smell test. I'm not saying the Mueller investigation is a complete sham, but I'm not buying it as legit either.

Read the latest link: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/house-intel-memo-released-what-it-says/article/2647937

[critter]

Read the latest link: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/house-intel-memo-released-what-it-says/article/2647937

I imagine one to three very pissed off FISA court judges. Threats of contempt charges before coughing up info... Yeah, secrecy rules. We should have more of it... Any speculations as to where it goes from here?

[LittleLebowski]

I imagine one to three very pissed off FISA court judges. Threats of contempt charges before coughing up info... Yeah, secrecy rules. We should have more of it... Any speculations as to where it goes from here?

I have no idea. I would imagine at the very least, the FISA warrant rules are changed completely. I expect the Ohrs to be hit hard for their corruption.

[Dagga Boy]

I would like to see whatever FISA judge signed off on this. That is where some neutral investigation could come from. Most of the judges I have dealt with would have your ass if you “played” them.

[Grey]

Still not seeing the big deal here...

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[blues]

I would like to see whatever FISA judge signed off on this. That is where some neutral investigation could come from. Most of the judges I have dealt with would have your ass if you “played” them.

I agree with this. They don't like being reversed and they don't like their reps coming under fire...so, assuming that the judge was a straight shooter and didn't have a dog in this fight, he or she was completely reliant upon the affiant as to the "truth" and "substance" of the evidence and probable cause proffered.

If it turns out that the oath was given in bad faith, I would expect major repercussions up and down the line. (And it will be interesting to see who insulates him or herself from the fallout by saying that they were duped by those who may have "fabricated" evidence which wasn't in hand.)

[Grey]

So in the interest of "transparency" is trump going to releases his taxes And let Mueller finish his job?

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[Eastex]

I’ll be real curious to see the FISA judges reactions as well. From the political tactics side I’d be very surprised if this is all that Trump has in store. I expect other shoes to fall in rapid order about other abuses from different departments during the Obama era.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[critter]

So in the interest of "transparency" is trump going to releases his taxes And let Mueller finish his job?

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

I'd ask what similarity refusal to release tax forms (it's no one's business what I make or how I make it.. but I include the government and IRS in that group whose business it's none of... they erroneously assert differently) and (the possibility of) deliberate investigatory misconduct?

[Grey]

I'd ask what similarity refusal to release tax forms (it's no one's business what I make or how I make it.. but I include the government and IRS in that group whose business it's none of... they erroneously assert differently) and (the possibility of) deliberate investigatory misconduct?Most candidates release that information. I view it as an act of good faith that You have nothing to hide. The fact that I have my finances combed through for a security clearance Means Its relevant to me.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[critter]

Most candidates release that information. I view it as an act of good faith that You have nothing to hide. The fact that I have my finances combed through for a security clearance Means Its relevant to me.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

good faith vs deliberate misconduct. I can see your point of view, I just don't get the equivalence.

[JHC]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/house-intel-memo-released-what-it-says/article/2647937

OK. But those bullets are Byron York repeating what is argued in the memo. That may be provable.

But there is other info that indicates the counter-intelligence investigation began prior to the Steele dossier's arrival.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/30/us/politics/how-fbi-russia-investigation-began-george-papadopoulos.html

[Grey]

good faith vs deliberate misconduct. I can see your point of view, I just don't get the equivalence.Not sure I understand Where You think I implied equivalence?

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[blues]

I’ll be real curious to see the FISA judges reactions as well. From the political tactics side I’d be very surprised if this is all that Trump has in store. I expect other shoes to fall in rapid order about other abuses from different departments during the Obama era.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The problem is that taking someone's word that there are abuses without being able to view and evaluate the evidence itself, is hardly proof.

Compounded by the Democrat's memo being kept from being published, the whole thing stinks. This is not the America I was proud to serve...where every effort is taken to keep the truth from coming to light.

I am officially ashamed of what's become of my country.

[Grey]

The problem is that taking someone's word that there are abuses without being able to view and evaluate the evidence itself, is hardly proof.

Compounded by the Democrat's memo being kept from being published, the whole thing stinks. This is not the America I was proud to serve...where every effort is taken to keep the truth from coming to light.

I am officially ashamed of what's become of my country.Agreed... if this is so damning Where is the proof? All we have are some partisan claims that the fbi And DoJ are Somehow conspiring against the Donald. If that was true we should have something more than anecdotes. A 3.5 page memo is hardly the bigger than watergate expose...

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[Eastex]

The first two words in Comeys twitter response were “That’s it?” I don’t care if he laid out a Magna Carta/Declaration of Independence level explanation after those two words. Those two words say more about that elitist POS than anything Trump or the GOP or Fox News ever could. He sounds like exactly the kind of deep state connected jackass that should have never been given any job much less Director of the FBI .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JodyH]

I smell a well set trap.
Release a teaser memo.
Let the swamp pitch a fit about how everything in it is partisan and incorrect.
Let the media pick up and run with that narrative at full blast for a few days.
Once everybody in the swamp has a story and are sticking to it like grim death... that's when you trigger the trap and call for a full release of ALL supporting documents.
Kind of hard to hold on to the narrative that everything is a lie while at the same time demanding that nothing be released to prove it's a lie...

Myself, I have zero doubts that the Obama/Clinton machine has weaponized many FedGov agencies for personal and political gains.

I also have zero doubt that Trump is pretty damn clean.
I guarantee that hundreds of millions (if not billions of dollars) and millions of man hours have been spent going over every minute of Trumps life looking for *anything* of substance.
As of right now they're hanging their hopes on Mueller catching Trump on a "Martha Stewart" process crime...
That tells me all I need to know.

[JHC]

Carter Page has been on the radar re Russia longer than this. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/19/us/politics/carter-page-russia-trump.html


Separately from NBC news is this image of a footnote from the memo which collaborates the NYT story above and undermines the memo's key point about the Steele dossier. It started earlier.

Very interesting stuff.

2351823518

[TGS]

Carter Page has been on the radar re Russia longer than this. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/19/us/politics/carter-page-russia-trump.html


Separately from NBC news is this image of a footnote from the memo which collaborates the NYT story above and undermines the memo's key point about the Steele dossier. It started earlier.

Very interesting stuff.

2351823518


Still not seeing the big deal here...

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk


The first two words in Comeys twitter response were “That’s it?” I don’t care if he laid out a Magna Carta/Declaration of Independence level explanation after those two words. Those two words say more about that elitist POS than anything Trump or the GOP or Fox News ever could.

Why?

I'm with JHC and Grey, here. Unless I'm missing something, the facts that are available to us don't verify any sort of corruption or malfeasance attributable to the feebs.

[Dagga Boy]

Carter Page has been on the radar re Russia longer than this. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/19/us/politics/carter-page-russia-trump.html


Separately from NBC news is this image of a footnote from the memo which collaborates the NYT story above and undermines the memo's key point about the Steele dossier. It started earlier.

Very interesting stuff.

2351823518

I have ZERO doubt that Trump had some people in his campaign....mostly “volunteers”that had some agenda’s and were scumbags. That is called “Politics” and is essentially the entire “Lobbying” thing. It is disgusting in everybody’s campaigns. Difference is, Trump was a totally rookie in the political arena versus the biggest professional political scumbags we have.

I find it absolutely hilarious is a sad way that we had the “After my election I have more flexibility”with the Russians yet now...from the same people who were actually colluding......everybody else sucks. Anyone ever get a look at the “hacking victims”computer at the DNC? You know, where it must be Trumps fault that the DNC was rigging the debates and primaries for Hilary?

Basically, you got a rookie surrounded by scumbags and the professional scumbags are mad. The whole thing is totally insane and demonstrates hypocrisy at a level that is beyond belief.

[Jeep]

I have to disagree with some people here. If true, it is more than extremely troubling that the FBI relied on the Steele dossier to get a FISA warrant, without telling the FISA court that the dossier was unverified OPPOSITION RESEARCH paid for by the Clinton campaign.

How can you possibly overlook those facts when you use the dossier as a reason why you should get a warrant? How can you not tell the Court them?

Nor did the Court ever get told that the press clippings that were used to buttress the dossier came from the same information being fed by Steele to the media. The FBI apparently didn't know that at first, but it learned it later--and dumped Steele because of it--but apparently didn't tell the FISA court that fact.

If true, this is bad. Very, very bad. The FBI (and Justice Department (and higher?)) wanted a warrant so badly that they used basically useless information (no one had any reason to trust it) to get a warrant without giving the judges the information they needed to assess whether it was justified. And they did so to gain information about a political campaign that was opposed by the sitting administration. Other information suggests that many of those involved in these warrants were strong political partisans.

This is the kind of stuff Wilson/FDR/Johnson and Nixon pulled on their opponents. I am not a Trump fan but using the powers of the state in this way is very scary stuff.

Equally scary was the report in the Wall Street Journal this morning that the IRS just apologized to a pro-Israel group to which it denied a routine tax exemption filing for seven years because its position on Israel differed from that of the Obama administration. The IRS even argued in court that it was free to deny such exemptions to organizations that took different positions from the government.

Our administrative state has obviously grown too powerful, too arrogant, and too entitled and needs to be trimmed back. Because it isn't just Trump it can do this stuff to. It can treat any of us this way, and unlike Trump we don't have the resources to fight back if it decides to squash us.

[TAZ]

Why?

I'm with JHC and Grey, here. Unless I'm missing something, the facts that are available to us don't verify any sort of corruption or malfeasance attributable to the feebs.

I’m confused. The DNC paid a guy to dig up dirt on their political opponent. The FBI also paid for the info. The guy gathering info leaks info to Yahoo news and then claims his work is awesome cause even Yahoo is corroborating his info. Never mind he gave the info to Yahoo. McCabe is on record saying that they wouldn’t have gotten the warrants without the dossier. Comey is on record as the dossier being unvetted aka tits on a boar useless. Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein all present the dossier to the FISC as evidence for a warrant. So either they all lied under oath to Congress or they all lied under oath to the FISC. Which one doesn’t matter to me so long as they get ruined professionally and do time for perjury.

So you think there is no malfeasance there?? I see enough to warrant a truly independent investigation into all of those folks and EVERY case these asshats have ever run. I wonder just how many little people these POS squashed with bad info, if they are this bold now. Every serial killer warms up to the task. These guys are no different.

[JHC]

How can you possibly overlook those facts when you use the dossier as a reason why you should get a warrant? How can you not tell the Court them?


What if you do not think of the dossier in total but any one or more of it's 17 different reports which range far and wide in topic; far from hookers and peeing games? And any one or more was found to be potentially valid by other leads?

It may be way too dumbed down for us to just use dossier as shorthand. Here the 17 reports are broken out. Republished today.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/10/25/what-the-trump-dossier-says-and-what-it-doesnt/?utm_term=.6892acd205d9


Then what if the Nunes memo mis-states what was sworn Senate testimony on the verification of any part of the 17 reports in this memo today? Because here we can see the contrast between the memo and what Comey actually said - and there is tape. When asked if ANY of the elements were verified, he declined to answer in open session. He referred to the "salacious" material (the watersports) as unverified.
It's not encouraging that Nunes would be playing games with this detail and doesn't strike me as very bright to do so about videotaped Senate testimony.

https://www.redstate.com/patterico/2018/02/02/significant-inaccuracy-thememo-calls-credibility-question/

And I'm seeing a lot published that informant biases are not by any means automatically disqualifying as a reason to seek or issue a warrant. Plenty of LE here to weigh in on that. Especially if any part of the informant's info is found to be verified whatever that means in the parlance.

But, we've been conditioned to just speak of "the dossier" by most reporting and most of that alluded to the "salacious" part.

This is not the slam dunk I don't think. I don't think it can be taken at face value without a lot of transcript material.

[TGS]

So you think there is no malfeasance there?? I see enough to warrant a truly independent investigation into all of those folks and EVERY case these asshats have ever run. I wonder just how many little people these POS squashed with bad info, if they are this bold now. Every serial killer warms up to the task. These guys are no different.

Enough to warrant an investigation is not the same thing as evidence of malfeasance, and I never said there wasn't enough to warrant investigation.

That memo is exactly what it's called.....a memo. It's not a criminal complaint.....if you read a criminal complaint, you'll see the difference between reporting facts vs conclusions. It's also a partisan memo. In the memo are also statements that the FBI did the right thing, such as cutting sources when problems arose with their information.....or reassigning persons from an investigation when conflicts of interest arose.....or the fact that a guy who investigated an R also investigated a Dem......so on. It's not all doom and gloom in there, actually.

Like Blues said,


The problem is that taking someone's word that there are abuses without being able to view and evaluate the evidence itself, is hardly proof.

[JHC]

Everybody trusts Trey Gowdy right? Nobody's fool.

Why would he say this today?

"I also remain 100 percent confident in Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The contents of this memo do not - in any way - discredit his investigation."

https://twitter.com/TGowdySC/status/959495152770469888?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fhotair.com%2Farchives%2F2018 %2F02%2F02%2Fno-way-memo-discredit-bob-muellers-investigation-says-trey-gowdy%2F

[TGS]

This is not the slam dunk I don't think. I don't think it can be taken at face value without a lot of transcript material.

Stop it with your critical thinking.


Everybody trusts Trey Gowdy right? Nobody's fool.

Why would he say this today?

"I also remain 100 percent confident in Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The contents of this memo do not - in any way - discredit his investigation."

https://twitter.com/TGowdySC/status/959495152770469888?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fhotair.com%2Farchives%2F2018 %2F02%2F02%2Fno-way-memo-discredit-bob-muellers-investigation-says-trey-gowdy%2F

Wait, you mean the Special Counsel that reassigned a member of the team when a possible conflict of interest arose?

No......say it isn't so! That can't be right........wait....it's in the same memo everyone is getting so riled up with...oh.......well, we'll just ignore that part because we want to be angry at something.

[TAZ]

Enough to warrant an investigation is not the same thing as evidence of malfeasance, and I never said there wasn't enough to warrant investigation.

That memo is exactly what it's called.....a memo. It's not a criminal complaint.....if you read a criminal complaint, you'll see the difference between reporting facts vs conclusions. It's also a partisan memo. In the memo are also statements that the FBI did the right thing, such as cutting sources when problems arose with their information.....or reassigning persons from an investigation when conflicts of interest arose.....or the fact that a guy who investigated an R also investigated a Dem......so on. It's not all doom and gloom in there, actually.

Like Blues said,

Apologies. I misunderstood your note as being dismissive of potential abuses of the FISA system in this particular case and the DOJ,FBI in general for political gain.

The memo suggests that there is evidence of unprofessional behavior in the least and possibly other more serious issues at the DOJ. Some truly independent investigator needs to begin digging into this and burn folks that need burning.

I have ZERO idea how one can find an investigator who isn’t a political creature beholden to the DC elite though. We have let this partisan bullshit rule the day for so long that I’m afraid it will be impossible to truly go after facts when it involves players at this level. Sad commentary on this nation.

[Jeep]

What if you do not think of the dossier in total but any one or more of it's 17 different reports which range far and wide in topic; far from hookers and peeing games? And any one or more was found to be potentially valid by other leads?

It may be way too dumbed down for us to just use dossier as shorthand. Here the 17 reports are broken out. Republished today.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/10/25/what-the-trump-dossier-says-and-what-it-doesnt/?utm_term=.6892acd205d9


Then what if the Nunes memo mis-states what was sworn Senate testimony on the verification of any part of the 17 reports in this memo today? Because here we can see the contrast between the memo and what Comey actually said - and there is tape. When asked if ANY of the elements were verified, he declined to answer in open session. He referred to the "salacious" material (the watersports) as unverified.
It's not encouraging that Nunes would be playing games with this detail and doesn't strike me as very bright to do so about videotaped Senate testimony.

https://www.redstate.com/patterico/2018/02/02/significant-inaccuracy-thememo-calls-credibility-question/

And I'm seeing a lot published that informant biases are not by any means automatically disqualifying as a reason to seek or issue a warrant. Plenty of LE here to weigh in on that. Especially if any part of the informant's info is found to be verified whatever that means in the parlance.

But, we've been conditioned to just speak of "the dossier" by most reporting and most of that alluded to the "salacious" part.

