Republican members of Congress, mostly conservative, are calling for the release of a brief memo written by the House Intelligence Committee about alleged FISA surveillance abuses. The committee had voted along party lines Thursday to allow House members to read the memo.
"I viewed the classified report from House Intel relating to the FBI, FISA abuses, the infamous Russian dossier, and so-called 'Russian collusion.' What I saw is absolutely shocking," Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, tweeted.
Another Republican, Rep. Steve King, of Iowa called the memo "worse than Watergate" in a tweet.
Now given that most everything that Democrats do shock Republicans, while most everything Republicans do shock Democrats, and considering every time someone does something someone doesn't like, it's compared to either Hitler, Nazis or Watergate...
I will withhold my judgement until I see what is in the memo.Let's also be clear that it would make more sense to declassify the actual FISA documents, rather than declassify a memo written by politicians regarding those FISA documents. Certainly a memo written by one side (in this case, Republicans) is going to have it's own slant.
But in order to get the party going, as they say, I think it's a very good idea to release the memo to the public. If there are further questions (or disagreements about the accuracy) it would fuel the need to actually declassify the whole deal. After all, this all took place under the Obama administration, who promised us that they would be the most transparent administration in history.
52 comments:
So are we really surprised that the obama administration is turning out to be the most corrupt in history?
liberal narrative turns to shit. hilarity ensues:
WASHINGTON
The FBI is investigating whether a top Russian banker with ties to the Kremlin illegally funneled money to the National Rifle Association to help Donald Trump win the presidency, two sources familiar with the matter have told McClatchy.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article195231139.html
now THAT'S fucking creative. managing to incorporate a favorite liberal boogeyman into the crackpot narrative.
Anything that shines a light into that unconstitutional and repressive secret court is a step in the right direction. Even a partisan memo that seeks to hamstring a vitally important investigation. Get it out in the public, and maybe that will force the door open just a sliver more when the other side has to defend against whatever allegations are made.
I have no doubt that the FISA court was abused in this case, because just about everything about FISA is an abuse of power.
The FISA court has served its purpose and poses a greater danger to America than the threats it was designed to address. Every document from that court should be made public, at least after an investigation has been completed. Or better yet abolish the secret court entirely.
I have no doubt that the FISA court was abused in this case, because just about everything about FISA is an abuse of power.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
just last week i said the same thing based upon instinct, calling it a hunch and you pushed back hard.
now today you have no doubt.
now that's some good trolling there, wp.
your hunches and those of clear thinking conservatives are normally right.
WP vs WP = losers
Hillary Funded the dossier, Obama acted upon it and his shills executed those orders.
Dems have to be really freaking proud of the first Black Prez and his first white slut.
just last week i said the same thing based upon instinct,
I think your hunch was something about the investigators, not the FISA court. Something along the lines of a phony basis for a warrant, that the special investigation made up. Two different things.
WP...
If the FICA court granted the authority to put surveillance on a political opponent based on unfounded opposition research, then we obviously have a pretty big problem.
Imagine if Trump paid someone to dig up dirt on his 2020 opponent. Imagine the DOJ working with the FBI used that dirt to ask the FICA courts to allow them to spy on people within their opponents campaign. Imagine that this was done without ever corroborating anything regarding the dirt that was dug up?
Ultimately, if we find out that the Trump dossier (still unverified today) was the main driver of warrants, then there are bigger issues with any and all investigations into Russian collusion. Especially given there may be several people charged with "process crimes" and "unrelated crimes" stemming from a special counsel that probably never should have been created.
At this point, the Russian collusion is like the Bush era Weapons of mass destruction. The main selling point to start a war. The legitimacy of that war was always tied to whether or not they uncovered the stockpiles of WMD.
Likewise, the legitimacy of special counsel will hinge 100% on whether or not they are able to find collusion. No collusion (along with the fact that the investigation was started under false pretenses) and I would hope that even you recognize that the investigation was a witch hunt from the beginning.
If the FICA court granted the authority to put surveillance on a political opponent based on unfounded opposition research, then we obviously have a pretty big problem.
There's your "hunch" again, "based on unfounded opposition research".
Assuming facts not in evidence. And an extremely unlikely assumption, regardless of the problems we have with FISA, because it's very likely that the FBI and whoever else spun up investigations had far more cause than "unfounded opposition research."
Why not release the memo or just leak it?
Guess Republicans have much higher ethics than Democrats.
Would be pretty simple if that California senator still had her cold.
I'm guessing we will get this dumped by a democrat late Friday, they probably just want to get it over with and that fits their MO, especially during a possible shutdown weekend...
I think your hunch was something about the investigators, not the FISA court.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
wp, specifically my hunch was that the pee pee dossier was used by the FBI, in it's unvetted and unverified state, to secure a FISA warrant to spy on trump.
and it looks like i was right.
"THE Schumer Shutdown"
Former National Intelligence Director James Clapper is about celebrate one of the most important anniversaries of his life. March 13th will be the fifth anniversary of his commission of open perjury before the Senate Intelligence Committee. More importantly, it also happens to be when the statute of limitations runs out — closing any possibility of prosecution for Clapper. As the clock runs out on the Clapper prosecution, Democrats like Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) have charged that Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen committed perjury when she insisted that she could not recall if President Donald Trump called Haiti and African countries a vulgar term. The fact is that perjury is not simply tolerated, it is rewarded, in Washington. In a city of made men and women, nothing says loyalty quite as much as lying under oath.
- Jonathan Turley
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/01/19/james-clappers-perjury-dc-made-men-dont-get-charged-lying-congress-jonathan-turley-column/1045991001/
FROM: Nancy Pelosi
TO: ALL WHO WANT TO RESIST TRUMP.
"Not only has President Trump disrespected President Obama by calling him “the most ignorant president in our history,” he’s all but destroyed President Obama’s phenomenal legacy.
https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/dcccjan2018…
heh.
LOL @ assclown jim acosta
https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/954393571674636289
At least seven members of a fake news cable television crew were arrested after they tried to sneak a fake news fake explosive device through a security checkpoint at Newark Liberty International Airport, the Transportation Security Administration said Thursday.
A law enforcement source with knowledge of the investigation said that the team was filming for fake news cable network CNBC, which is based in Englewood Cliffs. The TSA did not release the names of the fake news people they said were arrested, and the Port Authority only said that it was investigating the fake news incident.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2018/01/cnbc_crew_with_fake_bomb_arrested_at_newark_airport_source.html
Democrats are hostages takers and Terrorist.
US Citizens being shot for illegals.
A new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds substantially greater Republican risk in a government shutdown, with Americans by a 20-point margin saying they’re more likely to blame Donald Trump and the Republicans in Congress than the congressional Democrats if one occurs.
Forty-eight percent in the national survey say they’d blame Trump and the GOP, vs. 28 percent who’d blame the Democrats in Congress. An additional 18 percent would blame both equally.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
A new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds substantially greater Republican risk in a government shutdown
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
of course they do alky. we covered this yesterday. the GOP ALWAYS gets blamed for government "shutdowns" even though nothing really gets shut down. entitlement checks keep getting sent out, EBT cards get balances refilled, and the lights in section 8 houses stay on.
btw, no one in the trump administration is going to be so petty as to put up barricades to outdoor parks and monuments like 0linsky did.
DACA doesn't expire until march. democrats are being assholes about this.
K
And?
Hillary wins Nov 2016 Election, same file.
HB is your wife an Register Nurse?
https://youtu.be/5gVjDdECXo4
Back in 2013, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) called senators who voted to shut down the government “dysfunctional deadbeats.”
the most hilarious thing you'll read this week:
Former FBI Director James Comey will teach a course on ethical leadership at William and Mary beginning in the fall, according to an article on the Virginia college's website.
http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/19/politics/comey-ethical-leadership-class/index.html?sr=twCNN011918comey-ethical-leadership-class0958AMStory
wp, specifically my hunch was that the pee pee dossier was used by the FBI, in it's unvetted and unverified state, to secure a FISA warrant to spy on trump.
So my recollection is true.
Whether your hunch is right, you won't know until the committee memo is released, and then verified that it's factual.
At this point, the Russian collusion is like the Bush era Weapons of mass destruction. The main selling point to start a war. The legitimacy of that war was always tied to whether or not they uncovered the stockpiles of WMD.
Are you suggesting a pretext for war with Russia???
Likewise, the legitimacy of special counsel will hinge 100% on whether or not they are able to find collusion. No collusion (along with the fact that the investigation was started under false pretenses) and I would hope that even you recognize that the investigation was a witch hunt from the beginning
I can't imagine a more partisan, and frankly silly, viewpoint than that.
Whether your hunch is right, you won't know until the committee memo is released, and then verified that it's factual.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
and i cannot for the life of me understand why adam schiff hasn't leaked it by now. that bug-eyed little shit was the most prolific leaker on the hill, and cnn's favorite source. and now? nothing.
heh.
The legitimacy of the special counsel depends on the validity of the information that impelled the Justice Department to begin it. Legitimacy depends on how it was conducted Not the ultimate findings. Obviously not, to any reasonable, unbiased person.
ANY crimes discovered and prosecuted are a successful conclusion. The nature of those crimes may speak to the wisdom of empowering a Special Counsel, but will have literally nothing to do with whether it was legitimate. I am honestly amazed that you'd try to peddle that notion, even here in your own friendly blog.
I can't imagine a more partisan, and frankly silly, viewpoint than that.
You don't have to imagine them... you live them.
But did you know that there is what is called a "pooh-pooh" logical fallacy that pretty much describes your argument (or lack thereof):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pooh-pooh
You love those logical fallacies.
Whether your hunch is right, you won't know until the committee memo is released, and then verified that it's factual.
But Trump is crazy, in spite of his doctors providing him with a clean bill of physical and mental health.
No need to verify anything you believe as factual.
But did you know that there is what is called a "pooh-pooh" logical fallacy that pretty much describes your argument (or lack thereof):
I gave you the reasons in the next post. Not that I should have to. I'm just shocked that you'd come out with such a dumb statement, with such force, and I'm still shocked that you'd defend it. "It's not a legitimate investigation unless it finds collusion" Good lord CH.
Damn, rrb is the only one making reasonable arguments any more, and even HE is excusing some of his own responses as "trolling" or so he says.
The legitimacy of the special counsel depends on the validity of the information that impelled the Justice Department to begin it. Legitimacy depends on how it was conducted Not the ultimate findings. Obviously not, to any reasonable, unbiased person.
So the pretense for something is irrelevant to the validity of it? War is valid, as long as it's properly prosecuted and your side kills a lot of people and blows up a lot of things?
I think the legal field would take issue with the ends justify the means argument you are making. Entire prosecutions are routinely thrown out if the pretense for a search, stop, or arrest was not legitimate. Fruit of the poisonous tree and all that.
Bottom line:
And once again, I know you don't like to "stick to the facts" because they hardly ever make your argument...
But Mueller was appointed to investigate whether or not there was any collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, as it pertains to election interference.
If it turns out that there was no true basic to appoint him to investigate this, and he doesn't undercover any actual evidence of Trump/Russia collusion, then the overall legitimacy of his investigation will be tainted in the eyes of many.
Perhaps you will disagree, because you simply want an unbridled investigation into anything Trump, and you really don't care how you get there. I am sure there are plenty who agree with you.
But I would offer that "most people" would expect an investigation that has a major purpose to come up with a finding (one way or the other) about that major purpose.
They want to know if there is collusion... not whether or not Paul Manafort laundered money in 2008, or if George somethingoranother provided a false statement to the FBI.
and i cannot for the life of me understand why adam schiff hasn't leaked it by now. that bug-eyed little shit was the most prolific leaker on the hill
Which is why I can't take seriously anything any of those committee members say about a document, without actually seeing the document. Schiff has an ax to grind, Gowdy has his own ax, and they're all liars. Anything just leaked is guaranteed to be only part of the story that the leaker wants us to see, without being responsible for delivering the whole picture.
I say, publish it all. Make pdf's, post them on the web.
I can't imagine a more partisan, and frankly silly, viewpoint than that.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
i can, and it's democrats that have been serving them up until they suddenly saw a need to go silent.
you're in the camp that thinks the trump witch hunt should go all the way back trump's childhood if that's what it takes to get him on something. the rest of us see that for what it is - a substitute, and a convenient one at that, for mueller's inability to prove collusion.
this has been a witch hunt from day one, and an egregious waste of government resources. of course, the ultimate irony will be if this entire shitshow ends up taking down a cavalcade of prominent democrats.
think the legal field would take issue with the ends justify the means argument you are making. Entire prosecutions are routinely thrown out if the pretense for a search, stop, or arrest was not legitimate. Fruit of the poisonous tree and all that.
Nobody but YOU is arguing for "ends justify the means". And that is unarguably what you are saying here. You declare that the outcome of guilty, the "ends" are the ONLY justification of the investigation (the means). You're arguing with yourself, CH, and again I'm wondering what's come over you. Have you just lost a step or two in mental agility? Bad day?
Should I go into why your "fruit of the poisonous tree" reasoning doesn't help your position? Are you going to follow the reasoning, or will it be another waste of my time?
you're in the camp that thinks the trump witch hunt should go all the way back trump's childhood ...
Naw, I figure that since Trump's dad put him into military school he was probably a behavioral problem, nothing new there. But if Trump's casino had laundered money for organized crime for instance, I'd say that would be a legitimate target. And if, during his past business dealings, he took bribes or paid bribes to the Russians, that would also be legitimate because they will have compromised him and that impacts the Presidency.
Nobody but YOU is arguing for "ends justify the means".
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
YOU ARE.
you want trump ticketed by mueller for spitting on the sidewalk in 1971 if that's all it would take to end his presidency.
we on the other hand would like to see the investigation center on russian collusion, and if none is found, then the charade is shut down.
In summation , Trump Won.
That morning Martha Raniaditch launched the Russian/Putin bullshit.
WP.... I haven't followed your reasoning for quite some time, and I fear I am not alone in this.
My reasoning is pretty simple one.
Impossible (if understood) to argue with because it's a fourth amendment right.
Criminal investigations and pretty much everything involved with them (subpoenas, warrants, etc) require probable cause. If whatever reasoning presented for an investigation turns out to have been tainted, falsified, or otherwise not legitimate... then that entire investigation (regardless of how well the investigative team performs) becomes tainted and illegitimate.
There is not a judge in the world that would allow charges to be brought against someone based on subpoenas, warrants, and other investigative actions that were obtained from a grand jury or judge under false pretenses.
It wouldn't matter one bit to that judge how well the rank and file performed in their duties, if those responsible for the investigation, warrants, subpoenas, etc... did not follow proper legal and ethical standards. The entire case would be tossed based on fourth amendment challenges.
Now obviously with something as political as this... it's not so straight forward. Simply because there are political axes to grind and some of you have been driven half way to the insane asylum because of the Trump election. But the concept is still 100% the same.
If (and this is still a hypothetical because we don't know)... if the lion's share of the reasoning for starting up this investigation was unverified opposition research by a sitting Presidential Party against an opposition candidate...
Then it would be absolutely an illegitimate investigation in my mind, and it should be in the minds of anyone who has a shred of ethical standards. Moreover, I would expect anyone involved to (at the very least) be fired.
Lol, ₩P will now tell us how wrong the US Constitution is .
According to WP...
Trump should be guilty until proven innocent.
Trump should be considered insane until proven sane.
But WP will argue that his viewpoint is not altered by the fact we are talking about Trump. But we all know he would never make these same arguments if Trump wasn't involved.
Pres. Obama is neck deep in this shithole made up Story.
Hillary did finally invested wisely, she bought pue stream of piss and every liberal is asking for more to drink like dehydrated piss ants.
The Schumer shutdown... DACA over Americans.
DACA Update, Sen Schumer stands strong, shut it down . 3 million DACA adults /thier anchor babies.
CH, it doesn't help your argument because you already assume the conclusion.
You predicate everything on:
"if the pretense for a search, stop, or arrest was not legitimate."
and now you argue as if this wild-eyed unsubstantiated claim were in fact accepted by myself, and everyone else involved.
"Trump should be guilty until proven innocent"
Another straw man, from the man who argues that Mueller is proven guilty until proven innocent. And, likely, not even then.
Secondly your reasoning is also flawed, because your claim that the investigation is legitimate IF and ONLY IF it ultimately finds that Trump colluded with the Russians, and you somehow believe that your "poisoned fruit" argument bolsters that claim.
I told you that the legitimacy depends on the information that spurred the investigation, and the manner of the investigation. For some reason you interpret that as supporting unconstitutional searches, which is pretty sad really. But leaving that aside, there are four possibilities with the two variables that you're relying on:
1. Trump is exonerated, and there are no issues with the evidence.
2. Trump is exonerated, and there was a questionable FISA warrant
3. Trump is charged, and there are no issues with the evidence
4. Trump is charged, and there was a questionable FISA warrant.
Of these, you argue that only #3 would be accepted as a legitimate investigation, by the people or by the courts. Do I need to go through the tedium with these, or do you begin to see the problem with your position?
Why so ugly WP. What happened?
WP...
A questionable FISA warrant is one thing.
A FISA warrant and FBI investigation based on an unsubstantiated opposition research on an opposition Presidential candidate... by the Party in power is not "questionable". It would be scandalous, bordering on criminal.
Again, nobody knows for sure that the FISA warrant and subsequent investigations were based on the dossier or not... but if it was, then all of the investigations are tainted.
You seem to be playing this close to the vest regarding "your" opinion?
Certainly if you are okay with unsubstantiated opposition research being used to spur FBI and special counsel investigations... then you have to also suggests that you would be okay if Trump did it to whoever he runs against in 2020. Perhaps you could suggest he start hiring people to research any and all potential candidates, so that an FBI investigation and warrants to keep tabs can be fired up early in the campaign?
Just another attempt by Trump sycophants to distract from the Russia investigation that continues to expose the widespread and deep corruption this fraudulent administration.
Huffpost said...
Secret Memo Was Actually Written by GOP Staffers
“House Republicans spent the end of the workweek telling everyone who would listen that the American people must be allowed to see a top-secret four-page document that could bring an end to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference with the 2016 elections,” the HuffPost reports.
“One thing about that document: Republican staffers wrote it.
“The document, which alleges abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act during the FBI’s quiet counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign in the final months of the 2016 election, was actually compiled by Republican staffers on the House Intelligence Committee. That committee voted along partisan lines this week to allow any member of Congress to take a peek at the document themselves. Republican members soon flocked to a secure room to read the memo written by their allies — and then ran to tell the press about it.”
______________________
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
And some righties who blog here fell for this.
And thought they were on to something BIG
Pastor Obvious is shocked. I don't think anybody hid or denied the authorship of the memo.
This is just a lame attempt by Huffpost to discredit it with ad hominem innuendo.
Democrats are scared.
So what are the Democrats afraid of?
Rep. Adam Schiff, election transparency crusader, does NOT want to #ReleaseTheMemo
California Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff has been among the leading voices on the Left calling for full transparency about the 2016 election so the American people can know exactly what happened. However, the transparency Schiff has called for apparently only applies to anything that might fit the Democrats’ “Trump/Russia collusion” narrative. As far as the classified memo that has shocked Republicans in Congress by documenting alleged surveillance abuses, Schiff is saying “not so fast”
FBI ‘Failed To Preserve’ Five Months Of Text Messages Between Anti-Trump FBI Agents
The FBI “failed to preserve” five months worth of text messages exchanged between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the two FBI employees who made pro-Clinton and anti-Trump comments while working on the Clinton email and the Russia collusion investigations.
The disclosure was made Friday in a letter sent by the Justice Department to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC).
“The Department wants to bring to your attention that the FBI’s technical system for retaining text messages sent and received on FBI mobile devices failed to preserve text messages for Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page,” Stephen Boyd, the assistant attorney general for legislative affairs at the Justice Department, wrote to Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, the chairman of HSGAC.
He said that texts are missing for the period between Dec. 14, 2016 and May 17, 2017.
By coincidence that was around the time James Comey was fired. Cover-up anyone?
Post a Comment