Re: Here's the GOP memo [orphious] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 6:25

Post #226 of 278 (2470 views)

orphious wrote:

Kay Serrar wrote:

Except the FBI and the FISA court believed that enough of Steele's sources and information were credible to grant the warrant. Steele was likely "desperate" for Trump not to be president not because he's had a life-long hatred of Republican politics (and a love of Clinton), but rather because of the information he had on Trump. If he believed - rightly or wrongly - that Putin had leverage over Trump, it is reasonable for him not to want Trump to become president. Think about it for a moment outside your echo chamber.

Which ones were credible?

MUCH of it. She told our dumbasses that yesterday. Try to keep up.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [orphious] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 6:37

Post #227 of 278 (2459 views)

orphious wrote:

Kay Serrar wrote:

Except the FBI and the FISA court believed that enough of Steele's sources and information were credible to grant the warrant. Steele was likely "desperate" for Trump not to be president not because he's had a life-long hatred of Republican politics (and a love of Clinton), but rather because of the information he had on Trump. If he believed - rightly or wrongly - that Putin had leverage over Trump, it is reasonable for him not to want Trump to become president. Think about it for a moment outside your echo chamber.

Which ones were credible?

Steele already had credibility with the FBI for his work on the successful corruption case against memebers of FIFA.

But more specifically, these elements of the report may have had credibility with the FBI and FISA court:
- Russia able to provide damaging information on HRC (later confirmed per the Trump Jr emails and meeting in Trump Tower and Cohen's contacts with Peskov and email from Felix Sater: “Our boy can become president of the USA and we can engineer it. I will get all of Putin’s team to buy in on this.”)
- An agreement by Manafort to sideline Ukraine as a campaign issue as a quid pro quo for HRC 'dirt' (Trump allegedly pressed for watered down support of Ukraine, which was officially adopted by the RNC)
- Fears by Russian officials that kick-back payments to Manafort would be picked up by US authorities (Manafort has since been charged with money laundering)
- Carter Page travelled to Moscow in July 2016, ostensibly for a conference, but while there he met with Putin ally and Chairman of the Russian state oil company, Igor Sechin and also with Parliamentary Secretary Igor Divyekin (later confirmed and the FBI briefed senior members of congress on it)
- Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's promises to lift sanctions immediately following the inauguration (may be consistent with discussions by Trump campaign with Russians during the transition period)
- Russia using hackers to spread false news/information to try to influence voters (later confirmed by CIA)

Also possibly credible, but we (Joe Public) don't know:
- Cohen making payments to Russian hackers (we now know Cohen has many more Russia contacts that previously thought/known)

On balance, there seems like there was enough 'smoke' there to grant the FISA warrant to monitor Page.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 6:47

Post #228 of 278 (2447 views)

Kay Serrar wrote:

orphious wrote:

Kay Serrar wrote:

Except the FBI and the FISA court believed that enough of Steele's sources and information were credible to grant the warrant. Steele was likely "desperate" for Trump not to be president not because he's had a life-long hatred of Republican politics (and a love of Clinton), but rather because of the information he had on Trump. If he believed - rightly or wrongly - that Putin had leverage over Trump, it is reasonable for him not to want Trump to become president. Think about it for a moment outside your echo chamber.

Which ones were credible?

Steele already had credibility with the FBI for his work on the successful corruption case against memebers of FIFA.

But more specifically, these elements of the report may have had credibility with the FBI and FISA court:
- Russia able to provide damaging information on HRC (later confirmed per the Trump Jr emails and meeting in Trump Tower and Cohen's contacts with Peskov and email from Felix Sater: “Our boy can become president of the USA and we can engineer it. I will get all of Putin’s team to buy in on this.”)
- An agreement by Manafort to sideline Ukraine as a campaign issue as a quid pro quo for HRC 'dirt' (Trump allegedly pressed for watered down support of Ukraine, which was officially adopted by the RNC)
- Fears by Russian officials that kick-back payments to Manafort would be picked up by US authorities (Manafort has since been charged with money laundering)
- Carter Page travelled to Moscow in July 2016, ostensibly for a conference, but while there he met with Putin ally and Chairman of the Russian state oil company, Igor Sechin and also with Parliamentary Secretary Igor Divyekin (later confirmed and the FBI briefed senior members of congress on it)
- Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's promises to lift sanctions immediately following the inauguration (may be consistent with discussions by Trump campaign with Russians during the transition period)
- Russia using hackers to spread false news/information to try to influence voters (later confirmed by CIA)

Also possibly credible, but we (Joe Public) don't know:
- Cohen making payments to Russian hackers (we now know Cohen has many more Russia contacts that previously thought/known)

On balance, there seems like there was enough 'smoke' there to grant the FISA warrant to monitor Page.

