I’d also like to know what’s in there that’s a threat to national security, which the left went berserk over. Were the nuke launch codes in the memo and I missed it?

And in your hypothetical, you’d also need to include that deputy attorney general had a wife who ran for the senate and took huge money from the Koch brothers, and an FBI assistant director whose wife worked at Fusion GPS, the company that put together the dossier.

Nope, nothing to see, move along.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

your example is as much a fantasy as the Nunes Memo . using innuendo , conjecture and conspiracy theories and presented as Fact

Only the American right has had a consistent, large, and organized faction based on paranoid conspiracism for six decades.

interesting read https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...-to-today.html

Well I guess it's over. Trump just claimed the Memo completely vindicates him in the Russia investigations.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You would have to be a moron or completely drunk on Trump cool aid, to not see this for what it is. It’s just one of what is now a truly astounding number of moves to discredit anyone associated with either the initial Russia investigation or now the Meuller investigation. Ironically the more of these moves Trump makes, the more he helps Meuller build a case of obstruction of justice.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I bet the FISA folks are a bit angry that they were mislead...repeatedly

I think Scott was asking a fair question. Would the Democrats complain about the investigation if there was a Democratic president. Of course they would. But I think this goes far beyond what the Democrats would do. The Republicans are claiming there's a deep state and that the highest levels of the justice department and the FBI are basically crooked. It's my understanding with Watergate that both parties were critical of Nixon. With the Clinton investigations I'm sure the Democrats put up a defense of him. But again I don't think they claimed there's a deep state and certainly did not put out a bipartisan memo that the FBI basically said is full of BS. The Republicans seem to have a propensity to believe anything they hear. Pizzagate Scott rich, Etc.maybe it Hhas something to do with Info wars, Breitbart and veritas. when those entities put out their stories and they proved to be made up they just come out with another story a few weeks later and people believe them.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nothing in the memo, as far as I know, has been revealed to be untrue. A series of "facts" are presented in the memo. Any pertinent facts that have been left out can easily be stated. So far, the only innuendo is that the facts in the memo can be misleading because of some supposed omissions.

This memo is just an attempt to promote the idea that the investigation was started as a result of a corrupted and partisian process. if you could prove that you can prove the entire investigation is biased. It has failed to do that. The page warrant is only one small part of a much larger investigation. It confirmed the contacts between Papadopoulos and the Russians and that was the reason for the opening of the investigation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I've seen nothing to indicate any FISA folks were misled.

McCabe stated under oath that without the Steele "dossier" there would not have been a FISA warrant to wire tap Page. There was a previous attempt to get a warrant on Page which was (which rarely happens) denied. The unverified dossier was the key element needed to get the warrant. Any information gathered via use of the warrant would be fruit of the poisoned tree and therefore inadmissible.

And if that is somehow in dispute, it still does not absolve the FBI from presenting the "dossier" to a FISA judge without revealing that it was not verified and was paid for by an opposition party or candidate. The knowing use of such a faulty document to get a warrant is, undeniably, a corruption of the process.

As far as Papadopoulos goes, he was guilty of lying to the FBI, not of seeking dirt on Hillary (which would not have been enough "evidence" to get a FISA warrant to spy on Papadopoulos, and certainly not enough to do so on Page).

The Democrats in the same hearing have stated in writing that McCabe's remark is mis-characterized in the memo.

My understanding is that the use of the dossier was presented as political in nature in the FISA request. Remember both Republicans and Democrats contributed to it's creation.

Page was already under a FISA warrant which had been renewed THREE times for a list of concerns all having nothing to do with the Dossier and everything about his potentially illegal dealings with Russians.

I am not aware of a FISA warrant on Page surveillance before the one issued with the dossier being used as evidence. I've heard of one that was dismissed before the dossier was used. And if there was already a FISA warrant to surveil Page, why would the FBI have to apply for a new one?

They certainly did in their response to the memo which is classified.

I believe the FISA standard is just that it has to be reasonable not that is has to be verified. Steele is a known reputable source and of lot of the Dossier has proven to have merit. But it also certainly sounds like there were many pieces of evidence used to justify the warrant according to those who have read it.

He already was under surveillance and the warrant had been renewed three times I believe. For that to occur they would have to have shown the previous warrants were producing valuable information and/or bring new evidence.

I'm not sure how long they last but I do know a FISA warrant is time bound.

Another factor to consider is how all this came about. Steele was concerned there was a real crime going on and contacted the FBI himself.

Spence is butchering the timeline and distorting facts...I feel mislead reading his memos

Conjecturing motivation which seems sketchy to begin with could well be considered as mischaracterization. Did he on his own volition, out of some idealistic compulsion, go about digging up dirt? We can't know that, nor is it relevant to the accuracy of the "dossier." We do know that he was paid a great deal of money to do it.

Be specific or be gone.

If you read my post just before this one by you, you will note a concern about your FISA warrants on Page timeline. You keep stating that there were FISA warrants on Page before the "dossier" granted one. I didn't find a record of any. But if there were, they apparently were not fruitful enough to continue being granted since the FISA application, submitted shortly before the "dossier" one, was not allowed. Were there actually previous warrants, or are you confusing the current one with some supposed previous ones?

I think the fact that they've stated it, documented it and asked the Republicans to make it public says quite a lot.

Reasonable here is in context of the FBI's process...which doesn't require information to be proven. The standard is very high which is why to your point above FISA requests are rarely denied.

It's a collection of items some verified and some not. That doesn't invalidate the entire collection.


I think some of the Dossier was included in the last extension which was signed off on by Trump appointees.

I have no idea how much Steele was paid. His employer was paid a decent amount although I'd assume if you want good quality research it doesn't come cheap.

Actually it looks like the WP, NYT and WSJ are all reporting the political nature of the dossier was fully disclosed in the FISA application.

???????????????????

I know right?

"Know" ????????????????

he's clearly lost his mind

Seems like senior Republicans, senior Democrats, the FBI and most of the Media agree with what I'm saying.

Who's lost their mind?

Seems like they all have.

Maybe that should tell you something.

The herd instinct.

spence talk

The adage says "you get what you pay for." If you ask for high quality dirt, you should be prepared to pay high quality fees. Steele was paid by Fusion, by Clinton campaign, and by the FBI. I think one of those sources, maybe the Clinton campaign, paid him $160,000.

None of the points made in the memo have been claimed to be false. The spin is that without other information, what's in the memo, truthful as it is, can be "misleading." What is stated in the memo is pretty straightforward. It would take a lot of information to make the FBI's actions listed in the memo lawful. We await the further information which will make the memo a "nothingburger."

A lot has been said in this thread and in the spinning media and political pundits about the supposed damage the release of the memo was supposed to inflict on national security and on the integrity of our institutions. I haven't seen anything in the memo as released that endangers national security. And the integrity of the FBI, if it can be damaged by some rogues, was already severely damaged by Comey when he presented a solid case for prosecution of HRC but didn't recommend prosecution to the Attorney General, who had broadcasted ahead of his decision that she would abide by his recommendation. And the abuse the Dems heaped on Comey before and after the election surely would cause no less damage to the integrity of the FBI than would this memo. And, it is not the integrity of the FBI that is in question. It is the integrity of those who manipulated the "process" in an attempt to achieve their ends.

You talking about the election right?

;)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I like it when you're happy. So interpret it in anyway that makes you feel good.

BTW, I was sorry to hear what happened to the space your business occupied so many years. I hope you find something as nice or better. I wish you the best.

Thanks. I’ll find something.. I’m actually happy I have to move. My current studio is way too small
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I like that.

https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-spy-c...ampaign=buffer


not suggesting what it means but very interesting

In testimony before Congress, fbi director Comey called the dossier salacious and unverified. Those are his words. Yet he signed off using it to help obtain FISA warrants against a presidential campaign. The salacious and unverified dossier was prepared by a company that employed the wife of the deputy attorney general.

Nothing concerning there? Nothing at all?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and the FISA warrant that was applied for required evidence of some pretty serious wrong doing.....what exactly has Carter Page been charged with or arrested for to date?

He said it contained items that were...not the entire thing Jim.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ummm he was being recruited as a Russian spy...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ummmm...."salacious and unverified"


http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/...ods-procedures

not even Sean Hannity suggests that every word of the dossier is incorrect. So not sure what your point is.

You spin with the best of them.