The White House staffers should add The Untouchables to Donnie's Netflix queue. The FBI has a good track record of taking down powerful 'businessmen' who think they are above the law.

---

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's

Is this the same FBI that has in the past changed significant wording in an investigation to seriously alter the impact of the outcome?

Just sayin

---

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody

Al Capone occupied the Oval Office???

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Fact or opinion? Of course they are going to say stuff was omitted to cover their ass.

Beats me, since I neither know WTF you are talking about nor how it relates to what the FBI is currently saying.

Are you "sayin" or are you asking?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Hard to imagine that a group would try to hide stuff that makes them look bad. True for either side....

There's a reason why Nunes refused to release the Schiff rebuttal memo that details the shortcomings of Nunes' memo.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Christopher Wray never worked for the FBI and had been in private practice since 2005 until being appointed in 2017 by Trump. So there is nothing in there that could make him look bad. Hard to imagine any reason why he would say this if it was not true. Especially since it is sure to anger his boss and people his position tend to get fired for such statements.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

I think you meant to say anyone who jumps to conclusions prior to knowing the facts is an idiot.

I’m curious about what I understand is an IG report following an investigation into the Clinton email matter and those involved (McCabe, etc). Why wouldnt the WH just wait for the IG report which is due in the spring and address this memo at that time?

Who said anything about Christopher Wray?

I know right? It isn't like he is the head of the agency advocating against releasing this memo.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

When you say "They are going to say stuff..." you mean the FBI is going to say stuff. The statement released that says the "memo" has material omissisons of fact and is inaccurate was released by Christopher Wray. So whether you knew it or not, you said something about Christopher Wray.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Anybody think nunes has a shred of integrity? Let IG finish analysis first and issue report.

Add his flunkie committee members. No wonder gowdy moving on.....

What I don't get is that the FBI should be fairly conservative in nature. I don't think a lot of liberals aspire to be FBI agents. But all the sudden the FBI is in the crosshairs of conservatives? It makes about as much sense as a pro-life liberal.

Cha Ching. How many ny FBI guys were leaking to crazy Rudy G. Early in campaign. Where did that nutjob go?

Another point is trump said he would release memo 100% before reading it. What a guy!

FBI agent Strzok (sp?) Changed the Clinton investigation wording to lessen the impact.

I don't think the entire FBI is dirty, but they have recent not so flattering history.

---

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody

Christopher Wray wasn't there during the time frame in the memo was he?

If the rumors about what is in the memo are true, then no. Wray was in private practice at the time that the warrant to listen in on Carter Page was extended. Unless they continued extending that warrant after Comey was fired and Wray appointed. We would not know that publicly, but it seems unlikely.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Well then your little diatribe on Wray is false. In other words even though Wray might have released the statement, he doesn't have to cover his ass like his predecessors.

Anyone who thinks that this memo is anything but an attempt to pre-emptively cast doubt on Mueller, the FBI, and every investigation into Russian meddling is an idiot.

And the Trump supporters will be coming out in force denying it has anything to do with the Mueller probe and then simply dig up anything in history that casts some shadow over the FBI.

Just a wild guess though.

What?? YOU said Wray said that the memo was inaccurate to cover his ass:

"Of course they are going to say stuff was omitted to cover their ass."

My point, which you just agreed to, is that he clearly was NOT covering his ass.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

I completely agree!

I don't care if it shows a 100% smoking gun PROVING that Mueller's investigation is a farce. It doesn't matter! It should be true because I FEEL it should be!

Facts be damned! I don't care what they are, my side is right and the other are idiots!


sheesh. It's information. Let it come out and then draw your own conclusions, which, based on your statement you unfortunately already have.

---

----------------------------------------------------------------

My training

   I think it's a fools errand, owing mostly to the fact that the FBI controls all the actual evidence. OTOH I have read repeatedly of the committee trying to get info from the FBI relative to their investigation, so this is probably born of frustration. I'll still hope that a bunch of the info gets declassified, and we can make our own judgement accordingly...but then we still have to trust that the FBI is being totally straight.

Just replying to the last post and not specifically talking to any points made:

I'm having a hard time keeping up with whether or not I should hate the FBI. Didn't the right love the FBI as recently as late 2016 around the time Comey dropped the "We're investigating Hillary" statement hours/days before the election? Now there is a huge liberal underground within it hell bent on taking down the president? Do personnel changes happen that quickly?

The FBI is relatively conservative. It's the opposite of the DOL or the NLRB.

But there's a reason why they're in the Republican crosshairs (and I used Republican instead of conservative, because there's a difference). The reason is Trump and the need to win at all costs. Many Republicans, and fortunately not all, who used to run on conservative values have thrown that out in the name of Trump, who has taught them that their base really isn't and never was that conservative.

-
I don't think it's con/liberal, it's Trump, a man hated by many on either side, and perhaps feared as an utter incompetent or too far out of the mainstream by the FBI. I suspect there was some partisanship in the decision-making over the Hillary investigation, but don't think much of anything has come out to sully Mueller, other than a few leaks and his ignorance of the whole picture on some he chose for his team (and that something McCabe should have communicated). Govt depts can become weaponized not only by order of the guy at the top, but on their own and for their own reasons, eg the Lois Lerner IRS I don't believe acted on Obama marching orders, but saw their own ability to act in a way that would help their much worshiped leader. I think the FBI may have acted in a partisan manner for the opposite reason, that they recoiled, as many of us did, from the idea and reality of a Trump presidency.

Is Nunes looking for a job on the Trump defense team?

wasn't he part of the transition team so has a conflict of interest in trying to discredit the FBI investigation?

Hopefully the people of the 22nd district can find someone a bit more stable to represent them later this year. He seems to have a few issues.

I don't care if it shows a 100% smoking gun PROVING that Mueller's investigation is a farce. It doesn't matter! It should be true because I FEEL it should be!

Facts be damned! I don't care what they are, my side is right and the other are idiots!

You do realize that Ken isn't commenting on the results, right. He is saying that anyone who thinks the memo is anything but an attempt to pre-emptively cast doubt on Mueller, is an idiot. He's talking about what the Trump team is trying to do with the release of the memo and he's right. Anyone who doesn't question the timing of the release and the fact that the administration is desperately trying to influence the eventual findings of Mueller, is living in a fantasy world.

Relax though. Lots of people like you will never accept anything from the FBI, NYTimes or any other source because the Trump team will simply do what they do best, dig up some dirt and loudly claim the source is biased. You and the other Trump devotees eat that up. No independent thinking required, nothing more to see here, move right along folks.

Sad.

It seems to me that if there was anything mind blowing in the memo, we would have a non-stop twitter tirade from Trump already. I can't imagine any scenario where he wouldn't be berating the FBI endlessly if there were even a hint of something bad. He loves gloating too much.

It's interesting to me this entire scenario, which was punctuated by the FBI Director re-opening an investigation into Sec Clinton just days before the election, which obviously had negative impacts on her campaign, has been turned all the way around into an issue of the FBI being biased for her and against Pres Trump.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

The FBI, in general, skews very conservative and very Republican, especially within the Agent ranks. As I've stated before, I'm pretty politically agnostic. I will vote for the people I think will do the best job given the climate at the time. I have voted for both major parties. For example, I voted for Bush once and didn't vote for him once. I would've voted for McCain in '08 but his choosing that dimwit Sarah Palin as his running mate made me vote for Obama.

Being politically agnostic and hovering around dead center has branded me as a diehard liberal in the FBI on numerous occasions.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

Go slower so some can absorb your statement. I would be interested in finding out from IG why mccabe may have been slow to react to wiener laptop find.

Gowdy so glad their going to give him judge job instead of hanging with that dumarse nunes.

You just exact quoted me. I don't see Wray's name anywhere in the quote.

I need to correct. Nunes is a dumarse crook.....

We'll see. I doubt it's "information." I suspect it's going to be conclusions drawn from classified information. That way it can't be rebutted without revealling classified information.

---

“Read the transcript.”

I think the immediate purpose is to replace Rosenstein with a flunky. That way Mueller can be boxed in without firing him.

---

“Read the transcript.”

If you want to watch a non-stop tirade against the FBI just watch Lou Dobbs on Fox. I used to think that guy was fairly respectable, but he's turned into a Trump lackey.

The FBI, in general, skews very conservative and very Republican, especially within the Agent ranks.

Are people within the FBI openly political or is it more water cooler talk when it comes to politics?

If you want to watch a non-stop tirade against the FBI just watch Lou Dobbs on Fox. I used to think that guy was fairly respectable, but he's turned into a Trump lackey.

It's the Trump playbook repeating itself and you see it in politics all the time.

They know there are problems ahead with the Mueller investigation and since firing Mueller would be a big problem now, the next step is to discredit the FBI and then draw a conclusion, based on one or two findings, that the entire agency can't be trusted and that they have it in for Trump. It's really hard for me to understand how people can't see that.

More water cooler talk. The FBI is heavily restricted when it comes to political activities due to the Hatch Act. For example, if my wife were running for some office I couldn't even put her campaign sign in my front yard. From Wikipedia:

Permitted and prohibited activities for employees who may not participate in partisan political activity[edit]
These federal employees may:

• register and vote as they choose
• assist in voter registration drives
• express opinions about candidates and issues
• participate in campaigns where none of the candidates represent a political party
• contribute money to political organizations or attend political fund raising functions
• attend political rallies and meetings
• join political clubs or parties
• sign nominating petitions
• campaign for or against referendum questions, constitutional amendments, municipal ordinances

These federal employees may not:

• be candidates for public office in partisan elections
• campaign for or against a candidate or slate of candidates in partisan elections
• make campaign speeches
• collect contributions or sell tickets to political fund raising functions
• distribute campaign material in partisan elections
• organize or manage political rallies or meetings
• hold office in political clubs or parties
• circulate nominating petitions
• work to register voters for one party only
• wear political buttons at work

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

Amen. Now reported stroek, the maligned supposedly biased agent, assisted comey in writing letter aimed at HRC right before election. Another repub conspiracy deflated.

And Kelly what a disappointment. There has been much more turnover in trump higher admin than others by longshot. That's gotta tell you something.

But hand it to repubs...offer tax cuts(on the credit card) and most dumarses will fall for it. Wonder how those Carrier employees that are now unemployed after Prez bs are feeling?

