Release The Memo
- Thread starter Clean
- Start date
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
This is where Vox reached, IMO. Their argument is that "political origins" is vague and could mean any number of things. They argue that Nunes is not actually saying that senior officials knew that the dossier was paid for by the Clinton campaign or the DNC, or that it was oppo research. He says those things weren't included, but then uses the phrase "political origins" later on. Vox is obviously looking to discredit this, and so they pick up on that and say "SEE!!! HE CHANGED THE WORDING THERE! He must be trying to hide that he's not talking about what he listed before." But I don't really know what else that would mean - it has to at very least mean that they knew it was from Clinton or from a group with an interest in beating Trump. Seems to me that needed to be explored and disclosed.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Nunes was running a private parallel investigation. One in which he initially recused himself from then claimed that he didn't recuse himself. Not until Monday did he admit for public consumption that he was investigating the FBI. Regardless, Gowdy was the R in charge of the investigation. The FBI wasn't stonewalling the committee. At least, there wasn't accusations from Gowdy or Schiff that the FBI was stalling. Notice that Nunes simply wanted information from the DOJ/FBI, no interviews were ever requested, including after his 2 staffers discovered this information that is "worse than Watergate".
Gowdy may have been a political hack in the Benghazi investigations but he's eminently more qualified than Nunes. The only reason I can see for Nunes to be named Chairman when Chaffetz departed was because the Trump admin orchestrated it behind the scenes. Remember, Nunes was part or Trump's transition team thus clearly had loyalty to Trump. This was further reinforced by the charade last March in which he "uncovered" malfeasence, ran to the White House to alert Trump and have a press conference, only to find out that it was the White House that fed him the info. So, forgive me if Nunes credibility is severely lacking.
I tire of the political theatrics from congress. My frustration grows during moments like these when it appears there may be real issues to resolve. Political drama being injected by those claiming to want to solve it doesn't help us reach any solution.
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
Per Trey Gowdy
As I have said repeatedly, I also remain 100 percent confident in Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The contents of this memo do not - in any way - discredit his investigation.
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
Paul Ryan also said essentially that yesterday. And I believe I alluded to it as well earlier in this thread. So I'm not sure if that was supposed to be a "gotcha" moment for you? If so, good job!
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
If you mean Steele's participation, then this is false, as has been shown to you multiple times. Steele did not become involved until after Trump had secured the nomination. Congress has the proof of all of this in the form of bank records. There is a money trail for everything.
Timeline
Perkins, Coie was the law firm representing the Hillary Campaign/DNC
Feb 2016 - Bush dropped out of the R-primary. Bush's campaign was funded by billionaire Paul Singer a former Cayman Islands-based hedge fund manager who used dubious means to acquire his wealth. He also bought the Washington Free Beacon. They had hired GPS Fusion to do oppo research on Trump. This is, I believe what you keep referring to. This contract with GPS FU formally ended May 2016. Singer/Free Beacon said under oath they had nothing to do with the hiring of Steele.
Apr 2016 -- seeing the writing on the wall (Rubio dropped out in Mar/Cruz in May, which left Trump as last candidate), GPS FU contacted Perkins, Coie about continuing its oppo research on Trump. That month (April 2016) Perkins Coie, using money from the Clinton campaign and DNC, hired Fusion GPS. Marc Elias, a Perkins Coie partner and general counsel for both the campaign and DNC, was the bagman (the Clintons always have a bagman). All of this is confirmed by FEC filings.
June 2016 -- GPS FU hired Christopher Steele who is purported to be a former British intelligence officer (and his London-based firm, Orbis Business Intelligenc). We know this from Steele disclosures in court filings in a lawsuit. Steele said he worked for Fusion GPS from June through Nov 2016.
June 20: Steele wrote the first memo of his "dossier." This was the peeing prostitutes story
So, this claim you keep making about who originally hired Steele is wrong, as been demonstrated to you multiple times in the past.
Further, all of this began in this forum with you and other leftist posters feigning concern with purported "Russian interference" in the 2016 election. Well here it is for you on a silver platter. DNC/Hillary money went to Perkins Coie, then to GPS FU, then to Steele, then to Russians. We know who did it, why they did it and who paid for it. This is concrete proof of Russian collusion in the election. But now, none of you care anymore about "Russian collusion." How do you account for that?
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
Actually, I was pointing out that Gowdy seems reasonable on this. Just a few posts earlier you were praising him. That's all. Gowdy also thinks that it's important to know who's behind the dodgy dossier (Carter Paige used that a lot) and if it was used for FISA consideration. Seems reasonable as well. You know, we can actually agree on an item or two.
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
I think you meant, "how's that for hi-jinks?"
So money went from Steele to the Russians? Seems counter intuitive to me.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
We also know from Bruce Oher that Steele hate severe personal hatred for Trump and was willing to do anything to keep him from becoming president.
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
So, he's a patriot?
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
He's a liar
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
What the FISA process does is give legal cover to an unconstitutional act.
Given how easily that process was subverted here, for purely partisan, political purposes, it does make you wonder why we would they insist on re-authorizing another section of FISA (702) that has even greater potential for abuse.
Given how easily that process was subverted here, for purely partisan, political purposes, it does make you wonder why we would they insist on re-authorizing another section of FISA (702) that has even greater potential for abuse.
Last edited:
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
I understand the circle the wagons mentality and the desire to protect your people, but at some point you have to take a stand for the Constitution itself and the rule of law. Otherwise, you never had any business occupying that job
In his tweet here, probably worth noting that he makes no dispute of any of the facts in the memo
In his tweet here, probably worth noting that he makes no dispute of any of the facts in the memo
Last edited:
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Also, with regard to Steele, there is more coming.
You dont seem aware that the FBI fired him/cut him loose for breach of trust and for lying to them? (recall the charge against Flynn was for lying to them).
In addition, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Grassley and Sen. Graham made an 8-page criminal referral to DOJ with regard to Steele.
This memo is supposed to be released (in a redacted form of course) soon.
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
Not a shock. My understanding was that the Steele dossier was a combination from various sources and it was treated much like someone researching a topic might use wikipedia - meaning I will use that source for something but go to a more solid source to verify a fact. Carter Paige was on the FBI's radar as far back as '13, right?
To be honest I could see 85% of the dossier being accurate but 15% of it being knowingly wrongfully provided by those wanting to sow distrust in the US.
How would you classify Soros contributing millions to support the libs?
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
You mean the guy who's been a US citizen since 1961?
It seems to me that his donations are informed by his survival of Nazi Hungary. Makes sense to me.
And that is true. Only the results of the investigation could discredit Mueller.
If that is the case, you shouldn't have any complaints about an investigation of the FBI.
In regard to "The Memo," here are my thoughts. First, the allegations in it are a big deal. If true, you have FBI personnel submitting information they know to be BS to the FISA court and obviously for political reasons. It should be enough to get people fired, disbarred, and perhaps charged criminally. If we were talking about anybody but a Trump associate, the ACLU and civil libertarian types would be crapping in their pants over this.
Second, the attempts to put this on the Republicans who originally hired Fusion GPS is garbage. The sleazy part of this story is Steele dossier, and that was entirely the work of Democrats. Sorry, Barry.
Third, the whining about its release destroying national security and the intelligence community is almost surely horse crap. That whole narrative should be discredited, though I'm sure it won't be treated as such.
Fourth, I know very little about the FISA system, but I sense that the process is pretty one-sided based on the fact that the court obviously didn't apply much scrutiny or ask many questions about the evidence the FBI submitted. I know the approval rate for warrant requests is over 99 percent, and of course, it conducts itself in secret ex parte hearings. I understand why it operates that way, and it's for good reason. However, a system like that is asking to be abused, and it needs to be balanced. Somebody needs to be at these hearings to advocate for the rights of the person on whom the government wants to spy. These hearings need to be at least somewhat adversarial.
Now for the other side of this.
First, this memo is partisan accusation, not evidence. That doesn't mean it's BS. However, it does mean that it has to be approached with a significant degree of skepticism. We haven't seen the actual evidence that supports the memo and haven't seen any potential controverting evidence or evidence to provide context. In other words, we shouldn't judge anybody yet, even the people specifically named.
Second, assuming that the allegations are true, this is not damning on the FBI as a whole. It's damning on a fairly small but powerful group of people. Trying to exploit this to discredit the entire agency is foolish and will backfire.
Third, assuming that the allegations are true, this is not damning of Robert Mueller or his investigation. Some will try to delegitimize his work based on this. That's a diversion. There's no evidence that he had anything to do with any of this or that it forms the basis for his investigation.
In short, the Memo is disturbing, but we should all be in "wait and see" mode, not "get a rope" mode or "it's no big deal" mode.
Second, the attempts to put this on the Republicans who originally hired Fusion GPS is garbage. The sleazy part of this story is Steele dossier, and that was entirely the work of Democrats. Sorry, Barry.
Third, the whining about its release destroying national security and the intelligence community is almost surely horse crap. That whole narrative should be discredited, though I'm sure it won't be treated as such.
Fourth, I know very little about the FISA system, but I sense that the process is pretty one-sided based on the fact that the court obviously didn't apply much scrutiny or ask many questions about the evidence the FBI submitted. I know the approval rate for warrant requests is over 99 percent, and of course, it conducts itself in secret ex parte hearings. I understand why it operates that way, and it's for good reason. However, a system like that is asking to be abused, and it needs to be balanced. Somebody needs to be at these hearings to advocate for the rights of the person on whom the government wants to spy. These hearings need to be at least somewhat adversarial.
Now for the other side of this.
First, this memo is partisan accusation, not evidence. That doesn't mean it's BS. However, it does mean that it has to be approached with a significant degree of skepticism. We haven't seen the actual evidence that supports the memo and haven't seen any potential controverting evidence or evidence to provide context. In other words, we shouldn't judge anybody yet, even the people specifically named.
Second, assuming that the allegations are true, this is not damning on the FBI as a whole. It's damning on a fairly small but powerful group of people. Trying to exploit this to discredit the entire agency is foolish and will backfire.
Third, assuming that the allegations are true, this is not damning of Robert Mueller or his investigation. Some will try to delegitimize his work based on this. That's a diversion. There's no evidence that he had anything to do with any of this or that it forms the basis for his investigation.
In short, the Memo is disturbing, but we should all be in "wait and see" mode, not "get a rope" mode or "it's no big deal" mode.
I've read it ... I can hardly disagree.
I did not see Mueller implicated in the memo, so why not? Plus, Gowdy is my favorite. Hate to see him go.
Although I do not always agree with you, you are the Hemingway of this board.
You might want to let the FBI and DOJ folks that have been fired and demoted that they have a right to get their jobs back.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
This small but powerful group are very wealthy, veteran careerists that have been around for decades.
Comey worked as a US attorney under both the Clinton and Bush administrations. He made millions at Lockheed and Bridgewater.
McCabe has been with the FBI for 22 years. Rosenstein has been with the DOJ since the early 90's.
Comey, Brennan, Clapper....all of these people have access to the world's most sophisticated surveillance technology. Following Snowden's revelations, everyone knows about the enormous feeral data storage facility in Utah. What you may not realize is the government has an even larger geo-spatial facility in Virginia. The government has the ability to not only track your communication and transactions, they also have the ability to track the location of any human being that carries a GPS chip via their phone, vehicle, or even clothing if a chip is embedded. In the wrong hands, such technologies can be used to manage both personnel and supply chains (drugs? weapons?) as well as carry out surveillance. This is used to fight terrorism, but the potential to use these tools for lucrative criminal activity is theoretically possible.
The questions you have to begin asking are why would these men, financially set, knowledgeable and experienced with respect to the law, etc., conspire to manipulate the legal process for the purpose of rigging or overturning an election? Did they do this for ideological reasons? I find this difficult to believe. More likely, in my opinion, they currently have tremendous power as a result of the tools at their disposal, and viewed Trump as a potential threat to this power.
If they were willing to to risk everything to hold their positions of power, just what type of benefits were they reaping from their positions?
It can be argued that what they did with respect to the elections was treason - a serious crime. But it can be speculated that they are hiding activities that may be even worse. The swamp is going to need a good scrubbing.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