Speaking of Echo chamber...

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 7:14

Post #229 of 278 (2436 views)

As long as we're imputing motive to Steele, he could also have been desperate because that was part of his new job, and success would have cemented him as a guy who could help make things like that happen, and been very lucrative going forward. His sharing of info with media without telling the FBI, could feed either take, but if it was only to keep Trump out, why would he not share that info with the FBI? I'm back to "we just don't know", but we do know the FBI was not happy, and punted him.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 7:30

Post #230 of 278 (2420 views)

Quote:

On balance, there seems like there was enough 'smoke' there to grant the FISA warrant to monitor Page.

Oh yeah, smoke. How about actual fire? Like actual texts between FBI agents and DOJ personnel? How about Obama using a pseudonym on Clinton's private email server to exchange emails with her? How about (now admitted) secret meetings between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch? How about texts admitting that she was going to let Clinton skate well before the end of the investigation? How about Obama's directions to call it a 'matter' not an 'investigation'?

The FBI cannot give credibility to Steele because they now lack credibility.

Even if parts of the dossier happen to be true, it, in and of itself, is the only identifiable evidence that Russia was/is trying to meddle in the election and/or de-legitimize the Trump Presidency.

As I mentioned before, I find it far more likely that the Russians were interested in recruiting/use (former British spy) Steele than (run of the mill bum) Page.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [orphious] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 7:32

Post #231 of 278 (2419 views)

orphious wrote:

Kay Serrar wrote:

orphious wrote:

Kay Serrar wrote:

Except the FBI and the FISA court believed that enough of Steele's sources and information were credible to grant the warrant. Steele was likely "desperate" for Trump not to be president not because he's had a life-long hatred of Republican politics (and a love of Clinton), but rather because of the information he had on Trump. If he believed - rightly or wrongly - that Putin had leverage over Trump, it is reasonable for him not to want Trump to become president. Think about it for a moment outside your echo chamber.

Which ones were credible?

Steele already had credibility with the FBI for his work on the successful corruption case against memebers of FIFA.

But more specifically, these elements of the report may have had credibility with the FBI and FISA court:
- Russia able to provide damaging information on HRC (later confirmed per the Trump Jr emails and meeting in Trump Tower and Cohen's contacts with Peskov and email from Felix Sater: “Our boy can become president of the USA and we can engineer it. I will get all of Putin’s team to buy in on this.”)
- An agreement by Manafort to sideline Ukraine as a campaign issue as a quid pro quo for HRC 'dirt' (Trump allegedly pressed for watered down support of Ukraine, which was officially adopted by the RNC)
- Fears by Russian officials that kick-back payments to Manafort would be picked up by US authorities (Manafort has since been charged with money laundering)
- Carter Page travelled to Moscow in July 2016, ostensibly for a conference, but while there he met with Putin ally and Chairman of the Russian state oil company, Igor Sechin and also with Parliamentary Secretary Igor Divyekin (later confirmed and the FBI briefed senior members of congress on it)
- Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's promises to lift sanctions immediately following the inauguration (may be consistent with discussions by Trump campaign with Russians during the transition period)
- Russia using hackers to spread false news/information to try to influence voters (later confirmed by CIA)

Also possibly credible, but we (Joe Public) don't know:
- Cohen making payments to Russian hackers (we now know Cohen has many more Russia contacts that previously thought/known)

On balance, there seems like there was enough 'smoke' there to grant the FISA warrant to monitor Page.

Speaking of Echo chamber...

You asked for information in the dossier that may have been considered credible enough to grant a FISA warrant by the court. Tell me why the above information should not have been considered by the court?

Bottom line, we are both working with limited information. The court and the FBI may have had other information that corroborated aspects of the dossier, and they may also have had other independent information to make them suspiciaous of Page (we just don't know at this point, despite what BK asserts with such authority). Remember that Page was considered highly suspicious even before 2016, and then he was suddenly on Team Trump, which would have seemed strange on its face given he was an ex-banker. What was his role on the Trump team, and why did he travel to Moscow in July 2016?

We'll see what comes of the Mueller investigation...