-
I'm interested, even anxious, for Mueller's findings, and happy to follow whatever direction they lead. That does not mean I don't think the FBI and other agencies need oversight, and right now the congressional part of that is broken. Everyone should go read this piece about what rule Nunes is using to make his own memo public.
-
http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/371581-vote-to-unveil-fisa-memo-delivers-congress-intelligence-oversight-win


To revisit a story of note in all this, fake news about Trump people shows up, with accordant w ll to wall coverage, McCabe shows up to tell Preibus that FBI knows it's not true, Priebus points to TVs and says can you put that truth out there, and McCabe and Comey both tell the WH basically, "no". A week later it gets leaked that Preibus asked the FBI to knock down a story that made the WH look bad...obstruction! Here's what Comey later said during his appearance before the congress critters:
-

"In the main, it was not true," Comey responded. "And again, all of you know this. Maybe the American people don't. The challenge, and I'm not picking on reporters about writing stories about classified information, is the people talking about it often don't really know what's going on, and those of us who know what's going on are not talking about it. And we don't call the press to say, 'hey, you got that thing wrong about the sensitive topic.' We have to leave it there."
-
http://www.businessinsider.com/...ia-inaccurate-2017-6
-
I notice that now that info may come out that may make the FBI look bad, they are all over it ahead of the release...
-

Surprised. Shocked. Betrayed.

You're kidding right? Do you have the short term memory of a canary? Go back and read our exchange. Or not. Whatever.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Seems like the Times report was criticised by Comey not for its incorrect facts, but in its emphasis. In other words, the Times reported "repeated" contacts between Trump officials and the Russians, which some (Comey included) believe was too strong. Because clearly there were a number of contacts between Trump officials and Russians during 2016, including by Manafort, Sessions, Flynn, Trump Jr, Kuchner and Page. That seems like it could be described as "repeated," no?

Note that the Times story even goes on to say that some of these contacts could be in the normal course of business (given that some of the individuals like Manafort have a history of business dealings with Russia and Ukraine) and that any contact with Russian intelligence officials could have been unwitting:

"And it is not unusual for American businessmen to come in contact with foreign intelligence officials, sometimes unwittingly, in countries like Russia and Ukraine, where the spy services are deeply embedded in society."

So this doesn't exactly look like "fake news" unless I'm missing something. Presumably when the Mueller investigation concludes we'll know the extent that this story may represent an exaggeration.

I said "They" as in the FBI.. Not as in "They" as in one individual. Are you really that dense? I never mentioned anyone specifically by name. You are the one to attribute my comments to an individual. In respect.. yes Wray is apart of the FBI.. Yes Wray is probably not involved in anything from the memo other than coming into a mess afterwards. So no Wray doesnt have to cover his ass. That doesnt mean the others dont or that Wray is is not supporting them covering their ass.

As I said, that statement was released specifically by Wray. Not an amorphous collective FBI. There is no way Wray would release a false statement to the public to protect some people that may or may have not done something wrong before he got there. Especially since if his statement was not truthful, we would be likely to find out.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Trump devotee? lol. I guess everyone who doesn't worship HRC and toe the dem party line to discredit the discreditors is a Trump devotee.

Suggest you actually read my recent posts. I have called him: Moron. Childish. Purile. Cheetoh. Dumbass. Reckless. Yeah total Trump devotee here.

The only people not thinking for themselves are folks like you and Ken, who immediately write off information (before seeing it) and attack anyone who doesn't attack it themselves. That falls under the category of the adjectives used above.

Suggest you take a step back, see what comes out, and stop labeling folks Trump devotees if they don't espouse the DNC talking points everyday. Have you received yours from Chuck Schumer yet today?

---

----------------------------------------------------------------

My training

My point exactly. "You suspect". You don't know anything but have ALREADY DRAWN YOUR CONCLUSIONS.

Please see above. Wait. let ti come out and then draw your own conclusions. Stop believing everything Maddow says.

---

----------------------------------------------------------------

My training

I dont think Wray knows what truth is.. Just like everyone else in this thread.

I'll agree no-one knows what the truth is. So we have to take a bet.

Red is: the typically-Republican / conservative-skewing FBI that arguably threw the election for Trump is in fact the fulcrum of a deep state conspiracy to get him elected but then kneecap his presidency because...they're bored. Far from being a grasping little tool, Carter Page is a professional, self-aware diplomat whose trips to and contact with Russia are beyond reproach. The FISA application to place him under surveillance likely runs 50-60 pages but to understand clearly all the evidence (or lack thereof) presented to the judge in the case you only need to read a four page summary prepared by grown up Draco Malfoy (who's now retiring), Trey Gowdy, under the direction of Nunes, a member of Trump's transition team who was supposed to have recused himself from this mess after being caught running round DC at midnight trying to gin up interest in the unmasking debacle - Republicans' last groundless attempt to distract from the Russia probe. Using a never-before employed public interest claim to release classified information to the public is in this case justified because torching America's faith in their premier law enforcement agency is right and necessary in the defense of the unfairly besmirched virtue of... Donald Trump. Republicans' refusal to release a counter-point memo addressing what Democrats feel is fact picking and inaccuracy in the Nunes memo is based on legitimate and non-partisan security fears that do not apply to the Nunes memo.

Black is: Literally anything else.

Where do you put your money?

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

Neither.. How about, the FBI didn't try to throw the election for anybody. There were a certain few who thought Trump would never win so decided to not prosecute Hillary assuming she would win the election. As for the FISA warrants? I think there was some improper usage with them but don't know exactly what. I think that it should be investigated and it is. I also think you can't avoid involving the Russian collusion investigation becasue the 2 and the people involved are so closely related is almost impossible not to overlap them. I think both should be allowed to continue the investigations. Any wrong doing by either side, all should be prosecuted.

• I didn't say the FBI tried to throw the election I said they may, objectively, have done so. Whether the decision to reopen the email investigation was a canny bit of electioneering by a biased NY field office led by Giuliani or was just the professional dispatching of their duties after they found Wiener's laptop is anyone's guess - but we can talk intelligently about the impact and outcome.
• As for the FISA warrant (I think we're only discussing one), you think there was some improper usage but why do you think that? On what basis? Some republicans argue strongly that's the case but let's not forget that (a) one of the loudest voices claimed to have a deepthroat source confirming to him the existence of a secret society, then admitted that source was "probably twitter," then admitted the only reference to a "secret society" was "probably a joke" and (b) another of the loudest voices just invited one of chief proponents of pizzagate to the state of the union.
• I agree that if Republicans feel there were issues it should be investigated and I agree that that is happening. What I don't understand is why Nunes thinks how a sober and careful investigation is served by creating a media circus focused around his selection of information from classified materials that the public he's whipping into a frenzy will never get to see. It only makes sense if you accept that Nunes' only real goal is to discredit Mueller.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

It's being reported now that Trump has been commenting on multiple occasions that releasing report will undermine Mueller's investigation.

It would be stunning, if it weren't now so entirely predictable, to hear an American President attempting to discredit the FBI, run by his own appointee, in a naked attempt to save face.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

tv reporting wh wants some redactions, but fbi warned without complete facts then memo is still misleading. does faux still use fair and balanced????

My wife just forwarded me this video that a (slightly cuckoo) co-worker sent to her for some inexplicable reason.

If the video itself doesn't astound you enough, read some of the comments below it. People believe this shit??

For the Nunes memo: he says so.
Against the Nunes memo: Schiff says things are left out. FBI says things are left out. Nunes refuses to publish Schiff memo refuting Nunes' memo by stating what is left out.

And I'm the one who isn't thinking here?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Worth a read

This is the (long) pull quote:

"Ryan, who has never served on the Intelligence Committee, seems not to understand the central bargain underpinning the creation of the intelligence committees after Watergate. In exchange for the intelligence community’s willingness to reveal closely guarded national secrets to a select group of members and staff for the purposes of oversight, the committees and the congressional leadership pledged to handle that information responsibly and without regard to politics.
That contract has now been spectacularly broken by the creation of a partisan memo that misrepresents highly classified information that will never be made public. Intelligence agencies can no longer be confident that material they provide the committee will not be repurposed and manipulated for reasons having nothing to do with national security. As a result, they will be far more reluctant to share their secrets with us in the future. Moreover, sources of information that the agencies rely upon may dry up, since they can no longer count on secrecy when the political winds are blowing. This is a grave cost for short-term political gain."

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

don't think ryan is mensa material.....or mccarthy

Yes. You just said that you're listening to Nunes and Schiff. They're both partisan hacks with agendas.

Think for yourself instead of listening to partisan hacks.

---

----------------------------------------------------------------

My training

tyrod1 wrote:

tv reporting wh wants some redactions, but fbi warned without complete facts then memo is still misleading. does faux still use fair and balanced????

-
Source? Not what I've seen reported. Here's WAPO's headline:

PowerPost
"Trump to approve release of GOP memo Friday after redactions requested by intelligence officials"
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/trump-expected-to-approve-release-of-memo-following-redactions-requested-by-intelligence-officials/2018/02/01/a55210e6-0757-11e8-8777-2a059f168dd2_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_congressmemo-650pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.08c6726640f0

-
the reason Nunes gave for not releasing the dem memo was that the pub piece had been out for weeks, even having been looked at by the FBI; not so for the dem entry, and he said it needed the same scrutiny. I kind of bought that line, then I subsequently saw that Nunes made some change after the feds had perused...advantage dems now, but then the final seems to have been reviewed and redacted by intelligence guys, so fine with the Nunes memo coming out. No reason why dems can't have the FBI take a look and then call for release, and they should do so.

https://www.fbi.gov/...tement-on-hpsci-memo

Nunes won't share memo with burr head of senate intelligence committee before releasing. Nunes dum fuck on masking dum fuck period.

Speaking of dumb fucks... do you think you could try to write a complete sentence so we don't have to interpret what you are saying all the time?

Sorry for shorthand...guess dum fucks like u have problem.

*I guess *dumb fucks like *you have a problem.

I'm looking forward to seeing what's in the memo. With the Repubs wanting it released and the Dems wanting it kept private I imagine it shows some people in the FBI acting shady due to a political bias.

I'd wait for IG report if forthcoming fairly soon. Public has right at sometime soon to know both majority and minority viewpoint, same time if safe for our intel community. Given Nunes track record, I would be wary of anything he does. Let's see...Comey, Wray, Rosenstein, & Mueller are republican. Trump, republican. Trump would bitch if they used a clean rubber on him.

Seriously, read up a bit on this mess before commenting.

You could start here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/01/opinion/dont-believe-the-liberal-fbi.html


Start at the fourth paragraph if you don't want the opinion / color.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

You'll have to wait a bit, as the House web site crashed, probably because of this memo. See the damage releasing it has done?

(edit: can now get a response)

As expected, the memo is devoid of content. Really: the PDF is blank.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

I just heard a radio interview discussing the IG report and input from a former high level FBI contact. What they described was that Wray read some early draft of the IG findings and immediately removed McCabe. The reason was the classified emails from HRCs team that were found on Weiner’s laptop by NYPD that were copied and sent to McCabe and McCabe collaborated/conspired with a few others in the FBI to sit on the emails until after the election. Then, 3 weeks later one of the FBI team members got cold feet and told Comey. Comey then alerted Congress the very next day so he wouldn’t be caught up in the scandal.

According to this source they have McCabe stating they’re sitting on the info until after the election.

The sentiment is when the IG report is released some folks are going to jail.

I do not know if this info is accurate or credible. However, IF it’s accurate it then makes sense the Memo is being released today to start the narrative that there was an anti-Trump group in the FBI acting with nefarious intent as evidenced by the Memo then followed up by the IG report.

The only reason I could imagine Trump not running out with the interim IG findings is they want to start the narrative and let the IG supplement it.

This would also (to me) illustrate why the Dems are reacting so strongly.

We shall see.

Are you a 13 year old girl? The only people I know who use your "shorthand" are teenage girls. It makes you look like a moron, of course considering most of your posts...

You can read the memo here

It's mortifying. For Nunes and Republicans.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

how many times have you used that line....must be getting to you, dimwit

Brings this scene to mind

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLS-npemQYQ

What gets to me is that every time you post you sound like a child. Try and have an adult conversation, one in which you don't sound like an uneducated juvenile.

It certainly does not look good for Team Donkey and the FBI. Ridiculous abuses of process. Inexcusable political bias.

Team Donkey used to be good at cheating. What happened?

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I was pretty passionate about Trump not being President too. So I didn't vote for him......

You'll have to explain that interpretation with reference to the memo. Happy to respond point by point.

Tough to see from the outset though how you'd lump together Comey, McCabe, Yates, Boente and Rosenstein as "Team Donkey"

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

Obviously we are moving way beyond voting

Or At least some of us in a position to move way beyond it are.

Do you believe the memo to be true? I want to know the sources of where that came from?

You weren't responding to me but, to be clear, I do believe the memo is true, just cherry-picked and disingenuous. None of us will ever be in a complete position to assess that but some of the ways in which the Nunes memo MAY have been selective are laid out pretty clearly in SChiff's statement (and, yes, he's also a partisan hack with his own motivations but he's not the one who has to justify torching the IC in defence of El Cheeto). My emphasis:

“Chairman Nunes’ decision, supported by House Speaker Ryan and Republican Members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, to publicly release misleading allegations against the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation is a shameful effort to discredit these institutions, undermine the Special Counsel’s ongoing investigation, and undercut congressional probes. Furthermore, their refusal to allow release of a comprehensive response memorandum prepared by Committee Democrats is a transparent effort to suppress the full truth.
“As the DOJ emphasized to Chairman Nunes, the decision to employ an obscure and never before used House rule to release classified information without DOJ and FBI vetting was ‘extraordinarily reckless.’ The selective release and politicization of classified information sets a terrible precedent and will do long-term damage to the Intelligence Community and our law enforcement agencies. If potential intelligence sources know that their identities might be compromised when political winds arise, those sources of vital information will simply dry up, at great cost to our national security.
“The Republican document mischaracterizes highly sensitive classified information that few Members of Congress have seen, and which Chairman Nunes himself chose not to review. It fails to provide vital context and information contained in DOJ’s FISA application and renewals, and ignores why and how the FBI initiated, and the Special Counsel has continued, its counterintelligence investigation into Russia’s election interference and links to the Trump campaign. The sole purpose of the Republican document is to circle the wagons around the White House and insulate the President. Tellingly, when asked whether the Republican staff who wrote the memo had coordinated its drafting with the White House, the Chairman refused to answer.
“The premise of the Nunes memo is that the FBI and DOJ corruptly sought a FISA warrant on a former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, Carter Page, and deliberately misled the court as part of a systematic abuse of the FISA process. As the Minority memo makes clear, none of this is true. The FBI had good reason to be concerned about Carter Page and would have been derelict in its responsibility to protect the country had it not sought a FISA warrant.
“In order to understand the context in which the FBI sought a FISA warrant for Carter Page, it is necessary to understand how the investigation began, what other information the FBI had about Russia’s efforts to interfere with our election, and what the FBI knew about Carter Page prior to making application to the court – including Carter Page’s previous interactions with Russian intelligence operatives. This is set out in the Democratic response which the GOP so far refuses to make public.
“The authors of the GOP memo would like the country to believe that the investigation began with Christopher Steele and the dossier, and if they can just discredit Mr. Steele, they can make the whole investigation go away regardless of the Russians’ interference in our election or the role of the Trump campaign in that interference. This ignores the inconvenient fact that the investigation did not begin with, or arise from Christopher Steele or the dossier, and that the investigation would persist on the basis of wholly independent evidence had Christopher Steele never entered the picture.
“The DOJ appropriately provided the court with a comprehensive explanation of Russia’s election interference, including evidence that Russian agents courted another Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, George Papadopoulos. As we know from Papadopoulos’ guilty plea, Russian agents disclosed to Papadopoulos their possession of stolen Clinton emails and interest in a relationship with the campaign. In claiming that there is ‘no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos,’ the Majority deliberately misstates the reason why DOJ specifically explained Russia’s role in courting Papadopoulos and the context in which to evaluate Russian approaches to Page.
“The Majority suggests that the FBI failed to alert the court as to Mr. Steele’s potential political motivations or the political motivations of those who hired him, but this is not accurate. The GOP memo also claims that a Yahoo News article was used to corroborate Steele, but this is not at all why the article was referenced. These are but a few of the serious mischaracterizations of the FISA application. There are many more set out in the Democratic response, which we will again be seeking a vote to release publicly on Monday, February 5th. Unlike Committee Republicans, however, we will ask the relevant agencies to propose any necessary redactions to protect any sources and methods not already disclosed by Chairman Nunes’ document.
“It is telling that Chairman Nunes put out this memo without bothering to read the underlying materials, and that he ordered changes to the document without informing his own committee members. It is a terrible lapse in leadership that Speaker Ryan failed to intervene and prevent the abuse of classified materials in this way. It is tragic, if all too predictable, that this President would allow the release of the memo despite FBI and DOJ’s expressions of ‘grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the [Republicans’] memo’s accuracy’. But most destructive of all may be the announcement by Chairman Nunes that he has placed the FBI and DOJ under investigation, impugning and impairing the work of the dedicated professionals trying to keep our country safe.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

A little, yes.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

Looks like Nunes has some explaining to do.

I haven't been this disappointed since Geraldo Rivera opened the tomb.

I don't think history will be kind to Nunes or the GOP on this.

-
That scenario is pretty much what I had created with the timeline of info out there. Of course I think most would think along those lines given the salient data points, so it might just be someone else's posit. I'd almost like for this to be true, and for a light cleaning to be done at FBI, just so I can have some confidence in the institution after such a clusterfuck of a Hillary investigation.

Three and a half pages and they still manage to screw up matters of public record:

n/

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Really? Exposing the FBI and its director, who was appointed by Obama and who failed in office with regard to the Hillary email server, as extremely politically biased and opposed to Trump winning the Oval Office is not a bad look? Add to that the funding by Team Donkey.

Then there is this:

That's where the dossier — containing information compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele on behalf of Democrats — comes in. The memo says neither the initial application for the warrant in October 2016 or any of the renewals reference the roles of the Democratic National Committee or Hillary Clinton's campaign in funding of Steele's efforts — even though the political origins of the dossier were apparently known to officials at DOJ and FBI.

And this:

"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 the Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information," the memo claims.


And this:

The memo also claims that, before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he kept in touch with the DOJ through then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr. Ohr, who worked closely with Yates then Rosenstein, eventually spoke with the FBI about his communications with Steele. In September 2016, Steele apparently told Ohr he was "'desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president,'" according to the memo. The memo also notes Ohr's wife worked for Fusion GPS to help with the opposition research against Trump, something the memo claims was not disclosed.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

What are you quoting here - this isn't the text of the memo?

EDIT:

Wait, I figured it out. You've copy and pasted from a CBS article - why? Does work not let you click through to scribd etc.? Which begs the question...have you read the memo?

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

I thought I included the link, did I not?

I did read the memo. The article is accurate.

You seem to be deflecting.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

So slow today I'll even respond to CBS.

Really? Exposing the FBI and its director, who was appointed by Obama and who failed in office with regard to the Hillary email server, as extremely politically biased and opposed to Trump winning the Oval Office is not a bad look? Add to that the funding by Team Donkey.

Not really, no. The FBI and DOJ are comprised of grown adults with political opinions, typically conservative. Some will hate Hilary, some will hate Donald, no reasonable person could expect anything else. The only "bad look" would be if the memo demonstrated that any bias there may or may not have been influenced the process, which it spectacularly failed to do.

Then there is this:

That's where the dossier — containing information compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele on behalf of Democrats — comes in. The memo says neither the initial application for the warrant in October 2016 or any of the renewals reference the roles of the Democratic National Committee or Hillary Clinton's campaign in funding of Steele's efforts — even though the political origins of the dossier were apparently known to officials at DOJ and FBI.

Why would they? Renewals are only granted if a previously granted FISA was productive. We could imagine a world where on application for renewal the FISA judge said: "nothing's been produced in the last 90 days and as I recall the application was based only on info. from some dossier. So your renewal's turned down and I want to know if there's anything you want to confess about the origin of that dossier?" But that, of course, is not the world we seem to be living in. In the world we're in, the initial application, including information "in" (but notable not necessarily "from"), the memo was approved. Page has admitted he was an active target of recruitment by the SVR in 2013. I've no idea what the FBI had on him by 2016 but I don't understand anyone who'd bet against the FBI's initial case against him being sound. Every renewal since then would have been on the basis that the previous extension was productive.

You may work for my mortal enemy but if you tell the cops I'm cooking meth in my garage and you're right, your employment isn't a great defense for me.

And this:

"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 the Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information," the memo claims.

See above.

And this:

The memo also claims that, before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he kept in touch with the DOJ through then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr. Ohr, who worked closely with Yates then Rosenstein, eventually spoke with the FBI about his communications with Steele. In September 2016, Steele apparently told Ohr he was "'desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president,'" according to the memo. The memo also notes Ohr's wife worked for Fusion GPS to help with the opposition research against Trump, something the memo claims was not disclosed.