This is not the slam dunk I don't think. I don't think it can be taken at face value without a lot of transcript material.

Again, I don't know if the facts in the memo are true. But, it does not matter which part of the dossier was used as backup for the warrant application. As I understand it, the whole thing was opposition research paid for by the opposing presidential campaign. And if that is correct, then that fact had to be disclosed to the FISA court so it could make its own conclusion about reliability.

That court is the only neutral party between us and government surveillance. It has to be told not only the truth, but the full truth--including the warts. According to the memo, that was not done here, and so far no one appears to have contradicted it. Instead, again as I understand it, the arguments made are that Steele had some more credible material in there, the FBI had reason to investigate based on other information it had previously been given and that overall the Trump investigation has merit.

Those, however, are not the issues with which I'm concerned. What I find shocking is that applications signed by the most senior FBI and Justice department officials did not disclose to the Court the source of these materials. If that is true, I think it is inexcusable because it was plainly material. Either the people who prepared the documents were incompetent (which I doubt) or a deliberate decision was made not to tell the Court that the FBI was relying on opposition research.

Had the Court been told that, it still could have granted the warrant--but my guess is that it would have asked a lot of skeptical questions before doing so.

And there is where we get to the real rub. People sometimes say that the 4th amendment warrant requirement relies on neutral and detached magistrates. And it does. But it relies even more on the integrity of the cops and lawyers who submit the materials seeking the warrants. If they make omissions or misrepresentations a judge usually won't be able to know that, and a 4th amendment violation will take place.

These guys were the top of the FBI and Main Justice. If they omit a key detail like this (and maybe they didn't, but so far I don't think we've heard that) how can the system hope to work? How in the long-term can we keep the government from smashing the rest of us?

I can understand them not liking Trump. I personally don't much care for him either. But I cannot understand them omitting such a key detail in their applications and believe the necessary implication is that they are--at a minimum--very casual about the 4th amendment rights of Americans they don't like.

I find that extremely troubling.

[Sensei]

I’m confused. The DNC paid a guy to dig up dirt on their political opponent. The FBI also paid for the info. The guy gathering info leaks info to Yahoo news and then claims his work is awesome cause even Yahoo is corroborating his info. Never mind he gave the info to Yahoo. McCabe is on record saying that they wouldn’t have gotten the warrants without the dossier. Comey is on record as the dossier being unvetted aka tits on a boar useless. Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein all present the dossier to the FISC as evidence for a warrant. So either they all lied under oath to Congress or they all lied under oath to the FISC. Which one doesn’t matter to me so long as they get ruined professionally and do time for perjury.

So you think there is no malfeasance there?? I see enough to warrant a truly independent investigation into all of those folks and EVERY case these asshats have ever run. I wonder just how many little people these POS squashed with bad info, if they are this bold now. Every serial killer warms up to the task. These guys are no different.

The reason why you are confused is the bolded sentence. What you wrote is exactly what some want you to believe, but it is incorrect. However, Comey said that only parts of the dossier were salacious and unverified; he refused to comment on the other parts. There is a very good chance that portions of the dossier were legit and contemporaneously supported by other evidence submitted to the court.

The fact that FNC is peddling in those distortions is why I rank them down there with CNN and MSLSD.

[TAZ]

The reason why you are confused is the bolded sentence. What you wrote is exactly what some want you to believe, but it is incorrect. However, Comey said that only parts of the dossier were salacious and unverified; he refused to comment on the other parts. There is a very good chance that portions of the dossier were legit and contemporaneously supported by other evidence submitted to the court.

The fact that FNC is peddling in those distortions is why I rank them down there with CNN and MSLSD.

That may well be true that Comey only commented on some sections of the doc being bogus. I’ll have to go back and read his transcripts if still available to see what he actually said. I didn’t get that portion of the post from FNC. I was going from memory.

Doesn’t change my opinion much about the process they used to gain a FISA warrant. IMO documents are fact or fiction. Once you mix in fiction your shit just went from fact to fiction in its entirety. Kind of like that whole MMGW. Once the facts were manipulated the entire study went to shit for me. It’s toss it out and start over with some credible researchers.

For me there is enough stink to warrant a complete review of what triggered ANY Trump investigation in specific. And more generally how the whole FISA fiasco works and why we should continue to empower the government with these secret and EASY to abuse powers.

[critter]

At the very least the memo explicitly states Stzrok and Page orchestrated the leaks to the media. One mystery definitively solved. Um, isn't that like sorta kinda illegal? How long have the holders of the documentation known about that? Why is the guy, HR dept or not, still employed by the taxpayers?

[JHC]

Again, I don't know if the facts in the memo are true. But, it does not matter which part of the dossier was used as backup for the warrant application. As I understand it, the whole thing was opposition research paid for by the opposing presidential campaign. And if that is correct, then that fact had to be disclosed to the FISA court so it could make its own conclusion about reliability.

That court is the only neutral party between us and government surveillance. It has to be told not only the truth, but the full truth--including the warts. According to the memo, that was not done here, and so far no one appears to have contradicted it. Instead, again as I understand it, the arguments made are that Steele had some more credible material in there, the FBI had reason to investigate based on other information it had previously been given and that overall the Trump investigation has merit.

Those, however, are not the issues with which I'm concerned. What I find shocking is that applications signed by the most senior FBI and Justice department officials did not disclose to the Court the source of these materials. If that is true, I think it is inexcusable because it was plainly material. Either the people who prepared the documents were incompetent (which I doubt) or a deliberate decision was made not to tell the Court that the FBI was relying on opposition research.

Had the Court been told that, it still could have granted the warrant--but my guess is that it would have asked a lot of skeptical questions before doing so.

And there is where we get to the real rub. People sometimes say that the 4th amendment warrant requirement relies on neutral and detached magistrates. And it does. But it relies even more on the integrity of the cops and lawyers who submit the materials seeking the warrants. If they make omissions or misrepresentations a judge usually won't be able to know that, and a 4th amendment violation will take place.

These guys were the top of the FBI and Main Justice. If they omit a key detail like this (and maybe they didn't, but so far I don't think we've heard that) how can the system hope to work? How in the long-term can we keep the government from smashing the rest of us?

I can understand them not liking Trump. I personally don't much care for him either. But I cannot understand them omitting such a key detail in their applications and believe the necessary implication is that they are--at a minimum--very casual about the 4th amendment rights of Americans they don't like.

I find that extremely troubling.

Stay tuned. Its already been reported (but it's good to let such thing age a bit) that the application did identify the material used from whichever of the dossier reports came from a "political" source without naming names, albeit not too hard for a judge to surmise. So we'll see.

Nunes said on FoxNews last night he didn't read the applications. Trey Gowdy is the only Congressman who did. And he said yesterday nothing in this memo delegitimizes the investigation.

Not sure the path to info on other points of view however. I don't see Nunes or Trump checking off on letting the Democrat's version reach the public.

[Dagga Boy]

Stay tuned. Its already been reported (but it's good to let such thing age a bit) that the application did identify the material used from whichever of the dossier reports came from a "political" source without naming names, albeit not too hard for a judge to surmise. So we'll see.

Nunes said on FoxNews last night he didn't read the applications. Trey Gowdy is the only Congressman who did. And he said yesterday nothing in this memo delegitimizes the investigation.

Not sure the path to info on other points of view however. I don't see Nunes or Trump checking off on letting the Democrat's version reach the public.

Nunes didn’t read it because they were only allowed to have one house member and a couple investigators view the documents and Trey Gowdy was chosen for that task that makes perfect sense.

I had a thought last night that makes me pretty much done with this. I notice that most of the Fed’s on here don’t think this is an issue at all. If all of this was part of a big city mayoral campaign and involved a Chief of Police and high ranking executive staff of that cities police department, the FBI would be all over it and people would be introduced to the federal justice system the hard way. Turn it around and it’s a meh......which is par for the course in the world of do as we say not as we do.

[JHC]

Nunes didn’t read it because they were only allowed to have one house member and a couple investigators view the documents and Trey Gowdy was chosen for that task that makes perfect sense.

I had a thought last night that makes me pretty much done with this. I notice that most of the Fed’s on here don’t think this is an issue at all. If all of this was part of a big city mayoral campaign and involved a Chief of Police and high ranking executive staff of that cities police department, the FBI would be all over it and people would be introduced to the federal justice system the hard way. Turn it around and it’s a meh......which is par for the course in the world of do as we say not as we do.

It's still pretty queer to write the definitive book report about a book you didn't read. :D

And then we have Gowdy's take on the matter. The guy who did read it all.

[Jeep]

Everybody trusts Trey Gowdy right? Nobody's fool.

Why would he say this today?

"I also remain 100 percent confident in Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The contents of this memo do not - in any way - discredit his investigation."

https://twitter.com/TGowdySC/status/959495152770469888?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fhotair.com%2Farchives%2F2018 %2F02%2F02%2Fno-way-memo-discredit-bob-muellers-investigation-says-trey-gowdy%2F

I don't know much about him, and therefore don't want to say anything negative about him, but the lesson I've learned during life is to be doubtful about politicians--all of them. I'm skeptical of what all of them say because the truth doesn't seem to be a priority with so many of them. I think that one of the lessons of the current mess is that one should be skeptical of high-level civil servants as well. Too many of them (including guys wearing stars) spend too much time currying favor to help their careers, and when they get senior enough, they then curry favor with Caesar.

Of course, not all of them would sell their souls for Caesar's smile--but too many would.

The big lesson that I take from the last year and a half is that DC has far too much power, that because of that the political battles have become far too intense, and that if we don't cut back its power we are soon going to find ourselves living in a very different country where the government is pretty much allowed to do whatever the governing classes want it to do, and the folks outside the governing classes have very little to say about what their government does. Some might say we are already there, and in some ways we are. But it is going to get worse unless action is taken.

[Dagga Boy]

It's still pretty queer to write the definitive book report about a book you didn't read. :D

And then we have Gowdy's take on the matter. The guy who did read it all.

Again....someone else’s rules. Each side got one house member to read the source documents. In regards to Gowdy, I agree. The whole FISA thing stinks in process, we don’t know yet about Mueller.....but he did manage to place nothing but non neutral “investigators” in his probe. Reality.....did the Russians jack with our process.....no doubt. Like that is fricking new. Did they hack the DNC computer nobody has ever examined and release info regarding some pretty unethical crap....yep. Did they provide opposition research to the DNC to screw with the other candidate....yep. Am I remotely shocked that a KGB era heavyweight is joyously fucking with our entire political system...no. Is it working.....we should be so good. Are upper levels of the FBI and DOJ totally politicized at this point....yep. Is that wrong?........I think so, but apparently I am unique in that thinking. Should real investigators be picking sides or looking for truth and facts?

I have seen all this crap on a local scale and it is total bullshit there, and should really be an issue at the federal level, but it’s not.

The system is broken and unfixable. I am simply riding the wave until eventually the Balkanization happens and/or the military wins and hope I am in the right place or right side. At this point, every level of he federal government is a corrupt beast and history has shown this is a normal part of the downfall process of most great civilizations.

[Sensei]

That may well be true that Comey only commented on some sections of the doc being bogus. I’ll have to go back and read his transcripts if still available to see what he actually said. I didn’t get that portion of the post from FNC. I was going from memory.

Doesn’t change my opinion much about the process they used to gain a FISA warrant. IMO documents are fact or fiction. Once you mix in fiction your shit just went from fact to fiction in its entirety. Kind of like that whole MMGW. Once the facts were manipulated the entire study went to shit for me. It’s toss it out and start over with some credible researchers.

For me there is enough stink to warrant a complete review of what triggered ANY Trump investigation in specific. And more generally how the whole FISA fiasco works and why we should continue to empower the government with these secret and EASY to abuse powers.

Here is a link that contains the transcript of Comey’s testimony.

https://www.redstate.com/patterico/2018/02/02/significant-inaccuracy-thememo-calls-credibility-question/

As for a review of what triggered the Trump investigation, I believe that is already known and does not begin with the Steele Dossier. Instead, the Trump campaign came under FBI scrutiny when it began associating with Carter Page - a guy who was under FBI surveillance since 2013 for contacts with Russian intelligence. The case for looking into the Trump campaign was bolstered when a second campaign member (probably more of an underling), Mr. Papadopoulos, began bragging that Russians were going to tank Hillary’s campaign with a bunch of hacked emails. In what bizzaro world do we live in where the FBI does not investigate such circumstances?

I don’t believe that Trump or the upper echelons of his campaign “colluded” with Russia. At the same time, I also doubt that the FBI obtained a warrant using manufactured evidence.

[blues]

Nunes didn’t read it because they were only allowed to have one house member and a couple investigators view the documents and Trey Gowdy was chosen for that task that makes perfect sense.

I had a thought last night that makes me pretty much done with this. I notice that most of the Fed’s on here don’t think this is an issue at all. If all of this was part of a big city mayoral campaign and involved a Chief of Police and high ranking executive staff of that cities police department, the FBI would be all over it and people would be introduced to the federal justice system the hard way. Turn it around and it’s a meh......which is par for the course in the world of do as we say not as we do.

I'm not sure who you are referring to so I hope I'm not being lumped into this category as it wouldn't be at all accurate.

I'm still of the mind that we won't begin to know the truth of the matter until we get beyond this despicable political cat wrangling and have access to the actual reports, documents and material which serve as a basis for the investigation and any intercepts. I don't have an issue with certain redactions being made to protect the lives of sources or the methods of collection per se.

Nobody is coming out looking good from all this. Not the Congress. Not the President, (Tweeter-In-Chief). Not Comey, (who should log off Twitter altogether as he's not winning any hearts and minds, the moron). Not the Republicans. Not the Democrats. Not the news networks.

It seems like the only folks who give a shit what the truth may actually be are right here, posting in this thread. I know that's not true but for crying out loud, why does it seem that so few people even care about what's true anymore? They simply want their side to "win" and damn the consequences...which pretty much guarantees a "loss" for America no matter how you look at it.

What a shit show.

[blues]

Are upper levels of the FBI and DOJ totally politicized at this point....yep. Is that wrong?........I think so, but apparently I am unique in that thinking. Should real investigators be picking sides or looking for truth and facts?

I have seen all this crap on a local scale and it is total bullshit there, and should really be an issue at the federal level, but it’s not.

DB, I know you like to rant and use hyperbole to some extent but clearly you know better than this.

I've held the gov'ts feet to the fire on these boards since I began sharing here...including how my own investigation revealed the CIA's involvement in narco-trafficking, (and some kind of unholy connection to Cuba), which was ultimately aired in the press and on 60 Minutes. I didn't stand down then and it probably was the beginning of the end of my career, if not in length of service, in the quality of my relationship to my own agency and its administration.

As it says in my sig..."Trust, like the soul, once departed never returns."

[Dagga Boy]

This is where I need to just quit looking at the GD section for awhile. This stuff makes my blood boil and probably shouldn’t matter.

I think with blues, I have done the right thing instead of political thing as a matter of how business is done. That is what real investigators are supposed to do. I was a primary investigator in a case involving 2.5 billion dollars of liability to our client. Sitting in a room with the principles, it was made perfectly clear that they would get the truth, and if we determined wrongdoing done on the clients part, they would cut checks to the wronged and make it right with no questions asked. I find it interesting that a couple of the most powerful corporations on the planet can work this way, but the government can’t.

[fixer]

I am more concerned about the fedgov involving itself in an election than a foreign govt. I am 100% sure this isn't the first time either.

[blues]

This is where I need to just quit looking at the GD section for awhile. This stuff makes my blood boil and probably shouldn’t matter.

I think with blues, I have done the right thing instead of political thing as a matter of how business is done. That is what real investigators are supposed to do. I was a primary investigator in a case involving 2.5 billion dollars of liability to our client. Sitting in a room with the principles, it was made perfectly clear that they would get the truth, and if we determined wrongdoing done on the clients part, they would cut checks to the wronged and make it right with no questions asked. I find it interesting that a couple of the most powerful corporations on the planet can work this way, but the government can’t.

We're cool, DB. Thanks for the PM. I (pretty much) knew we were on the same page, I just didn't want it to come across (inadvertently) as though we were at cross purposes by being lumped into a "them".

[Sensei]

Again....someone else’s rules. Each side got one house member to read the source documents. In regards to Gowdy, I agree. The whole FISA thing stinks in process, we don’t know yet about Mueller.....but he did manage to place nothing but non neutral “investigators” in his probe. Reality.....did the Russians jack with our process.....no doubt. Like that is fricking new. Did they hack the DNC computer nobody has ever examined and release info regarding some pretty unethical crap....yep. Did they provide opposition research to the DNC to screw with the other candidate....yep. Am I remotely shocked that a KGB era heavyweight is joyously fucking with our entire political system...no. Is it working.....we should be so good. Are upper levels of the FBI and DOJ totally politicized at this point....yep. Is that wrong?........I think so, but apparently I am unique in that thinking. Should real investigators be picking sides or looking for truth and facts?

I have seen all this crap on a local scale and it is total bullshit there, and should really be an issue at the federal level, but it’s not.

The system is broken and unfixable. I am simply riding the wave until eventually the Balkanization happens and/or the military wins and hope I am in the right place or right side. At this point, every level of he federal government is a corrupt beast and history has shown this is a normal part of the downfall process of most great civilizations.

There is a lot of emotion in those sentences and you seem to be painting a portrait with a pretty big brush. Nobody is acquitting Comey, McCabe, Strzok, or his gizzmop girlfriend; nor are we saying that Trump colluded with Putin.

We are simply saying that this memo appears to be a political document that provides very little substantive evidence of wrong doing. On the other hand, I and just about everyone else on this forum (with the possible exception of Stephanie) fully support the FBI IG probe into the handling of the Clinton email server as well as the release of as much of the source materials as possible that were submitted to the FISA court as justification for surveillance of a presidential candidate. We support these measures as the best means to determine if high ranking DOJ officials triangulated against a political opponent or suppressed evidence of crimes committed by a political ally.

None of us see any evidence of corruption within the Bureau on a FO level. If you really think as you posted that all levels of the federal government are corrupt, then I strongly suggest that you give me a call and come and shoot my M107A1...it will clear your sinuses and reset your thinking. ;)

Speaking for myself, I also support Muller’s investigation provided that it wraps up in the next few months as the best way to silence the liberal talking points of collusion which so far does not seem evidence based.

Capisce, Paisan?

[UNK]

Nunes didn’t read it because they were only allowed to have one house member and a couple investigators view the documents and Trey Gowdy was chosen for that task that makes perfect sense.

I had a thought last night that makes me pretty much done with this. I notice that most of the Fed’s on here don’t think this is an issue at all. If all of this was part of a big city mayoral campaign and involved a Chief of Police and high ranking executive staff of that cities police department, the FBI would be all over it and people would be introduced to the federal justice system the hard way. Turn it around and it’s a meh......which is par for the course in the world of do as we say not as we do.

The Trump campaign, the Sig 320 military contract and this. There are a lot of smart people on here but that doesn't mean they are always right and there is definitely little tolerance for opposing views.
Makes me wonder what was the prevailing attitude when Watergate broke.

[TAZ]

The Trump campaign, the Sig 320 military contract and this. There are a lot of smart people on here but that doesn't mean they are always right and there is definitely little tolerance for opposing views.
Makes me wonder what was the prevailing attitude when Watergate broke.

The prevailing attitude of the government, any government run by career bureaucrats and politicians hasn’t changed since ancient times. The attitude is: protect the government. Not the people and the nation only to the extent that it enables the government to prosper. This is pretty much a universal constant.

To me the memo is definitely not a smoking gun. It’s a hole in a corpse. It shows that something was amiss and we need to figure out what happened. Could be cold blooded murder, could be accidental, could be justified self defense or could be an asteroid. Either way someone needs to find out what happened and that can’t happen with you only get to read the odd pages of every seventh chapter of the victim’s diary. That’s what we have here. The house intelligence committee, who oversees the secret shit our government does, can’t read all the documents. Why? Play that with the IRS when they audit YOU and see where you land.

[Eastex]

Hillary had to have a private server in her closet. This whole damn mess was triggered by that. Nixon ain’t even in her league.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[critter]

Look on the bright side. This memo is the tip of the iceberg. According to "sources" we have only 10-15% of what will be released in "memos". Perhaps these memos will be the trickle through the dam which will eventually bring the entire structure of the shroud of secrecy crashing down around all of this. The way those in control of the information harped over releasing this memo for "security" reasons have shown to be either prone to exaggeration or deliberately disingenuous when using the labels - not because it endangers national security, nor because exposes methods, but because they just don't want us to see it or Security Hyperbole Intelligence Tactics.

[blues]

The way those in control of the information harped over releasing this memo for "security" reasons have shown to be either prone to exaggeration or deliberately disingenuous when using the labels - not because it endangers national security, nor because exposes methods, but because they just don't want us to see it or Security Hyperbole Intelligence Tactics.

I'd say that we're not in a position to make that determination until after we have an opportunity to make an evaluation of the actual facts.

The rest is hearsay...and there's a good reason why it's not admissible in court (with certain exceptions).

[CWM11B]

Ok, so the memo is a political document, I get that. What in DC land is not? My problem with the whole dossier is the FBI has said they would not have pursed a FISA warrant without it. IF some of it was tainted/false, and IF some of it was true, that's a big "You can't use it" to get a warrant in my former world. It is a credibility thing, and in most criminal cases involving average peons, all of your evidence would be inadmissible after the suppression hearing if you used a source that was not credible. And judges tend to get REAL pissy if they think you have played loose with anything in your application. Cherry picking facts is not allowed by either side of the equation. I do NOT want to live in a world where this becomes common place. While it is NOT rampant, there are plenty of cases where overzealous officers at all levels have pushed the limits and yes, fabricated testimony to get a warrant. From the limited experience I had with it, it was more out of zeal for doing the job than malfeasance, but intention is immaterial when the outcome is unconstitutional.

All that said, what is that folks want to see here? Every Firearms/conservative/libertarian discussion I have seen, heard, or read has decried for years the status quo in DC and the preached the need to "throw the bums out". No third party or outsider has ever had the chance. Now, in Trump, we have a total outsider who has done a lot of things we say we want, and his reward is basically the cry to lynch him from all circles. I did not vote for him in the primary, never believed he had the chance to be the nominee, and truly believed it was a publicity stunt, or he would pull a Perot on us and guarantee a continuation of the Clinton/Obama regime. But damned if the guy didn't pull it off. He is losing money by being POTUS, does not appear to owe anybody, and from my perspective is doing a fairly decent job. But because he is not a zero defect human, he's got to go. Where will that leave us? Once/if (and I think it is probable that it will) the establishment (Rs And Ds collectively. It exists to serve itself) retakes power I am of the opinion that it/they will stack the deck and rig the game to ensure no other outsider EVER gets in to a position of power.

I want to see this Mueller investigation halted. Now. Why? It is clearly a fishing expedition. There is no evidence that the Trump campaign did any colluding with Russia. And the government had incredible resources at its disposal to find it. The level of vitriol and hatred for DJT is unprecedented. If there was something there, it would have turned up. The media, some insider looking for fame and fortune, the LE and intelligence communities would have found it and served him up. I am at a loss to explain how someone we are told is stupid, incompetent, unqualified, incapable, etc. as he is has been able to keep his nefarious deeds hidden away from all those brilliant aforementioned resources, some of which have been (figuratively) gunning for him from day one. If the Russians, who are clearly trying to re-establish their power on the world stage, had colluded with Trump, is it not likely they would leak this out? What better way to weaken the US than to unseat the POTUS?

I get it, lots of folks don't like the guy. I don't know him, but he is leaps and bounds better than the last one, and undoubtedly better than what we would have been saddled with as an alternative. But not liking a guy is not grounds for unseating him, putting him in prison, or worse. If a minute fraction of the investigative resources thrown at Trump had been used on any number of past POTUSs and candidates I would be willing to bet a year's salary we would have seen plenty of them in jail. If he is brought down (and if he is ACTUALLY GUILTY of something that would do it, he should be) we all better be aware of the likely consequences. They won't be pretty.

[Totem Polar]

It seems like the only folks who give a shit what the truth may actually be are right here, posting in this thread. I know that's not true but for crying out loud, why does it seem that so few people even care about what's true anymore? They simply want their side to "win" and damn the consequences...which pretty much guarantees a "loss" for America no matter how you look at it.

What a shit show.

I’m pretty much a reader, not a poster, in this thread because of knowledge base. That said, the above could have come out of my head. It’s like a war between a liver and a pair of kidneys for control of the digestive tract’s ability to take a dump. We’re in for a rough road if we can’t get the majority party in America (the knee-jerker partisan goggle party) to sit down and take a big collective breath.

[blues]

I’m pretty much a reader, not a poster, in this thread because of knowledge base. That said, the above could have come out of my head. It’s like a war between a liver and a pair of kidneys for control of the digestive tract’s ability to take a dump. We’re in for a rough road if we can’t get the majority party in America (the knee-jerker partisan goggle party) to sit down and take a big collective breath.

If something your humble servant wrote seems like it might have been something you'd have posted...I'd recommend taking that clothespin off your nose so you can get more oxygen to your brain. ;)

[critter]

I'd say that we're not in a position to make that determination until after we have an opportunity to make an evaluation of the actual facts.

The rest is hearsay...and there's a good reason why it's not admissible in court (with certain exceptions).

Yes, you are absolutely correct here.

[AMC]

The memo isn't a smoking gun. More like shell casings and blood spatter at an empty crime scene. Something clearly happened, and it probably wasn't good, but we don't know the real facts. It is also not a blow to National security, treason, or totally made up partisan attempts to "obstruct justice"....or something. We absolutely need to see the source material at this point. That includes Mcabes testimony, and the actual FISA application. Nothing else will answer these questions. People are getting very heated...perhaps rightly so. But rhetoric is way out of hand at this point. We have Republican Congress critters saying people need to go to jail (FWIW, I think some of this is likely true), and Democommie politicians saying that the Repubs and the president need to step down and be removed for treason. Talking heads on MSLSD are saying people need to take to the streets in Revolution, and Hannity is trying to convince people that 2+2=22. Well, maybe it's just 4, dude. At this point, I'm Frankly less concerned with protecting sources and methods than I am preserving the Republic. I don't see any good outcome from the current circus.

[NH Shooter]

I don't see any good outcome from the current circus.

It's going to be a train wreck of the highest order.

[blues]

It's going to be a train wreck of the highest order.

Maybe it's time to start buying stock in...

https://coxclark.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/dreamstime_l_884419691.jpg?w=1200&h=627&crop=1

[JohnO]

Some hard hitting commentary on the Memo found here. Take a look.

https://twitter.com/Imperator_Rex3/status/959523313545486336

[NH Shooter]

Maybe it's time to start buying stock in...

Yup.

Vladimir's minions take out ads on social media to sow discord and distrust, hack some unprotected servers to make our esteemed leaders look bad, etc. The swamp critters fall for it lock, stock and barrel and are now in too much a mindless rage to realize they've been duped.

This debacle will be studied by future students of history.

[blues]

Yup.

Vladimir's minions take out ads on social media to sow discord and distrust, hack some unprotected servers to make our esteemed leaders look bad, etc. The swamp critters fall for it lock, stock and barrel and are now in too much a mindless rage to realize they've been duped.

This debacle will be studied by future students of history.

http://www.history.com/s3static/video-thumbnails/AETN-History_VMS/21/145/History_Jeffrey_Lewis_The_Fall_of_the_Soviet_Union _rev_rev_SF_HD_1104x622-16x9.jpg

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2873047.1479161413!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_1200/putin15n-1-web.jpg

"Turnabout is fair play...no?"

[NH Shooter]

Meanwhile, this pressing legislative issue (http://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/2018/01/31/bill-would-charge-owners-wandering-chickens-with-trespassing.html) in NH.....

[Totem Polar]

...I'd recommend taking that clothespin off your nose so you can get more oxygen to your brain. ;)

No way, dude. Delayed gratification; the essence of self-discipline.

Besides, you're a pretty smart dude, dude.

Dude.

https://barnfinds.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/image-6.jpg

[Jeep]

I am more concerned about the fedgov involving itself in an election than a foreign govt. I am 100% sure this isn't the first time either.

This is a very important point. From what I can see the Russians played both camps in this election in order to cause chaos--and did a heck of a good job. Both camps can see that the other side was played, but have a hard time to see that their own team was also played and both are so angry at the other side they are unlikely to be able to open their eyes.

So well done Putin. You did what you wanted to do--though I suspect that you will find the long-term consequences less enjoyable.

In the end, though, Putin was only a limited threat. Having fedgov join the fray on one side (and we aren't only talking about this mess, but the fact that many senior Obama administration officials were "unmasking" wiretap information, and then apparently leaking selected bits to anti-Trump reporters) is really dangerous stuff.

Indeed, according to news reports, it has some really creepy aspects. For example Samantha Power, the UN ambassador, was recorded as unmasking dozens of transcripts. She denies that she did it, which if she is telling the truth means that someone else very high up was using her name to hide his/her own.

I tend to believe Power. To my mind she is one of the legion of beltway people who comes up with a half-baked idea (her's was "duty to respond") that any teenager can tear apart, but who nevertheless fully believes it. She had no business in government, but instead belonged in some utopian think tank where she wrote papers on how we can build a world of rainbows and unicorns if only we do X and spend lots of taxpayers money on it.

She was not, however, a Machiavellian, and it is hard seeing her reading transcripts of Americans caught on wiretaps, much less "unmasking" the transcripts to find their identities. Which means someone, presumably above her, was signing Power's name. And that is pretty creepy.

[blues]

In the end, though, Putin was only a limited threat. Having fedgov join the fray on one side (and we aren't only talking about this mess, but the fact that many senior Obama administration officials were "unmasking" wiretap information, and then apparently leaking selected bits to anti-Trump reporters) is really dangerous stuff.

Oddly enough, though, either through ineptitude or mysterious 4D chess moves, Comey and company did more to derail the Clinton machine than anyone could have envisioned before he became persona non grata with the Trump administration that he could take a lot of credit for making possible.

Only in America.

[Jeep]

Oddly enough, though, either through ineptitude or mysterious 4D chess moves, Comey and company did more to derail the Clinton machine than anyone could have envisioned before he became persona non grata with the Trump administration that he could take a lot of credit for making possible.

Only in America.

Very true. I think "bureaucratic ineptitude" is probably the reason. A lot of fairly smart people sitting around and trying to figure out what to do to fudge their way out of an impossible situation for them. So they managed to convince a lot of people that (1) Hillary is a crook, but (2) the Swamp fixed things for her.

By the way, I think the "Swamp" is a very good descriptor for DC and its satellites. I think Obama, Hillary, Comey, and most of Congress are Swamp creatures. Where I differ from others is that I think Trump was a long-time Swamp Creature as well. Indeed, I think what is going on in Washington could be called the "Battle of the Swamp Creatures."

It's a shame we can't license and sell it to Hollywood and use the money to make a token paydown on the national debt. But then again, all Swamp Creatures like the national debt.

[blues]

...Where I differ from others is that I think Trump was a long-time Swamp Creature as well. Indeed, I think what is going on in Washington could be called the "Battle of the Swamp Creatures."

It's a shame we can't license and sell it to Hollywood and use the money to make a token paydown on the national debt. But then again, all Swamp Creatures like the national debt.

Too late. Already been done.

http://www.bridgefazio.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Film_TheCreatureFromTheBlackLagoon_INT_ENG_BD_RET_ SteelBook_Outer_G2_withPLATES_R01.jpg

[Shoresy]

Too late. Already been done.

http://www.bridgefazio.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Film_TheCreatureFromTheBlackLagoon_INT_ENG_BD_RET_ SteelBook_Outer_G2_withPLATES_R01.jpg

I was going to say House of Cards; it's more accurate, but yours is more humorous - I'll go with that.

[Totem Polar]

If you want to combine Russian action in the U.S. with ^^^that creature, "the shape of water" is your huckleberry.

Carry on.

[Jaywalker]

Rep. Trey Gowdy has read the intel source documents. He said on "Face the Nation," as reported by Axios, the following:


There is a Russia investigation without a dossier… the dossier has nothing to do with the meeting at Trump Tower. The dossier has nothing to do with an email sent by Cambridge Analytica. The dossier really has nothing to do with George Papadopoulos' meeting in Great Britain. It also doesn't have anything to do with obstruction of justice.

I really liked what Gowdy had to say about Andrew McCabe
I found him to be a professional witness even though I disagree with some of the decisions he made. And I think we've got to get to some point in life where you can disagree with the decision-making process that someone engaged in, without believing that they are corrupt or somehow part of the 'deep state', whatever that means.

We really do.

[JodyH]

I wonder how many people are toeing the line because they are dirty as fuck and scared of having their closet door opened up...

[Sensei]

Rep. Trey Gowdy has read the intel source documents. He said on "Face the Nation," as reported by Axios, the following:



I really liked what Gowdy had to say about Andrew McCabe

We really do.

Gowdy seems to be one of the few Republicans in Congress who is immune to the “Trump Effect” which is highly contagious mental illness causing elected representatives to:

1) View issues pertaining to Trump in only the most extreme light. For example, Dems must view him as a racist Russian collaborator who must be impeached; Republicans see him as the next Reagan being targeted by the swap.
2) Be willing to compromise one’s values for The Cause. That means misrepresenting facts, presenting half truths, etc. are done in the name of saving or impeaching Trump. The ends justify the means.

The fact that he is immune is probably why he is getting out of Congress. I imagine that being aware that one is surrounded by intellectual lepers gets old after a while.

[blues]

My biggest problem with Trey Gowdy is that when I see him he reminds me of a bleached K.D. Lang in drag. Otherwise, other than being from S.C. he's generally pretty tolerable as politicians go.

I kid, I kid...

[critter]

My biggest problem with Trey Gowdy is that when I see him he reminds me of a bleached K.D. Lang in drag. Otherwise, other than being from S.C. he's generally pretty tolerable as politicians go.

I kid, I kid...

LoL... he does have some of the weirdest haircuts for the shape of his head imaginable. I'm thinking this is by design. The bizarre hair patterns contain encoded messages to Russia.

[Zincwarrior]

Gowdy seems to be one of the few Republicans in Congress who is immune to the “Trump Effect” which is highly contagious mental illness causing elected representatives to:

1) View issues pertaining to Trump in only the most extreme light. For example, Dems must view him as a racist Russian collaborator who must be impeached; Republicans see him as the next Reagan being targeted by the swap.
2) Be willing to compromise one’s values for The Cause. That means misrepresenting facts, presenting half truths, etc. are done in the name of saving or impeaching Trump. The ends justify the means.

The fact that he is immune is probably why he is getting out of Congress. I imagine that being aware that one is surrounded by intellectual lepers gets old after a while.

Gowdy is also one of thirty to announce their retirement.

[critter]

Gowdy seems to be one of the few Republicans in Congress who is immune to the “Trump Effect” which is highly contagious mental illness causing elected representatives to:

...
2) Be willing to compromise one’s values for The Cause. That means misrepresenting facts, presenting half truths, etc. are done in the name of saving or impeaching Trump. The ends justify the means.



How about we remove all secrecy from government and all government agencies, including identifying all existing government agencies, to which branch they are accountable, etc., etc., so the actual facts can be, and are disseminated in real time, readable, viewable, and ready for honest debate at all times as should happen in a free representative society with accountable government. Problem solved.



The fact that he is immune is probably why he is getting out of Congress. I imagine that being aware that one is surrounded by intellectual lepers gets old after a while.

Wasn't there a recent opening on the 4th district appeals Court? That would be my guess. But yeah, I imagine be being at least halfway honest (I have *complete* faith in no one in government) and believing in holding those in power accountable would be as tiring as swimming in molasses.

[blues]

How about we remove all secrecy from government and all government agencies, including identifying all existing government agencies, to which branch they are accountable, etc., etc., so the actual facts can be, and are disseminated in real time, readable, viewable, and ready for honest debate at all times as should happen in a free representative society with accountable government. Problem solved.

critter, it's time for you to open the window and let some of that smoke out...

http://www.lidtime.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Student-wrapped-the-whole-room-with-tin-foil-in-an-awesome-prank1.jpg

;)

[JHC]

Some important summary points that have developed with and since Friday's release of The Memo:

1. The CI investigation began checking into Popadopolis, before the Steele Dossier arrived on the scene. Acknowledged in The Memo itself.
2. The principal target of the FISA warrant in question here was Carter Page who had been serially on the counter-intelligence radar vis a vis Russians since 2013.
3. The NYT, the WP, and the WSJ have reported this weekend that via multiple sources - the FBI did include the disclosure in the application for the warrant that certain info from the Steele dossier was paid for by a law firm representing a political party. It is normal to speak "generically" about such roots of tips if those roots (the law firm) are not the subject of the warrant.
4. The FISA court certainly knew of the dossier info's roots either from #3 above to begin with or for each of two more renewals because it was so well covered in the news. There's nothing inherently disqualifying about any of that.
5. We further know The Memo mis-represented Comey's statements about the unverified info of the dossier. We know because we've now re-watched the tape of his Senate testimony were he said the "salacious" material was unverified and when asked if anything in the dossier (17 different reports) WAS verified, he declined to answer in a public forum.

I think this is pretty much destroying the narrative that FBI corrupted the process or that the Mueller investigation is illegitimate.

[critter]

critter, it's time for you to open the window and let some of that smoke out...

http://www.lidtime.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Student-wrapped-the-whole-room-with-tin-foil-in-an-awesome-prank1.jpg

;)

ROFL!! Yeah, maybe that's not actually molasses I'm swimming in....

[blues]

JHC, you're not going to make any friends if you keep trying to inject reason and common sense into the discussion...

[JHC]

Worth checking out how many times and ways Trey Gowdy made the point on today's news shows that there is a Russian investigation regardless of the dossier's contributions for several reasons he explains.

Gowdy, the only Congressman that has read all the documents.

[critter]

I think this is pretty much destroying the narrative that FBI corrupted the process or that the Mueller investigation is illegitimate.

My problem with Mueller is this: Comey is, by all accounts, good friends with Mueller. Rosenstein brought Mueller in for the FBI director job interview. Mueller didn't get the job. Rosenstein then immediately appoints Mueller to investigate *anything* with the guy who just turned him down. What's that about appearance of impropriety?

[JodyH]

Worth checking out how many times and ways Trey Gowdy made the point on today's news shows that there is a Russian investigation regardless of the dossier's contributions for several reasons he explains.

Gowdy, the only Congressman that has read all the documents.
I've never been impressed with Gowdy.
IMO he's nothing more than a grandstanding firewall much like Sessions.

[TGS]

I think this is pretty much destroying the narrative that FBI corrupted the process or that the Mueller investigation is illegitimate.

Big let down for everyone who wanted to see America collapse just so they could feel righteous about their political leanings.

[JodyH]

When I heard Chuck Schumer demand that the Democrat rebuttal be released I have a feeling he's standing on the landmine trigger.

Trump's team:
"Of course I'm going to declassify the Democrat rebuttal memo. To do otherwise would be very partisan."
"BTW: I'm also going to start declassifying ALL supporting documents for BOTH memos and releasing them directly to the people."

[critter]

Big let down for everyone who wanted to see America collapse just so they could feel righteous about their political leanings.

America would collapse were (regardless of whom) corrupt/criminal individuals in government (elected, appointed, or hired) actually held accountable for their corruption/criminality? And those of us who demand government accountability want to see the collapse of America? Wax hyperbolic much? :cool:

[TGS]

My problem with Mueller is this: Comey is, by all accounts, good friends with Mueller. Rosenstein brought Mueller in for the FBI director job interview. Mueller didn't get the job. Rosenstein then immediately appoints Mueller to investigate *anything* with the guy who just turned him down. What's that about appearance of impropriety?

The problem with conspiracies is that when you think the world is falling apart you can create anything you want out of thin air and you're bound to be a total believer in it regardless of what is actually evidenced (like the fact of Mueller removing people from his investigative team for conflicts of interest).

Do you actually have any clue who Mueller is? If you did, you'd know how ludicrous the shit you're typing sounds, just the same as all the baseless crap you've vomited into this thread with admittedly zero actual knowledge of about what the fuck you're writing.


Wax hyperbolic much? :cool:

Says the guy who thinks destroying any capability of government secrecy is a good idea.

Classified programs, court rules, grand jury secrecy, etc. All gone. That'll obviously be a good thing.

[critter]

When I heard Chuck Schumer demand that the Democrat rebuttal be released I have a feeling he's standing on the landmine trigger.

Trump's team:
"Of course I'm going to declassify the Democrat rebuttal memo. To do otherwise would be very partisan."
"BTW: I'm also going to start declassifying ALL supporting documents for BOTH memos and releasing them directly to the people."

Now, as I see it, that would be a small victory for *We the people*. It would lead to wherever it leads. Let sunlight disinfect the whole damn thing.

[ranger]

I had a Secret or Top Secret clearance for over 30 years. I understand that the government needs to keep some secrets. However, it "appears" to me that the Executive branch became "weaponized" over the last decade - there are too many issues with ATF, IRS, DOJ, State and FBI to just "keep quiet" and "trust us". I think we need to open everything up to the fresh air and sunlight and let the American people decide.

If we are so worried about secrets, then we should have been concerned with the way HRC handled classified documents. The hypocrisy is overwhelming and cries for another Special Prosecutor.

We need to drain the swamp and it is time to bring these issues out in the open and expose the Republicans and Democrats and the "Deep State" or whatever the current cabal is in DC.

[blues]

I had a Secret or Top Secret clearance for over 30 years. I understand that the government needs to keep some secrets. However, it "appears" to me that the Executive branch became "weaponized" over the last decade - there are too many issues with ATF, IRS, DOJ, State and FBI to just "keep quiet" and "trust us". I think we need to open everything up to the fresh air and sunlight and let the American people decide.

This is largely the problem I had with the Republican memo. In effect saying: "Trust us, this is a true and accurate depiction of the underlying source documents." Compounded by stymieing efforts by the Democrats to air their rebuttal.

Doesn't lead to a lot of confidence.

Having held the same levels of clearance during my career, I totally understand your POV...and I thank you for your service to the nation.

[critter]

The problem with conspiracies is that when you think the world is falling apart you can create anything you want out of thin air and you're bound to be a total believer in it regardless of what is actually evidenced (like the fact of Mueller removing people from his investigative team for conflicts of interest).

Do you actually have any clue who Mueller is? If you did, you'd know how ludicrous the shit you're typing sounds, just the same as all the baseless crap you've vomited into this thread with admittedly zero actual knowledge of about what the fuck you're writing.



Says the guy who thinks destroying any capability of government secrecy is a good idea.

Classified programs, court rules, grand jury secrecy, etc. All gone. That'll obviously be a good thing.

Does it really matter *who* Mueller is? He may be the essence of Jesus himself. It still doesn't look right.

You're definitely correct, I know little about the secrecy programs (and I wonder why that is...). Lack of transparency is the breeding ground for conspiracy theories.

[JodyH]

This is largely the problem I had with the Republican memo. In effect saying: "Trust us, this is a true and accurate depiction of the underlying source documents." Compounded by stymieing efforts by the Democrats to air their rebuttal.
When you were interviewing a suspect did you always lay out all your evidence on the table from the very start?
I'm guessing you'd "leak" just a little bit and then let the suspect admit or deny from that point so you could lock them into a story.

I think the Trump team has released just enough info to get the D's locked into a story.
Next step is to "reluctantly" release the D rebuttal memo.
Allow the D's enough time to feel comfortable fully supporting their narrative.
Drop the atomic bomb by declassifying all kinds of shit that leaves absolutely no doubt there was a soft coup being perpetrated by the political class of the various government agencies.

That's the perfect way to clean house of the minions and their high level enablers.

[JodyH]

Do you actually have any clue who Mueller is?
Yes... he's a bought and paid for Clinton hack just like Rosenstein.

[JodyH]

I think there are a lot of people that project their own level of integrity and professionalism onto others because they have a similar job title.

[blues]

When you were interviewing a suspect did you always lay out all your evidence on the table from the very start?
I'm guessing you'd "leak" just a little bit and then let the suspect admit or deny from that point so you could lock them into a story.

I think the Trump team has released just enough info to get the D's locked into a story.
Next step is to "reluctantly" release the D rebuttal memo.
Allow the D's enough time to feel comfortable fully supporting their narrative.
Drop the atomic bomb by declassifying all kinds of shit that leaves absolutely no doubt there was a soft coup being perpetrated by the political class of the various government agencies.

That's the perfect way to clean house of the minions and their high level enablers.

Jody, in the end it's not the memos I'm concerned with...R or D. Stepping on the ability of one side to address the matter to the electorate just plain smells.

That said, what either side has to say is not evidence...just as what the lawyers argue in court is not evidence. So, unless or until we have the opportunity to examine the underlying facts and evidence, (in redacted form or straight up), it's a bunch of finger pointing and political jockeying which isn't worth the paper it's written on.

However, the worthless paper shouldn't be monopolized by one political party while muzzling the other. This is not the way we (should) do things in this country.

[critter]

(like the fact of Mueller removing people from his investigative team for conflicts of interest).



This is not a disingenuous, baiting question. I'm serious.

When, exactly, did Mueller actually remove those people with conflicted interests? was it not in close correlation to the public release of text messages?

If not, so be it. If so, is it normal for lead investigators to be completely unaware of such leanings in a group that has worked closely together in the past on other investigations?

[JHC]

This is not a disingenuous, baiting question. I'm serious.

When, exactly, did Mueller actually remove those people with conflicted interests? was it not in close correlation to the public release of text messages?

If not, so be it. If so, is it normal for lead investigators to be completely unaware of such leanings in a group that has worked closely together in the past on other investigations?

It was just before the text messages hit the news. He got it from the IG and acted, and soon thereafter it broke in the news. He's solid. He and Comey faced down the Bush Chief of Staff threatening to resign if they signed an executive order to authorize more domestic surveillance. Bush decided to side with Mueller and Comey and spiked that executive order.

[TGS]

Yes... he's a bought and paid for Clinton hack just like Rosenstein.

What evidence do you have of that?

[Sensei]

So Mueller, a decorated Marine with a Bronze Star-V and Purple Heart from Vietnam and decades of honorable service under bipartisan administrations, is the corrupt hack, but President Heel Spurs is squeaky clean?

Let me remind the name callers how we got here. Carter Page, a self-described “special advisor to the Kremlin” and Putin apologist who has been under the FBI’s eye since 2013, gets hired by the Trump campaign as a foreign policy advisor. Around the same time, the campaign leadership is switched over to Paul Manafort, a lobbyist for various corrupt dictators (including the former pro-Putin Ukrainian President) and the subject of an FBI criminal investigation since 2014. They also managed to hire a foreign policy advisor in the form of George Dipshitadopolos who reached out to Putin operatives in an attempt to get dirt on Hillary Clinton, and managed to ping the radar of foreign intelligence operatives by bragging about the hacked emails before it was known that the DNC server had been compromised. Finally, we have Trump’s trusted advisor and NSA appointee, Michael Flynn. This true American hero tried to conceal his lobbying and consulting efforts on behalf of foreign interests while serving as an advisor to a candidate for POTUS.

From where I’m sitting, all the talk of Russia, Russia, Russia has a lot less to do with Robert Mueller’s character and a lot more to do with Trump packing his campaign with corrupt assholes. But hey, that’s the price you pay for nominating a political novice, right?

[Jaywalker]

Does it really matter *who* Mueller is? He may be the essence of Jesus himself. It still doesn't look right.

You're definitely correct, I know little about the secrecy programs (and I wonder why that is...). Lack of transparency is the breeding ground for conspiracy theories.Critter, I guess you understand Mueller was the FBI Director already, beginning 4 Sept 2001. For all we know, when he met with Trump for the FBI Director he might have said "Been there, done that" in grownup terms, such as "Mr. President, thank you for considering me and if you insist I'll take it, but I'd rather not." I've said similar things before, but certainly not at that level.

Like others here I do know something about classified programs - TS and above for 37 years. What I've seen from the FBI doesn't bother me, as it appears they're following current law. I can understand having problems with the law itself, and I do, but don't blame the FBI or Mueller for the current law - blame Congress.

[TGS]

It was just before the text messages hit the news. He got it from the IG and acted, and soon thereafter it broke in the news. He's solid. He and Comey faced down the Bush Chief of Staff threatening to resign if they signed an executive order to authorize more domestic surveillance. Bush decided to side with Mueller and Comey and spiked that executive order.

Right.

In addition, Critter, everyone has biases.....simply because someone leans one way or the other politically is not justification in itself to remove them from a given investigation or evidence that an investigation has been corrupted. If their biases are likely to effect the integrity of their work, then they should recuse themselves or their supervisors take them off when such comes to light (which is what happened here).

As for how well you know people.....I mean, come on dude. I don't know what any of my co-case agents write in their private text messages. My supervisor doesn't know what I write in my personal text messages. At least in my work place, we're all fairly apolitical when actually executing our tasks. Those who aren't seem to be attention seekers to me, like an agent who made a very public and lame resignation letter when Trump was elected. Good riddance...we don't need people who can't separate their political leanings from executing a unified mission.

[TGS]

So Mueller, a decorated Marine with a Bronze Star-V and Purple Heart from Vietnam and decades of honorable service under bipartisan administrations, is the corrupt hack, but President Heel Spurs is squeaky clean?

Let me remind the name callers how we got here. Carter Page, a self-described “special advisor to the Kremlin” and Putin apologist who has been under the FBI’s eye since 2013, gets hired by the Trump campaign as a foreign policy advisor. Around the same time, the campaign leadership is switched over to Paul Manafort, a lobbyist for various corrupt dictators (including the former pro-Putin Ukrainian President) and the subject of an FBI criminal investigation since 2014. They also managed to hire a foreign policy advisor in the form of George Dipshitadopolos who reached out to Putin operatives in an attempt to get dirt on Hillary Clinton, and managed to ping the radar of foreign intelligence operatives by bragging about the hacked emails before it was known that the DNC server had been compromised. Finally, we have Trump’s trusted advisor and NSA appointee, Michael Flynn. This true American hero tried to conceal his lobbying and consulting efforts on behalf of foreign interests while serving as an advisor to a candidate for POTUS.

From where I’m sitting, all the talk of Russia, Russia, Russia has a lot less to do with Robert Mueller’s character and a lot more to do with Trump packing his campaign with corrupt assholes. But hey, that’s the price you pay for nominating a political novice, right?

Come back to the dark side.

We have cookies......at least when we're not shut down.

[Sensei]

Come back to the dark side.

We have cookies......at least when we're not shut down.

I wish I could, but my wife would kill me. Even with LEAP and cost of living adjustments, I was slowly going broke trying to maintain my medical credentials (about $5K per year in terms of license, CME, and professional memberships) and care for a special needs child. I was given “the ultimatum” by my wife when the sequester hit and there was hiring freezes and talk of furloughs...so I popped smoke. Now, I probably couldn’t pass the PFT or poly. ;)

[blues]

I never got any cookies! WTF!

[JodyH]

However, the worthless paper shouldn't be monopolized by one political party while muzzling the other. This is not the way we (should) do things in this country.
That's been going on for at least the past 75 years, it's just been ramped up to significantly over the past 25 years or so.

Elections have consequences...

[blues]

That's been going on for at least the past 75 years, it's just been ramped up to significantly over the past 25 years or so.

Elections have consequences...

Well, call me a stinking, effete pie in the sky idealist. Somehow I've managed to keep certain values along the way. Go figure.

Fair play still matters to me. I even don't like (gasp) my team to win in sports by cheating or the refs / umpires getting the call wrong.

What a pussy.

[JodyH]

Everybody loves hotdogs.
Nobody like the lips and assholes they're made out of.

[critter]

So Mueller, a decorated Marine with a Bronze Star-V and Purple Heart from Vietnam and decades of honorable service under bipartisan administrations, is the corrupt hack, but President Heel Spurs is squeaky clean?

....

I don't really even like Trump. I doubt anyone is squeaky clean, and if he's done something criminally illegal raising to the level of Treason, Bribery, other High Crimes/Misdemeanors (and not simply trapped into a process crime) then I'll fully support his ousting. He annoys me and I often wish he would STFU, but he was constitutionally elected, is the de facto head of both the DoJ and FBI regardless of whether the mysterious "they" (or anyone) likes it. The relentless pursuit beginning prior to the election, the cries for impeachment beginning election night from most all the D's, and a number of R's - has more of the smell of a soft coup to a percentage of the constituency, all things considered, than that of above board investigations. This just from a normal citizen looking at what is available from the public view.

From the public record, Mueller apparently has more Russian ties than Trump through his ascribed participation in the Uranium One dealings (again appearances), and then the manner, surroundings, et al, in which he was appointed just doesn't pass the appearance test. It's surprising that few seem to care about that. He may be the squeakiest cleanest Patriot of them all. That doesn't change how it looks to those of us on the outside looking in. I thought it was SOP to avoid even the appearance of possible impropriety.

Would it have made a difference if some no name agent/investigator with his own stellar record/resume were appointed? To me it would. I'd still have a nagging suspicion that the investigation may be political sabotage in origin, but I'd be far less sceptical of the findings were those findings not to the President's benefit.

[critter]

I appreciate the sincere answers to my question... thank you.

[critter]

Critter, I guess you understand Mueller was the FBI Director already, beginning 4 Sept 2001. For all we know, when he met with Trump for the FBI Director he might have said "Been there, done that" in grownup terms, such as "Mr. President, thank you for considering me and if you insist I'll take it, but I'd rather not." I've said similar things before, but certainly not at that level.

Like others here I do know something about classified programs - TS and above for 37 years. What I've seen from the FBI doesn't bother me, as it appears they're following current law. I can understand having problems with the law itself, and I do, but don't blame the FBI or Mueller for the current law - blame Congress.

Oh I do. The politician with whom I had the most political/constitutional viewpoints in common was/is Ron Paul -- federal reserve, constitutional authority(or lack thereof), transparency, use of military, etc. He was considered by most to be 'out there' if not a lunatic. I guess that's rather telling. Of what would be the question...

[CWM11B]

So Mueller, a decorated Marine with a Bronze Star-V and Purple Heart from Vietnam and decades of honorable service under bipartisan administrations, is the corrupt hack, but President Heel Spurs is squeaky clean?


From where I’m sitting, all the talk of Russia, Russia, Russia has a lot less to do with Robert Mueller’s character and a lot more to do with Trump packing his campaign with corrupt assholes. But hey, that’s the price you pay for nominating a political novice, right?

We probably agree on way more than we would disagree on, but caution should be used when pointing to military decorations as an indicator of integrity. John Kerry has two purple hearts and a silver star. LBJ got a silver star and JFK had a Navy Cross and purple heart. Not exactly squeaky clean either. I don't believe anyone here is claiming DJT to be as pure as the driven snow. What is the price for nominating professional political operatives? None of the political class would ever stoop to surrounding themselves with corrupt assholes (or domestic terrorists) would they? Much less being corrupt assholes themselves? Or do we not care because their experience allows them to cover their tracks better? I'm still curious as to what the answer is for the "burn the witch" crowd (rhetorical, not lumping you or anyone on the board in this category)? Do we just keep putting the same elites into office and hope they don't send us down the road to perdition? From my perspective, we have not been well served by the last three administrations. All run by the "pros".

For the record, and I have said this many, many times over the years, I do not believe in grand conspiracy theories. Too many people would have to keep their mouths shut and that goes against human nature. More so in the social media era. I do believe there are small scale conspiracies, because they take place every day on various levels. The word is used in the charging language found in the statutes. State, local, and federal agencies investigate, draw charges and see them to trial regularly, and folks are in prison for it. I say again : IF DJT did something illegal and worthy of removing him from office or criminally charged, then I'm all for it, with incontrovertible evidence. Hell, if I was in the position to do so I'd put the cuffs on myself. Most of what I'm seeing is the worst case of sore loser displayed in modern history, the loser being the established political class.

[JHC]

So Mueller, a decorated Marine with a Bronze Star-V and Purple Heart from Vietnam and decades of honorable service under bipartisan administrations, is the corrupt hack, but President Heel Spurs is squeaky clean?

Let me remind the name callers how we got here. Carter Page, a self-described “special advisor to the Kremlin” and Putin apologist who has been under the FBI’s eye since 2013, gets hired by the Trump campaign as a foreign policy advisor. Around the same time, the campaign leadership is switched over to Paul Manafort, a lobbyist for various corrupt dictators (including the former pro-Putin Ukrainian President) and the subject of an FBI criminal investigation since 2014. They also managed to hire a foreign policy advisor in the form of George Dipshitadopolos who reached out to Putin operatives in an attempt to get dirt on Hillary Clinton, and managed to ping the radar of foreign intelligence operatives by bragging about the hacked emails before it was known that the DNC server had been compromised. Finally, we have Trump’s trusted advisor and NSA appointee, Michael Flynn. This true American hero tried to conceal his lobbying and consulting efforts on behalf of foreign interests while serving as an advisor to a candidate for POTUS.

From where I’m sitting, all the talk of Russia, Russia, Russia has a lot less to do with Robert Mueller’s character and a lot more to do with Trump packing his campaign with corrupt assholes. But hey, that’s the price you pay for nominating a political novice, right?

Right? LOL

[Grey]

So Mueller, a decorated Marine with a Bronze Star-V and Purple Heart from Vietnam and decades of honorable service under bipartisan administrations, is the corrupt hack, but President Heel Spurs is squeaky clean?

Let me remind the name callers how we got here. Carter Page, a self-described “special advisor to the Kremlin” and Putin apologist who has been under the FBI’s eye since 2013, gets hired by the Trump campaign as a foreign policy advisor. Around the same time, the campaign leadership is switched over to Paul Manafort, a lobbyist for various corrupt dictators (including the former pro-Putin Ukrainian President) and the subject of an FBI criminal investigation since 2014. They also managed to hire a foreign policy advisor in the form of George Dipshitadopolos who reached out to Putin operatives in an attempt to get dirt on Hillary Clinton, and managed to ping the radar of foreign intelligence operatives by bragging about the hacked emails before it was known that the DNC server had been compromised. Finally, we have Trump’s trusted advisor and NSA appointee, Michael Flynn. This true American hero tried to conceal his lobbying and consulting efforts on behalf of foreign interests while serving as an advisor to a candidate for POTUS.

From where I’m sitting, all the talk of Russia, Russia, Russia has a lot less to do with Robert Mueller’s character and a lot more to do with Trump packing his campaign with corrupt assholes. But hey, that’s the price you pay for nominating a political novice, right?slow clap, standing ovation slow clap.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[critter]

I get the slow claps and ovations... here's my question(s).. as presidential candidate, did Trump not get daily security briefs? Why wouldn't all of that information be divulged to the potential POTUS as a part of those briefs?

How did those players happen into the campaign? Were they sought out by Trump? Who brought them in? Who vetted them? Just some curiosities...

[Jaywalker]

The contents of the Memo surprised me. With Democrats objecting and GOP supporting it never occurred to me that the Memo would argue that the FBI had a solid case against Carter Page!

Page was warned in 2013 by the FBI that he was a target for recruitment by Russian intelligence. So, for the FBI to get a FISA warrant against Page, an American citizen, means he had to have disregarded that warning and continued to deal with known intelligence officers. I'm actually surprised the FBI waited until September 2016 after Page left the Trump campaign to begin surveilling him.

The warrant had three 90-day extensions, which requires a demonstration each time to the FISA court that Page's intercepted communications were, indeed, providing foreign intelligence. Without that demonstration the warrant would lapse.

If Devin Nunes were trying to show there was nothing to the investigation, instead he managed to demonstrate that it was on very solid ground. I don't know Devin Nunes but he surely isn't a mastermind, is he?

[Sensei]

We probably agree on way more than we would disagree on, but caution should be used when pointing to military decorations as an indicator of integrity.

Most of what I'm seeing is the worst case of sore loser displayed in modern history, the loser being the established political class.

I didn’t point to military decorations as an indicator of integrity. I pointed to decorations AND a record of honorable service spanning decades - including service as a United States Attorney, United States Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, Acting U.S. Deputy Attorney General, and FBI Director. The guy successfully transformed the Bureau’s focus from financial/organized crime to an elite counter terrorism agency, and probably saved thousands of lives in the process. He was all-night dedicated as director; the first to arrive and last to leave.

Unless someone can show me evidence of his corruption, most of what I’m seeing is a typical case of the immature name calling that I’ve come to expect from the internet.

[Sensei]

I get the slow claps and ovations... here's my question(s).. as presidential candidate, did Trump not get daily security briefs? Why wouldn't all of that information be divulged to the potential POTUS as a part of those briefs?

How did those players happen into the campaign? Were they sought out by Trump? Who brought them in? Who vetted them? Just some curiosities...

Trump connected with Manafort at the recommendation of a fellow real estate mogul and hired him on the cheap due to his foreign policy chops. Most seem to think that Manafort brought Flynn to the forefront of the campaign since that seemed to coincide with Flynn being shortlisted for VP. I don’t think anyone knows who hired Page or Papadopoulos.

[Zincwarrior]

Yes... he's a bought and paid for Clinton hack just like Rosenstein.

I didn't know Republicans who were appointed by Bush were Clinton hacks....

[Jaywalker]

I get the slow claps and ovations... here's my question(s).. as presidential candidate, did Trump not get daily security briefs? Why wouldn't all of that information be divulged to the potential POTUS as a part of those briefs? Trump would likely not have received detailed briefings on on-going criminal or espionage investigations. He would likely have received sub-rosa suggestions that one person or another was unsuitable; we know that happened in Flynn's case. It's also not a secret that Trump ignores such advice, as he did with Flynn.

I said above that "Trump would likely not have received detailed briefings on on-going criminal or espionage investigations." There were pretty strong indications that some FBI agents in New York leaked some things to Rudolph Giuliani while he was working with Trump's campaign. It's possible that Trump was apprised of more investigation details than he should have been.

[Sensei]

I didn't know Republicans who were appointed by Bush were Clinton hacks....

He was FBI Director when the Uranium One deal was approved. He MUST have taken bribes from the Clinton Foundation for that to have been approved. No further evidence is needed to impeach his character. ;)

[Zincwarrior]

He was FBI Director when the Uranium One deal was approved. He MUST have taken bribes from the Clinton Foundation for that to have been approved. No further evidence is needed to impeach his character.

That's not a logical statement. Unless it's sarcasm...

[JHC]

That's not a logical statement. Unless it's sarcasm...

Yeah, the latter. :D

[CWM11B]

I didn’t point to military decorations as an indicator of integrity. I pointed to decorations AND a record of honorable service spanning decades - including service as a United States Attorney, United States Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, Acting U.S. Deputy Attorney General, and FBI Director. The guy successfully transformed the Bureau’s focus from financial/organized crime to an elite counter terrorism agency, and probably saved thousands of lives in the process. He was all-night dedicated as director; the first to arrive and last to leave.

Unless someone can show me evidence of his corruption, most of what I’m seeing is a typical case of the immature name calling that I’ve come to expect from the internet.

Okay, fair enough. And for arguments sake, I will go with your assessment of Mueller's career, although I have read of plenty of claims about blunders he made. He's human, so not infallible, and surely has made many enemies in his time just like the current POTUS, so the criticisms may be unwarranted. Perhaps you have inside knowledge of the man. And I agree, there is way to much name calling. On both sides of this issue. I'm guilty of it in conversations real time, and suspect you are as well, along with damn near everyone discussing it regardless of forum. And the only way we would get that evidence would be to have and investigation into him, something that is above my paygrade, and frankly, probably unwarranted. But using that same argument, where is the evidence against Trump? You cannot tell me they could not have found it by now with the resources they have, and by your comment regarding LEAP I am going to make the assumption (knowing full well the danger of that) you have some LE and or investigative background. If you've read what little I have commented on this, you pretty much know my feelings on the guy (POTUS). The hypocrisy of this whole thing is what gets me. Plenty of smoke for investigations surrounding the last admin, the previous one, and God knows the one before that. DJT was set upon before he took office. And there are those who are willing to usurp. Always have and always will. Just ask Bernie Sanders. My question is why all of the others got a pass but DJT has to be burned at the stake? And why the circular firing squad over the guy from the arenas who have screamed from the mountaintops about getting someone who is not a DC type insider into national office? Again, If he is guilty of crimes for which he should be indicted/tried/impeached/imprisoned then I am all for it. But by God hold everyone to the same standard. In my opinion, that has absolutely not been done. When DJT is gone, and if/when the "establishment" (R and D inclusive. The careerists are a self licking ice cream cone) regains power, you can bet they will rig the system to ensure they are never challenged like this again. So again I ask: What is the answer? Maybe we should just go get a beer sometime and hash it out.

[Sensei]

That's not a logical statement. Unless it's sarcasm...

Sarcasm. I’ve added a wink emoji to my original statement.

[Zincwarrior]

Yeah, the latter. :D
:o

[Jaywalker]

... where is the evidence against Trump? It's an investigation to develop facts, not a trial. They haven't told us what they know. The media, left and right, pontificate as if they have inside knowledge, but they don't, so we don't know if Mueller's found anything. Personally, if he says there nothing there then I'll believe him.

[CWM11B]

I'm fully aware of that. They have been investigating over a year and so far have served up a process crime. At some point, you have to say "there is no there, there" and move on. The appearance becomes that of a vindictive witch hunt. He says there is nothing there, I'm good with that. They present solid evidence against him and go to trial, I'm good with that too. This whole thing is supposedly about Trump, via his campaign, getting the Russians to influence the election in his favor, something I believe Comey answered in the negative under questioning by Gowdy. At this point, regardless of the outcome, both sides are still going to want to tear each other apart. If it continues on the track we are currently on, violence is a real possibility and we all lose in that case. Both sides are so damaged by self inflicted wounds right now, I'm not sure finding the truth is even possible.

[critter]

I'm fully aware of that. They have been investigating over a year and so far have served up a process crime. At some point, you have to say "there is no there, there" and move on. The appearance becomes that of a vindictive witch hunt. He says there is nothing there, I'm good with that. They present solid evidence against him and go to trial, I'm good with that too. This whole thing is supposedly about Trump, via his campaign, getting the Russians to influence the election in his favor, something I believe Comey answered in the negative under questioning by Gowdy. At this point, regardless of the outcome, both sides are still going to want to tear each other apart. If it continues on the track we are currently on, violence is a real possibility and we all lose in that case. Both sides are so damaged by self inflicted wounds right now, I'm not sure finding the truth is even possible.

Rosenstein's wording (or whoever wrote it) basically states " ..and anything arising from the investigation." What would that not possibly cover?

ETA:
Rosenstein's letter of appointment (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/05/17/us/politics/document-Robert-Mueller-Special-Counsel-Russia.html)


ETA2: Is this type open verbiage typical for investigations?

[Sensei]

I'm fully aware of that. They have been investigating over a year and so far have served up a process crime. At some point, you have to say "there is no there, there" and move on. The appearance becomes that of a vindictive witch hunt. He says there is nothing there, I'm good with that. They present solid evidence against him and go to trial, I'm good with that too. This whole thing is supposedly about Trump, via his campaign, getting the Russians to influence the election in his favor, something I believe Comey answered in the negative under questioning by Gowdy. At this point, regardless of the outcome, both sides are still going to want to tear each other apart. If it continues on the track we are currently on, violence is a real possibility and we all lose in that case. Both sides are so damaged by self inflicted wounds right now, I'm not sure finding the truth is even possible.

Respectfully, much of what you posted is incorrect and I believe that you are making honest mistakes. First, Meuller’s investigation has only been going on since May, not more than a year. That is a blink of an eye on the scale of federal investigations. For context, Starr’s investigation of the Clinton Whitewater scandal lasted 4 years. Second, Meuller’s has served up far more than process crime as Manafort faces decades for money laundering involving his relationship to Russian financial interests. Yes, those crimes occurred prior to working for Trump, but they are still legit charges. Flynn was allowed to plea guilty to a process crime in exchange for his cooperation, but he too was starring down the barrel of multiple felonies for crimes committed while advising Trump.

From my limited perspective, I see little wrong or irregular with how Meuller is conducting his investigation. Yes, he has put democratic operatives on his team; a smart move for a republican wanting to show impartiality. He has also booted team members who demonstrated overt bias. My biggest issue is with the leaks, but notice how things tightened up once Strzok got the boot.

My suggestion - sit back, relax, and have a whiskey. I’ve seen no evidence that Trump committed an impeachable offense. A rigerous investigation that clears Trump a couple months before the 2018 midterms would be the best thing that could happen to the republicans assuming the economy keeps humming along. Besides, there is a damn good chance that certain former DOJ officials will not like the forthcoming IG report.

[Sensei]

Rosenstein's wording (or whoever wrote it) basically states " ..and anything arising from the investigation." What would that not possibly cover?

ETA:
Rosenstein's letter of appointment (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/05/17/us/politics/document-Robert-Mueller-Special-Counsel-Russia.html)


ETA2: Is this type open verbiage typical for investigations?

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/01/29/orders/

Yes. This link will take you to the 3 judge decision to expand Ken Starr’s investigation to the Lewinsky matter. Notice numbers 3 and 4...

"(3) The Independent Counsel shall have jurisdiction and authority to investigate related violations of federal criminal law, other than a Class B or C misdemeanor or infraction, including any person or entity who has engaged in unlawful conspiracy or who has aided or abetted any federal offense, as necessary to resolve the matter described above.

"(4) The Independent Counsel shall have jurisdiction and authority to investigate crimes, such as any violation of 28 U.S.C. 1826, any obstruction of the due administration of justice, or any material false testimony or statement in violation of federal criminal law, arising out of his investigation of the matter described above.

[CWM11B]

Gotcha, no worries. I merged Comey/Mueller together as a total, I should have been more clear. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Trumps campaign was a target of FBI investigation prior to his election? I'll readily admit it is getting hard for me to keep up with. I get the Manafort thing, but as you stated, that had nothing to do with the matter at hand and would never have been uncovered without this investigation. I don't have a problem with that either, as plenty of cases I worked led to similar discoveries. I'm with you on the length of federal investigations. Worked on a couple peripherally that went on for a LONG time, (and have an unbelievable/funny/sad/how the FUCK did that happen?story out of one). Tracking on Starr as well. For what it's worth, I thought that one was a debacle of a fishing expedition as well. I have zero doubt that Clinton was a dirty to the core and still is. I also believe he has commited criminal acts. But all they could come up with was a blow job that wouldn't have been anything more than embarrassing if he hadn't lied about it under oath. I loathed Clinton, but thought even then the investigation became ridiculous.
I see your point on the operatives in the team, but believe it should be a bit more diverse. It looks to be one sided not just with Democrat operatives, but HRC supporters and allies. How about a half and half? Or political independents? While it may work out if they come up with no findings, as the Trump team can say even his staunch enemies exonerated him, if they do find something it smacks of a lack of objectivity and may open the door for challenges in court. Either way, there's going to be howling over the outcome. I'm with you, I don't believe he has done anything impeachable. I am also disgusted by the leaks, and anyone caught doing it needs to be given a varsity spot on the Ft. Leavenworth Precision Lawnmowing Team with a side job of manual boulder reduction specialist until they leave this mortal coil. Classified means classified. Cheers folks, and have a good night.

[wvincent]

[QUOTE=CWM11B;706396] a varsity spot on the Ft. Leavenworth Precision Lawnmowing Team /QUOTE]

As an aside,you know that's a thing, right?

I first learned of it at the CINC's conference, in 86'.

Sorry to sidetrack, just kind of jumped out at me, like WTF, how you know bout that?

[CWM11B]

wvincent sure do. Couldn't have come up with a quip that clever :). Buddy of mine was out there for a course. He said it was funny as hell to see.

[Drang]

All the graduates of the Army's Command and General Staff course I knew described it.
Many of them went after their first command, and before the tour of the "correctional facility" they were asked if they had sent anyone there. If so, they were removed from the tour.

[wvincent]

Meanwhile, back on track.

If I was in charge of the SVR RF, I would be handing out YUUUGE performance bonuses. I mean, think about it. They have sown so much discord and distrust in this country in one election cycle, it's freaking amazing.

Job well done, Assholes.

They also provided the deep state with the magic arrow for their quiver, effectively hamstringing a sitting President. And, it's going to have some serious effects on the 2018 cycle, too.

And for those who believe the deep state is some made up boogeyman, this is worth a read:


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/...-about-it.html

It's always been there, it always will be there.

[Grey]

Meanwhile, back on track.

If I was in charge of the SVR RF, I would be handing out YUUUGE performance bonuses. I mean, think about it. They have sown so much discord and distrust in this country in one election cycle, it's freaking amazing.

Job well done, Assholes.

They also provided the deep state with the magic arrow for their quiver, effectively hamstringing a sitting President. And, it's going to have some serious effects on the 2018 cycle, too.

And for those who believe the deep state is some made up boogeyman, this is worth a read:


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/...-about-it.html

It's always been there, it always will be there.Fox news opinion piece isn't exactly a smoking gun...

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[wvincent]

Fox news opinion piece isn't exactly a smoking gun...

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

Absolutely correct.
Posted wrong link.
This should be the right one.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/02/03/steve-hilton-yes-there-is-deep-state-and-tony-blair-warned-me-about-it.html

I think it is good summary of the issue, with a couple of pretty good sources.

[Grey]

Absolutely correct.
Posted wrong link.
This should be the right one.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/02/03/steve-hilton-yes-there-is-deep-state-and-tony-blair-warned-me-about-it.html

I think it is good summary of the issue, with a couple of pretty good sources.Reads more like an advert for a tv show. Which They advertise at the end. I don't know enough to say one way or the other about a deep state but that piece is Pretty weak.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[TGS]

Reads more like an advert for a tv show. Which They advertise at the end. I don't know enough to say one way or the other about a deep state but that piece is Pretty weak.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

Weak is an understatement. That article was pure junk......as for a list of good sources, I didn't see any. What I saw was a dude with an unsubstantiated and poorly explained opinion he formed with his vast experience by "talking with people" since 2012. I'll chalk that right up there with the person(s) "who are familiar with Comey's way of thinking" garbage that hit the news last year.

As for the deep state thing....I think a lot of people are throwing around that term thinking they sound smart, or as if they've uncovered some secret society.

It's no secret that power circles are formed in any entity/organization, but people are just acting stupid with it right now.

P.S.: the "deep state" includes insanely rich business people as part of its definition, which is obvious given they want to influence government for their benefit. I have no fucking clue how Trump has come to represent the everyman vs the deep state.....by every facet of his life, he is 100% deep state material.

[Sensei]

Meanwhile, back on track.

If I was in charge of the SVR RF, I would be handing out YUUUGE performance bonuses. I mean, think about it. They have sown so much discord and distrust in this country in one election cycle, it's freaking amazing.

Job well done, Assholes.

They also provided the deep state with the magic arrow for their quiver, effectively hamstringing a sitting President. And, it's going to have some serious effects on the 2018 cycle, too.

And for those who believe the deep state is some made up boogeyman, this is worth a read:


http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/...-about-it.html

It's always been there, it always will be there.

It was really a quite elegant model. 1) They cultivated financial relationships with various personnel from all of the campaigns including Trump, Clinton, and Stein. 2) Offer up dirt on the opposition to each campaign. 3) Then, sit back and watch the fireworks as the losers finger point and cry foul.

IMHO, this is where the Trump campaign opened itself up to criticism and created a tremendous perception of impropriety. By touting a reset of Russian-American relations, employing senior campaign staff with Russian financial ties, and seeming open to Russian assistance, the campaign essentially guaranteed scrutiny from federal LE.

I’ve seen no evidence that anyone from the Trump campaign exchanged something of value with Russians which would constitute collusion and a violation of election laws. However, I’m concerned by the campaign’s willingness to meet with Russian operatives with the hopes of gaining a material advantage. That was extremely stupid; not just in a political novice way, but also in a common sense way. It placed senior campaign and family members in immediate jeopardy of violating campaign and conspiracy laws, as well as downstream risk of process crimes (i.e. lying to the FBI and obstruction of justice) during the inevitable post-hoc investigations.

So, while I see no evidence and doubt that Trump colluded with Russians or obstructed justice in firing Comey, I am not so confident that his senior staff and family are so lucky. I give it 50:50 odds that someone very close to Trump will face felony charges for lying or attempting to conceal material information in an attempt to coverup something that was embarrassing but not a crime.

[critter]

Some commentary by former FBI agents:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjhpnduIYfY


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5orq9385Z0

Gowdy answers questions on Face the Nation:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNNj5UnjDWA

[JHC]

And who the heck is Carter Page anyway?

I do not know how complete or accurate this is. But it's the most effort I've seen put into chronicling Page and how he came to draw such attention. Just your basic everyman who has a knack of consorting with Russian spies? ;)

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/03/carter-page-nunes-memo-216934

[critter]

It was really a quite elegant model. 1) They cultivated financial relationships with various personnel from all of the campaigns including Trump, Clinton, and Stein. 2) Offer up dirt on the opposition to each campaign. 3) Then, sit back and watch the fireworks as the losers finger point and cry foul.

IMHO, this is where the Trump campaign opened itself up to criticism and created a tremendous perception of impropriety. By touting a reset of Russian-American relations, employing senior campaign staff with Russian financial ties, and seeming open to Russian assistance, the campaign essentially guaranteed scrutiny from federal LE.

I’ve seen no evidence that anyone from the Trump campaign exchanged something of value with Russians which would constitute collusion and a violation of election laws. However, I’m concerned by the campaign’s willingness to meet with Russian operatives with the hopes of gaining a material advantage. That was extremely stupid; not just in a political novice way, but also in a common sense way. It placed senior campaign and family members in immediate jeopardy of violating campaign and conspiracy laws, as well as downstream risk of process crimes (i.e. lying to the FBI and obstruction of justice) during the inevitable post-hoc investigations.

So, while I see no evidence and doubt that Trump colluded with Russians or obstructed justice in firing Comey, I am not so confident that his senior staff and family are so lucky. I give it 50:50 odds that someone very close to Trump will face felony charges for lying or attempting to conceal material information in an attempt to coverup something that was embarrassing but not a crime.

Excellent summary...

[Drang]

The House Intel Memo - Law & Liberty (http://www.libertylawsite.org/2018/02/05/the-house-intel-memo/)

After all of the fanfare about whether the House Intelligence Committee Memo should have been released, we can now see what the fuss was about. In my view, the memo outlines a significant amount of serious government wrongdoing by the FBI and the Department of Justice.
...

This Memo ignores so much, including the the fake investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email practices and the large scale unmaskings committed by the Obama Administration. While there is no way to know for sure at this point, when this other wrongdoing is added to the picture, it is likely that we will have a situation of overwhelming partisan corruption conducted by the executive branch.
...
The most important aspect of this investigation is easy to overlook. An Administration of one party ran several investigations of the other party during a political campaign (while at the same time running a phony investigation of the candidate from its own party). This is an extremely sensitive situation. Such an investigation should be conducted in a scrupulous way. That is not what happened.

It's a short piece, GRTWT.



About

The Online Library of Law and Liberty’s focus is on the content, status, and development of law in the context of republican and limited government and the ways that liberty and law and law and liberty mutually reinforce the other. This site brings together serious debate, commentary, essays, book reviews, interviews, and educational material in a commitment to the first principles of law in a free society. Law and Liberty considers a range of foundational and contemporary legal issues, legal philosophy, and pedagogy.

The website is provided by Liberty Fund, Inc., a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals. The Foundation develops, supervises, and finances its own educational activities, with the goal of fostering discussion and thought on enduring topics pertaining to the creation and maintenance of such a society.

[willie]

In my career I was always as a low level guy in local and state government jobs. I never worked a single place where the people who ran it would not tell lies. The reason was protecting their own interests. Aren't political appointees running the big agencies? So go figure. Their lips are moving.

[blues]

Some commentary by former FBI agents...snip

Hahaha! Chris Swecker. I don't think I'd be going to him for any particular point of view. He tried to weasel a case and one of my CI's out from under me, (without so much as a phone call before taking certain steps), putting people and an op I was running at risk.

We ended up having our mutual SAC's sit down in a meeting with us at which point I said that unless they backed off I'd report to the media how they tried to backdoor my op and could've gotten people hurt. They decided they'd be better off fishing in other waters. I agreed.

And then there was the credit he received for the apprehension of Eric Rudolph...:rolleyes:

(Admittedly, I have a long memory and I should probably just forgive him his weasely attempt to trespass.)

[Jaywalker]

Of course, the fat lady has yet to sing, but so far there has been some substantial damage. Both Republicans and Democrats are yelling at each again, making common ground on other matters - infrastructure, immigration, etc. - harder to find. American belief in the probity of federal law enforcement has been severely damaged, making the cooperation they need with the public more difficult. Relations between intelligence agencies and congressional oversight have been shattered - the understanding was that intel agencies would lay out their crown jewels on the understanding that oversight committees would not use them to score partisan points; that's gone, and we don't know what will replace it.

[blues]

Of course, the fat lady has yet to sing, but so far there has been some substantial damage. Both Republicans and Democrats are yelling at each again, making common ground on other matters - infrastructure, immigration, etc. - harder to find. American belief in the probity of federal law enforcement has been severely damaged, making the cooperation they need with the public more difficult. Relations between intelligence agencies and congressional oversight have been shattered - the understanding was that intel agencies would lay out their crown jewels on the understanding that oversight committees would not use them to score partisan points; that's gone, and we don't know what will replace it.

Ain't democracy great?!!? We'll be dealing with the smoldering embers for years to come unless the Twitterer-In-Chief can distract us all with some other sleight of hand.

[critter]

Hahaha! Chris Swecker. I don't think I'd be going to him for any particular point of view. He tried to weasel a case and one of my CI's out from under me, (without so much as a phone call before taking certain steps), putting people and an op I was running at risk.

We ended up having our mutual SAC's sit down in a meeting with us at which point I said that unless they backed off I'd report to the media how they tried to backdoor my op and could've got people hurt. They decided they'd be better off fishing in other waters. I agreed.

And then there was the credit he received for the apprehension of Eric Rudolph...:rolleyes:

(Admittedly I have a long memory and I should probably just forgive him his weasely attempt to trespass.)

Forgiveness is for the weak! j/k .. sorta... chalk up one loss for weasely types. Glad he didn't blow for you and those who trusted you. Both of them appear to be treating the memo as the evidence. They may have some connections with information, but unlikely they've actually viewed the actual warrants, et al.

[blues]

Forgiveness is for the weak! j/k .. sorta... chalk up one loss for weasely types. Glad he didn't blow for you and those who trusted you. Both of them appear to be treating the memo as the evidence. They may have some connections with information, but unlikely they've actually viewed the actual warrants, et al.

Just for the record, critter, since you highlighted the line about Eric Rudolph, I was not involved in that matter. However, somewhat humorously, I used to spend a lot of time in Bryson City, NC at the time hiking in the Nantahala N.F. and the Great Smoky Mountains N.P. and the folks at the bed and breakfast my wife and I stayed at thought I was there to search for Rudolph in the mountains and woods. I tried to explain that I didn't normally bring my wife on such adventures. It did make me laugh though...they never quite believed me...and they probably just thought my wife was a fellow agent.

But again, that was not a case I had any active participation on.

[critter]

Of course, the fat lady has yet to sing, but so far there has been some substantial damage. Both Republicans and Democrats are yelling at each again, making common ground on other matters - infrastructure, immigration, etc. - harder to find. American belief in the probity of federal law enforcement has been severely damaged, making the cooperation they need with the public more difficult. Relations between intelligence agencies and congressional oversight have been shattered - the understanding was that intel agencies would lay out their crown jewels on the understanding that oversight committees would not use them to score partisan points; that's gone, and we don't know what will replace it.

Not trying to get into a debate with you because you have been quite the rational voice. From an outsider looking at all of this -- what you've written there implies responding with laying out those crown jewels to oversight is a voluntary cooperation process. Granted, the memo isn't the evidence, but it would appear that this particular intelligence agency wasn't particularly forthcoming with *required* information. Quite the opposite, they were stonewalling and responded only when threatened with contempt charges... at least on the surface it would appear that it wasn't the HIC breaking the faith. After watching tons of oversight committee proceedings on CSPAN over the last few years, stonewalling appears to be the new norm rather than cooperation.

[critter]

Just for the record, critter, since you highlighted the line about Eric Rudolph, I was not involved in that matter. However, somewhat humorously, I used to spend a lot of time in Bryson City, NC at the time hiking in the Nantahala N.F. and the Great Smoky Mountains N.P. and the folks at the bed and breakfast my wife and I stayed at thought I was there to search for Rudolph in the mountains and woods. I tried to explain that I didn't normally bring my wife on such adventures. It did make me laugh though...they never quite believed me...and they probably just thought my wife was a fellow agent.

But again, that was not a case I had any active participation on.

You never know, she may really be an intelligence agent, and just can't tell you... :cool: or can you tell your spouse? You were hanging out in my former neck of the woods (or I was in yours)... when I actually had working knees, we hiked all over that area. Gorgeous. At least two weeks every spring/summer over a 20 year span. Damn I miss that..

I'm also obviously suffering ADD (pertaining to the highlighted Rudolph part). I intended, but somehow forgot to add - THAT'S where I remember Swecker from... couldn't place him but he looked familiar..

[Jaywalker]

From an outsider looking at all of this -- what you've written there implies responding with laying out those crown jewels to oversight is a voluntary cooperation process.
That's a reasonable question. No, oversight, per se, is not voluntary. There are several normal limits on it, however. First and foremost is the level of detail provided, and budget oversight can take place at a much higher level than FISA applications for warrants, for instance. Suppose intel agencies learned not to trust members of the oversight committee for whatever reason. They might provide details indicating that they have issues 34 FISA warrants two quarters ago (sorry about the delay while we checked its accuracy). Also sorry, details are classified. Please nominate a member from among this list of congressmen and staffers to be read into the program. Another approach might be to move the program to a Black program that can only be reviewed by specific committees. There are other bureaucratic approaches that comply with the letter of oversight requirements while removing the details. Sure, high-level intervention would fix that, but if your boss were on your side of the issue it might be required for each and every request that's denied/delayed. That's what Devin Nunes appears to be trying to force, even when the facts aren't on his side. If he were smarter he'd see that.

And before you ask, no, that's not a "deep state" issue; that's people trying to protect our intelligence sources and methods from partisan use.

[critter]

That's a reasonable question. No, oversight, per se, is not voluntary. There are several normal limits on it, however. First and foremost is the level of detail provided, and budget oversight can take place at a much higher level than FISA applications for warrants, for instance. Suppose intel agencies learned not to trust members of the oversight committee for whatever reason. They might provide details indicating that they have issues 34 FISA warrants two quarters ago (sorry about the delay while we checked its accuracy). Also sorry, details are classified. Please nominate a member from among this list of congressmen and staffers to be read into the program. Another approach might be to move the program to a Black program that can only be reviewed by specific committees. There are other bureaucratic approaches that comply with the letter of oversight requirements while removing the details. Sure, high-level intervention would fix that, but if your boss were on your side of the issue it might be required for each and every request that's denied/delayed. That's what Devin Nunes appears to be trying to force, even when the facts aren't on his side. If he were smarter he'd see that.

And before you ask, no, that's not a "deep state" issue; that's people trying to protect our intelligence sources and methods from partisan use.

Thank you for the elaboration... that actually makes perfect sense.

[wvincent]

Weak is an understatement. That article was pure junk......as for a list of good sources, I didn't see any. What I saw was a dude with an unsubstantiated and poorly explained opinion he formed with his vast experience by "talking with people" since 2012. I'll chalk that right up there with the person(s) "who are familiar with Comey's way of thinking" garbage that hit the news last year.

As for the deep state thing....I think a lot of people are throwing around that term thinking they sound smart, or as if they've uncovered some secret society.

It's no secret that power circles are formed in any entity/organization, but people are just acting stupid with it right now.

P.S.: the "deep state" includes insanely rich business people as part of its definition, which is obvious given they want to influence government for their benefit. I have no fucking clue how Trump has come to represent the everyman vs the deep state.....by every facet of his life, he is 100% deep state material.

You know, I agree. "Deep State" does sound pretty theatrical. Perhaps we should just refer to it as the "Entrenched Bureaucracy".

They had their druthers on who they wanted for a President, and they showed their bias during the classified data investigation.

I'm not saying the rank and file field agents did anything wrong, but a select few in leadership showed their asses.

I suspect the only reason it was reopened is because the info came from a field office in New York, thus too may people outside the circle had knowledge of it's existence.

Maybe that's why it is alleged that they sat on it for 3 weeks before notifying Congress that they had it.

I imagine it created quite a bit of hand wringing and "oh sh*ts" during those 3 weeks.

[critter]

Interesting commentary by Joe DiGenova stating that the FBI under Obama had already been lambasted by the FISC for providing false information (lambasted? why not something more serious?), and he discusses the lack of a predicate crime in the Mueller investigation and also states that it is required in the case of a special counsel appointment (I have no idea):

Those two topics, at least, aren't based on the "memo as evidence." I haven't found corroborating documents for the first claim... Anything search with FISA or FISC points to the memo or to wiki pages.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKr6MSe9XiQ&t

[Sensei]

Interesting commentary by Joe DiGenova stating that the FBI under Obama had already been lambasted by the FISC for providing false information (lambasted? why not something more serious?), and he discusses the lack of a predicate crime in the Mueller investigation and also states that it is required in the case of a special counsel appointment (I have no idea):

Those two topics, at least, aren't based on the "memo as evidence." I haven't found corroborating documents for the first claim... Anything search with FISA or FISC points to the memo or to wiki pages.


Here is 28 CFR 600.1 Gounds for Appointing a Special Counsel:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.1

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

The AG or AAG just needs to determine that a criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted. There is no requirements that the AG name a specific crime that has been committed, only a determination that an investigation needs to take place. Most people would say that probable cause for an investigation was easily reached since foreign expenditures to influence an election is a crime. Then, there was that guy Trump hired to run his campaign who was laundering Ukrainian/Russian money for years. Oh, and the dude he appointed as NSA who, just months prior, was an unregistered agent of a foreign governmet. And finally, there is the uncomfortable matter of his family members agreeing to meet with Russian operatives advertising dirt on Hillary, which was likely just shitty optics, but would have been illegal as hell had they offered something in return for that dirt; certainly worth a looksie by the men in black, no? ;)

Contrast that with how Hillary operates. She may be a corrupt bitch, but at least she has the common sense to hire consulting firms to perform opposition research so that no one from the campaign is in direct contact with a foreign entity...

[critter]

Here is 28 CFR 600.1 Gounds for Appointing a Special Counsel:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.1

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

The AG or AAG just needs to determine that a criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted. There is no requirements that the AG name a specific crime that has been committed, only a determination that an investigation needs to take place. Most people would say that probable cause for an investigation was easily reached since foreign expenditures to influence an election is a crime. Then, there was that guy Trump hired to run his campaign who was laundering Ukrainian/Russian money for years. Oh, and the dude he appointed as NSA who, just months prior, was an unregistered agent of a foreign governmet. And finally, there is the uncomfortable matter of his family members agreeing to meet with Russian operatives advertising dirt on Hillary, which was likely just shitty optics, but would have been illegal as hell had they offered something in return for that dirt; certainly worth a looksie by the men in black, no? ;)

Contrast that with how Hillary operates. She may be a corrupt bitch, but at least she has the common sense to hire consulting firms to perform opposition research so that no one from the campaign is in direct contact with a foreign entity...

lol words to keep in mind if any of us ever decide to go the corrupt politician route..

It's becoming pretty clear that at least half the people with comment vids/papers are just blathering wildly.

[Eastex]

Two things of note, seems the Republicans on the House Intel committee voted unanimously to release the Democrats memo, bad optics at the least since Democrats voted as a block to block the release of the Republicans.
Also the Carter Page stuff is getting even more interesting. Apparently in March he’s working for the FBI and by October he’s labeled a Foreign spy to justify Title 1 surveillance of anyone he’s been in contact with.
Im going to post this link with the full knowledge that liberal/Democrats will just attack it as a blog or some other right wing hack job site. I know some of those sites myself and can recognize them as such. This one is more journalistic in its approach, long form, annotated in some of its work and honestly better than most of what passes for journalism today in my opinion. https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/05/in-march-2016-carter-page-was-an-fbi-employee-in-october-2016-fbi-told-fisa-court-hes-a-spy/#more-145498


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JHC]

Also the Carter Page stuff is getting even more interesting. Apparently in March he’s working for the FBI and by October he’s labeled a Foreign spy to justify Title 1 surveillance of anyone he’s been in contact with.


Yes it is. Apparently somewhere along this path - of being on the FBI's radar since 2013, agents met with him and warned that some of his Russian contacts may be attempting to recruit him for espionage purposes.

[JHC]

IMO the Republicans are being played to get and stay outraged.

Very little of what the FBI's critics believe will turn out to be accurate, me thinks.

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/05/nunes-well-technically-maybe-doj-disclose-dossiers-political-bias-fisa-court/

"But the apparent fact remains that the judge was notified of the document’s political origins and signed off on the warrant anyway."

Why? Because it doesn't matter. There were other threads of intel I'm sure from other investigations. Because Republicans also paid Steele for oppo against Trump during the primaries before the DNC picked it up. It's just one piece of many used to further keep an eye on Carter Page.

Why does Trump resist this so?

[blues]

Why does Trump resist this so?

You and your rhetorical questions...;)

[critter]

IMO the Republicans are being played to get and stay outraged.

Very little of what the FBI's critics believe will turn out to be accurate, me thinks.

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/05/nunes-well-technically-maybe-doj-disclose-dossiers-political-bias-fisa-court/

"But the apparent fact remains that the judge was notified of the document’s political origins and signed off on the warrant anyway."

Why? Because it doesn't matter. There were other threads of intel I'm sure from other investigations. Because Republicans also paid Steele for oppo against Trump during the primaries before the DNC picked it up. It's just one piece of many used to further keep an eye on Carter Page.

Why does Trump resist this so?

I think the faux Clinton/Clinton foundation investigations are the primary cause(s) of any outrage at the FBI and DoJ. Strzok's text messages and "the memo" only solidify the already existing distrust. Former Deputy Director Kallstrom has detailed many times exactly how those investigations were shams and completely outside FBI SOP. I'm not a Republican, and haven't been since the advent of the Necons/RINOs and was never a Dem. Gowdy, the only one talking having actually read all the info, had voiced 'grave concerns' and also spoke of "FISA abuses'. He also voices complete confidence in Mueller. He also states that there would be a Russia investigation without the alleged abuses.

It was my understanding that when FISA was expanded (for lack of a better term) under Bush, that the premise was that the 4thA was upheld because none of the intel gathered through use of a FISA warrant/surveillance could be used to initiate prosecution or as evidence against a US Citizen in court. It was merely "gathering information" for national security. Every judge I've seen comment on FISA (Including one here locally, which of course isn't every judge there is) flatly states that FISA is a violation of the 4thA if it is used to gather evidence for or to initiate prosecution. So far, none of the players have been prosecuted, but there is major ongoing investigation of US Citizens that appears to have been initiated based upon FISA surveillance which obviously may lead to the prosecution of US Citizens. How does that transition become possible? (serious question, how does it get from surveillance to investigation/prosecution without being either a violation of the 4th or navigate around the "fruit of the poisonous tree"? Is this why there is no predicate "crime" as the basis? "We're investigating Russian interference, but if we find something else, we can prosecute...")

[JHC]

You and your rhetorical questions...;)

I have read it's not unusual for an application to not name a party that is connected to a source but is not the subject of the investigation, perhaps a law firm in this case IIRC. In this context, describing it as a political party or backed by a political party etc without naming the law firm that the DNC engaged to run point. Does that sound accurate/reasonable?

FISA judge would have to be pretty dense not to be able to figure this out.

[JHC]

I think the faux Clinton/Clinton foundation investigations are the primary cause(s) of any outrage at the FBI and DoJ. Strzok's text messages and "the memo" only solidify the already existing distrust. Former Deputy Director Kallstrom has detailed many times exactly how those investigations were shams and completely outside FBI SOP. I'm not a Republican, and haven't been since the advent of the Necons/RINOs and was never a Dem. Gowdy, the only one talking having actually read all the info, had voiced 'grave concerns' and also spoke of "FISA abuses'. He also voices complete confidence in Mueller. He also states that there would be a Russia investigation without the alleged abuses.

It was my understanding that when FISA was expanded (for lack of a better term) under Bush, that the premise was that the 4thA was upheld because none of the intel gathered through use of a FISA warrant/surveillance could be used to initiate prosecution or as evidence against a US Citizen in court. It was merely "gathering information" for national security. Every judge I've seen comment on FISA (Including one here locally, which of course isn't every judge there is) flatly states that FISA is a violation of the 4thA if it is used to gather evidence for or to initiate prosecution. So far, none of the players have been prosecuted, but there is major ongoing investigation of US Citizens that appears to have been initiated based upon FISA surveillance which obviously may lead to the prosecution of US Citizens. How does that transition become possible? (serious question, how does it get from surveillance to investigation/prosecution without being either a violation of the 4th or navigate around the "fruit of the poisonous tree"? Is this why there is no predicate "crime" as the basis? "We're investigating Russian interference, but if we find something else, we can prosecute...")

Don't ask me. I'm an unrepentant neocon. ;)

I think this was for a counter-intelligence investigation. So there's that. The links HCM included early in the thread may have some of those answers however.

[critter]

Don't ask me. I'm an unrepentant neocon. ;)

I think this was for a counter-intelligence investigation. So there's that. The links HCM included early in the thread may have some of those answers however.

LoL, damn.. and you actually sounded more libertarian..

AHHHH yes... I began reading those and then got sidetracked... thank you for the reminder.

[blues]

I have read it's not unusual for an application to not name a party that is connected to a source but is not the subject of the investigation, perhaps a law firm in this case IIRC. In this context, describing it as a political party or backed by a political party etc without naming the law firm that the DNC engaged to run point. Does that sound accurate/reasonable?

FISA judge would have to be pretty dense not to be able to figure this out.

That's too many negatives in one sentence before my first cup of coffee...(which is just now arriving).

I have limited FISA court experience and will defer to those who may have more. That said, I don't think it's a matter of norm so much as whether the application accurately supports the foundation, (probable cause), and premise for which the application is being filed.

If the court, (judge), feels that the predicate has to be fleshed out more, the application will be updated or revised to meet the judge's approval. It's a (somewhat) fluid process.

[Jaywalker]

Before the Patriot Act a "wall" separated intelligence surveillance and law enforcement.

Sections 218 and 504 of the USA PATRIOT Act helped to bring down this “wall” separating intelligence and law enforcement officials. They erased the perceived statutory impediment to more robust information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement personnel.https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/usa-patriot-act-amendments-to-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-authorities

[blues]

Before the Patriot Act a "wall" separated intelligence surveillance and law enforcement.
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/usa-patriot-act-amendments-to-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-authorities

That was the reason why there was so much complication in my case which involved a FISA matter.

The particular instance involved a corrupt police detective I had arrested and who was convicted and sentenced to 40 years for his involvement in an international narco-trafficking organization, which was later determined to have been aided and abetted by the CIA (unbeknownst to us at that point in time). This was only one small part of the overall case which involved several subjects in the U.S. and abroad, a cargo airline, (created for trafficking), and local and foreign gov't corruption.

His attorneys tried to argue that the involvement of a (rogue) gov't agency in the matter absolved their client of his participation in the illegal scheme.

Since there was a wall between the intelligence and law enforcement side, even though it was law enforcement that brought it to light, the wall became an impediment which needed to be gotten around by the U.S. Attorney's Office, aside from the matter of establishing all the requisite clearances.

I don't miss the headaches.

[HCM]

Before the Patriot Act a "wall" separated intelligence surveillance and law enforcement.
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/usa-patriot-act-amendments-to-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-authorities

There was a reason that was changed:

23609

[blues]

^^^To illustrate the point most emphatically...(when a finer point wouldn't quite have the same impact nor import).

[JRB]

There was a reason that was changed:

23609

Fear, uncertainty, and disaster are wonderful incentives to give up rights and liberties. I don't respond to 'its for the kids' appeals to safety on gun rights, I won't respond in the same vein to threats of terrorism on undermining (if not giving up) other constitutional rights.

I've read as much as I can find on the matter, and sadly most of it is other people's opinions and tinfoil-hat conspiracy BS with little hard facts. But the conclusion I inevitably reach was that yes, we could have prevented it without the Patriot Act.
Would it have been 'harder' as in requiring more cooperation between agencies and more agency man power, specifically in translating commo intercepts and proactively acting on it? Yes. But it could still be done.
If anyone has better or well-vetted reading I can find on the subject, I'm very interested in understanding as much as I can. But I've spent years reading about it since that morning, and outside of specific organizations with an OCONUS mission that are aimed exclusively at non-citizens, I cannot see the constitutional justification for the expanded powers aimed directly at US Citizens "for my safety". Especially when most of its proponents in LE and Gov roles are simply happy that it made their job 'easier'.
People in power want more power - what else is new?

Also, I'm getting weary of seeing people call President Trump 'Cadet Bone Spurs' or similar. If you want to hold all elected officials that skated out of military service to the same derisive snark, go for it, but there's a hell of a lot of them. Selectively applying that bias is intellectually dishonest and I think we can all agree that President Trump has provided plenty of other material for derisive snark.
On that other hand, I'm also sick of people parading around someone else's military awards and decorations as if it's indicative of nobility or integrity. Some of the biggest dirtbags in uniform that I've ever known are wearing Silver Stars or Bronze Stars and some of the best Soldiers I've ever served with barely got an end-of-deployment AAM.
High awards are very rarely given for genuine heroism. Mostly they are indicative of rank held in theater and political connections to higher ranking individuals, and little else.

Going back on topic, all this memo proved was that the system is the same system it's been for years. Everyone's feeding on every news source that matches their confirmation bias because being pissed off at the TV is what gets the ratings and ad revenue.

Nihil sub sole novum.

[Sensei]

I’m getting more than a little weary of Trump’s supporters calling people like Meuller a “bought and paid for Clinton hack” (post #117). While we are at it, I suppose that I’m also weary of Trump’s Twitterfarting, name calling, and general kindergarten behavior.

[Totem Polar]

While we are at it, I suppose that I’m also weary of Trump’s Twitterfarting, name calling, and general kindergarten behavior.

He’s easily the least presidential president I’ve seen in my lifetime, with both pros and cons springing from that fact.

[JRB]

I’m getting more than a little weary of Trump’s supporters calling people like Meuller a “bought and paid for Clinton hack” (post #117). While we are at it, I suppose that I’m also weary of Trump’s Twitterfarting, name calling, and general kindergarten behavior.

I'm weary of the goldfish-span memory brought about by the modern news cycle, that lasts about as long as a tweet, and is 'fact checked' by memes.
I'm weary of how ratcheting up such 'bought and paid for Clinton hack' and 'President Cheeto' sorts of rhetoric basically divorces these discussions from rational discourse or any semblance of scientific, fact-based skepticism. You're either for Team A or Team One and that's that.
I'm weary of how many otherwise intelligent people believe that boorish behavior/snark is justified 'because *THEY* are doing it too!'. It makes all aspects of political discussion the equivalent of two 7 year olds screaming at each other in a playground.
We certainly can't expect the tinfoil brigade or SJW 'community organizers' to pull their heads out of their collective asses if the intelligent folks in the middle can't even be bothered to air opinions or perceptions without derisive snark.

[blues]

I just want my country back...with its values intact.

I don't want to hear about hyphen Americans of any ilk. I want to hear about Americans and what we're doing to make the country safe, strong and viable going forward for all Americans regardless of their predilections or any other skin deep (apparent) differences.

We don't need different classes of Americans, or special laws that mark them as a separate entity, as that just divides us. We need to go back to core American values, and by that I don't mean the ones that allowed slavery or Japanese internment or turning our backs on those in need.

How about we just treat each other like we'd want to be treated and take the country back. That'd be "change you can believe in" and "making America great again" in my humble opinion. Or at least a start worth working toward.

And the politicians and political appointees that are ruining our institutions...how about we just throw all the bums out by refusing to return those who promote them to elected office.

(Hey, a guy can dream can't he?)

[critter]

haven't read it.. but initial buzz is more details about the dossier.

[Robinson]

I just want my country back...with its values intact.

I don't want to hear about hyphen Americans of any ilk. I want to hear about Americans and what we're doing to make the country safe, strong and viable going forward for all Americans regardless of their predilections or any other skin deep (apparent) differences.

We don't need different classes of Americans, or special laws that mark them as a separate entity, as that just divides us. We need to go back to core American values, and by that I don't mean the ones that allowed slavery or Japanese internment or turning our backs on those in need.

How about we just treat each other like we'd want to be treated and take the country back. That'd be "change you can believe in" and "making America great again" in my humble opinion. Or at least a start worth working toward.

And the politicians and political appointees that are ruining our institutions...how about we just throw all the bums out by refusing to return those who promote them to elected office.

(Hey, a guy can dream can't he?)

I've been staying the hell out of the political threads and intend to continue to do so, but I support the above. Umm... now how do we do it?

[blues]

I've been staying the hell out of the political threads and intend to continue to do so, but I support the above. Umm... now how do we do it?

I guess we each start by making the best, most responsible and ethical decisions we can in our daily lives. I don't know of any shortcuts.

Let your elected representatives know where you stand and vote them out of office if they don't represent your point of view. (Unfortunately, "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" is too often the case.)

No guarantee of things going our way but it's better than just sitting on the sideline ranting.

Not that I'm particularly sanguine about our chances of turning this apparently rudderless ship around, but I don't want to see things come to "burn it down to the waterline".

[critter]

On a lighter note, the Adam Schiff prank, if it's actually him (does sound like Mr. Bugeyes) is rather hilarious.

Pics of "Naked Trump" (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5355713/Adam-Schiff-spoofed-Russian-claim-nude-Trump-pic.html#ixzz56NzQ7ufC)

disclaimer: I'm not claiming this as fact. I am, however, waiting for the avalanche of memes... the Audio *was* played on Fox.

[Eastex]

Now there are texts referencing “hitting thumb drives” from the love birds not long after the networks started calling states for Trump. I’m sure it’s all innocent though....https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180207/6c427eb171712025af7fd7d76c113303.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sensei]

Redacted versions of the FISA applications have been released. The Cliff’s Notes version is that the FBI believed Carter Page to be an agent of the Russian government. While the Steele memo played a significant role, it seems that the court was made aware that the Steele memo was derived from opposition research trying to discredit Trump’s campaign. Thus, both sides have something to argue about going forward.

https://themarketswork.com/2018/07/21/the-carter-page-fisa-applications/

[Grey]

Redacted versions of the FISA applications have been released. The Cliff’s Notes version is that the FBI believed Carter Page to be an agent of the Russian government. While the Steele memo played a significant role, it seems that the court was made aware that the Steele memo was derived from opposition research trying to discredit Trump’s campaign. Thus, both sides have something to argue about going forward.Based upon the extensions, the Steele dossier was corroborated and played less of a role as the FBI investigation proceeded. Nunes basically outed as a politically motivated hack.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[Sensei]

Based upon the extensions, the Steele dossier was corroborated and played less of a role as the FBI investigation proceeded. Nunes basically outed as a politically motivated hack.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

Actually, I don’t see any evidence or even a suggestion from Trump’s most ardent detractors that the Steele Dossier was corroborated. Yes, the purpose of the memo’s existence was disclosed to the judges, but nothing has been corroborated including the entire premise behind the investigation that Carter Page (and possibly others within the Trump Campaign) was a Russian spy. I’d be interested to see your evidence supporting the content about golden showers or even Carter Page being a spy.

Based on the released information, I feel that the FBI/DOJ probably met the necessary legal thresholds before the FISA court. However, I remain unconvinced that the entire investigation as a whole was predicated on a legitimate concern for Russian spying as opposed to an effort to hamstring Trump’s administration in the off chance that he won. While they (meaning Comey, Clapper, McCabe, et al) were within the letter of the law, theere actions were not ethical as we are learning from various IG reports.

[JHC]

And Congressmen Nunes and Jordan knew this well.

"Now we have some additional information in the form of the redacted FISA applications themselves, and the Nunes memo looks even worse. In my earlier post, I observed that the FBI’s disclosures about Steele were contained in a footnote, but argued that this did not detract from their sufficiency: “As someone who has read and approved many FISA applications and dealt extensively with the FISA Court, I will anticipate and reject a claim that the disclosure was somehow insufficient because it appeared in a footnote; in my experience, the court reads the footnotes.” Now we can see that the footnote disclosing Steele’s possible bias takes up more than a full page in the applications, so there is literally no way the FISA Court could have missed it. The FBI gave the court enough information to evaluate Steele’s credibility."

https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-make-carter-page-fisa-applications

[Drang]

A couple items courtesy Instapundit:
Instapundit » Blog Archive » KIMBERLEY STRASSEL:... (https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/303323/) links to WSJ: Devin Nunes, Washington’s Public Enemy No. 1: What did the FBI do in the 2016 campaign? The head of the House inquiry on what he has found—and questions still unanswered. (https://www.wsj.com/articles/devin-nunes-washingtons-public-enemy-no-1-1532729666?redirect=amp)

...This spring Mr. Nunes obtained information showing the FBI had used informants to gather intelligence on the Trump camp. The Justice Department is still playing hide-and-seek with documents. “We still don’t know how many informants were run before July 31, 2016”—the official open of the counterintelligence investigation—“and how much they were paid. That’s the big outstanding question,” he says. Mr. Nunes adds that the department and the FBI haven’t done anything about the unmaskings or taken action against the Flynn leakers—because, in his view, “they are too busy working with Democrats to cover all this up.”

He and his committee colleagues in June sent a letter asking Mr. Trump to declassify at least 20 pages of the FISA application. Mr. Nunes says they are critical: “If people think using the Clinton dirt to get a FISA is bad, what else that’s in that application is even worse.”

Mr. Nunes has harsh words for his adversaries. How, he asks, can his committee’s Democrats, who spent years “worrying about privacy and civil liberties,” be so blasé about unmaskings, surveillance of U.S. citizens, and intelligence leaks? On the FBI: “I’m not the one that used an unverified dossier to get a FISA warrant,” Mr. Nunes says. “I’m not the one who obstructed a congressional investigation. I’m not the one who lied and said Republicans paid for the dossier. I’m just one of a few people in a position to get to the bottom of it.” And on the press: “Today’s media is corrupt. It’s chosen a side. But it’s also making itself irrelevant. The sooner Republicans understand that, the better.”

and Instapundit » Blog Archive » BYRON YORK (https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/302990/) links to Washington Examiner: Next step: House Intel asks Trump to declassify rest of FISA application; tantalizing clues about pages 10-12 and 17-34. (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/byron-york-next-step-house-intel-asks-trump-to-declassify-rest-of-fisa-application-tantalizing-clues-about-pages-10-12-and-17-34)

The release of a heavily-redacted version of the FBI’s application for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to wiretap onetime Trump foreign policy adviser Carter Page has spurred calls to remove the redactions, to un-black out the pages blacked out by the FBI before the document was made public.

The long sections of censored material have made it impossible to reach definitive conclusions about the warrant application. It has also led to the publication of de-contextualized sensational accusations. For example, page 8 of the original warrant application contains a passage which begins with two blacked-out lines, then includes the words “the FBI believes that the Russian Government’s efforts are being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with Candidate #1’s [Donald Trump’s] campaign,” and continues with more blacked-out material. Is there a critical prefatory clause in that sentence fragment? The answer is unclear.
...
Defenders of the FBI have begun to argue that the blacked-out portions contain the truly powerful evidence that supports their position... It’s a point that is impossible to assess as long as the application remains heavily redacted. Which is why House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes — the man most responsible for bringing the application to light in the first place — is asking President Trump to declassify the rest of the warrant application.