Re: Here's the GOP memo [efernand] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 7:37

Post #232 of 278 (2415 views)

efernand wrote:

Quote:

On balance, there seems like there was enough 'smoke' there to grant the FISA warrant to monitor Page.

Oh yeah, smoke. How about actual fire? Like actual texts between FBI agents and DOJ personnel? How about Obama using a pseudonym on Clinton's private email server to exchange emails with her? How about (now admitted) secret meetings between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch? How about texts admitting that she was going to let Clinton skate well before the end of the investigation? How about Obama's directions to call it a 'matter' not an 'investigation'?

The FBI cannot give credibility to Steele because they now lack credibility.

Even if parts of the dossier happen to be true, it, in and of itself, is the only identifiable evidence that Russia was/is trying to meddle in the election and/or de-legitimize the Trump Presidency.

As I mentioned before, I find it far more likely that the Russians were interested in recruiting/use (former British spy) Steele than (run of the mill bum) Page.

You believe what you want to believe. This part of the discussion is about the FISA warrant and whether there was credible information to grant it. We're not discussing the Clinton email investigation, though I know how fond you are of saying "look over here!". (I've made my position clear on that and it's closer to yours, despite you wanting to paint me as a Clinton supporter.)

So, was there enough smoke to grant a FISA warrant? That's the question here. The court's answer was "yes". Tell me why, knowing what they knew at the time (and even knowing what we know now), why the answer should have been "no".

Re: Here's the GOP memo [efernand] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 7:42

Post #233 of 278 (2410 views)

Anyone remember the "reports" from last year that the rank and file FBI agents were unhappy? Some wondered if it was because they didn't like that Clinton wasn't being charged.

I now wonder if it is because they were aware of what was going on at the top.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 7:47

Post #234 of 278 (2408 views)

What sane agent knowing trump's background (ny city, Roy Cohn,gambling connections, bankruptcies, con man schtick) would not be on alert and somewhat skeptical maybe even biased a bit? Just like some agents, maybe retired, fed Rudy g some gossip on hrc.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 8:01

Post #235 of 278 (2401 views)

Quote:

You believe what you want to believe. This part of the discussion is about the FISA warrant and whether there was credible information to grant it. We're not discussing the Clinton email investigation, though I know how fond you are of saying "look over here!". (I've made my position clear on that and it's closer to yours, despite you wanting to paint me as a Clinton supporter.)
So, was there enough smoke to grant a FISA warrant? That's the question here. The court's answer was "yes". Tell me why, knowing what they knew at the time (and even knowing what we know now), why the answer should have been "no".

The Clinton fiasco isn't just a 'look over here' ploy, it's part and parcel of everything going on. High level members of the FBI and DOJ, and Obama himself had massive interests in making the Clinton email server 'matter' go away, so that she could go on and get anointed the First Female President. Once she was elected, all of there (most likely illegal) shenanigans would be viewed by Clinton as loyal friends doing what had to be done to 'save the country.' And we all know the Clinton value loyalty over everything else.

Now, a lot of the same people who perverted the Clinton investigation were/are involved in the Trump/Russia kerfuffle. And the whole Trump/Russia story line was something Clinton and her team made up as an excuse for her not 'winning by 50 points.'

So, with the, to them, 'inconceivable', win by Trump, they needed something to both de-legitimize the Trump Presidency, and to hopefully distract from any further inqiry into their behavior in the Clinton investigation.

As far as the legitimacy of the FISA warrant, it's becoming very clear that the Steele dossier was a critical part of it's approval, and the facts that Steele was staunchly anti-Trump and that the dossier was secretly funded by Clinton was NOT revealed to the court.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [efernand] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 9:54

Post #236 of 278 (2371 views)

efernand wrote:

Quote:

You believe what you want to believe. This part of the discussion is about the FISA warrant and whether there was credible information to grant it. We're not discussing the Clinton email investigation, though I know how fond you are of saying "look over here!". (I've made my position clear on that and it's closer to yours, despite you wanting to paint me as a Clinton supporter.)
So, was there enough smoke to grant a FISA warrant? That's the question here. The court's answer was "yes". Tell me why, knowing what they knew at the time (and even knowing what we know now), why the answer should have been "no".

The Clinton fiasco isn't just a 'look over here' ploy, it's part and parcel of everything going on. High level members of the FBI and DOJ, and Obama himself had massive interests in making the Clinton email server 'matter' go away, so that she could go on and get anointed the First Female President. Once she was elected, all of there (most likely illegal) shenanigans would be viewed by Clinton as loyal friends doing what had to be done to 'save the country.' And we all know the Clinton value loyalty over everything else.

