|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1517655172 Message started by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/03/18 at 02:52:52 |
|
Title: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/03/18 at 02:52:52 here's a link to the whole thing, that you can copy and paste from. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/read-the-full-text-of-the-nunes-memo/552191/ this does not have the first 2 pages of ass kissing by the White House it's declaration of why they think it's important to release this memo, more lies actually but again, not included here. I'll start the copy and paste in the next post. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/03/18 at 02:54:52 January 18, 2018 To: HPSCI Majority Members From: HPSCI Majority Staff Subject: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses at the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation Purpose This memorandum provides Members an update on significant facts relating to the Committee’s ongoing investigation into the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and their use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) during the 2016 presidential election cycle. Our findings, which are detailed below, 1) raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), and 2) represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from abuses related to the FISA process. Investigation Update On October 21, 2016, DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA probable cause order (not under Title VII) authorizing electronic surveillance on Carter Page from the FISC. Page is a U.S. citizen who served as a volunteer advisor to the Trump presidential campaign. Consistent with requirements under FISA, the application had to be first certified by the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI. It then required the approval of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General (DAG), or the Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division. The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC. As required by statute (50 U.S.C. §,1805(d)(l)), a FISA order on an American citizen must be renewed by the FISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a separate finding of probable cause. Then-Director James Comey signed three FISA applications in question on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one. Then-DAG Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ. Due to the sensitive nature of foreign intelligence activity, FISA submissions (including renewals) before the FISC are classified. As such, the public’s confidence in the integrity of the FISA process depends on the court’s ability to hold the government to the highest standard—particularly as it relates to surveillance of American citizens. However, the FISC’s rigor in protecting the rights of Americans, which is reinforced by 90-day renewals of surveillance orders, is necessarily dependent on the government’s production to the court of all material and relevant facts. This should include information potentially favorable to the target of the FISA application that is known by the government. In the case of Carter Page, the government had at least four independent opportunities before the FISC to accurately provide an accounting of the relevant facts. However, our findings indicate that, as described below, material and relevant information was omitted. 1) The “dossier” compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application. Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign, via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS, to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump’s ties to Russia. a) Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials. b) The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a U.S. law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOJ at the time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier). The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of—and paid by—the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information. 2) The Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016, Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff, which focuses on Page’s July 2016 trip to Moscow. This article does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News. The Page FISA application incorrectly assesses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News. Steele has admitted in British court filings that he met with Yahoo News—and several other outlets—in September 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS. Perkins Coie was aware of Steele’s initial media contacts because they hosted at least one meeting in Washington D.C. in 2016 with Steele and Fusion GPS where this matter was discussed. a) Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations—an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jones article by David Corn. Steele should have been terminated for his previous undisclosed contacts with Yahoo and other outlets in September—before the Page application was submitted to the FISC in October—but Steele improperly concealed from and lied to the FBI about those contacts. b) Steele’s numerous encounters with the media violated the cardinal rule of source handling—maintaining confidentiality—and demonstrated that Steele had become a less than reliable source for the FBI. 3) Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General Yates and later Rosenstein. Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Ohr, documenting his communications with Steele. For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files—but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications. a) During this same time period, Ohr’s wife was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all of his wife’s opposition research, paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign via Fusion GPS. The Ohrs’ relationship with Steele and Fusion GPS was inexplicably concealed from the FISC. 4) According to the head of the FBI’s counterintelligence division, Assistant Director Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its “infancy” at the time of the initial Page FISA application. After Steele was terminated, a source validation report conducted by an independent unit within FBI assessed Steele’s reporting as only minimally corroborated. Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was—according to his June 2017 testimony—“salacious and unverified.” While the FISA application relied on Steele’s past record of credible reporting on other unrelated matters, it ignored or concealed his anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations. Furthermore, Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information. 5) The Page FISA application also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos. The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok. Strzok was reassigned by the Special Counsel’s Office to FBI Human Resources for improper text messages with his mistress, FBI Attorney Lisa Page (no known relation to Carter Page), where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of Clinton, whom Strzok had also investigated. The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an “insurance” policy against President Trump’s election. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/03/18 at 02:59:17 now this is how it works pick the section or line you want to comment on, copy JUST THAT SECTION, control/command C people, then paste that into the reply box control.command V, then make your comment. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES quote the full memo text. IF ANYONE DOES THAT, I GIVE ANY MODERATOR THE BLESSING TO DELETE THIS WHOLE FREAKING THING, NOT JUST THAT POST, EVERY REPLY AND POST, THIS WHOLE THREAD. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/03/18 at 03:24:07 Out of the last 35,000 FISA applications only 12 have been refused. The following single line defeats the whole premise of the memo...The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok. Strzok, was also the one who ended up shafting Hilary Clinton just before the election, which also undercuts the memo's implications. The entire episode is weird and ultimately the truth will come out in the end regarding Trump's treasonous (as Bannon said) behaviour. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/03/18 at 03:29:08 " 1) raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), and 2) represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from abuses related to the FISA process." this is in the first paragraph. First, concerns about FISA being abused has been a concern of many for quite awhile, thank you Republicans for finally waking up to this. I know it's easy to ignore the abuses when they are going after those "terrorists" you all fear so much. the FISA courts are like grand jury's only for intelligence instead of indictments for state/local DA's so thank you for finally paying attention. now maybe, and I know I'm wishing on a star here, maybe you all will start thinking about how that all trickles down to local police and government. now with that aside so, this whole thing is over the RENEWAL of a FISA warrant for Carter Page. Page himself admits to being a "deal maker" in Russia, so when he gets involved in an AMERICAN campaign for president, yeah, maybe if he contacts Russia we might want to know if there's any there there. does that violate privacy rights, maybe, but you do it for terrorists to keep us safe, well, Russians aren't much better |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by oldNslow on 02/03/18 at 06:20:14 A fairly long, but pretty accurate and well reasoned exposition of what the memo means, and who is liable to step in the dogshit. Le's all keep in mind that we are talking about the FBI here. An institution with a pretty long and well documented history of abusing it's power at the expense of American citizens for political reasons. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/456084/nunes-memo-fbi-doj-corruption-ticking-memo |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by MnSpring on 02/03/18 at 06:22:30 6A435E41495E405560435F586D5E58455F582C0 wrote:
Gosh, the above post, Sounds like, It came from a Ultra - Ultra - Conservative 'You Must Do THIS, This Way Or Else !’ (This drive by brought to you by, …) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/03/18 at 06:51:24 605E5F53415D5C320 wrote:
"On various later occasions, high FBI officials purportedly admitted to the congressional inquirers both that the FISA requests would not have been made without use of the dossier, and yet its contents could not be verified or in fact were scarcely yet scrutinized." this statement in the article is actually up for dispute and until we get the actual transcript of said inquiry, skepticism says to dismiss this "Is this a Scandal? If all this is not a scandal — then the following protocols are now considered permissible in American electoral practice and constitutional jurisprudence: An incumbent administration can freely use the FBI and the DOJ to favor one side in a presidential election, by buying its opposition research against the other candidate, using its own prestige to authenticate such a third-party oppositional dossier, and then using it to obtain court-ordered wiretaps on American citizens employed by a candidate’s campaign — and do so by deliberately misleading the court about the origins and authors of the dossier that was used to obtain the warrants." no, not freely, but if the other side is meeting with FOREIGN governments, maybe FISA should check on that, you know for the sake of our NATIONAL SECURITY. the DNC and canidates bought the opposition research, NOT THE ADMINISTRATION the origins of the dossier aren't really valid, as it alone wasn't used to justify the warrant, maybe it started it, but the FISA COURT approved the warrant, so they thought they had enough evidence to at least survey Page. so until we see the WHOLE warrant, you have a republican political document in front of you. if you don't like that the FISA court based their decision on a democratic political document, then don't base your conclusions on an equally biased republican political bias. the rest of the article is speculation and spin, and as it's an opinion piece, that's allowed, but yeah it's an OPINION |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by oldNslow on 02/03/18 at 07:25:02 Quote:
