Benghazi Gowdy : http://thehill.com/...ler-probe-in-any-way
Lavender Room
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Bretom]
[ In reply to ]
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Bretom]
[ In reply to ]
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.
Uh-huh.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Greg66]
[ In reply to ]
"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.
Most of the dossier remains uncorroborated.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Greg66]
[ In reply to ]
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
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
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Greg66]
[ In reply to ]
Greg66 wrote:
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.
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.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [spot]
[ In reply to ]
Right but:
"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek
- 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
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [spot]
[ In reply to ]
spot wrote:
Greg66 wrote:
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.
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.
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.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [efernand]
[ In reply to ]
efernand wrote:
"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.
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.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Bretom]
[ In reply to ]
Bretom wrote:
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.
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.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Greg66]
[ In reply to ]
Greg66 wrote:
spot wrote:
Greg66 wrote:
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.
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.
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.
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.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Bretom]
[ In reply to ]
Bretom wrote:
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.
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
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Greg66]
[ In reply to ]
Greg66 wrote:
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.
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
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [JSA]
[ In reply to ]
JSA wrote:
Greg66 wrote:
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.
That's kinda like saying the Russians "interfered" with the US election because they released information about Hillary that was completely true.
No, it’s completely unlike saying that.
It’s shooting the messenger. Your thing is defending the messenger.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Greg66]
[ In reply to ]
Greg66 wrote:
JSA wrote:
Greg66 wrote:
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.
That's kinda like saying the Russians "interfered" with the US election because they released information about Hillary that was completely true.
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
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [JSA]
[ In reply to ]
JSA wrote:
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/
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.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [stal]
[ In reply to ]
stal wrote:
klehner wrote:
Quote:
The “F.B.I. was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo the day before the committee voted to release it,” the bureau said in a statement. “As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy.”Wray and Rosenstein went to the WH to persuade them not to approve of the release, but apparently CoS Kelly turned them down.
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.
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.
You summed it up perfectly stal.
----------------------------------------------------------------
my strava
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Greg66]
[ In reply to ]
Greg66 wrote:
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.
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
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [JSA]
[ In reply to ]
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
Didn't you accuse me of deflecting a couple of posts up?
"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [JSA]
[ In reply to ]
JSA wrote:
Greg66 wrote:
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.
Did you actually read what you just wrote?
Yes thanks. And understood it too.
You would do well to do likewise. Good luck.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Bretom]
[ In reply to ]
Bretom wrote:
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?
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
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Greg66]
[ In reply to ]
Greg66 wrote:
JSA wrote:
Greg66 wrote:
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.
Did you actually read what you just wrote?
Yes thanks. And understood it too.
You would do well to do likewise. Good luck.
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
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [klehner]
[ In reply to ]
klehner wrote:
Quote:
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.
Uh, of course it is. And the Easter Bunny isn't real. Next topic.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Bretom]
[ In reply to ]
I suggest you google Woods Procedure re FISA court evidence.
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [klehner]
[ In reply to ]
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?
spot wrote:
Bretom wrote:
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.
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.
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.