Now, a lot of the same people who perverted the Clinton investigation were/are involved in the Trump/Russia kerfuffle. And the whole Trump/Russia story line was something Clinton and her team made up as an excuse for her not 'winning by 50 points.'

So, with the, to them, 'inconceivable', win by Trump, they needed something to both de-legitimize the Trump Presidency, and to hopefully distract from any further inqiry into their behavior in the Clinton investigation.

As far as the legitimacy of the FISA warrant, it's becoming very clear that the Steele dossier was a critical part of it's approval, and the facts that Steele was staunchly anti-Trump and that the dossier was secretly funded by Clinton was NOT revealed to the court.

Bullshit! You need to quit watching Hannity, he's killing your brain cells.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [rick_pcfl] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 10:04

Post #237 of 278 (2364 views)

rick_pcfl wrote:

Anyone remember the "reports" from last year that the rank and file FBI agents were unhappy? Some wondered if it was because they didn't like that Clinton wasn't being charged.

I now wonder if it is because they were aware of what was going on at the top.

Were those the same reports that predicted mass resignations of FBI agents if she wasn't eventually charged? How'd that prediction turn out? Yeah, "reports."

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

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 12:17

Post #238 of 278 (2338 views)

From “much of it has been confirmed and corroborated” to “may have been considered credible” in one day. That’s some serious crawfishing.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Spiridon Louis] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 13:25

Post #239 of 278 (2318 views)

Spiridon Louis wrote:

From “much of it has been confirmed and corroborated” to “may have been considered credible” in one day. That’s some serious crawfishing.

I guess reading's not your strong suit. Let me help. One referred to what we know now. The other referred to what the FISA court "may have considered credible" at the time when the warrant was being sought.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [efernand] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 13:36

Post #240 of 278 (2313 views)

Once more, w/ feeling...

efernand wrote:

The Trump fiasco isn't just a 'look over here' ploy, it's part and parcel of everything going on. High level members of the cabinet team and GOP, and Trump himself had massive interests in keeping the Clinton email server 'matter' in the news, so that he could go on and "Make America Great Again". Once he was elected, all of there (most likely illegal) shenanigans would be viewed by Trump as loyal friends doing what had to be done to 'save the country.' And we all know Trump values loyalty over everything else.

Gee, that was easy!

Re: Here's the GOP memo [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 14:18

Post #241 of 278 (2293 views)

Quote:

Gee, that was easy!

Yeah, too bad it doesn't make any sense.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Spiridon Louis] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 14:37

Post #242 of 278 (2282 views)

Spiridon Louis wrote:

I read it. It doesn't show what you claim. There are 17 points or accusations made in the dossier, right? It's something like that anyway. How many have been "confirmed and corroborated" (your words)?

much
məCH/
determiner & pronoun

1.
a large amount.
"I did not get much sleep"
synonyms:a lot of, a great/good deal of, a great/large amount of, plenty of, ample, copious, abundant, plentiful, considerable; More

adverb

1.
to a great extent; a great deal.
"did it hurt much?"
synonyms:greatly, to a great extent/degree, a great deal, a lot, considerably, appreciably
"it didn't hurt much"

Bump

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 14:43

Post #243 of 278 (2272 views)

Kay Serrar wrote:

Spiridon Louis wrote:

From “much of it has been confirmed and corroborated” to “may have been considered credible” in one day. That’s some serious crawfishing.

I guess reading's not your strong suit. Let me help. One referred to what we know now. The other referred to what the FISA court "may have considered credible" at the time when the warrant was being sought.

l read just fine. In post 225 you said they “were” credible. Now you’re saying “may have been considered” credible. Those mean different things.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Spiridon Louis] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 14:55

Post #244 of 278 (2257 views)

Spiridon Louis wrote:

Kay Serrar wrote:

Spiridon Louis wrote:

From “much of it has been confirmed and corroborated” to “may have been considered credible” in one day. That’s some serious crawfishing.

I guess reading's not your strong suit. Let me help. One referred to what we know now. The other referred to what the FISA court "may have considered credible" at the time when the warrant was being sought.

l read just fine. In post 225 you said they “were” credible. Now you’re saying “may have been considered” credible. Those mean different things.

Again. This reading stuff is hard, apparently.

In 225 I said that the sources and information presented to the FISA court "were credible enough" to grant the warrant. That is a fact, because the warrant was granted (unless you want to lump the judge into your giant conspiracy theory). Then I was asked which items in the dossier "May have been considered credible" by the court. I don't know which items exactly the court considered credible or not because I haven't read the transcript, but I posted a number of details from the dossier that "May have been considered credible" by the court at the time.

Is that clearer for you now?

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 15:08

Post #245 of 278 (2248 views)

No. l think you’ll just say anything that fits your talking point. You seem to have moved right along past “much of it has now been confirmed and corroborated.”

l don’t know what happened with all this. Neither do the people who are trying to say there’s nothing to it. That bothers me. You think you’re clever and have this all figured out. You aren’t and you don’t.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [dave_w] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 19:08

Post #246 of 278 (2214 views)

dave_w wrote:

As long as we're imputing motive to Steele, he could also have been desperate because that was part of his new job, and success would have cemented him as a guy who could help make things like that happen, and been very lucrative going forward. His sharing of info with media without telling the FBI, could feed either take, but if it was only to keep Trump out, why would he not share that info with the FBI? I'm back to "we just don't know", but we do know the FBI was not happy, and punted him.

Yes, Christopher Steele has been been spending years building up a reputation as the an expert on Russia. Then spent years providing information FBI, which I assume was good intel since they kept trusting him provide more. While also building up a private intelligence company hired by large corporations. All of this was planned knowing that Trump would run for president and he could make up a bunch of stuff about him! Brilliant plan there, because now everyone will hire him! Because if a company wants to invest in a company in Russia, they don't want the truth, they want lies. This is such a brilliant business move.

Also, why not share it with the FBI? Maybe because he did not trust the FBI, for example when he read in the NYT that sources in the FBI said they had stopped the investigation into Trump, when he knew that it was still going on. Obviously some people in the FBI were covering for Trump, maybe that is what caused him to go to the press, since the FBI could just cover it up.

Re: Here's the GOP memo [Spiridon Louis] [ In reply to ]

Feb 8, 18 23:41

Post #247 of 278 (2198 views)

Hey, yet another memo has dropped. It's heavily redacted, but still worth a read:

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Re: Here's the GOP memo [chaparral] [ In reply to ]

Feb 9, 18 4:30

Post #248 of 278 (2173 views)

chaparral wrote:

dave_w wrote:

As long as we're imputing motive to Steele, he could also have been desperate because that was part of his new job, and success would have cemented him as a guy who could help make things like that happen, and been very lucrative going forward. His sharing of info with media without telling the FBI, could feed either take, but if it was only to keep Trump out, why would he not share that info with the FBI? I'm back to "we just don't know", but we do know the FBI was not happy, and punted him.

Yes, Christopher Steele has been been spending years building up a reputation as the an expert on Russia. Then spent years providing information FBI, which I assume was good intel since they kept trusting him provide more. While also building up a private intelligence company hired by large corporations. All of this was planned knowing that Trump would run for president and he could make up a bunch of stuff about him! Brilliant plan there, because now everyone will hire him! Because if a company wants to invest in a company in Russia, they don't want the truth, they want lies. This is such a brilliant business move.

Also, why not share it with the FBI? Maybe because he did not trust the FBI, for example when he read in the NYT that sources in the FBI said they had stopped the investigation into Trump, when he knew that it was still going on. Obviously some people in the FBI were covering for Trump, maybe that is what caused him to go to the press, since the FBI could just cover it up.

-
Cool; our erstwhile British spy is both more trustworthy than the FBI, and cares more about America. I'll stick with "we just don't know", but add a sharp conservative that is thinking along the same lines, and makes a couple of good points.
-
https://www.wsj.com/articles/who-is-christopher-steele-1518135346?shareToken=st3c12410d2f964a218abe1361ac889771&reflink=article_email_share

Re: Here's the GOP memo [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

Feb 9, 18 5:59

Post #249 of 278 (2491 views)

slowguy wrote:

Quote:

Ah yes, there’s the old BK. Straight off the deep end. Welcome back.

It’s sad really. I think this story had already been basically debunked by the time Kahuna posted about it.

Big Kahuna: What? Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!
Otter: [to Boon] Germans?
Boon: Forget it, he's rolling.

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

Re: Here's the GOP memo [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]

Feb 9, 18 6:10

Post #250 of 278 (2487 views)

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.