Quite right. I never said it was anything else. What is not opinion is whether or not the FBI or some officials in the FBI, broke the law. The memo alleges that they did. The underlying documents will, or will not, bear that out. Until they see the light of day - if they ever do - everything said about the memo, here or anywhere else, is just opinion. Speculation and spin in your words. My opinion is that they are guilty as hell. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by Serowbot on 02/03/18 at 07:44:06 https://www.yahoo.com/news/not-details-gop-memo-help-undercut-mueller-probe-054606701--politics.html Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by T And T Garage on 02/03/18 at 07:54:01 382E39243C29243F4B0 wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
[/quote] Bot dropping the hammer! +100 |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by raydawg on 02/03/18 at 09:19:49 427C7D71637F7E100 wrote:
I've yet to read any explanation as to why all the fear, prior, then nothingburger...... Just more BS to put on top of more BS. All this speculation was there prior, ans all of this is still just speculation, NOTHING NEW FROM NOBODY..... No Russia, no nothing, nutin honey. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/03/18 at 10:20:13 24372F32372131560 wrote:
I've yet to read any explanation as to why all the fear, prior, then nothingburger...... Just more BS to put on top of more BS. All this speculation was there prior, ans all of this is still just speculation, NOTHING NEW FROM NOBODY..... No Russia, no nothing, nutin honey. [/quote] hey dumb@ss, fear of the unknown, once known, oh hey, nothing to worry about enough for ya or did that make your head hurt? the FBI and DOJ said the memo was dangerously misleading, so when people involved in national law enforcement say hey, this might not be a good idea.... then I think it's fair for us to take pause and consider their advice, now that it has been released, yeah I don't see too much to worry about, but the FBI and DOJ who have special insight into all of this might still see things to worry about. because they have a bigger more complete picture than me, and their counterparts across the world, also have a bigger more complete picture than me |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by oldNslow on 02/03/18 at 10:35:52 Quote:
In these kind of situations people tend to be fearful when they have something that they'd rather not be found out. Not complicated really. Human nature. The louder the protestations of innocence, the longer they go on and the more arcane they become, the more likely it is that those doing the protesting are guilty. Prisons are plumb full of of people that "didn't do it" Just ask 'em. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by raydawg on 02/03/18 at 11:29:02 0F31303C2E32335D0 wrote:
Like Bill and Harvey? |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/03/18 at 13:58:44 This NYT piece captures the salient points of the memo. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/03/opinion/memo-nunes-trump-obstruction.html In addition, the timeline set forth in the memo indicates that the FISA warrants were submitted by both the Obama and Trump administrations. The initial surveillance began before Mr. Rosenstein was deputy attorney general, and by the time he was at the Justice Department, he approved renewal applications that were based on the intelligence gathered from the earlier surveillance — not the dossier. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/03/18 at 14:03:21 Guess who said this... “When you’re attacking FBI agents because you’re under criminal investigation, you’re losing.” https://twitter.com/sarahhuckabee/status/794255968448020480 |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/03/18 at 14:18:47 Also the three judges who approved the renewal of the FISA order to surveil Page, (meaning that each time they had to be convinced that the previous renewal bore useful information) were all Republican appointees. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/03/18 at 14:30:34 The Lawfare Podcast on the memo... with genuine FISA experts. https://www.lawfareblog.com/lawfare-podcast-special-edition-memo-released |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by Serowbot on 02/03/18 at 15:11:13 James Comey On The GOP Memo: 'That's It?' ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by ruckus430 on 02/03/18 at 22:25:59 LoL nice work guys this memo really holds no weight and just comfirms that Carter Page was in fact a Russian agent that was hired by the trump admin and the FBI legally obtained FISA warrants. Also it's funny how repubs wanted FISA so bad but now all of the sudden they are "concerned" over intelligence surveillance abuses. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/04/18 at 00:01:09 @ruckus430 It's pretty clear that this memo is a precursor to sacking Rosenstein to install a flunky who'll sack Mueller III. However they won't get away with it. Trump is clearly f.ucked so he may as well try to burn the house down, it can't get any worse for him. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by oldNslow on 02/04/18 at 07:33:21 https://www.daybydaycartoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/020418.jpg |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by T And T Garage on 02/04/18 at 08:56:35 754B4A46544849270 wrote:
Yeah, because cartoons are the answer..... Nice work of fiction though. Anything that makes you feel better I guess. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by oldNslow on 02/04/18 at 09:19:43 322C23222F322934460 wrote:
Yeah, because cartoons are the answer..... Nice work of fiction though. Anything that makes you feel better I guess.[/quote] Well, I have to hand it to you . You have a real knack for totally missing the point. Do you even know where the Quotation in the cartoon comes from ? Nevermind. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by raydawg on 02/04/18 at 09:28:25 506E6F63716D6C020 wrote:
Yeah, because cartoons are the answer..... Nice work of fiction though. Anything that makes you feel better I guess.[/quote] Well, I have to hand it to you . You have a real knack for totally missing the point. Do you even know where the Quotation in the cartoon comes from ? Nevermind. [/quote] I am hoping to see the democrat reply still, and to why they said so much damage would result from this release.... Nobody has answered that at all. I guess listening and believing talking points is like listening to Jim and Tammy Faye, still ;D Maybe the birthers will rise again too ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by T And T Garage on 02/04/18 at 10:30:12 536D6C60726E6F010 wrote:
Yeah, because cartoons are the answer..... Nice work of fiction though. Anything that makes you feel better I guess.[/quote] Well, I have to hand it to you . You have a real knack for totally missing the point. Do you even know where the Quotation in the cartoon comes from ? Nevermind. [/quote] No, I understand perfectly - you see old, the first line in the cartoon is a lie. They didn't "pay a spy to fake a dossier". That's problem number one with your little cartoon. Problem number 2 - it's not "their" investigation, it's the FBI. Any idea what the reporting structure is of the FBI? (hint - it ain't the dnc or hillary...) |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/04/18 at 10:57:38 What will eventually become obvious The DNC paid steel He, using his Spy Guy history as Bonafides, leaked information to the FBI, Got them paying attention Got THEM to carry the lies To the court, because the DNC would not be credible, and the FBI said nothing about who was paying for the lies and how unverified they were to the judge. Steel quietly leaked information to six media outlets, and then USED their reporting to lend credibility To the dossier. But, I'm nearly always Wrong so, just remember I said this so you can point it out later. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/04/18 at 11:40:17 392620273A3D0C3C0C34262A61530 wrote:
and? also you claim that they are lies, but you don't really have any evidence that they are lies, just like I don't have any evidence that they are true. you're working off of half truths here. We don't have the full FISA warrant, only what the proTrump republicans want us to see. so like I've said before, if you are all upset that the DNC biased dossier was used to get a survelliance warrant, then why are you so happy to have another biased document convince you of anything?? oh, because you are a sucker, hook, line and sinker. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memoi part 1 Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/04/18 at 17:51:13 I analyze events and use historical facts to guide my best guess about what is happening. My batting average is good enough to comfort me. I said what I believe will be the eventual outcome. I STATED months ago that the unverified dossier, that all you rabid lefties Said would keep Trump from winning, So WRONG, always Wrong,, I said that load of crap was used to help get the warrant. I was RIGHT. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/04/18 at 18:19:41 My post is My analysis based on what I've been seeing. I go lots of places and read. I also have a grasp of the level of angst over Trump being elected. You guys are not alone. The establishment HATES Trump, and the willingness to break laws and engage in unethical behavior to destroy him isn't limited to the lefties on the street. This is the beginnings of the spotlight shining on an attempted coup. I would say that based on my ability to see truths, regardless of political affiliation. Maybe you have missed my criticisms of Trump. Maybe you didn't see my criticisms of Bush. I wonder how many people here would cheat at a game and Still be jubilant that they won. You CAN'T cheat Aaand Win. There's nowhere I know of where anyone is saying what I said. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by oldNslow on 02/04/18 at 20:05:50 2A343B3A372A312C5E0 wrote:
Yeah, because cartoons are the answer..... Nice work of fiction though. Anything that makes you feel better I guess.[/quote] Well, I have to hand it to you . You have a real knack for totally missing the point. Do you even know where the Quotation in the cartoon comes from ? Nevermind. [/quote] No, I understand perfectly - you see old, the first line in the cartoon is a lie. They didn't "pay a spy to fake a dossier". That's problem number one with your little cartoon. Problem number 2 - it's not "their" investigation, it's the FBI. Any idea what the reporting structure is of the FBI? (hint - it ain't the dnc or hillary...) [/quote] If the Nunes memo is accurate, and I suspect that it mostly is, then the first line of the cartoon describes exactly what happened, Read it again. The rest of the cartoon sets out a likely scenario of where this whole debacle might possibly be headed.That's the point that I think you are missing. Just because it happens to be a cartoon doesn't mean it isn't addressing a serious issue. Quote:
I didn't post it because it makes me feel better. There is nothing about this whole sorry spectacle that makes me feel 'better" about any of it. You didn't answer my question about the dialogue in the cartoon that is in quotes. Most of what has a yellow background. The source of that quotation should be a clue to what the cartoon is trying to convey. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/04/18 at 22:36:39 @justin_o_guy2 If you're serious about wanting to find out what's what then you should check out the lawfare podcast I linked to earlier, it's a straightforward non partisan analysis by lawyers who have actually worked on the FISA courts and know how the who procedure works. It's the best you'll get till the process is over. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/05/18 at 03:34:34 Will do,thanks. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/05/18 at 04:06:05 41534744535557320 wrote:
I can't take notes and don't want to forget, so. A point was made that the memo suggests that the judge was left in the dark regarding who funded the research. At the same time the memo failed to inform the reader of something, I'll have to go back unless someone got that. One thing they're talking about is the verification of the information. I'm not seeing anyone stand up and say what parts of the information that was used to get a warrant has been verified. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memoi part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/05/18 at 08:39:14 6C7375726F6859695961737F34060 wrote:
you're "batting average" so you have a ledger with stats to validate that claim? or is that just your ego talking, as usual? |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/05/18 at 08:40:54 687771766B6C5D6D5D65777B30020 wrote:
I can't take notes and don't want to forget, so. A point was made that the memo suggests that the judge was left in the dark regarding who funded the research. At the same time the memo failed to inform the reader of something, I'll have to go back unless someone got that. One thing they're talking about is the verification of the information. I'm not seeing anyone stand up and say what parts of the information that was used to get a warrant has been verified. [/quote] that's because it was left out of the memo you seem to put so much faith in and cherish so much to prove..... oh wait, yeah, no verification, either way... |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by Serowbot on 02/05/18 at 08:56:17 Many parts of the dossier have since been verified,... none have been disproven... |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by T And T Garage on 02/05/18 at 09:00:56 *sniff*... *sniff*.... Hmm... I smell something (someone?) burning. ;D |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/05/18 at 11:12:48 042D302F27302E3B0E2D31360330362B3136420 wrote:
I can't take notes and don't want to forget, so. A point was made that the memo suggests that the judge was left in the dark regarding who funded the research. At the same time the memo failed to inform the reader of something, I'll have to go back unless someone got that. One thing they're talking about is the verification of the information. I'm not seeing anyone stand up and say what parts of the information that was used to get a warrant has been verified. [/quote] that's because it was left out of the memo you seem to put so much faith in and cherish so much to prove..... oh wait, yeah, no verification, either way... [/quote] I'm trying to find and analyze information and conclude what will eventually be discovered. Your assumption that I'm so partisan that truth is my victim is ridiculous. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/05/18 at 11:14:38 The dossier is easy to find. The list of things proven? I don't have it. Bot seems to have access to information I haven't seen. How about sharing? |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/05/18 at 13:40:54 544B4D4A5750615161594B470C3E0 wrote:
I can't take notes and don't want to forget, so. A point was made that the memo suggests that the judge was left in the dark regarding who funded the research. At the same time the memo failed to inform the reader of something, I'll have to go back unless someone got that. One thing they're talking about is the verification of the information. I'm not seeing anyone stand up and say what parts of the information that was used to get a warrant has been verified. [/quote] that's because it was left out of the memo you seem to put so much faith in and cherish so much to prove..... oh wait, yeah, no verification, either way... [/quote] I'm trying to find and analyze information and conclude what will eventually be discovered. Your assumption that I'm so partisan that truth is my victim is ridiculous. [/quote] now?? now? after like a week of badgering, your finally opening your eyes to seeing what the rest of us have been yelling at you for a week? now, you're finally, "like, well maybe...." you were so cocky and sure that the memo was the answer and proved everything and that criminal charges were going to be pressed and the destruction of the democratic party was at hand... and now you're like, "no, I'm not partisan, not me, nah...." *sigh* :-/ |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/05/18 at 13:52:56 4D5254534E4978487840525E15270 wrote:
here's a Vox article that kinda breaks it down: https://www.vox.com/2018/1/5/16845704/steele-dossier-russia-trump this is the key takeaway for me: "The most one can really say has been confirmed about the Steele dossier is that a) there was in fact a Russian effort to help Trump, and b) the Trump camp clearly knew more about it than they said publicly. Given those conclusions, it’s certainly possible that the other stuff Steele alleges is also true, but virtually none of the particulars have been verified." still waiting to see here. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by T And T Garage on 02/05/18 at 14:01:31 0128352A22352B3E0B2834330635332E3433470 wrote:
I can't take notes and don't want to forget, so. A point was made that the memo suggests that the judge was left in the dark regarding who funded the research. At the same time the memo failed to inform the reader of something, I'll have to go back unless someone got that. One thing they're talking about is the verification of the information. I'm not seeing anyone stand up and say what parts of the information that was used to get a warrant has been verified. [/quote] that's because it was left out of the memo you seem to put so much faith in and cherish so much to prove..... oh wait, yeah, no verification, either way... [/quote] I'm trying to find and analyze information and conclude what will eventually be discovered. Your assumption that I'm so partisan that truth is my victim is ridiculous. [/quote] now?? now? after like a week of badgering, your finally opening your eyes to seeing what the rest of us have been yelling at you for a week? now, you're finally, "like, well maybe...." you were so cocky and sure that the memo was the answer and proved everything and that criminal charges were going to be pressed and the destruction of the democratic party was at hand... and now you're like, "no, I'm not partisan, not me, nah...." *sigh* :-/[/quote] Oh my... that was yummy and SWEET!! |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/06/18 at 00:40:37 from Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), whose partisan credentials are unimpeachable — he led the Benghazi inquisition — and who was dispatched by Nunes to review all the classified intelligence used to obtain the Page warrant. “There is a Russia investigation without a dossier,” he said Sunday. “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’s meeting in Great Britain. It also doesn’t have anything to do with obstruction of justice.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-nunes-memo-vindicates-our-worst-fears-about-the-gop/2018/02/05/2eaac792-0aba-11e8-95a5-c396801049ef_story.html |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/06/18 at 05:05:28 UPDATE:... House Intelligence Committee unanimously votes to release Democratic memo... https://www.vox.com/2018/2/5/16974516/democrat-memo-schiff-nunes-trump-house-intelligence-vote donald has f.ucked himself bigly. Not that that's really news, or surprising. He must have decided to burn the house down because what is going to be revealed by the FBI investigation is obviously a problem. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by T And T Garage on 02/06/18 at 12:49:49 5B495D5E494F4D280 wrote:
Did you see the part where they said our president would be briefed on it because it was too long to read? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D And to think - there are morons out there who think he's responsible for the economy doing well right now! [smiley=lolk.gif] |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/06/18 at 18:27:13 Some more clarity about Steele as a 'source' from a former intelligence insider... https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/05/christopher-steele-dossier-smearing-216940 A professional intelligence service understands that all sources have individual biases. Being biased is hardly a disqualifier. If it were, we would have a tough time finding sources in most countries around the world. It is the job of a handling service to understand a source’s bias, perspective, access, motivations and reliability. It is standard stuff. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/06/18 at 18:43:57 A referee can prefer one team win and Still deliver impartial judgments. Steele is on record as being determined to stop Trump. See the difference? |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/06/18 at 19:13:37 796660677A7D4C7C4C74666A21130 wrote:
Steele isn't a referee, he's a player, the FISA JUDGE is the referee, and NOTHING IN THE MEMO SAYS SH!T about how the judge interpreted or took the information in the dossier or what other information the JUDGE used to make his/her call. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/06/18 at 20:00:55 Way to dodge an unmissable point. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by FormerlyLostArtist on 02/06/18 at 21:14:27 594640475A5D6C5C6C54464A01330 wrote:
you messed up your point then. wanna try again? unless you were actually agreeing with eau de sauvage in some cryptic way...... |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/07/18 at 00:35:42 425D5B5C41467747774F5D511A280 wrote:
You really need to acknowledge that you're basing your opinion on an entirely partisan interpretation with selected out of context points. You should read the article I linked to which is from an intel insider. Will be fascinating to see how Trump reacts now that he's the one who decides if the Democrat's memo is published. He's darned if he does and darned if he doesn't seeing as his own party wants it released. I'm betting he won't release it because he's just interested in burning down the house. In the end the truth will out. |
|
Title: Re: NUNES dogsh!t memo part 1 Post by eau de sauvage on 02/07/18 at 01:06:46 Here's a new interesting wrinkle... New York Times Requests Orders and Applications for Page Surveillance https://www.lawfareblog.com/document-new-york-times-requests-orders-and-applications-page-surveillance And then there's this, which contains more unravelling of the shenanigans... https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-fisc-clean-nunes-memos-mess |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |