Inspector general report says FBI had ‘authorized purpose’ to investigate Trump campaign’s Russia ti

mrdeltoid said:

Clearly you haven’t read the IG report. At least read the executive summary. You will see the investigation should have concluded the “charges “ unfounded about 6 months after it started. Seriously, this is the most shocking abuse of power the FBI has seen since J Edgar Hoover was the Director. I don’t care if you hate Trump or not, this report should at the very least concern you.

Click to expand...

I haven't gotten to it yet, and I was mistakenly opining on the Ukraine investigation. Apologies.

marke said:

I'm sure if there was no criminal intent then Barr and Durham will not be pursuing charges against those who used a discredited dossier to keep spying on Trump after his election.

Click to expand...

Ah.... understood!

Some of our members would rank the impartiality of Barr and Durham right up there with the likelihood that the Book of Genesis provides an accurate account of creation.

Fenton said:

The IG report was worse than I thought. And when I say worse I mean damning.

The FBI relied exclusively on the Steele dossier to get a FISA warrant on Page. They also admitted there was no evidence to corroborate any of the the dossiers allegations

If that wasn't bad enough, they falsified documents and then submitted them to the FISC, and they didn't inform the FISC of Steele's media leaks and contacts until a year after the final FISA application

They didn't inform the FISC if Steele's bias either.

Horowitz told Sen. Leahy he did not find evidence of political bias in starting Crossfire Hurricane. Then Horowitz added: 'The question gets more challenging when you get to the FISA.'

Ya think ?

Hard to believe the Left thinks this report is a big win for them. Hell, Comey tweeted out that the report exonerated him and the FBI ! Lol !

Click to expand...

The report showed that the bar for getting a FISA warrant is low - and the FBI even had to cheat to get above that meager threshold.

as Lindsay Graham noted, I don't see how FISA warrants can continue in their present form.

Washington Post's response to claims about the Horowitz report by both Republicans and Democrats

A guide to the misleading spin on the IG report

When an official government report disrupts a political narrative, it’s exceedingly rare for politicians to admit error. They either play down the new information — or stick with the original script.

That’s what happened after the release of the Justice Department inspector general’s report on the origin of the FBI investigation into the Trump campaign’s possible ties to Russia.

The 434-page report disputed long-held GOP claims that a “dossier” of salacious material originally commissioned by Democrats triggered the probe and that the FBI spied on the Trump campaign.

But the body of the report, issued by Inspector General Michael Horowitz, also raises questions about a memo released in 2018 by Democrats that defended four applications the FBI made to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to monitor former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. The report found 17 “significant errors or omissions” in the FISA applications, but the Democratic memo had asserted the FBI did not “abuse” the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) process or “omit material information.”

Click to expand...

eman623 said:

The report showed that the bar for getting a FISA warrant is low - and the FBI even had to cheat to get above that meager threshold.

as Lindsay Graham noted, I don't see how FISA warrants can continue in their present form.

Click to expand...

This is what the IG report showed...

— The FBI spied on the Trump campaign under false pretenses

—They withheld exculpatory evidence from FISC

— They sought FISA based on uncorroborated dossier

—Interviewed Steele’s only primary source post election, he didn’t corroborate

—Repeatedly misled FISA court to imply source corroborated

- Told Horrowitz they didn't need to corroborate dossier

- They used a defensive briefing to gather intelligence on Flynn and Trump

Etc, etc

Somerville said:

Washington Post's response to claims about the Horowitz report by both Republicans and Democrats

Click to expand...

Let's call that Democrat memo what it is. It was Adam Schiffs counter memo to Nunes's memo, and it was filled with lies

Schiff memo stated that “FBI and DOJ officials did not abuse the [FISA] process, omit material information, or subvert this vital tool to spy on the Trump campaign.”

False. IG Michael Horowitz’s report lists the many and varied ways the FBI did all of those


The Schiff memo also claimed that “DOJ cited multiple sources to support the case for surveilling Page—but made only narrow use of information from Steele’s sources about Page’s specific activities in 2016 . . .

False again. They relied on a h corroborated dossier


Horowitz report says the FBI considered surveilling Mr. Page in August 2016 but decided it lacked probable cause.
The bureau moved ahead with its FISA application after it received the Steele dossier on September 19, and the report says the dossier “played a central and essential role” in that decision.

Mr. Horowitz says the part of the application detailing Mr. Page’s 2016 activities “relied entirely” on “information from Steele Reports"


Mr. Schiff claimed DOJ “met the rigor, transparency, and evidentiary basis needed to meet” FISA court standards."

False. The IG report made xkear that FBI officials didn’t even tell senior Justice officials about the concerns and irregularities of its Page application.


Adam Schiff had access to the same documents as Nunes and he chose to lie to our faces.

Here is Diane Feinstein's tweet backing Schiffs memo.

"The Schiff memo is a well-considered rebuttal to the misinformation in the Nunes memo. As I said when it was released, the Nunes memo was an attempt to undermine the Steele dossier and Robert Mueller’s investigation, and it shouldn’t have " seen the light of day."

Ooof

Trippy Trekker said:

Ah.... understood!

Some of our members would rank the impartiality of Barr and Durham right up there with the likelihood that the Book of Genesis provides an accurate account of creation.

Click to expand...

Do you think Horowitz's non-binding superficial assessment of what was going on with the FISA applications will keep Durham from indicting those partisan hacks for lying to the FISA court multiple times?

ludin said:

I guess it is ok then to use FBI or CIA operatives to spy on campaigns. it also means that it is ok to use the FBI or CIA to spy on your political opponents and it is
not considered an abuse of power. this sets an ugly and frankly scary set of circumstances going forward.

I don't agree with this at all.

even if it requires lying lawyers.
and bogus russian misinformation ploys to get the warrants then it is ok to do so.
not only that but that it is ok for FBI and CIA agents to lie to federal courts about their
information to obtain those warrants. wow.

this is very scary stuff we are talking about.

Click to expand...

Did you at least read the 19 page summary of the IG's report? Or (taking things a bit further) do you know the difference between surveillance and spying?

Surveillance = close observation; monitoring; observing one's conduct, movements or behavioral patterns

syping= the act of secretly collecting information about an enemy or competitor

The IG report makes it clear: NO ONE FROM THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN WAS SPIED ON

marke said:

Do you think Horowitz's non-binding superficial assessment of what was going on with the FISA applications will keep Durham from indicting those partisan hacks for lying to the FISA court multiple times?

Click to expand...

Actually if I am NOT mistaken IG Horowits stated he REFERRED it to the DOJ. He has referred all potential criminal manners TO the DOJ


So while Horowitz has not stated the actual charges the DOJ NOW is drafting the potential charges based on the IG report.


SPECIFIC that Horowitz has NOT exonerated ANYONE, meaning there WILL be some people that get their day in court.

Objective Voice said:

Did you at least read the 19 page summary of the IG's report? Or (taking things a bit further) do you know the difference between surveillance and spying?

Surveillance = close observation; monitoring; observing one's conduct, movements or behavioral patterns

syping= the act of secretly collecting information about an enemy or competitor

The IG report makes it clear: NO ONE FROM THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN WAS SPIED ON

Click to expand...

No he did not say that,

He stated he refuses to USE the TERM "SPY" because its not a legal term. He used the term "CHS or confidential human sources" Which was EFFECTIVELY USED on the Trump campaign.

This is the sad part NO matter how we TWIST the words (TRUMP as well "Wire tapping") The BASIS needs to be applied.


Was there sanction individuals used by the FBI to monitor collect information from Trumps Campaign. You dont need to use SPY, Spy having a potential negative connotation take the word out. That fact is was there an intentionally placed individual approved or not used to collect date from Trump's Campaign. YES there was.


Was Carter page used with a FISA app, YES he was, What is the point of a FISA, to be able to legally monitor an American Citizen. What was the indirect issue. ALL calls and monitors are collected, (not necessarily disclosed) But if Page was monitored and called anyone from the Trump campaign this would have been Collected by authorization of the FISA. NOW could it be USED in the court (the indirect collection of Trump info) probably not unless there was a malicious scheme. BUT that FACT IS.


1) YES Confidential Human sources WERE implemented and used on the Trump Campaign, Authorized or NOT it DID factually happen as verified by the IG
2) Was Trump Wired tapped, INDIRECTLY. Done through a legal approved means by the FISA, BUT we found the FISA app itself to have "significant" issues. THE USE of the FISA is legit, the predicate to GET the FISA is legit. BUT the application and the way it was submitted seems to have "significant" issue and the continued renewal was done on a false or limited FISA app.


PREDICATE is fine, BUT context is everything

Simon W. Moon said:

I think the lesson is that in order to avoid LEO scrutiny, don't fill your campaign with felons

Click to expand...

OR with people who are suspected or known to associate themselves with members from the communist block.

I said it from the very beginning that Trump's campaign was full of people with close associations with Russians:

Carter Page*
George Papadopolous
Rex Tillerson
Michael Flynn*
Paul Manafort*
Even Donald J. Trump, Sr himself!

Tie in Jeff Sessions who recued himself because of his questionable contacts with the Russian Ambassador and you end up with a campaign with TOO MANY PEOPLE ASSOCIATING THEMSELVES WITH RUSSIANS!

I'm sure I'm missing someone, but going just by the above head count that's 7 people we know for sure who had close contact with Russians and those with an (*) next had really close contact. You can't tell me that even in a post-Cold War era something about one campaign having that many people with ties to Russia wouldn't make you extremely suspicious of their activity, as well as, the campaign's. The two questions the FBI had to be asking themselves were:

1) Why does so many people from this one campaign have so many contacts to Russia?
2) What are they up to?

Once word got back to the FBI from a foreign human information source what George Papadololis told him that (paraphrase) "the Russians had damaging information on Hillary Clinton it was willing to assist with anonymously making public," the brakes came off at that point. Carter Page merely became the conduit the FBI wrongfully used to obtain FISA warrants (even if done for the right reasons) and the Steele Dossier was pretty much a hodge-podge of misleading information mostly about Carter Page that gave the FBI the credibility it need to "keep looking" at (certain members of) the Trump campaign. Was it all done on the up-and-up? No, but I concur with the IG's overall findings in that the investigation was properly justified and conducted without political bias.

Sidenote: For those who might want to actually read the DoJ-OIG's report on the FBI's Russia investigation (or just skim over it). Link is here ===> FBI IG Report

Russia probe witness charged with funneling millions to Hillary Clinton'''s 2016 campaign
Former FBI lawyer under investigation after allegedly altering document in 2016 Russia probe - CNNPolitics
Misfired 'Hurricane': Comey's team abused Carter Page and the FBI | TheHill
Column: The FBI gets another black eye - Los Angeles Times
FBI lawyer under criminal investigation altered document to say Carter Page 'was not a source' for another agency
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nico...ction-interference_n_5de5b8bfe4b0913e6f841485
https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-chuck-todd-fbi-fisa-abuses-trump-barr
https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/4...tt-shows-network-has-officially-lost-the-left
https://www.thedailybeast.com/andre...bc-they-should-be-professionals-and-apologize
https://www.inquisitr.com/5759952/john-cusack-msnbc-bernie-sanders-boycott/
https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/11/cnn-msnbc-refuse-to-air-doj-inspector-general-hearing-live/
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/19/warren-sanders-call-for-nbc-abuse-probe-day-before-msnbc-debate.html
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news...mp-impeachment-and-2020-democrats/4410049002/

:coffeepap

Exactice said:

No he did not say that,

He stated he refuses to USE the TERM "SPY" because its not a legal term. He used the term "CHS or confidential human sources" Which was EFFECTIVELY USED on the Trump campaign.

This is the sad part NO matter how we TWIST the words (TRUMP as well "Wire tapping") The BASIS needs to be applied.


Was there sanction individuals used by the FBI to monitor collect information from Trumps Campaign. You dont need to use SPY, Spy having a potential negative connotation take the word out. That fact is was there an intentionally placed individual approved or not used to collect date from Trump's Campaign. YES there was.


Was Carter page used with a FISA app, YES he was, What is the point of a FISA, to be able to legally monitor an American Citizen. What was the indirect issue. ALL calls and monitors are collected, (not necessarily disclosed) But if Page was monitored and called anyone from the Trump campaign this would have been Collected by authorization of the FISA. NOW could it be USED in the court (the indirect collection of Trump info) probably not unless there was a malicious scheme. BUT that FACT IS.


1) YES Confidential Human sources WERE implemented and used on the Trump Campaign, Authorized or NOT it DID factually happen as verified by the IG
2) Was Trump Wired tapped, INDIRECTLY. Done through a legal approved means by the FISA, BUT we found the FISA app itself to have "significant" issues. THE USE of the FISA is legit, the predicate to GET the FISA is legit. BUT the application and the way it was submitted seems to have "significant" issue and the continued renewal was done on a false or limited FISA app.


PREDICATE is fine, BUT context is everything

Click to expand...

However way you wish to explain it, it still comes out the same way: Surveyed, YES; spied on, NO.

Objective Voice said:

However way you wish to explain it, it still comes out the same way: Surveyed, YES; spied on, NO.

Click to expand...

Right back at you... how ever you WANT TO say it or explain it.

Was a Confidential Human Source used to collect date on the Trump Campaign, YES. PERIOD

"Confidential Human Source" can be interpreted ANYWAY you want.


I am still asking the follow on questions.

If the Predicate is sound, But the continued investigation has significant errors in justification and continuation...... thats OK with you?

Re: Inspector general report says FBI had ‘authorized purpose’ to investigate Trump campaign’s

ocean515 said:

No. I would not be able to offer that number. I would have to be really stupid to think I could.

Click to expand...

You don't think you could take the number of voting age Americans and multiply it by the percentage?

Exactice said:

Right back at you... how ever you WANT TO say it or explain it.

Was a Confidential Human Source used to collect date on the Trump Campaign, YES. PERIOD

"Confidential Human Source" can be interpreted ANYWAY you want.


I am still asking the follow on questions.

If the Predicate is sound, But the continued investigation has significant errors in justification and continuation...... thats OK with you?

Click to expand...

As a general rule, no.

The FBI shouldn't have used flimsy, unverified accounts or omissions of facts to continue it's justification to survey Carter Page. However, on the whole Carter Page wasn't the only person they kept a watchful eye on and, thus, he wasn't the only person whom it utilized (a) human source(s) to obtain information on as far as reporting on Page's movements, conduct or associations. He just comes off as the primary asset because it was through him that the FBI was able to justify its continuance of procuring FISA warrants.

Is it reasonable (and, thus logical) to assume that had the FBI been honest about Carter Page concurrently working with another US intelligence agency they wouldn't have pursued a FISA warrant at all? YES, ABSOLUTELY! Because it's highly unlikely the FBI would have consider him a foreign agent of Russia. Therefore, if we are to assume that Carter Page was the only asset the FBI had to monitor in order to learn what the Trump campaign was up to, then yes, I would totally agree that the entire Russia investigation was a scam from the very beginning. But Carter Page wasn't the FBI's only asset; there were others. Carter Page was simply the easiest asset to survey because of his constant travels between the U.S. and Russia and his involvement with the Trump campaign (limited though it was).

Objective Voice said:

As a general rule, no.

The FBI shouldn't have used flimsy, unverified accounts or omissions of facts to continue it's justification to survey Carter Page. However, on the whole Carter Page wasn't the only person they kept a watchful eye on and, thus, he wasn't the only person whom it utilized (a) human source(s) to obtain information on as far as reporting on Page's movements, conduct or associations. He just comes off as the primary asset because it was through him that the FBI was able to justify its continuance of procuring FISA warrants.

Is it reasonable (and, thus logical) to assume that had the FBI been honest about Carter Page concurrently working with another US intelligence agency they wouldn't have pursued a FISA warrant at all? YES, ABSOLUTELY! Because it's highly unlikely the FBI would have consider him a foreign agent of Russia. Therefore, if we are to assume that Carter Page was the only asset the FBI had to monitor in order to learn what the Trump campaign was up to, then yes, I would totally agree that the entire Russia investigation was a scam from the very beginning. But Carter Page wasn't the FBI's only asset; there were others. Carter Page was simply the easiest asset to survey because of his constant travels between the U.S. and Russia and his involvement with the Trump campaign (limited though it was).

Click to expand...

Thanks for your response a well balanced and thought out discussion!

With that being said to continue on you have brought up specifics that need to be addressed as well.

You are CORRECT there was others that were pursued by the FBI, but currently on the books we only know of the FISA of carter page. The other sources at this time did NOT have an active FISA on them

This is a significant difference. What I mean is.

1) using CHS as a legal means is a common element. But this LIMITS the specific scope of the CHS's ability to interact.
2) THE FISA is a tool that is able to collect data on the target and any specific time.
3) THE CHS is limited in collection of direct data and communication
4) The FISA has indirect collection as they are able to monitor all contact by the target. AGAIN if Carter page managed to call Trump. The FISA may have the ability to collect this Phone call and record. While Trump would needed to be masked in the disclosure they HAVE IT. Only if in a criminal action could it be revealed. THIS IS HIGHLY intrusive to a NON criminal. During the Period of Carter page's active FISA data was collected the whole time.


OK so.... that fact that is concerning, They could have used a CHS on Page and NOT a FISA, but they targeted Page, they omitted exculpatory evidence to push the application through. WHY was Page such the heavy target, or..... was page NOT the actual target... the indirect collection of data by using page as the conduit was the ACTUAL reason........ A low level person that wasnt even charged with a crime. The better person IF anything would have been MANAFORT, they should have put a FISA on HIM.... But he would be TOO high level and TOO suspicious no?



Anyways again, You highlight that there were additional sources and I can concede, but the issue is the FISA was only used on Page why? And more so it was altered to push through.


NOW The Predicate to initiate investigations is one but to continue and maintain an investigation with omitted exculpatory evidence is the BIGGEST ISSUE. And even bigger issue. THAT is whats being over looked in my opinion and dusted under the rug

Exactice said:

No he did not say that,

He stated he refuses to USE the TERM "SPY" because its not a legal term. He used the term "CHS or confidential human sources" Which was EFFECTIVELY USED on the Trump campaign.

This is the sad part NO matter how we TWIST the words (TRUMP as well "Wire tapping") The BASIS needs to be applied.


Was there sanction individuals used by the FBI to monitor collect information from Trumps Campaign. You dont need to use SPY, Spy having a potential negative connotation take the word out. That fact is was there an intentionally placed individual approved or not used to collect date from Trump's Campaign. YES there was.


Was Carter page used with a FISA app, YES he was, What is the point of a FISA, to be able to legally monitor an American Citizen. What was the indirect issue. ALL calls and monitors are collected, (not necessarily disclosed) But if Page was monitored and called anyone from the Trump campaign this would have been Collected by authorization of the FISA. NOW could it be USED in the court (the indirect collection of Trump info) probably not unless there was a malicious scheme. BUT that FACT IS.


1) YES Confidential Human sources WERE implemented and used on the Trump Campaign, Authorized or NOT it DID factually happen as verified by the IG
2) Was Trump Wired tapped, INDIRECTLY. Done through a legal approved means by the FISA, BUT we found the FISA app itself to have "significant" issues. THE USE of the FISA is legit, the predicate to GET the FISA is legit. BUT the application and the way it was submitted seems to have "significant" issue and the continued renewal was done on a false or limited FISA app.


PREDICATE is fine, BUT context is everything

Click to expand...

Partisan Trump-hating government officials violated multiple federal laws in their failed effort to capture dirt on Trump by illegal spying. Those crooks are now being investigated by Durham.

marke said:

Partisan Trump-hating government officials violated multiple federal laws in their failed effort to capture dirt on Trump by illegal spying. Those crooks are now being investigated by Durham.

Click to expand...

THIS!!!!! It so stupid, IG Horowitz is NOT the PROSECUTOR. Barr and Durham ARE.


So IG Horowitz has referred the FINDINGS to Barr and Durham SO THEY CAN Prosecute. Just because IG Horowitz has NOT defined the crimes....doesnt make those individuals that committed the significant errors innocent they will be referred and if justifiable a crime will be charged......


SO STUPID how the media twist this....

Re: Inspector general report says FBI had ‘authorized purpose’ to investigate Trump campaign’s

Simon W. Moon said:

You don't think you could take the number of voting age Americans and multiply it by the percentage?

Click to expand...

That's not what you did.

You took an aggregate of polling numbers, and applied the percentage to the total population of the US.

You posted this:


The first number you posted is 53% of the TOTAL population of the country. That's not just voting age Americans.

The second number is 48% of the TOTAL population of the country. Again, that's not just voting age Americans, that's a percentage of the total population.

Too funny.

Re: Inspector general report says FBI had ‘authorized purpose’ to investigate Trump campaign’s

ocean515 said:

That's not what you did.

Click to expand...

Iirc, I didn't say that was what I did.
I asked if you thought you could take the number of voting age Americans and multiply it by the percentage?:shrug:

Re: Inspector general report says FBI had ‘authorized purpose’ to investigate Trump campaign’s

ocean515 said:

That's not what you did.

You took an aggregate of polling numbers, and applied the percentage to the total population of the US.

You posted this:

176,344,000 everyday American think Trump sucks as PotUS.
159,236,000 everyday American think Trump should be impeached.​

The first number you posted is 53% of the TOTAL population of the country. That's not just voting age Americans.

The second number is 48% of the TOTAL population of the country. Again, that's not just voting age Americans, that's a percentage of the total population.

Too funny.

Click to expand...

Here is how polling works typically: Several thousand people from a sampling of Americans are asked, "If the president is found guilty of having conspired to dig up false information on his political opponent by strong-arming foreign leaders for personal reasons do you think he should be impeached?"

The poll results of taken from thousands of Americans indicate 159,236,000 of them want him impeached.

Re: Inspector general report says FBI had ‘authorized purpose’ to investigate Trump campaign’s

Simon W. Moon said:

Iirc, I didn't say that was what I did.
I asked if you thought you could take the number of voting age Americans and multiply it by the percentage?:shrug:

Click to expand...

This whole exchange started with your ridiculous claim, which was wrong, and to which you have never owned up to.

As to your question, if that is who the poll was directed, you could infer that the results could extrapolate to all voting age Americans. They don't, but that is the suggestion polls try to make.

Re: Inspector general report says FBI had ‘authorized purpose’ to investigate Trump campaign’s

marke said:

Here is how polling works typically: Several thousand people from a sampling of Americans are asked, "If the president is found guilty of having conspired to dig up false information on his political opponent by strong-arming foreign leaders for personal reasons do you think he should be impeached?"

The poll results of taken from thousands of Americans indicate 159,236,000 of them want him impeached.

Click to expand...

Pretty much.

Most articles citing polls will provide a link to the actual poll itself, where the questions and methodology can be viewed.

Most polls are taken from @ 1,000 people because that number is mathematically considered a sufficient sample size to provide a reasonable margin of error in the results.

The questions asked are where the people who pay for the polling get the results they are paying for. That's why people should read the actual poll questions, rather than the spin that is given to them.

TomFitz said:

I think a lot of them lose sleep over Carter Page.

Protecting Carter Page has always been a big part of this idiotic narrative.

I do not know why.

It is one of the more intreaguing aspects of the Trump/‘Russia scandal.

Click to expand...

I don't know why either. It seems Trump Fan Nation is obsessed with Carter Page. It's both sad and creepy how much they lose sleep over a man who doesn't even know they're alive, let alone care about them.