Dems set Trump trap? Source says FISA rebuttal memo loaded with sensitive details

[The Mark]

Is that why multiple FBI agents have been demoted, kicked off the investigation, resigned, and shuffled around to different departments?

If the FBI was biased, they wouldn't have been removed from said investigation.

I am utterly certain that the FBI removed them precisely because they knew questions such as you raise would be raised, and even if they thought the person's personal position on politics was not effecting the case, they could not have even the appearance of such.

Of course, the propaganda system is fighting to point out that it may have been, because hype is good for distraction.

 

[JoeTrumps]

what is the goddamn ****ing fascination of the right/conservatives/GOP with winning a goddamn ****ing election & still being hungup on the goddamn ****ing runner-up, ALL of goddamn ****ing 15 months post goddamn ****ing election?

does anyone in the goddamn ****ing GOP have a goddamn ****ing life, or a goddamn ****ing brain cell?

for ****s ****ing sake all****ingready .................

Clinton Supporters Weep Openly

Just so we're clear...........which one of these girls is you? I guess the one on the right.

 

[cuban smokes]

First, a large part of that " body of evidence " was a unsubstantiated Hillary campaign and DNC funded dossier that was corroborated in the application with a Yahoo article
Trey Gowdy said the FBI even led with the dossier in their FISA proceedings and without the dossier they would have not been successful in obtaining their warrant

The idea that the FISC court simply hands out FISA warrants based on the volume of allegations is absurd.

And of course Hillary and the DNC funded the dossier and if the motivations of the source didn't matter why did the FBI omit any mention of Hillary Clintons Campaign and the DNC paying for it ?

Trey Gowdy is running away from away from the US Congress with his finger stuck squarely up his OWN ass ...........

 

[cuban smokes]

Clinton Supporters Weep Openly

Just so we're clear...........which one of these girls is you? I guess the one on the right.
View attachment 67228209

so, as I stated: those on the right/conservatives/GOP types STILL have not gotten over the election, even tho' Donald Duck **** won the election .......... yep .......

 

[Fishking]

If the FBI was biased, they wouldn't have been removed from said investigation.

They were bias before that point, like when they were running a sham of an investigation on Hillary. This stuff just didn't happen last night. Also, unless they figured out time-traveling, removing people doesn't change who was involved in submitting the FISC warrant in the first place. You know...before the Special Counsel was even created? Gotta stay on top of those timelines.

 

[JoeTrumps]

so, as I stated: those on the right/conservatives/GOP types STILL have not gotten over the election, even tho' Donald Duck **** won the election .......... yep .......

 

[cuban smokes]

View attachment 67228210

so, by your OWN admission, you STILL have not gotten over the fact that Trump won the election BUT you are still hung up on the fact that HRC lost

that is some sick ****ing **** ******* ..............

 

[MAGAnificent]

Again, the DOJ and FBI didn't tell FISC that Hillary Clintons campaign and the DNC paid for the dossier

Alluding to possible political motivations of the source ( Christopher Steele ) is not the same as telling the Court the opposition candidate funded that dossier.

This idea that the Obama FBI ( who knew they were submitting unverified allegations paid for by the Clinton camp to gain a FISA warrant to spy on the oppposition candidate ) were acting in good in faith in their FISA application is absurd.

They were sure they could get away with it as they had high confidence that Hillary was going to be the next president.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Can someone please explain to me how this was a trap when the Republican reps on the HPSCI read the memo and authorized its release?

The republican establishment falls for traps all the time. That's why Schumer thought he could get away with shutting down the government over DACA. He was so used to the republicans folding like a pretzel at the mere threat of a shutdown. He thought they would fold again.

 

[The Mark]

They were bias before that point, like when they were running a sham of an investigation on Hillary. This stuff just didn't happen last night. Also, unless they figured out time-traveling, removing people doesn't change who was involved in submitting the FISC warrant in the first place. You know...before the Special Counsel was even created? Gotta stay on top of those timelines.

Of course - but as I've already addressed, the FISC was aware that some of the information they saw was politically motivated, took that into account, and granted the warrant anyway - are you now claiming that the presenters themselves were also politically motivated, and as a result their arguments to the FISC pushed said court into a decision which was faulty?

I'm just not seeing where the bias is, here.

And I certainly do not think the FBI is politically biased, beyond the individual political biases of it's members, which are impossible to avoid, generally speaking.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Comey reopening the case basically tanked her campaign.

Simply not true. Hillary tanked her own campaign. She was a lousy candidate who simply could not connect with the voters in states she had to win.

Strzok helped reopen the Clinton email investigation.

Why blame everyone but Hillary for Hillary's email scandal?

The Dossier alone wasn't used to spy on anyone.

According to former FBI second in command, McCabe, without the dossier, the FISA warrant would not have been granted.

 

[MAGAnificent]

FoxNews already does that for you.

God Bless Fox News.

 

[The Mark]

Simply not true. Hillary tanked her own campaign. She was a lousy candidate who simply could not connect with the voters in states she had to win.

Clinton was a terrible candidate, to be sure, (well, she was experienced in politics and skilled in being a politician, but in many ways those were disqualifications).

But the email investigation helped prevent her from winning, along with a bunch of other factors.

I do find it interesting that many (I think willingly blind) democrats place undue blame on one or more of those other factors, and attack anyone (even other liberals) who say Clinton being a bad candidate was a major cause of her loss.

 

[Fenton]

You're gonna need some special shampoo for all those split hairs.


Edit: I will agree that the article I linked does not say with 100% surety that the FBI flatly stated to the FISC "the Clinton campaign paid for this info we're presenting to you", but the FISC WAS fully aware that it was politically motivated, and thus had to be more closely examined due to the potential bias.

Edit 2: Here's the Washington Post article that the Business Insider article references, and a quote from it:


Further, even if we accept that the dossier was/is suspect in it's motivations, that article from The Intercept that I linked in my previous post mentions that the FBI was not only using it to ask for the warrant, and came back with new info indicating progress each time they asked for renewal of the warrant.

Its not splitting hairs to draw the obvious distinction between a obscure reference to political motivation and a the Hillary campaign and the DNC.

The FBI didn't include the fact her campaign and the DNC funded this dossier for a good reason

And 3 FISA renewals with Title I authority months after Carter Page left the Trump campaign is incriminating all on its own.
Plus, in the first FISA application, the FBI knowingly corroborated the dossier with a Yahoo article based on a leaked copy of the dossier.
The idea the FBI was concerned about ethics in their subsesquent FISC court proceedings is laughable.

Carter Page has yet to be charged with anything, and not a shred of evidence that Trump colluded with Russians in 2 years of investigations, and Christopher Steele is bing sued for Libel thanks to that dosssier.

 

[Slyfox696]

First, your link to the other thread doesn't say what you think it says.

Yes it does.

Secondly, are you saying that multiple FBI agents being either demoted, kicked off the investigation team, shuffled to different departments, or resigning was all done for no cause? Interesting.

Are you going to address what I actually said or are you going to continue building strawmen?

Try responding to what I actually said this time. Of course, facts and reality make that more difficult for you, but see what you can do.

Maybe I should make sure not to come at you "loaded for bear" because you might be a mod some day...oh wait...that was agents soft-peddling their investigation on Hillary because they were scared to do their jobs and then she became President. My bad. I got confused.

Amusing how I provided you with NUMEROUS facts on how you were wrong and you couldn't address a one of them and instead relied on strawmen and more hackish innuendo. Why am I not surprised?

How about you try addressing the facts in my post? How about you address the fact the FBI took a rare step to come out and express "grave concerns" over inaccuracies in the Nunes memo? How about you acknowledge Carter Page was under investigation before he joined the Trump team and that Papadapolous (I refuse to learn how to spell his name) was the origin of the FBI investigation into Russian election activities, not the Steele dossier? How about you try addressing facts for a change when discussing how the Nunes memo was just a partisan hack job?

 

[trouble13]

Dems set Trump trap? Source says FISA rebuttal memo loaded with sensitive details | Fox News



So predictable.

Schiff intentionally fills the Dem memo with items that he knows must be redacted so he can later claim the GOP made changes to his memo "for political reasons."

They should call his bluff. Just release it with redactions, let Schiff raise a stink, then release it again in its original form. Let the people see his corrupt tactics out in the open.

I would release it unredacted. Let them explain to the public why they wanted those assets outted. The fbi will need to develope new ones. The fbi hasnt objected to the dems memo so they must be ok with it

Oops just read the part where you say release it both ways. I like that too.

 

[trouble13]

Did we read different memo's? Was there a memo part 2 that I didn't read?

The memo seemed to make a huge deal about the Dossier and alluded to the idea that the Dossier was what spurred the investigation...yet the memo gets timelines wrong and people have stated the Dossier was only one part and the judge was told it was created by political opponents.

Grassleys memo says differently

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Fishking]

Of course - but as I've already addressed, the FISC was aware that some of the information they saw was politically motivated, took that into account, and granted the warrant anyway - are you now claiming that the presenters themselves were also politically motivated, and as a result their arguments to the FISC pushed said court into a decision which was faulty?

Exactly.

I'm just not seeing where the bias is, here.

There is already ample evidence for it.

And I certainly do not think the FBI is politically biased, beyond the individual political biases of it's members, which are impossible to avoid, generally speaking.

The FBI as a whole, no. Highly placed agents that were in charged of various investigations and procedures, we already know that's 100% true.

 

[Moot]

Rasmussen has him higher. You know, the poll that was a lot closer on election night?

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports®

From your link...

"The latest figures include 35% who Strongly Approve of the way Trump is performing and 41% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -6. (see trends)...."​

A presidential approval rating of -6. lol

 

[GDViking]

Only if they are ignorant of the processes that are involved and have also ignored all the information that has come out dating back to pre-election times, like the soft-peddling of the Clinton investigation and purposefully changing of a word from "negligent" to "careless" by a rabid anti-Trumper, which was then shown in texts, which involved talking about "insurance plans", which involved people who are married to a lady that was working for Fusion GPS, who was hired by the Dems and the Hillary campaign, which created a hit-piece of a "dossier", which was then used to spy on people.

^----all documented facts.

Yeah...you're right. This is nothing but a political stunt. Nothing to see here folks.

And the moon landing on july 20th 1969 was actually filmed in my uncles garage and all the people that witnessed the take off were under mass hypnotism.

Here have a straw you are obviously running low...

 

[GDViking]

Is that why multiple FBI agents have been demoted, kicked off the investigation, resigned, and shuffled around to different departments?

That was entirely done to make sure there is no question of impropriety in the investigation. People that really should not be removed have been just for the sake of appearances.

It's unfortunate, however it does take away one of the defenses arguments.

 

[JasperL]

Again, the DOJ and FBI didn't tell FISC that Hillary Clintons campaign and the DNC paid for the dossier

Alluding to possible political motivations of the source ( Christopher Steele ) is not the same as telling the Court the opposition candidate funded that dossier.

OK, let's look at the Nunes memo:

a) Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.

b) The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a U.S. law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOJ at the time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier). The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of—and paid by—the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.

Now Nunes evasive response but still admitting to the core allegation:



So what Nunes admits to is that there was that the warrant application did disclose the political nature of the dossier. If you read the memo, you'll not that it never claims FBI or DoJ knew the exact funding of the dossier at that time. Doesn't really matter because everyone on the planet including the FISC would correctly assume that opposition research against Trump at that point in time was funded by Clinton allies.

This idea that the Obama FBI ( who knew they were submitting unverified allegations paid for by the Clinton camp to gain a FISA warrant to spy on the oppposition candidate ) were acting in good in faith in their FISA application is absurd.

You stating something doesn't make it a fact, and that's not a fact you're asserting.

 

[upsideguy]

Is that why the democrats were losing their collective minds over the impending release of the memo? And btw, there are at least 5 memos to go.

Yes, and there were five releases of Sharknado. They didn't get any better. The first Sharknado was far more exciting and a better use of time than the Nunes Memo I.

 

[JasperL]

Its not splitting hairs to draw the obvious distinction between a obscure reference to political motivation and a the Hillary campaign and the DNC.

The FBI didn't include the fact her campaign and the DNC funded this dossier for a good reason

And 3 FISA renewals with Title I authority months after Carter Page left the Trump campaign is incriminating all on its own.

Can you cite any evidence the FBI knew at that time exactly who paid the law firm that hired Steele? Just curious, but as I said I don't think it matters.

As to your last comment, you've got that 180 degrees wrong. The renewals were required to show the surveillance was yielding the expected intelligence. You also had several sets of people, including Trump appointees signing those renewals, and from what I've read four judges signing the original warrant and three renewals. So a series of people at DoJ, FBI, including Trump appointees agreed the warrant was proper, and four different judges reviewed the evidence.

It's hard to get something entirely wrong, but you managed it! Congrats!

 

[The Mark]

Exactly.



There is already ample evidence for it.



The FBI as a whole, no. Highly placed agents that were in charged of various investigations and procedures, we already know that's 100% true.

Perhaps I haven't been paying attention to that aspect of recent events, then - because I am unaware of any 100% proven bias among specific leadership staff at the FBI.