Steele thought Trump had been compromised by Russia. I appreciate his desperation.

The memo DOES acknowledge that the Trump / Russia investigation started with Papodopoulos, to which HA HA HA HA.

IT's bias is made crystal clear by the way in which it characterizes easily verifiable matters of public record (See the discussion of Comey's "salatious" comments).


This is a huge own-goal.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

Not as far as I can see - the only link goes to an article from October. We're already going to try and discuss Nunes' selection (and apparent mischaracterization) of materials he didn't read. There's really no need to go one step further and discuss CBS' selection and interpretation of Nunes' selection (and apparent mischaracterization) of materials he didn't read.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

Benghazi Gowdy : http://thehill.com/...ler-probe-in-any-way

It’s notable that the memo makes precisely zero attacks on the substance of the GPS Fusion dossier. The message is: it should be completely disregarded because of who produced it and who paid for it. Even if every word of it is true.

Uh-huh.

"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."

Most of the dossier remains uncorroborated.

Agree.

The conspiracy the Republicans would like to sell you has three elements at least:

1. The Steele dosier is false
2. It was relied on by the FBI and the DOJ in bad faith
3. It was the crucial element in getting the whole Trump/Russia collusion investigation rolling.

Inadvertently or not they just acknowledged 3 is BS.
The Steele dossier looks better and better by the day (if the strongest claim Trump can still make is that no, really, he doesn't like getting peed on by prostitutes... that's a pretty weak victory)
We'll never know the actual answer to 2 but we'll be in a marginally better place when the Democratic memo gets released and if and when the FBI respond (they were apparently planning too but given how this memo's been received they may not feel it's worth it).

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

I don’t think that’s the message. I think the message is that in order for it to be used to justify spying on a US citizen vis a vis the FISA court, it needed to be: 1) Corroborated, and 2) The history of where it came from should have been disclosed.

There are plenty of laws on the books that ban the use of certain information based on how it was procured and presented, even if it the information is completely true.

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.

Right but:

• no-one here is an expert on the evidential standards for a FISA court but there is no evidence that the information "in" (the memo notably did not say "from") the memo was uncorroborated. In fact, if you take Schiff's statement at face value, it was and Nunes' attempt to imply otherwise was misleading.
  
• there are privileges that prevent the admission of certain evidence in certain cases but none I can think of that would apply here.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

This is the fruit of the poison tree thing that I see referred to on tv, right? We don’t really embrace that so much in England. But I wonder whether it is moderated in the US when it comes to national security. I have no idea. But generally when it comes to courts and law national security ends up trumping a lot of other principles.

How do you know that? If bits of it were corroborated I’d be willing to bet a fair bit that that fact would be classified. Sure, from a public facing point of view it is uncorroborated, but that is nowhere near the end of the story. And Nunes knows he can release half or less of the story with absolute impunity because the rest will remain classified and never be released.

Right. I will happily admit that I am not an expert as to what is admissible in the FISA court. I’m really going with what is implied in the memo, which may be complete bullshit.

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.

Generally speaking, from my laymans’ perspective, information obtained or used illegally in the US is almost always impermissible in a court of law. There have been many SCOTUS cases regarding how information was gathered and subsequently used to convict somebody. The FISA court may have very different rules; I don’t know.

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.

I know you believe you rebutted the Communist Broadcasting System article, but, you engaged in hyperbole and speculation.

That said, your diatribe makes for a fun read. It's fun watching Lefties eat their own ...

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

That's kinda like saying the Russians "interfered" with the US election because they released information about Hillary that was completely true.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

No, it’s completely unlike saying that.

It’s shooting the messenger. Your thing is defending the messenger.

Really? And you think the Fusion dossier was not attacked? How on earth do you read it that way.

Here is a good explanation:

The FBI relied heavily on the dubious Steele dossier, as well as a Yahoo! News article based on the salacious document, to obtain a surveillance warrant against a Trump campaign adviser prior to the 2016 election, according to an explosive but controversial memo approved for release by the White House on Friday.

The memo, which was crafted by House Republicans, also says that the FBI’s deputy director, Andrew McCabe, told Congress that a FISA warrant against the campaign adviser, Carter Page, would not have been granted without use of the dossier. That despite the FBI later determining that very little of the Democrat-funded document was corroborated.

And in another stunning revelation, the memo asserts that Justice Department official Bruce Ohr was used to pass information from the author of the dossier, Christopher Steele, to the DOJ.
Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, worked at the time for Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm research firm that commissioned the dossier. Bruce Ohr, who worked closely with Deputy Attorney Generals Sally Yates and Rod Rosenstein, passed his wife’s opposition research on Trump to the FBI, the memo says.

http://dailycaller.com/...anted-by-fusion-gps/

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Where does any of that attack the substance of a conclusion in the fusion dossier?

It asserts the dossier as a whole is dubious, salacious, uncorroborated and claims some stuff about someone who worked for Fusion, that really ends with ”and...?”. Nowhere does it take a statement from the dossier and refute it with facts.

It’s basically little different to watching a man speaking a foreign language very loudly and quickly, and waving his arms frantically at the same time.

You summed it up perfectly stal.

---

----------------------------------------------------------------
my strava

Did you actually read what you just wrote?

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Gaah. This is circular. I'm not rebutting the CBS article. I'm rebutting your opinion that the CBS summary of Nunes' selective and misleading summary of the underlying materials reveals anything untoward about the Trump /Russia investigation.

Didn't you accuse me of deflecting a couple of posts up?

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

Yes thanks. And understood it too.

You would do well to do likewise. Good luck.

Wait a minute. When did we start talking about the Trump/Russia investigation? I have been addressing the abuse of process in the Page investigation. If that is not what you are addressing, then we are completely talking past one another.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

LOL! Well then, you answered your own question.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I suggest you google Woods Procedure re FISA court evidence.

FBI vs White house with regard to Nunes memo will be adjudicated only through politics and elections.. At it's core this memo is about a US citizen, Carter Page, and his constitutional rights. Adjudication here is clearly through the judiciary. Let us see if Mr Page feels his rights were violated as alleged in the memo and files suit in a federal court of law. Will the ACLU take up his cause?

-
Does make one wonder why dems, the media, and even the FBI were screaming 'DON'T RELEASE THE MEMO' massive and lasting damage to American security!!! blah blah blah The reality is we don't know, and the FBI is not about to let anything out because they have ALL the cards. The only chance at some semblance of oversight is the IG. There is no oversight of these agencies, and they do as they will. That's one of the reasons a few congress critters were trying to bring charges against Clapper, for knowingly lying before congress.

See, I think you are interpreting that the way Nunes wants to. Why does the memo not say something like "And the FBI has not been able to corroborate the Steele Dossier any further." All the memo states is the state of collaboration at one point in time. If Nunes (or his staff/white house that actually wrote the memo) knew that the most corroboration that happened they would have stated as such. Instead they just stated what was known at the time, not what is known now. Other places in the document they talk about what is known now and not at the time of the FISA application, like McCabe's testimony about the application, so it is not limiting itself to that.

Simply, either Nunes/surrogates do not know if dossier has been corroborated further or that it has and it was not stated in the memo because it would hurt the purpose of the memo. I would imagine that Nunes or someone else on the committee asked McCabe during the same session referenced in the memo if more of the dossier had been corroborated, since it is an obvious question. So I would bet large sums of money more of the dossier has been corroborated since the initial FISA application and quote in the memo.

You mean like the meeting in Prague?

The dossier is a POS. If you go through and replace Trump with Clinton and change a few details, and add some Clinton Foundation, and uranium stuff. You'd have the 'opposition research' that was offered to Trump.

The Trump team was smart to walk away from it; the Dems bought it hook line and sinker.

I would not be surprised if the dossier is not 100%, it is raw intelligence (really should not be called a dossier). Just because some of it is wrong, does not mean all of it is. I am only 50/50 on Trump's team actually conspiring with Russia during the election, I just don't think that partnership was required and Trump's team is dumb enough that I doubt they would have kept it that hidden. On the other hand, I think there is a very good chance that Russia may have compromised Trump with his involvement with Russian Oligarchs over the past decade. This compromise could lead to Trump make decisions that are good for Russia/Oligarchs and bad for America. I think that is much more likely than collusion mentioned by Steele, because both were. We know that Trump was very dependant on Russia for money (by statements by the Trumps) because US banks would not loan to him after his bankruptcies. We also know from the Stormy Daniels thing that his susceptible to black mail.

Another sound, well-argued post. Bravo!

Conspiring to do what? Rig the election? How did they do that? How were illegal/invalid votes entered?


You mean like: Trump War: From Bombing Syria to Challenging Russian and Iran


Fake news!

Are you saying that the meeting in Prague happened? Despite Trump's lawyer never having traveled to Prague?

It's one small item in the dossier that was disproved, and disproved easily. So easily, it should have been easy to double check when the dossier was created, so speaks to the overall quality of the information in it.

First, I said it was unlikely that Trump conspired with Russia during the election. So thanks for quoting me out of context, really shows a strong case there.

Second, yes doing things like undermining Article 5. That is way bigger than bombing a Syrian air field and not hitting the Russian istallations. Not implementing sanctions against Russia is another example. And tons of other examples of Trump undermining our relationship with our Allies. Really Trump has been much better for Russia than Clinton would have been, because Clinton would have made many of the same anti-Russia moves and also done more. So while Trump has not been a lap dog, he has been much much better than Clinton would have been.

Third, sure fake news. Let us ignore the evidence and just go by statements by people that signed NDAs and ignore their statements prior to the NDA.

Do you actually believe this?

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

I know she's an attention seeking whore who was all set to 'expose Trump' on late night TV, then rescinded all of her allegations.

That wasn't the question.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Yes, the dossier does have some factual inaccuracies in it. That is virtually inevitable when gathering raw intelligence through clandestine means. Even if you trust your sources, and even if the sources believe they are passing you accurate information, that does not mean all the information will be correct. The raw intelligence is passed to the security analysts, whose jobs are to sort out what is reliable and what is not. Many items in the dossier have since been corroborated.

If you actually want to learn more about this, and what elements of the "dossier" have been corroborated, read this written by an ex-CIA Senior Intelligence Service member. (Warning, it's long and detailed, so it may take some time and concentration.)

https://www.justsecurity.org/...ele-dossier-knowing/