There’s a reporter claiming carter page is a double agent and it’s the real reason the FBI was against the memo being released.

There’s some gaps in the reasoning but Page is an odd ball

https://twitter.com/krassenstein/status/960908458974482434

2/6/2018 3:06:46 PM

It was already public knowledge that Page was an informant. Why would they care about the memo?

There is historical precedent for the executive branch using the FBI to spy on opponents, as well as the FBI spying for their own gain. And that’s seeming more and more to be the case here.

[Edited on February 6, 2018 at 3:33 PM. Reason : .]

2/6/2018 3:30:58 PM

Is there historical precedent for undercover FBI informants doing media tours?

2/6/2018 4:28:15 PM

^^^ I don't even know what to think of that.

2/6/2018 4:38:36 PM

^^
Why wouldn't they, if the idea is to publicize a narrative?

Dig in...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:FBI_informants

2/6/2018 5:05:18 PM

^^ guy is a conspiracy nut anti-Trumper from a quick glance at his twitter.

2/6/2018 5:06:47 PM

This would require you to believe that the FBI would poison its own investigation by applying for an illegal (misrepresented) FISA warrant 4+ times on Page. If you're trying to prosecute Trump, why would you begin the investigation with a ton of fraudulent paperwork that would absolutely turn up during the discovery process in court?

If your goal is just to uncover some shitty things about Trump to use against him politically, why would you leave a formal, legal paper trail by applying for a FISA warrant 4+ times on Page?

2/6/2018 5:35:45 PM

Because they needed a reason for wiretapping a Trump campaign official. And FISA warrant documentation is secret.

[Edited on February 6, 2018 at 5:58 PM. Reason : .]

2/6/2018 5:57:51 PM

2/6/2018 6:22:41 PM

^^why would you wiretap someone you could literally put a wire on (informant/employee)? Again, with all of the formal paper trail, which, while it's extremely hard to access, isn't totally secret. Nunes, Schiff, and their buddies have reviewed the Page warrant and he hasn't even been indicted yet. It will still be hard to access after indictment (and we should change this, absolutely) for most of us, but the president absolutely has the power to declassify it.

People at the FBI know that the DOJ, President, and Congress can absolutely find a way to review their process IF they really want to (That's a big IF, we should make this better too.). You don't make a paper trail if you're trying to be clandestine.

2/6/2018 6:39:54 PM

Quote :

"why would you wiretap someone you could literally put a wire on (informant/employee)?"

Because that is extremely illegal without a warrant, and if discovered would result in people going to jail. Additionally, illegally obtained information can't be used in court. A FISA warrant (which BTW are approved 99.7% of the time) makes all of this legal, even with the flimsiest of evidence.

Quote :

"You don't make a paper trail if you're trying to be clandestine."

Pleeease, of course you do. You just classify it until it's no longer relevant.

https://jacobinmag.com/2017/05/james-comey-firing-donald-trump-fbi-history

Something else I can't wrap my head around is why would an FBI informant, who most definitely knew he was under scrutiny for his dealings with Russians, further incriminate himself? Despite media attempts to paint him as such, Page is definitely not a moron.

[Edited on February 6, 2018 at 7:33 PM. Reason : .]

2/6/2018 7:29:19 PM

Quote :

"which BTW are approved 99.7% of the time"

What's an acceptable approval rate?

2/6/2018 7:42:58 PM

Good question, I don't know since they're generally kept secret. We learned in 2013 that FISA was used to conduct illegal mass spying on Americans. Do you think that's the only time they've abused it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court#2013_NSA_controversy

Further reading:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160420/06055234219/fisa-court-still-uncovering-surveillance-abuses-nsa-fbi.shtml
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/19/fisa-court-oversight-process-secrecy

2/6/2018 8:02:49 PM

The obvious solution here is for Trump to declassify the Page FISA warrant tomorrow morning. He could nearly exonerate himself and destroy a majority of his critics credibility in one move.

Quote :

"why would an FBI informant, who most definitely knew he was under scrutiny for his dealings with Russians, further incriminate himsel"

Because the FBI aren't the only ones manipulating him. Carter Page could have just as easily fallen 10 stories from his Moscow hotel bedroom. The guy is up to his eyeballs.

