npr was really bad during the election, they didn't even acknowledge sanders existed or was still running for a long time

2/21/2018 5:25:18 PM

^ That

2/21/2018 5:27:52 PM

when they did acknowledge him, it was to bash his gun stance for dumb reasons or criticize a minority of his supporters

reposting for this page: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/02/russiagate-bernie-sanders-jill-stein-msnbc

(btw the new issue of jacobin has an interview with bernie. it's totally worth subscribing to for anyone left of center.)

[Edited on February 21, 2018 at 5:35 PM. Reason : .]

2/21/2018 5:29:34 PM

Trump is owned by Russia and the NRA. There’s gotta be multiple pee-tape type blackmailing opportunities.

[Edited on February 21, 2018 at 8:19 PM. Reason : A]

2/21/2018 8:18:31 PM

NYM, how do you not understand how IPs work?

[Edited on February 21, 2018 at 9:01 PM. Reason : its the same narrowmindedness that makes you conclude i'm trolling because you havent heard it befor]

2/21/2018 8:40:55 PM

http://www.businessinsider.com/devin-nunes-asked-russian-bots-on-twitter-to-get-an-article-to-go-viral-2018-2

2/22/2018 7:57:35 AM

not even trying to hide it anymore

2/22/2018 8:28:37 AM

Turns out Manafort could afford to be Trump’s campaign manager for free because he was laundering $30m of dirty money for a decade up to and including his time as manager.

Wonder if Mueller is digging into another guy who has been rumored to have laundered money through real estate assets?

2/22/2018 4:49:36 PM

https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/22/17042070/trump-removes-election-security-commission-masterson

Quote :

"Election Assistance Commission chairman Matthew Masterson is being removed from his post by the White House and House Speaker Paul Ryan, according to a report from Reuters. Appointed to the commission in 2014 and serving as chairman since February, Masterson was expected to be appointed to a second four-year term. It’s unclear why Masterson was removed, but the timing is likely to be a significant blow to the ongoing effort to secure voting machines against hacking. Less than nine months remain before the 2018 elections, and several types of voting machines remain vulnerable to remote hacking through remote-access software attacks and other vulnerabilities. Observers expect Masterson’s replacement to be former prosecutor Christy McCormick, the other Republican member of the committee. In 2017, McCormick publicly criticized efforts to designate voting machines as critical infrastructure. In the same letter, she dismissed evidence that Russian agents were probing election infrastructure, describing the evidence as “disappointing, underwhelming, and thin.” There’s still no evidence that hacking efforts altered any voter rolls in 2016, and the decentralized nature of US elections makes it difficult to significantly alter rolls without being detected. Still, there’s strong evidence of foreign powers probing voter rolls and election officials’ computers. In June, the Department of Homeland Security estimated that election systems in 21 different states were scanned in the run-up to the 2016 election, although no direct attacks were recorded."

2/22/2018 7:32:30 PM

Lol

Someone explain why its wrong to call this type of thing treasonous

2/22/2018 8:05:51 PM

Manafort lived in trump tower for YEARS and “plotted” with trump all day. No way trump isn’t dirty af too.

2/22/2018 8:07:33 PM

^^,^^^ I wanna know where the states are. How are governors not screaming "PLZ HELP US WITH 2018 AHHHH!!!!!!"

^here is some more Manafort goodness for you:

Quote :

"43. MANAFORT and GATES made numerous false and fraudulent representations to secure the loans. For example, MANAFORT provided the bank with doctored P&Ls for DMI for both 2015 and 2016, overstating its income by millions of dollars. The doctored 2015 DMI P&L submitted to Lender D was the same false statement previously submitted to Lender C, which overstated DMI’s income by more than $4 million. The doctored 2016 DMI P&L was inflated by MANAFORT by more than $3.5 million. To create the false 2016 P&L, on or about October 21, 2016, MANAFORT emailed GATES a .pdf version of the real 2016 DMI P&L, which showed a loss of more than $600,000. GATES converted that .pdf into a “Word” document so that it could be edited, which GATES sent back to MANAFORT. MANAFORT altered that “Word” document by adding more than $3.5 million in income. He then sent this falsified P&L to GATES and asked that the “Word” document be converted back to a .pdf, which GATES did and returned to MANAFORT. MANAFORT then sent the falsified 2016 DMI P&L .pdf to Lender D."

Manafort, international man of mystery, created a damning paper trail because he couldn't convert his .doc to .pdf. Clownshoes.

[Edited on February 23, 2018 at 7:33 AM. Reason : quote is from most recent indictment.]

2/23/2018 7:32:50 AM

So a couple days ago Gates fires his lawyer (supposedly for trying to work a plea deal) and now he is pleading guilty. Did he fire him cause the deal wasn't good enough? What gives?

2/23/2018 12:31:36 PM

Gates is only pleaing to two of his $Texas charges. Manafort is def going to go down if he doesn't plea.

^most likely his old lawyers didn't want to plea out and he did so he canned em

[Edited on February 23, 2018 at 1:02 PM. Reason : a]

2/23/2018 1:01:47 PM

Surely it’s all pressure to flip Manafort, whom Mueller is betting has the goods on the campaign. Gonna get interesting.

I still think the end of this is Trump money laundering and not collusion.

2/23/2018 1:26:53 PM

the money laundering will be with Russian oligarchs and government officials. obvious where that then leads

2/23/2018 3:29:23 PM

Rohrabacher is referenced in Gates plea deal regarding Ukraine. This is going to be an interesting year.

2/23/2018 4:45:33 PM

Guess Manafort would rather die in jail then be killed by Russians..

2/23/2018 5:29:14 PM

If people think they have the goods on Trump with which to blackmail him, imagine what they have over Manafort.

2/23/2018 6:26:19 PM

Democrat memo is out. Great time to release it. Saturday night when everyone is out....

So basically Nunes is literally a lying piece of shit. wow.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/24/politics/read-democratic-memo/index.html

[Edited on February 24, 2018 at 8:22 PM. Reason : a]

2/24/2018 8:10:43 PM

Nunes didn't lie about anything. The Democratic memo tapdances around the issue of the DOJ never informing the courts that Steele was being funded through DNC channels. They talk about them paying him in the past and him being potentially biased, but they make no mention of disclosing to the FISA judges who was funding his work.

It's hard to read this memo and take any of it seriously without Carter Page in handcuffs right now. The 3rd paragraph on page 5 seems to list a ton of suspicious activity against him in the 3rd FISA application in June 2017, although it's hard to tell due to almost all of it being redacted. This memo seems to make the theory of Carter Page being an FBI/CIA spy even more likely, as we collected info on him for 9 months only to have no charges against him. Is this shit going to end with Mueller disclosing that the FBI counterintelligence division is currently holding 19% of Rosneft stock?

Also, LOL at the FBI authorizing payment to Steele and then cancelling payment afterwards, although I'd like to know the redacted part about how much a British spy gets paid by the FBI for doing spy stuff.

Also, an even bigger LOL at the memo claiming Strzok damaged Hillary Clinton's reputation by labeling her mishandling of classified emails as "extreme carelessness", when the claim being made by Republicans is that he changed the wording to that from "gross negligence", which would have been a felony accusation.

2/24/2018 9:34:12 PM

I question your reading comprehension if that's your response to this. And I don't mean that to be inflammatory. I sincerely wonder how on earth you read this, compare it with Nunes' memo and come up with a post like that.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/24/politics/nunes-schiff-key-areas-disagree/index.html

This is helpful.

Also, I was wrong. It turns out Nunes released the memo today, not the Democrats. The Democrats weren't told it was being released today. Now I understand why it was released Saturday evening when everyone is out.

[Edited on February 25, 2018 at 12:05 AM. Reason : a]

2/24/2018 11:57:21 PM

(It’s because he’s a hack)

There could have been a video of Nunes meeting with Trump and Putin and he’d blame someone else.

2/25/2018 9:07:26 AM

^gotcha. how many earls are there, just so i can keep track?

2/25/2018 10:35:38 AM

He regurgitating some right wing spin machine. Probably hannity

2/25/2018 10:51:03 AM

Right wing news is avoiding talking about the memo, other than to cry about it being released.

My assessment of this memo is valid, so try responding to it. how is it possible to believe this memo without Carter Page in handcuffs?

2/25/2018 11:07:46 AM

nah, you're a hack

2/25/2018 11:24:50 AM

Quote :

"how is it possible to believe this memo without Carter Page in handcuffs?"

Because there are still ACTIVE counter-intelligence operations ongoing. This is, and always has been, more than just a criminal investigation. Its pretty much guaranteed that the FBI has been monitoring Page, in one form or another, since possibly even before this particular FISA warrant. Page running around like a god damn idiot could be the intelligence gift that keeps on giving. None of us know who he's contacted, or continues to contact, or what the FBI has been able to glean from his contacts or movements, but the FBI may see some significant value in letting him run around on a leash for now.

If Page bought a plane ticket out of the country tomorrow, you can bet the FBI would be standing there at the terminal to take his ass into custody.

2/25/2018 11:38:12 AM

Nunes lied and misled. Pretty obvious. Don’t know how to arrive at a different conclusion.

Carter Page is an enigma. I can’t figure out what’s going on there, he’s dirty af.

My main takeaway is how the FBI sat on Steele’s info and essentially covered for trump preelection, while leaking Clinton info to hurt her.

2/25/2018 11:46:45 AM

I may do a write up on this memo like I did with the Republican one this evening.

2/25/2018 3:13:33 PM

^^

Giuliani went on Fox News saying he used his connections at the ny fbi field office to pressure Comey to hammer Clinton.

That would involve the FBI investigating itself, or congress actually investigating real corruption that doesn’t help trump.

2/25/2018 3:45:45 PM

For the people like eleusis:

Quote :

"Nunes’s memo contended that the Steele dossier’s allegations about Page meeting senior officials was the primary driver of the FISA warrant application and yet Steele’s bias in compiling that information wasn’t conveyed to the judges. The Democratic memo articulates specifically how that relationship was described. (All identifiers in the quote below have been added by The Washington Post except the identification of “Source #1?.) [Steele] was approached by an identified U.S. Person [apparently Fusion GPS’s Glenn Simpson], who indicated to Source #1 [Steele] that a U.S.-based law firm [Perkins Coie, which hired Fusion on behalf of the DNC and the Clinton campaign] had hired the identified U.S. Person to conduct research regarding Candidate #1’s [Trump’s] ties to Russia. (The identified U.S. Person and Source #1 have a long-standing business relationship.) The identified U.S. person hired Source #1 to conduct this research. The identified U.S. Person never advised Source #1 as to the motivation behind the research into Candidate #1’s ties to Russia. The FBI speculates that the identified U.S. Person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate #1’s campaign. The original FISA application was at least 56 pages long. Tait also noted that a footnote in the Democratic document cites Page 56 of the FISA application — meaning that it was at least that long and probably longer. The quote above concerning the presumptive bias of Simpson appears on the 15th and 16th pages of the application."

That's all you need to read to know Nunes is completely full of shit.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/02/25/what-we-learned-from-the-democratic-response-to-the-nunes-memo-and-what-we-didnt/?utm_term=.ff8798b63701

2/25/2018 4:34:30 PM

https://www.vox.com/world/2018/2/24/17048936/democrat-rebuttal-nunes-schiff-memo
https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/democrat_memo_charge_and_response.pdf

Quote :

"After the Schiff memo was released on Saturday, House Republicans released a document rebutting its core claims. Their response to this damning citation is — and I am not making this up — that the vital line in which the FBI discloses the information about Steele was “buried in a footnote.” “This is clearly an attempt to avoid informing the Court, in a straightforward manner that the DNC and Clinton campaign paid for the dossier,” the Republican rebuttal argues. It’s true that it was in a footnote. But that’s about as far as it goes."

Simply unbelievable. What a piece of shit Nunes is.

[Edited on February 25, 2018 at 5:10 PM. Reason : a]

2/25/2018 5:08:38 PM

I just saw CNN was airing a special to drive home the point that Mueller, despite 12 years in DC, has no political affiliation or partisan biases.

2/25/2018 6:19:56 PM

^Yea, they're working overtime on PR to keep the public on his side.

So sum total here, after reading the Nunes memo again, the Schiff memo again and then Nunes' weird response to the Schiff memo (https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/democrat_memo_charge_and_response.pdf):

Nunes memo - complete misrepresentation of everything that happened.

Schiff memo - corrects the record with possibly a small margin of error.

Nunes' response - one of the more bizarre things I've read throughout this ordeal. I was going to do a write up on the Schiff memo but there really is no need to because it's straight forward. I will try and point out the one or two areas that I consider "margin of error." But as for the Nunes' response, I'll go charge by charge:

Charge 1, page 1

Yea, the dossier fueled the FISA warrant in the same manner that adding a balled up newspaper fuels a camp fire that's been burning for three hours.

They gotta stop this DNC/Clinton campaign funded dossier shit. More of their misdirection attempts.

The FBI didn't "rely" on the dossier in court filings to the extent Nunes is trying to claim. Utterly ridiculous.

Charge 2, page 1

If Grassley and Graham read the entire FISA application and supporting documents, prior to referring Steele for speaking with the media, then this is a lie. If Grassley and Graham did read the entire FISA application, and claimed the dossier was the bulk of the FISA warrant, then this is a lie. As for the dossier being the only source regarding Page meeting specific Russians, that's a lie too. Page one of Schiff's memo speaks to that as do the supporting footnotes and a few other pages. On top of all of this, the FBI independently corroborated Steele's reporting. It literally doesn't matter whether they referenced it or not, they had the information from elsewhere and the dossier itself was proven true, at least in this regard. Nunes is simply off his rocker here.

Charge 3, page 1

No clue what he's talking about here. The earliest the FBI would have known this would have been approximately 10/31/2016. I think Nunes is trying to argue that in the subsequent renewals, they didn't tell the FISC that Steele was a source for the Yahoo News article. Except, according to Schiff's memo which actually references sources, they told the FISC when he was terminated, why he was terminated (speaking to the media), and also only referenced the Yahoo article to indicate Carter Page's public lies. They didn't use the article to say "look, Yahoo reporting verifies what Steele said." They said "look, we've shown to you multiple independent sources saying what Carter Page did, and now we're showing you multiple news articles where Page is lying about it." Further more they pointed out that he lied under oath about it too. Nunes is a strange dude.

Charge 4, page 2

This one is kind of stupid. Basically, Nunes let a bunch of people read his memo who had no way to dig into the details or verify any of the claims because they didn't have access to classified information. Nunes says it is because the DOJ stonewalled him. This is just Nunes being an obstructionist and using the fact that his GOP colleagues would blindly follow him on it rather than ask questions. As for the stonewalling, I could actually understand the frustration here from an oversight standpoint, except we're talking about about a COIN investigation that is being actively obstructed by the very people attempting to provide oversight here. Fuck Nunes.

Charge 5, page 2

Nunes doesn't say anything in his rebuttal here. However, in the original Nunes memo, he states in point five that there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos and that the Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI COIN investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok.

This is literally all he mentions about Papadopolous. Not sure what the point of this statement is. No one alleged anywhere a conspiracy between these two specifically and a relationship between them or a lack thereof was not the basis of any investigation or FISA activity. I think Nunes simply used this line to try and pull the Pete Strzok nonsense into the fray. I'm honestly stunned this guy is allowed to chair an intelligence committee.

Point 6, page 2

Yea, once again, the dossier didn't form the bulk of the FISA. Stop lying, Nunes.

As for waiting to seek a warrant on Page, this is one of the areas I consider a "margin of error" with respect to my assessment of the Schiff memo but we don't know enough either way to go further. All I could posit here is that they were following their processes/procedures and that they didn't get enough corroboration regarding Page's 2015-2016 activities until after they had received the dossier.

The "idiot" part was my favorite part of this. Nunes clearly has zero understanding of how intelligence works (or understands it perfectly well and is simply purposefully obstructing this process). Newsflash Comrade Nunes - idiots make great targets for recruitment. Aldrich Ames was a moron for spending his money the way he did and it got him caught by the FBI. Didn't make him any less valuable.

Charge 7, page 3

Cool Nunes, not sure how that validates anything. Would love to see how the dossier being referenced in one spot somehow formed the bulk of a 56+ page application.

Charge 8, page 3

Doesn't matter - there was enough information for an initial warrant. Moron.

Charge 9, page 3

Nunes is grasping hard on this one. Really hard. They didn't have to say DNC/Hillary. It is entirely sufficient to say "there was political motivation" and nothing else. One, it would have been entirely obvious who it would benefit and two, it doesn't matter WHO is politically motivated, just that there IS political motivation. Political motivation alone is enough context for someone to evaluate a FISA application. Literally, someone would be politically motivated to HELP Trump and that would be enough to make a FISA judge dig further.

Not sure how the footnote is convoluted. Seemed straightforward to me and I don't read hundreds of these every year. I imagine these judges and staff know wtf they're doing.

Also, and I'm glad Schiff pointed this out, the FISA warrants aren't SUPPOSED to name people unless absolutely necessary, that is, unless they themselves are the target of surveillance. Wasn't this the same shit Nunes was lying about regarding Obama and unmasking? My god he's literally a piece of shit.

I like how he quotes himself here too, by the way. "As confirmed in the GOP memo [that you wrote you lying bastard] Steele was 'desperate' to prevent Trump from becoming elected." I supposed he told you that directly, right Nunes?

Charge 9, page 4

The trust was perfectly well placed and he was credible. Speaking to the media doesn't make you less credible, it just makes people not want to tell you shit out of fear you'll leak it. Has zero impact on his PRIOR sourcing which is supported ad nauseam at this point. Furthermore, intent factors into credibility and Steele was said to have spoken with the media specifically because he thought the FBI was being used by the GOP to elect Trump. He indicated this when he referenced the reopening of the Hillary investigation.

As for this Graham/Grassley shit, once again, no one at the FBI knew about this until after the initial FISA.

As for the sub sub sources, I'm not sure how Nunes is making any claims here. Furthermore, he's only speaking about stuff related to the dossier. Once again, it was a small portion of the overall application. God damn, Nunes, seriously, god damn.

Charge 10, page 4

I consider this another aspect of my "margin of error" comment.

Charge 11, page 5

Pointless rebuttal. Everyone agrees Steele wasn't paid to produce his information.

Charge 12, page 5

I don't understand this Bruce Ohr conspiracy shit.

Charge 13, page 5

This is more Nunes lying. Schiff points out in the Democrat memo that there are tons of other text messages where they disparage Democrats as well.

For the first time in my life, I've actually considered donating to a political campaign - whoever it is that ends up challenging Nunes for his seat. This guy is bad.

By the way, when I say margin of error, Schiff and his friends very well could be intentionally misleading us here as well. So I'm not saying that the "margin of error" is simply an innocent mistake and that all of the mistakes in the GOP memo are grossly negligent. In regards to the "margin of error" items, Schiff could be being grossly negligent here. But without question, the entire GOP memo is grossly negligent.

[Edited on February 25, 2018 at 7:23 PM. Reason : a]

2/25/2018 7:14:46 PM

Quote :

"Yea, the dossier fueled the FISA warrant in the same manner that adding a balled up newspaper fuels a camp fire that's been burning for three hours."

the dossier fueled the FISA warrant in its entirety. The FBI investigating Papadopolous over drunk comments about Hillary's emails are completely separate from the FISA warrant on Carter page fueled by the Steele dossier. There's nothing in the Democratic memo to indicate the FBI was watching Carter Page prior to the Steele dossier, and there's nothing to indicate they actually gave a shit about Carter Page and that the intent of the FISA warrant wasn't to spy on the Trump Campaign. We know the FBI was denied a FISA warrant request prior to the Steele dossier, so they didn't have anything to justify ramping up their investigation prior to the Dossier.

[Edited on February 25, 2018 at 10:11 PM. Reason : there are miles of difference between investigating someone and getting a FISA warrant]

2/25/2018 10:10:22 PM

I'm not reading back through 11 pages to find out - have we established that using the dossier for the FISA court was even illegal? I mean is it written out somewhere that all evidence has to be proven and vetted?

In other words, even if the sole basis of the FISA request was the dossier - is that actually something they can't do?

2/25/2018 10:28:51 PM

^^Last time I'm responding because you clearly don't understand what you're reading or aren't reading anything to begin with. If neither of those options is the case then you simply are just taking whatever Hannity and Trump are shoving down your throat without question.

Schiff memo, pages one and two:

--DOJ detailed Page's past relationships with Russian spies and interaction with Russian officials during the 2016 campaign, <-redacted->.

--DOJ cited multiple sources to support the case for surveilling Page - but made only narrow use of information from Steel's sources about Page's specific activities in 2016, chiefly his suspected July 2016 meetings in Moscow with Russian officials.

--<-redacted->

--In fact, the FBI interviewed Page in March 2016 about his contact with Russian intelligence, the very month candidate Donald Trump named him a foreign policy advisor.

As DOJ informed the Court in subsequent renewals, <-redacted-> Steel's reporting about Page's Moscow meetings <-redacted->. DOJ's applications did not otherwise rely on Steele's reporting, including any "salacious" allegations about Trump, and the FBI never paid Steele for this reporting.

Schiff memo, pages three and four:

--DOJ first applied to the FISC on October 21, 2016 for a warrant to permit the FBI to initiate electronic surveillance and physical search of Page for 90 days, consistent with FISA requirements.

--DOJ's warrant request was based on compelling evidence and probable cause to believe Page was knowingly assisting clandestine Russian intelligence activities in the U.S.:

Key Points:

--Page's previous activities with Russian intelligence.

--Further information gathered leading to and resulting from March 2016 interviews with Carter Page by the FBI.

--Further COIN on Page during the campaign, including his travel to Moscow in July 2016, travel reported to the FBI separately via Steele in mid September, as mentioned on page three of the Schiff memo.

Schiff memo, pages six and seven:

--Papadopoulos's interaction with Russian agents, coupled with real-time evidence of Russian election interference, provided the Court with a broader context in which to evaluate Russia's clandestine activities and Page's history and alleged contact with Russian officials. Moreover, since only Page <-redacted->, no evidence of a separate conspiracy between him and Papadopoulos was required.

--DOJ referenced Isikoff's [Yahoo] article, alongside another article the Majority fails to mention, not to provide separate corroboration for Steele's reporting, but instead to inform the Court of Page's public denial of his suspected meetings in Moscow, which Page also echoed in a September 25, 2016 letter to FBI Director Comey. <-redacted->.

Relevant footnotes:

4 - Redacted
8 - Redacted
9 - Redacted
10 - Redacted
12 - FISC application pages 20 and 21
13 - Redacted
31 - FISC application page 25

Here's your basis for a FISA warrant:

Carter Page, a man with a history of involvement with Russian intelligence, a man who's previously been under surveillance before, a man who lived/worked in Russia, showed a strong affinity for Russia, wanted deals in Russia, was targeted by Russian intelligence and a man who worked to insinuate himself into the Trump Campaign pops up yet again on the FBI's radar while they are investigating intelligence from both allies and U.S. sources regarding Russian election interference. He becomes a foreign policy adviser to Trump, the second one with suspicious Russian activity with Papadopolous being the first. Context!

They meet and interview him yet again in March 2016.

They monitor him yet again as he departs for Russia (again) in July 2016. By now Papadopolous is already working with Mueller, mind you. Context again!

Steele's information makes its way to the FBI in September and independently indicates from sources not known to the FBI that Page is in Russia, meeting with persons x, y, z, etc. and working for Russian intelligence, possibly, or almost certainly being targeted/recruited by Russian intelligence.

Page publicly lies about this.

The FBI takes the sum total of this information - previous history, current activities, interview results (during which they would asses veracity and demeanor), independent source reporting including BUT NOT LIMITED TO Steele - and apply for a FISA warrant.

The FISA warrant is reviewed and approved by four Republican federal judges from three separate Republican administrations. https://www.justsecurity.org/38422/aint-easy-fisa-warrant-fbi-agent/

Quote :

"the dossier fueled the FISA warrant in its entirety"

You are either paranoid beyond comprehension or just not operating with intellectual honesty if you believe this.

Quote :

"The FBI investigating Papadopolous over drunk comments about Hillary's emails are completely separate from the FISA warrant on Carter page fueled by the Steele dossier."

In what way does this pertain to a FISA warrant on Carter Page? See the documents and my posts.

Quote :

"There's nothing in the Democratic memo to indicate the FBI was watching Carter Page prior to the Steele dossier, and there's nothing to indicate they actually gave a shit about Carter Page and that the intent of the FISA warrant wasn't to spy on the Trump Campaign."

Every part of the memo that mentions Carter Page indicates that the FBI was watching Carter Page prior to Steele. There is plenty to indicate they gave a shit about Carter Page, starting with the interviews in March 2016. The FISA occurred after Page left the campaign, so sorry, the FISA had nothing to do with spying on the Trump Campaign.

Quote :

"We know the FBI was denied a FISA warrant request prior to the Steele dossier, so they didn't have anything to justify ramping up their investigation prior to the Dossier."

Where are you coming up with this? Furthermore, let's entertain the false fantasy that there was no justification for ramping up their investigation. They obtained three renewals, each one requiring enough information to have been obtained from the previous to justify it. Meaning - they started surveilling him and low and behold they found shit!

^

Quote :

"I'm not reading back through 11 pages to find out - have we established that using the dossier for the FISA court was even illegal? I mean is it written out somewhere that all evidence has to be proven and vetted? In other words, even if the sole basis of the FISA request was the dossier - is that actually something they can't do?"

I don't blame you for not wanting to sift back through posts like the one I just responded to.

Using the dossier is not illegal. Any valid, credible information can be used to obtain a FISA as long as there is corroborating information or a substantial amount of other information that provides sufficient reason for suspicion.

The FISA would not have been approved if the sole basis was the information in the dossier.

https://www.justsecurity.org/38422/aint-easy-fisa-warrant-fbi-agent/

[Edited on February 25, 2018 at 10:58 PM. Reason : a]

2/25/2018 10:45:56 PM

Quote :

"They monitor him yet again as he departs for Russia (again) in July 2016. By now Papadopolous is already working with Mueller, mind you."

Didn’t George Papadopoulos begin cooperating with Bob Mueller in July of 2017?


Also...

Quote :

"There's nothing in the Democratic memo to indicate... that the intent of the FISA warrant wasn't to spy on the Trump Campaign."

What the shit is this?

[Edited on February 26, 2018 at 12:39 AM. Reason : ]

2/26/2018 12:20:27 AM

I think July is when we found out he was working with Mueller and that he had been cooperating for several months already. But let me double check that.

[Edited on February 26, 2018 at 7:35 AM. Reason : a]

2/26/2018 7:35:06 AM

So he was arrested on July 27 when attempting to fly overseas, same time frame as Page leaving for Moscow.

So again, it fits with the broader context and my honest guess is that some of his Intel/testimony was used in the Page FISA app. Nunes claims not but he already admitted he didn't read a single piece of the supporting material for the application nor the application itself.

[Edited on February 26, 2018 at 9:07 AM. Reason : a]

2/26/2018 9:05:16 AM

Mueller wasn't even in the picture several months prior to July 2017. Quit inventing a timeline to make you feel like your narrative makes sense.

Using unverified information to issue a warrant is a a gross violation of the 4th amendment. how can we possibly be asking that question in here?

Again, how can anyone believe this shit is real without Carter Page in handcuffs, and how do you explain away his previous FBI case from 2013 where it appeared obvious that Page was the one planting FBI listening devices to spy on the Russians involved?

2/26/2018 9:07:57 AM

^Mueller was appointed May 17. That's two months, also known as several months or just "months," plural.

I don't promise perfection with my posts I promise intellectual honesty and attempts to correct myself when wrong.

^^^^Thanks for pointing that out to me.

^You're officially a moron. Good luck navigating the difficulties of adulthood with comprehension skills such as those. Don't expect any further engagement with you from me.

How do the rest of you deal with people who can't follow logic? Do you just ignore them?

[Edited on February 26, 2018 at 9:14 AM. Reason : a]

2/26/2018 9:09:49 AM

^ No problem. So, just for the sake of clarity: George Papadopoulos had his drunken conversation with an Australian diplomat in May of 2016; however, he wasn't arrested and cooperating with Bob Mueller until July of 2017.

^^ Adam Schiff's memo suggests that the information in the dossier was corroborated by other existing intelligence; are you disputing the accuracy of this suggestion?

I honestly don't understand the context or the relevance of your questions regarding Carter Page. Would you care to elaborate?

2/26/2018 10:48:01 AM

he seems to just be ignoring it entirely

2/26/2018 10:49:28 AM

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/968516999545573377

Imagine what Gates gave up. Manafort must, at this point know, it’s time to talk or he’ll never breathe air in freedom again.

2/27/2018 11:08:44 AM

I'm unable to find verification of this and the Special Counsel site doesn't display this document.

2/27/2018 11:18:20 AM

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4389568/2-27-18-US-Motion-to-Dismiss-Gates.pdf

2/27/2018 11:27:39 AM

Thanks. This is just the official dismissal associated with the plea deal. I thought this was some new cooperation and they were dismissing all charges against him. He still has the two counts to which he plead guilty.

But yea, I imagine he is giving up some pretty detailed shit.

[Edited on February 27, 2018 at 11:49 AM. Reason : a]

2/27/2018 11:41:35 AM

I guess that this thread would be the best place to note that President Trump is making Brad Parscale his 2020 campaign manager.

2/27/2018 11:59:49 AM