Devin Nunes’ Anti-FBI Memo Names James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, and Andrew McCabe

A controversial Republican memo alleging surveillance abuse specifically names FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein along with former FBI Director James Comey.

Capitol Hill sources on both sides of the aisle say the memo’s release is only a matter of time. And when it comes out, these current and former officials — all GOP bêtes noires — are likely to face even more criticism from the right over their involvement in FBI counterintelligence work.

www.thedailybeast.com...

Now granted, this is from anonymous sources, so I guess we will have to wait and see.

But it is news worthy in that this is the first I have seen thaat actual namees that were in the memo were leaked.

Honestly, its no surprise that these are the people named.

However, it does show the magnitude of how serious the claims inside the memo may be.

I hope that the underlying evidence for the memo is released (as much as can be) as well. I Understand the need for keeping things classified, but this case seems to be exceptional, and I think at this point the credibility of the FBI and ithers is being questioned so much that not releasing that info is more of a risk than allowing a few classified documents to be public.

Release the memo, release the fisa applications, and release any other relevant intel behind it.

originally posted by: Grambler

Release the memo, release the fisa applications, and release any other relevant intel behind it.

are you sure you aren't a Russian bot?

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Grambler

Release the memo, release the fisa applications, and release any other relevant intel behind it.

are you sure you aren't a Russian bot?

I think he could be.
I mean the CEO's of twitter and facebook say that I am a Russian bot, so there.
I mean if we can't trust these two fine gentlemen....

a reply to: Grambler

If my bias is confirmed and indeed collusion at the highest levels of government occurred with the M.O being to spy on team-Trump during the campaign, then those names are what I would consider 'under-the-bus-fodder'.

Hillary, Obama, FBI, Mainstream media, Soros - since these are the key players, they need the most light shining on them because only an idiot would believe they were not engaged in a deceptive campaign strategy - they were at the helm calling the shots and guiding all the 'Hillary has a 93% chance-of-winning very fake news polls'

Release the entire #in Kraken - all of it.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Grambler

Release the memo, release the fisa applications, and release any other relevant intel behind it.

are you sure you aren't a Russian bot?

I think he could be.
I mean the CEO's of twitter and facebook say that I am a Russian bot, so there.
I mean if we can't trust these two fine gentlemen....

Yeah, I always thought I was an American of mainly Irish & Polish descent, but If Mr. Zuckerberg thinks I'm a Russian Bot, who am I to argue with such an authority?

The news spawned the hashtag #releasethememo, with actors ranging from WikiLeaks to the ACLU to Michael Flynn Jr. calling for the memo to be made public.

Now they gone and did it.

ACLU!

Them Russian bots!

a reply to: Grambler

Without the FISA warrant i see little value in this memo.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Grambler

Without the FISA warrant i see little value in this memo.

I agree that I would like that released as well.

Grassley, Jordan, gaetz and other have called for the release of the underlying intel of the memo.

In fact Gaetz (I think it was him) said last night that the hold up on releasing the memo is that they want to make sure it is sourced properly and that the relevant material proving it can be released as well.

Now no doubt that means things will be redacted, etc.

We will see what actually gets released.

However, as can be seen from the Boyd letter from the DOJ yesterday, they want nothing released gto the public. And as Grassley said yesterday, the FBI and doj have stonewalled congress at just about every step.

So releasing the memo at the very least could stir enough of a clamor for the relevant intel to be released to the public, something that many republicans are calling fro, and the FBI and many democrats are fighting totth and nail against.

There's a lot of value here.

In November 2016, Louise Mensch reported on the news website Heat Street that, after an initial June 2016 FBI request was denied, the FISA court had granted a more narrowly-focused October request from the FBI "to examine the activities of 'U.S. persons' in Donald Trump’s campaign with ties to Russia".[71] On 12 January 2017, BBC journalist Paul Wood reported that, in response to an April 2016 tip from a foreign intelligence agency to the CIA about "money from the Kremlin going into the US presidential campaign", a joint taskforce had been established including representatives of the FBI, the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Justice, the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Security Agency; and in June 2016 lawyers from the Department of Justice had applied to the FISA court for "permission to intercept the electronic records from two Russian banks". According to Wood, this application was rejected, as was a more narrowly focussed request in July, and the order was finally granted by a different FISA judge on 15 October, three weeks before the presidential election.[72] On January 19 the New York Times reported that one of its sources had claimed "intelligence reports based on some of the wiretapped communications had been provided to the White House".[73]

On 13 March, the Senate Intelligence Committee demanded that the Trump administration provide evidence to support the US president's claim,[74] and on 16 March the committee reported that they had seen no evidence to support Trump's accusation that the Obama administration tapped his phones during the 2016 presidential campaign.[75]

en.wikipedia.org...

Those are the same snip hats that marched out Simpson/Steele and that foreign paid $1,000,000 dossier.

And the tie that binds it all together.

The President may authorize, through the Attorney General, electronic surveillance without a court order for the period of one year, provided that it is only to acquire foreign intelligence information,[5] that it is solely directed at communications or property controlled exclusively by foreign powers,[6]that there is no substantial likelihood that it will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party,and that it be conducted only in accordance with defined minimization procedures.[7]

en.wikipedia.org...

At the behest of a political party.

The FISA system was abused.

The FBI became nothing more than the Gestapo for the party of the donkey.

This is why they FEAR the MEMO.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Grambler

Without the FISA warrant i see little value in this memo.

The memo is forcing more people to confront the fact that the FBI and DOJ were misused to attack Obama's political opponents.

The FISA warrant will be the final nail in the coffin. We already know the dossier was used to get the warrant. I wholly expect the warrant will show that the FBI misrepresented the dossier. Either they concealed the facts that it was compiled by a political research firm, and paid for by the DNC, or else they lied and said the information had been verified by US intelligence sources. That is why they won't release the warrant. If the basis for the warrant becomes known, the investigation will collapse and the indictments will be dismissed.

Criminal sanctions follows violations of electronic surveillance by intentionally engaging in electronic surveillance under the color of law or through disclosing information known to have been obtained through unauthorized surveillance. The penalties for either act are fines up to US$10,000, up to five years in jail, or both.[15]

In addition, the statute creates a cause of action for private individuals whose communications were unlawfully monitored. The statute permits actual damages of not less than $1,000 or $100 per day. In addition, that statute authorizes punitive damages and an award of attorney's fees.[16] Similar liability is found under the subchapter pertaining to physical searches. In both cases, the statute creates an affirmative defense for law enforcement personnel acting within their official duties and pursuant to a valid court order. Presumably, such a defense is not available to those operating exclusively under presidential authorization.

Trump and company can take them to court over this. BIGGLY.

Apparently Nunes never even saw the classified information he claims supports his memo.

But trust me. I have the proof right here. 📜

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: Grambler

If my bias is confirmed and indeed collusion at the highest levels of government occurred with the M.O being to spy on team-Trump during the campaign, then those names are what I would consider 'under-the-bus-fodder'.

Hillary, Obama, FBI, Mainstream media, Soros - since these are the key players, they need the most light shining on them because only an idiot would believe they were not engaged in a deceptive campaign strategy - they were at the helm calling the shots and guiding all the 'Hillary has a 93% chance-of-winning very fake news polls'

Release the entire #in Kraken - all of it.

That is what I would consider conspiratorial fodder.

Only an idiot would believe in what you posted without clear evidence. Unless, of course, you only believe that which confirms your biases.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Apparently Nunes never even saw the classified information he claims supports his memo.

But trust me. I have the proof right here. 📜

Based on what, a letter from Boyd saying that, who himself hasnt even seen the memo?

So somehow a guy form the DOJ that hasnt seen the memo knows that Nunes hasnt seen the intel that the memo is based on, despite boyd not having seen the memo himself.

Yep, makes sense.

In November 2016, Louise Mensch reported on the news website Heat Street that, after an initial June 2016 FBI request was denied, the FISA court had granted a more narrowly-focused October request from the FBI "to examine the activities of 'U.S. persons' in Donald Trump’s campaign with ties to Russia".

Don't forget people.

It began by going after Trump SPECIFICALLY.

Then they turned it in to guilt by association!

I love jumping to conclusions whilst simultaneously giving zero flux what people may interpret from it.

It...it brings me joy.

Like now for instance.

a reply to: introvert

Only an idiot would believe in what you posted without clear evidence. Unless, of course, you only believe that which confirms your biases.

Only an idiot calls opposition research 'intelligence', that the usual suspect believe wholeheartedly BECAUSE of bias.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

Only an idiot would believe in what you posted without clear evidence. Unless, of course, you only believe that which confirms your biases.

Only an idiot calls opposition research 'intelligence', that the usual suspect believe wholeheartedly BECAUSE of bias.

I agree. Apparently you and others have something in common with the people you describe.

Not sure you did yourself any favors there.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

Only an idiot would believe in what you posted without clear evidence. Unless, of course, you only believe that which confirms your biases.

Only an idiot calls opposition research 'intelligence', that the usual suspect believe wholeheartedly BECAUSE of bias.

I agree. Apparently you and others have something in common with the people you describe.

Not sure you did yourself any favors there.

Well that's a FAIL.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Grambler

Without the FISA warrant i see little value in this memo.

When the FBI refused to answer the question (during Congeessional hearings) of whether the Dossier was used in getting the FISA warrant... they answered the question.
If it wasn't used, they would have had no reason to avoid answering the question.