2/6/2018 8:03:01 PM

^^ We don't know that FISA was abused wrt Page.

You threw the 99.7% out there. Is it too high? Too low? Just right?

2/6/2018 8:12:21 PM

^
The 99.7% approval rate is irrelevant and I shouldn't have included it. But there is a documented history of FISA courts being abused, so you can't rule it out in this case.

Quote :

"The obvious solution here is for Trump to declassify the Page FISA warrant tomorrow morning."

Yup. If he doesn't, I'd have to assume there's something damaging in there.

Really doubt it will work, but NYT and USA are trying to get ahold of the full text as well.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/05/us/politics/new-york-times-carter-page-documents-request-unseal.html

2/6/2018 8:20:41 PM

Quote :

"If you're trying to prosecute Trump, why would you begin the investigation with a ton of fraudulent paperwork that would absolutely turn up during the discovery process in court?"

you're assuming the point of all this was to prosecute Trump and not to spy on his campaign for the purpose of turning data over to the incumbent party.

Quote :

"^^why would you wiretap someone you could literally put a wire on (informant/employee)? "

because a wire on someone not directly involved with the campaign doesn't give you anything useful, but getting a FISA warrant and then executing 3 hops of data collection would get you tons of information on everyone. Normally US citizens caught up in this would be masked, but we know that people were being unmasked

2/6/2018 8:45:57 PM

Quick poll - Carter Page was monitored by the FBI:

a) While working as a double agent for the FBI.
b) For having established connections to the Russian government.
c) To collect and turn data over to the Democratic Party.

2/6/2018 10:24:30 PM

Quote :

"A FISA warrant (which BTW are approved 99.7% of the time)"

For the record, this stat is completely meaningless unless you know the number of warrant applications that are initiated.

That's like saying 99.7% of the 3000 people who make it to the final round of their respective interview process at Google get an offer this year.

What about the rest of the 2 million applications to Google this year.

The layered approval process is incredibly rigorous so to even get it to the court you would have had to provide a very substantial amount of support.

The Krassenstein thing is actually pretty interesting on the surface but I call BS for a few reasons.

First off, if Carter Page is referred to as a double agent it means one of two things happened:

1) He was caught by the FBI spying for Russia and was flipped without Russia's knowledge in order to feed disinformation and gather intelligence. If thats the case, Trump still hired a traitor.

2) He was caught by the Russians spying for the United States and was flipped without the US' knowledge in order to feed disinformation and gather intelligence. If that is the case, Trump still hired a traitor.

Secondly, if the Russians had even the slightest suspicion Page was a spy, and furthermore if Page was outed by either the media or other means as a spy that also contributed to court proceedings he would never have been allowed to step foot in Russia for his meetings later in 2016.

So unless I'm misreading the timeline of when he was allegedly outed and his visits to Russia, BS. But it's def possible I'm misreading it. In which case, I still refer back to my first point.

[Edited on February 6, 2018 at 10:45 PM. Reason : a]

2/6/2018 10:32:08 PM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/chrisreeves/2018/02/05/doj-documents-show-carter-page-helped-fbi-catch-russian-spies-n2444651

Just to be clesr, though, LEO use criminals to catch other criminals all the time lol. Doesn't make him a patriotic asset.

[Edited on February 6, 2018 at 11:19 PM. Reason : a]

2/6/2018 11:14:24 PM

Quote :

"For the record, this stat is completely meaningless unless you know the number of warrant applications that are initiated."

I followed up on that point later. It has a record of being abused either way.

Quote :

"1) He was caught by the FBI spying for Russia and was flipped without Russia's knowledge in order to feed disinformation and gather intelligence. If thats the case, Trump still hired a traitor."

They wouldn't have known he was a traitor at that point. All they saw was a military veteran and member of the Council on Foreign Relations (where he is still listed as a member, oddly: https://www.cfr.org/membership-roster-l-p)

Quote :

"2) He was caught by the Russians spying for the United States and was flipped without the US' knowledge in order to feed disinformation and gather intelligence. If that is the case, Trump still hired a traitor."

There isn't any evidence for this and again, Trump wouldn't have known.

Quote :

"Secondly, if the Russians had even the slightest suspicion Page was a spy, and furthermore if Page was outed by either the media or other means as a spy that also contributed to court proceedings he would never have been allowed to step foot in Russia for his meetings later in 2016."

He wasn't outed as a spy until after these things happened.

Quote :

"Just to be clesr, though, LEO use criminals to catch other criminals all the time lol. Doesn't make him a patriotic asset."

Ofc not (although given his history with the CFR...it's not out of the question that he's been an asset all along). The point is, it would be monumentally stupid for Page to implicate himself in the same crime the FBI tailed him for previously. And he's clearly not a dumb guy.

2/6/2018 11:41:24 PM

Yea. I'm definitely intrigued by this angle. Will definitely go back and read up on some of these source docs.

The binders and bugs thing. I am almost certain I read about this a very long time ago, before 2015. I am going crazy trying to remember where. It may have been in a book I have.

2/6/2018 11:55:17 PM

[user]https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-02-06%20CEG%20LG%20to%20DOJ%20FBI%20(Unclassified%20Steele%20Referral).pdf

some interesting bits in here. It will be interesting to see what the state department was doing communicating with Steele during all this.

2/6/2018 11:59:16 PM

I do agree that what results from this memo will likely be pretty important, but for now I still qualify that based on the lack of knowledge of all other Intel supporting info used.

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 12:35 AM. Reason : a]

2/7/2018 12:29:13 AM

How much do you want to bet the only person who goes down for all of this is Steele? lmao

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 12:42 AM. Reason : .]

2/7/2018 12:42:05 AM

Comey has a lot of explaining to do based on this letter. It basically spells out that he signed off on 3 FISA warrants knowing Steele was compromised as a source and had lied to the FBI.

2/7/2018 7:17:01 AM

https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/961099501409898496

This thread (Warning: it’s a NatSec person so potentially some bias) is exactly why I find the FBI-pro Clinton narrative so utterly ridiculous.

2/7/2018 7:31:09 AM

just wait until the IG investigation is complete and they try to use the anti-clinton mishandling of the email investigation as evidence that they are biased against trump

2/7/2018 8:31:38 AM

Hey guys

Can we go back for me for a minute. I feel like this thread has kinda of gotten off-track due to all of the crap surrounding Trump, this investigation, and the media.

Can we recap exactly what we think Trump gained from any collusion with Russia? Is it trying to cover up shady business dealings over there pre-campaign? Do we think he actually received funding from Russian officials?

I still think the administration is one big chaotic mess, and I just can't believe what I hear from this administration on a daily basis (should be used to it by now). I'm not defending the man. I think this whole thing is still nuts. I'm just wanting some focus with this investigation. Sounds like they are just throwing a bunch of stuff against the wall to see what sticks.

2/7/2018 10:12:06 AM

^^ the FBI didn't have a choice but to "investigate" the Clinton emails, as the House Benghazi investigation made her private server and mishandling of classified information public knowledge. When the IG report comes out saying the FBI swept everything under the rug in that investigation, that logic falls to shit.

2/7/2018 10:12:27 AM

How was Steele compromised?

^^ It’s widely speculated that the Russians may have had information regarding Donald Trump’s moral and/or financial behavior that he would have not wanted to have released to the public.

It’s also speculated that he received most of his financial backing with regard to real estate developments from Russian institutions and that he had shown great interest in further developing real estate in Russia.

As far as I can tell, Russia’s hacking and leaking of DNC emails and its intensive social media campaign may have been conducted without the assistance of the Trump campaign.

That being said, it definitely appears that the Trump campaign sought political dirt on Hillary Clinton from the Russians (which I’m pretty sure would be illegal).

Also, it’s worth investigating whether the Trump campaign’s partner, Cambridge Analytica, partnered at all with Russia in its social media campaign.

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 10:31 AM. Reason : ]

2/7/2018 10:21:50 AM

Thanks

What I think makes it difficult is that Russia basically tries to get involved in elections everywhere. (I'm sure we do the same thing)

As far as getting intelligence from a foreign entity, just curious, isn't Steele a British citizen? I'm not arguing for or against the dossier here, just playing devil's advocate - if someone from the Trump campaign got intel on Hillary from a Russian intermediary, how is that any different than the Clinton campaign getting the dossier from a British agent?

2/7/2018 10:36:29 AM

The intent was to undermine, discredit and distract Clinton to prevent her from governing effectively. It was not to elect Trump.

Steele was a former intelligence officer from a friendly country working privately. He was not an active agent working for a hostile government sharing information gathered from intelligence operations.

2/7/2018 10:39:33 AM

Wasn't he also a subcontractor for Fusion anyway? Not even directly employed by either campaign entity, not that it makes a yuge difference...but it's a distinction.

2/7/2018 10:51:04 AM

Quote :

"Russia’s hacking and leaking of DNC emails"

This hasn't been proven.

2/7/2018 10:58:08 AM

It's been established that Natalia Veselnitskaya, with whom the Trump campaign met at Trump Tower, is closely tied to Russian intelligence. It was also reported at the time that Russian intelligence was responsible for the illegal hacking of the DNC. It's not unreasonable to view this meeting as conspiracy to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

The DNC contracted Fusion GPS to find dirt on Donald Trump, who then subcontracted Orbis Business Intelligence to find Russian-specific dirt on Donald Trump. Christopher Steele, who worked at Orbis Business Intelligence, had a number of established sources from which he was able to gather information.

I'm not sure that obtaining information from a foreign source is what's illegal. I believe that it's the possibility of aiding and abetting an illegal act in order to gain personal benefit that may be at issue here.

^ Okay, so should I have just said hacking and not leaking?

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 11:02 AM. Reason : ]

2/7/2018 10:58:10 AM

^^ seriously? Going Seth Rich again?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dutch-intelligence-us-fbi-russian-hacking-cozy-bear-democratic-national-committee/

I actually don’t know why this wasn’t major news a few weeks ago but it was during the dumb “shithole” gaslighting. I read the original Dutch report when it came out but I couldn’t find it this time (I think I posted it somewhere on here before though).

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 11:03 AM. Reason : The only way Greenwald disciples will believe it is if Putin himself says it tbh]

2/7/2018 11:01:15 AM

^ https://www.volkskrant.nl/tech/dutch-agencies-provide-crucial-intel-about-russia-s-interference-in-us-elections~a4561913/

2/7/2018 11:05:46 AM

Quote :

" The only way Greenwald disciples will believe it is if Putin himself says it tbh"

Sure, that would be one way to prove it. I just don't count it as fact, coming from intelligence agencies with a history of deceit (including AIVD).

Quote :

"It's been established that Natalia Veselnitskaya, with whom the Trump campaign met at Trump Tower, is closely tied to Russian intelligence."

It has? Because she was let into the country by Preet Bharaha, and also met with Fusion GPS on her trip.

2/7/2018 11:24:30 AM

isn't adultswim who posted the ridiculous blog post that tried to disprove russian hacking with some terrible analysis?

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 11:28 AM. Reason : ^it has, yes]

2/7/2018 11:26:50 AM

You mean the analysis supported by William Binney and VIPS? Are they Russian spies now as well?

2/7/2018 11:28:56 AM

if that is the really dumb analysis that is based on some easily explainable time stamps, then yes that's what i'm talking about

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 11:32 AM. Reason : ^two logical fallacies in one post, double points!]

2/7/2018 11:31:27 AM

^^^^ I posted this link on page 39 of this thread:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-tower-russian-lawyer-natalia-veselnitskaya-exposed-in-swiss-corruption-case

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 11:43 AM. Reason : ]

2/7/2018 11:42:09 AM

Gotcha, so why did she also meet with Glenn Simpson (Fusion GPS founder)? Isn't that a little strange?

Additionally:

Quote :

"Bharara’s office has recommended immigration paroles for Veselnitskaya on three occasions, when her client, Katsyv, was being deposed in the U.S. in the Prevezon case. But in March 2016, Bharara’s office said no. In a letter to Prevezon’s U.S. lawyers, prosecutors said such paroles aren’t appropriate for foreign lawyers asking to help U.S. counsel prepare for appellate arguments or to attend appellate proceedings. “Since neither Katsyv nor Veselnitskaya are required to appear as witnesses in person at this stage of proceedings, we do not believe that immigration parole is appropriate,” the since-fired U.S. attorney wrote. Nevertheless, three months later, Veselnitskaya not only attended oral arguments in the Prevezon case but also traveled uptown to meet with Trump campaign officials."

https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-otc-veselnitskaya/how-did-russian-lawyer-veselnitskaya-get-into-u-s-for-trump-tower-meeting-idUSKBN1D62Q2

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 11:50 AM. Reason : .]

2/7/2018 11:46:31 AM

It does seem strange. Glenn Simpson appears to have his fingers in a number of different pots. I don't know if that necessarily detracts from any of the previous points that I made, though.

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 11:51 AM. Reason : ]

2/7/2018 11:49:53 AM

True, there are a lot of threads worth looking into.

2/7/2018 11:57:16 AM

FusionGPS worked for BakerHostetler on the Prevezon Holding case, veselnitskaya was their russian lawyer and BakerHostetler their american law firm

it's already been discussed in this thread

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 12:00 PM. Reason : .]

2/7/2018 12:00:27 PM

and it's a pretty wild coincidence

2/7/2018 12:02:06 PM

Quote :

"What I think makes it difficult is that Russia basically tries to get involved in elections everywhere. (I'm sure we do the same thing) "

Not attacking you at all here but I wanted to point something out here that a lot of people seem to miss about this entire situation.

There is a difference between moral, legal and national defense arguments.

A lot of people say "it's not immoral to do what Russia did, we do it too, so what?" Or, "why should we be mad at Russia, we do it too, you're just being a hypocrite."

A lot of people say "it's not illegal and even if it is, we do it too."

Neither of these arguments is relevant to what actually happened. Russia attacked us. They may have worked with Americans to do it. Only one thing matters in this context: our defense against and response to this attack.

When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, people didn't say "so what, we attacked England in the 1700s, every one does it."

So these arguments about whether we're hypocrites for "being mad that Russia did something we do" are completely ridiculous. We were attacked. We now HAVE to figure out who did it, how they did it, and then upgrade our defenses and finally respond in some fashion.

There is absolutely no other proper response besides "defend, upgrade capability, and retaliate."

To be clear, I'm not saying we nuke Moscow. Any response should be commensurate wand appropriate. But good LORD this idea that we shouldn't care because we hack too or influence elections too is just ridiculous.

You can absolutely make the argument that to stop people from attacking us in the future, one way is to stop doing the shit we do. You can absolutely make that logical and academic argument. But dealing with current reality NOW, the current situation, all that matters is defending ourselves.

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 12:26 PM. Reason : a]

2/7/2018 12:11:51 PM

^^not really, you are once again the victim of misinformation. republicans tried to weave this into a thing during the simpson testimony

just re-summarizing previous discussion
Prevezon hired BakerHostetler. Baker Hostetlers hired Fusion GPS to help defend against a DOJ lawsuit. So up through some time in 2016 part of what FusionGPS was doing was research into Magnitsky Act issues regarding Prevezon (on the case that started the Magnitsky Act). So fusion was working on Trump's side at this point in opposing certain russia sanctions, because they work for who hires them and have no inherent political bias. So because Fusion worked for Baker Hostetler for Prevezon it only further legitimizes Steele's work subcontracted under them, because it demonstrates that they are not aligned with a certain political party.

What Republicans have tricked you into thinking is that because Fusion indirectly worked on a cause that Putin supported, that means that Steele was somehow working for Putin (... on a totally different case, and one that isn't particularly favorable to Putin).

The only takeaway you should have from that case is that FusionGPS is experienced working on Russian issues, that's probably why they were hired

(if you need to find that part of the testimony, it is right before the part where Simpson explains that their subcontractors, including Steele, are not told who the client was which really undermines the nunes memo's implication that Steele was acting for Clinton)

[Edited on February 7, 2018 at 12:16 PM. Reason : .]

2/7/2018 12:13:37 PM