• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

5 Questions Nunes Memo Must Answer

bubbabgone said:
The only thing corroborated was that Carter Paige went to Russia ... corroborated because he never tried to hide it. What he was accused of doing there was never corroborated.
Something has been corroborated?
What?
Click to expand...

Way back in 2013 FBI picked up information that Carter Page was being recruited as a Russian operative. They met with him and told him this. He was hey it's all good. He continued to have many contacts with Russian operatives and others, many of these contacts taped. He had established contacts with oligarch business interests. He visited Moscow frequently and sought meetings with many Russians who were being watched by the FBI and others. So Carter Page's relationships in Russia have been numerous and monitored. Steele found these as any investigator would. But if you would like to believe that Carter Page is as innocent as the new fallen snow, or perhaps just a coffee guy with no ties to the Trump administration, I think there is a wake up in your future.
 
DamnYankee said:
Yep. As long as the memo is factual, and it is according to two FBI officials, those responsible for abuses should be given a fair trial and proper sentencing. None of this would be happening if the left wouldn't have corrupted the Bureau, DOJ, IRS, EPA, and every other damn thing they get their grubby hands on. They don't call it the Party of Corruption for nothing.
Click to expand...

I should add that yep, the left is worried. They've failed on policy issue thus far, and what they have left is, "Yeah, well, your dog is ugly." All I can tell 'em, and God love 'em - is good luck in 2018.
 
JMR said:
Way back in 2013 FBI picked up information that Carter Page was being recruited as a Russian operative. They met with him and told him this. He was hey it's all good. He continued to have many contacts with Russian operatives and others, many of these contacts taped. He had established contacts with oligarch business interests. He visited Moscow frequently and sought meetings with many Russians who were being watched by the FBI and others. So Carter Page's relationships in Russia have been numerous and monitored. Steele found these as any investigator would. But if you would like to believe that Carter Page is as innocent as the new fallen snow, or perhaps just a coffee guy with no ties to the Trump administration, I think there is a wake up in your future.
Click to expand...

That's what I said.
Paige went to Moscow and never denied it.
What else was corroborated?
 
Tanngrisnir said:
LOL! No veracity of the memo has been ascertained yet. You're talking about something not yet proven (and very unlikely) to exist.
Click to expand...

This is true, and there is no veracity of the Russia - Trump thing, either. And since you say it has not been verified how do you get off saying it is not likely to exist? I’m sure it has been verified, and “the memo” is a synopsis of a much more detailed report.

I’m sure you agree that for veracity’s sake, a Special Counsel should be appointed to test the veracity of “the memo”.

:cheers:
 
https://www.justsecurity.org/44697/steele-dossier-knowing/

[Editor’s Note: In this special Just Security article, highly respected former member of the CIA’s Senior Intelligence Service, John Sipher examines the Steele dossier using methods that an intelligence officer would to try to validate such information. Sipher concludes that the dossier’s information on campaign collusion is generally credible when measured against standard Russian intelligence practices, events subsequent to Steele’s reporting, and information that has become available in the nine months since Steele’s final report. The dossier, in Sipher’s view, is not without fault, including factual inaccuracies. Those errors, however, do not detract from an overarching framework that has proven to be ever more reliable as new revelations about potential Trump campaign collusion with the Kremlin and its affiliates has come to light in the nine months since Steele submitted his final report.]
Click to expand...

So, more than a year after the production of the original raw reports, where do we stand?

I think it is fair to say that the report is not “garbage” as several commentators claimed. The Orbis sources certainly got some things right – details that they could not have known prior. Steele and his company appear serious and credible. Of course, the failure of the Trump team to report details that later leaked out and fit the narrative may make the Steele allegations appear more prescient than they otherwise might. At the same time, the hesitancy to be honest about contacts with Russia is consistent with allegations of a conspiracy.

All that said, one large portion of the dossier is crystal clear, certain, consistent and corroborated. Russia’s goal all along has been to do damage to America and our leadership role in the world. Also, the methods described in the report fit the Russians to a tee. If the remainder of the report is largely true, Russia has a powerful weapon to help achieve its goal. Even if it is largely false, the Kremlin still benefits from the confusion, uncertainty and political churn created by the resulting fallout. In any regard, the Administration could help cauterize the damage by being honest, transparent and assisting those looking into the matter. Sadly, the President has done the opposite, ensuring a Russian win no matter what. In any event, I would suspect the Russians will look to muddy the waters and spread false and misleading information to confuse investigators and public officials.
Click to expand...

We have to remember that the Steels dossier isn't just a single document, it's a collection of field reports. Some are true, some are not, so if some of it was used to secure a FISA warrant so what?
 
chuckiechan said:
This is true, and there is no veracity of the Russia - Trump thing, either. And since you say it has not been verified how do you get off saying it is not likely to exist? I’m sure it has been verified, and “the memo” is a synopsis of a much more detailed report.

I’m sure you agree that for veracity’s sake, a Special Counsel should be appointed to test the veracity of “the memo”.

:cheers:
Click to expand...

But, of course, there actually is veracity to the Russia Trump thing, as has been demonstrated here countless times. It's not likely to exist because Nunes is a know liar and puller of idiotic stunts to disrupt the investigations, starting with the 'unmasking' claim that turned out to be bull****. But you already knew that.

Playing stupid and pretending that's not the case doesn't serve any rational purpose.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
But, of course, there actually is veracity to the Russia Trump thing, as has been demonstrated here countless times. It's not likely to exist because Nunes is a know liar and puller of idiotic stunts to disrupt the investigations, starting with the 'unmasking' claim that turned out to be bull****. But you already knew that.

Playing stupid and pretending that's not the case doesn't serve any rational purpose.
Click to expand...

That has never been my opinion of you.
 
tres borrachos said:
Wow, that was actually a really interesting read, and I learned a lot in one document that helps me understand the processes, chains of command, etc.

The low blood sugar judge was the most fascinating part.

Thanks for posting this. I've saved the link in my favorites and will see if these things all get answered.
Click to expand...



Kind of takes the air out of the balloon that Trump is a victim.
 
bubbabgone said:
That's what I said.
Paige went to Moscow and never denied it.
What else was corroborated?
Click to expand...

What has been corroborated is that he was recruited as a Russian operative. That he had contact with many Russians. Many of these contacts were taped.
His behavior in Russia and in the U.S. with Russians was interesting enough to the FBI long before Donald Trump was a candidate that he was under surveillance. He continued to meet with Russians while advising the Trump campaign. He was made a foreign policy advisor to the Trump transition.
So NO, it's not at all what you said. There is much printed information about Carter Page. You can read it for yourself if you are so inclined.

Basic level info at Wikipedia: Foreign policy and links to Russia[edit]
In 1998, Page joined the Eurasia Group, a strategy consulting firm, but left three months later. In 2017, Eurasia Group president Ian Bremmer recalled on his Twitter feed that Page's strong pro-Russian stance was "not a good fit" for the firm and that Page was its "most wackadoodle" alumnus.[19] Stephen Sestanovich later described Page's foreign-policy views as having "an edgy Putinist resentment" and a sympathy to Russian leader Vladimir Putin's criticisms of the US.[2] Over time, Page became increasingly critical of US foreign policy toward Russia, and more supportive of Putin, with a US official describing Page as "a brazen apologist for anything Moscow did".[4] Page is frequently quoted by Russian state television, where he is presented as a "famous American economist".[3] In 2013, Russian intelligence operatives attempted to recruit Page, and one described him as enthusiastic about business opportunities in Russia but an "idiot".[2][20] News accounts in 2017 indicated that because of these ties to Russia, Page had been the subject of a FISA warrant in 2014, at least two years earlier than was indicated in the stories concerning his role in the 2016 Presidential campaign of Donald Trump.[21][22]
 
iliveonramen said:
A former FBI talks about the Nunes memo and what needs to be in it for it to implicate anything.

I'm not going to pretend to be an expert in FISA warrants and most likely most people only know they exist and what they are used for. The author goes a bit deeper and gives context. Well worth the read.

https://www.justsecurity.org/51630/five-questions-nunes-memo-answer/
Click to expand...

Interesting article, but when you get right down to it just plain wrong.

I want to highlight five questions that the Nunes Memo must clearly address in order for its allegations of abuse to be substantiated and credible.
Click to expand...

None of those five questions need to be answered by the memo. In fact, the memo CAN'T answer those questions. The memo is nothing more than a summary of evidence that is in possession of or been seen by Nunes and the House Intel Committee.

But please remember that there are three other investigations into DOJ/FBI actions that haven't released any findings. My opinion is that this Nunes information, combined with the other investigation's information will be used to convince Congress...both the House and the Senate...to vote for a Special Investigator to look at all of it and tie it all together. THEN, we might get answers to those five questions.
 
DamnYankee said:
Yep. As long as the memo is factual, and it is according to two FBI officials, those responsible for abuses should be given a fair trial and proper sentencing. None of this would be happening if the left wouldn't have corrupted the Bureau, DOJ, IRS, EPA, and every other damn thing they get their grubby hands on. They don't call it the Party of Corruption for nothing.
Click to expand...

This will not stop Mueller or his team. The sooner the Adorables get that thru there tin foil hat enclosed cranium the better. Do so looking forward to the Liar in Chief fibbing under oath. Not even a cherry picked memo from a known Liar (Nunes) will stop the Obstruction of Justice charge which is surely coming. If the GOP will not hold Trump accountable, they will find someone who can Nov 2018.
 
iliveonramen said:
A former FBI talks about the Nunes memo and what needs to be in it for it to implicate anything.

I'm not going to pretend to be an expert in FISA warrants and most likely most people only know they exist and what they are used for. The author goes a bit deeper and gives context. Well worth the read.

https://www.justsecurity.org/51630/five-questions-nunes-memo-answer/
Click to expand...

Two FBI officials have reveiwed the memo and found no " factual inaccuracies "

FBI officials review surveillance memo, could not cite 'any factual inaccuracies': source | Fox News

As for your link ? CNN reported back in may that the FBI used the dossier to bolster the investigation and to obtain a FISA warrant against Carter Page.

If the memo confirms that unverified Democrat funded oppo-research was used in any way to obtain a FISA warrant, then thats a huge problem

As for which FISA judge approved the warrant ?

Im going to guess it was Obama appointee, Judge Rudolph Contreras. He was the Judge over Flynns case until he recused himself without offering up a explanation

Turns out, he's one of 11 FISA judges and was on the court back when the Carter Page warrant was granted
 
humbolt said:
It's Patrick Ward - Chris Wallace's producer. He tweeted: “Two Senior FBI officials have now reviewed the Republican staff memo,” the Devin Nunes memo “a source familiar with the matter tells Fox News, adding that the officials ‘could not point to any factual inaccuracies,'”

I trust Wallace and his team. This is part of the WH review of the document in the five day window. I'm sure we'll hear more. Given that much of what is included has it's origination at the FBI and DOJ, this shouldn't be surprise. Now, I'll grant there's an un-named source(s) here, but entire constructions and many threads here have been devoted to less.
Click to expand...

So in other words, no link. You just repeat fake news. Got it. Thanks!
 
JMR said:
What has been corroborated is that he was recruited as a Russian operative. That he had contact with many Russians. Many of these contacts were taped.
His behavior in Russia and in the U.S. with Russians was interesting enough to the FBI long before Donald Trump was a candidate that he was under surveillance. He continued to meet with Russians while advising the Trump campaign. He was made a foreign policy advisor to the Trump transition.
So NO, it's not at all what you said. There is much printed information about Carter Page. You can read it for yourself if you are so inclined.

Basic level info at Wikipedia: Foreign policy and links to Russia[edit]
In 1998, Page joined the Eurasia Group, a strategy consulting firm, but left three months later. In 2017, Eurasia Group president Ian Bremmer recalled on his Twitter feed that Page's strong pro-Russian stance was "not a good fit" for the firm and that Page was its "most wackadoodle" alumnus.[19] Stephen Sestanovich later described Page's foreign-policy views as having "an edgy Putinist resentment" and a sympathy to Russian leader Vladimir Putin's criticisms of the US.[2] Over time, Page became increasingly critical of US foreign policy toward Russia, and more supportive of Putin, with a US official describing Page as "a brazen apologist for anything Moscow did".[4] Page is frequently quoted by Russian state television, where he is presented as a "famous American economist".[3] In 2013, Russian intelligence operatives attempted to recruit Page, and one described him as enthusiastic about business opportunities in Russia but an "idiot".[2][20] News accounts in 2017 indicated that because of these ties to Russia, Page had been the subject of a FISA warrant in 2014, at least two years earlier than was indicated in the stories concerning his role in the 2016 Presidential campaign of Donald Trump.[21][22]
Click to expand...

I read what there was to read about Carter Page ... last year when his name came up.
He was not recruited as a Russian operative.
Who said he was?
Even the NYT said the Russians tried to recruit him.

So the question remains, what was confirmed from the dossier?
If you bring up Page again it'll be obvious you have nothing.
 
Manc Skipper said:
...So we end up with only the word of Benedict Arnold Nunes.
Click to expand...

You saying he wrote that memo solo? Please say yes, because I know for a fact that's wrong. Please oh please.
 
American said:
You saying he wrote that memo solo? Please say yes, because I know for a fact that's wrong. Please oh please.
Click to expand...

Don't be silly, he had minions for that. He told them what he wanted, they produced it.
 
iliveonramen said:
A former FBI talks about the Nunes memo and what needs to be in it for it to implicate anything.

I'm not going to pretend to be an expert in FISA warrants and most likely most people only know they exist and what they are used for. The author goes a bit deeper and gives context. Well worth the read.

https://www.justsecurity.org/51630/five-questions-nunes-memo-answer/
Click to expand...

Very very compelling, but there isn't enough safeguards against determined politicians who run these organizations. If that were true, we'd never have a crooked politician succeed at committing corrupt acts. Her explanation is what should happen in a perfect world, and probably works a very high percentage of the time, but we're not just talking about possible corruption over Carter Page; but also Hillary Clinton, who was infinitely more important and had clout only inferior to President Obama's. So don't tell me things can't be fixed. There was all kinds of scandal during the Clinton Presidency; are you telling me they had no airtight govt rules then, and only now have rules so squeaky tight they can't fail. I call bull****!
 
holbritter said:
That's a bit extreme. All I'm saying is it won't be a disertation like the writer of that article appears to insist it must be in order to have any validity.
Click to expand...

What are the some things it should include to be valid in your opinion? I know that as someone that is not a Republican voter Nunes pushing out a memo with baseless claims won't do anything for me. If this is something that is supposed to be just to his base that will trust anything written..well...Fox News already serves that purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom