House Intelligence FISA memo released: What it says

originally posted by: CharlesT

originally posted by: Jefferton

originally posted by: Thorneblood
a reply to: wakeupstupid

I wager you lot are gonna be really disappointed.

Oh, haven't you heard? This is the end of the Democratic party.

Lol, I just peed.

theweek.com...

The DNC is reportedly 'dead broke.' The RNC has nearly $40 million.

The Democratic Party is carrying more than $6 million in debt, according to year-end filings — and has just $6.5 million in the bank.

That debt is bound to grow.... especially with a sharp dropoff in donations.

originally posted by: neo96

Finally, the memo released today does not represent the sum total of what House investigators have learned in their review of the FBI and Justice Department Trump-Russia investigation. That means the fight over the memo could be replayed in the future when the Intelligence Committee decides to release more information.

What's the smell ?

Ooooh that smell
Can't you smell that smell
Ooooh that smell
The smell of death surrounds you

originally posted by: Grambler
If it is true that the fisa warrant on page wouldnt have been approved without the dossier, it is the biggest political scandal of my lifetime.

I have been saying for months, that this would be Obama using paid for oppo research from his own party to spy on his opponent with the intel community, which is far more serious than something like watergate.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Does the memo say anything about Carter Page already being under. FISA warrant since 2014, prior to the Steele Dossier due to his involvement with known Russian spies? The FISA warrant was renewed since then, and the dossier was merely corroborating evidence that Carter still needed surveillance.

Here. The Washington Examiner from August 2017: Link

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks
I love seeing all these people arguing over what the memo says, when no one has read it yet.

Your agenda is showing.

I have linked the memo above and read it.

To me this is the biggest takeaway.

First, on Page 5 , number 4 ids the most damning info. First it says in a December 2017 hearingt McCabe admitted that there would have been no fisa warrant sought without the dossier. However, that same section shows that FBI counter intel Assistant director Bill Preistap admitted that at the time of the original fisa application of Page, corroboration of the dossier was in its infancy.

It also shows that when Steele was terminated in in relationship with the FBI, a separate FBI unit admits the dossier was only minimally corroborated.

This is made even more damning by the fact that despite the fact that the DOJ and fbi knew that Steele was paid for by the DNC and hillarys team, they failed to report that to the fisa court.

So what this means is that McCabe admits that there would have been no warrant without the dossier, they knew the dossier was not corroborated, and they did not tell the fisa court that the dnc and hillarys team paid for it.

If true, its an unbelievable level of corruption.

My take away, It seems the whole thing boils down to the FISA warrant being invalid because of the bias of the people connected to it.

Which isn't really a story at all. If you're being investigated by the FBI you're going to be investigated by people of all political persuasions. I fail to see how the political leanings of people connected to the dossier make it invalid, or inadmissible for use in a warrant.

I was expecting some kind of damning evidence against someone. But it's just the popular internet theories on what happened with the dossier written up by republican staffers with no supporting evidence. No wonder Trump released it without hesitation. There's nothing really there that people haven't already been talking about.

Its not just bias though.

Bias wouyld be I dont like trump, but that doesnt affect my ability to investigate him.

This is paid oppo research info from the FBI that they knew was not corroborated being used to spy on trumps team.

How do you know some of the information in the dossier wasn't corroborated by the FBI?

And how do you know the dossier was the only thing used to get the FISA warrant? Serious questions.

It seems all this hangs on the dossier being entirely false and also the only piece of information used for the FISA warrant.

Is there any evidence of either of those, beyond this memo which has no evidence to back it up?

I know because Comey admitted months later the dossier was salacious and unverified.

I know because the memo says that a separate FBI unit admitted that it was only minimally verified.

I know because Assistant director Bill Preistap said that corroboration was in its "infancy" when the fisa warrant was granted.

As far as were other things used to get the warrant.

I assume they were. But three points.

1. The first warrant against page was denied, which is almost unheard of. This shows that the dossier which was used the second time may have been the key to push it over the top.

2. The memo says that McCabe testified that there would have been no warrant without the dossier.

3. Using the dossier at all when it was not verified to spy on the people who paid for its political opponent is outrageous, even if there was other info.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: Grambler

If it is true that the fisa warrant on page wouldnt have been approved without the dossier, it is the biggest political scandal of my lifetime.

Excuse my ignorance Grambler [ATS - Deny Ignorance! Or at least admit it

], but can you elaborate on why the dossier being used to justify that FISA warrant is such a big deal? Is it because of the fact that the democratic party funded the investigation by the intel agencies or what exactly is the crux of it? Thank you for your knowledge and analysis!

because rumors were used to gain a warrant to spy on a democratically elected president in an effort to unseat him.

That is treason.

Well this is a lie. Trump wasn't elected at the time of the warrant.

Just finished reading Gramblers very informative post then I saw this and it made LOL, for real I laughed out loud.

The ignorance is just mind boggling. TY

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: soberbacchus

That carter page travelled to Russian when it was stated. Thats the only thing that has been found provable within the Dossier.

Meaning that what he did while there is, from a legal sense, made up.

He denied meeting with representatives of Rosneft or associates Igor Sechin or Discussing US Sanctions or a Stake in an Oil Deal.

All things the Dossier claimed.

All things that he has now admitted and is part of the official congressional transcript.

You post is false.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
OK, I've read the whole memo now. One thing I noticed is, later renewals of the FISA warrant pull in Pappadopolous as well, but there was no justification for doing so. They hadn't established any contact between Page and Papp.

The overall theme of memo is that the FBI knowingly and willfully misrepresented the dossier to get the warrant. They hid the facts that Steele was passionately anti-Trump, and was being paid by the Democrats. Andrew McCabe admitted to the committee under oath that without the dossier they would not have sought the FISA warrant.

good thing that the agencies didn't set a trap for these republicans.......

a reply to: Grambler

my oh my how the heads will start rolling!

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks
I love seeing all these people arguing over what the memo says, when no one has read it yet.

Your agenda is showing.

I have linked the memo above and read it.

To me this is the biggest takeaway.

First, on Page 5 , number 4 ids the most damning info. First it says in a December 2017 hearingt McCabe admitted that there would have been no fisa warrant sought without the dossier. However, that same section shows that FBI counter intel Assistant director Bill Preistap admitted that at the time of the original fisa application of Page, corroboration of the dossier was in its infancy.

It also shows that when Steele was terminated in in relationship with the FBI, a separate FBI unit admits the dossier was only minimally corroborated.

This is made even more damning by the fact that despite the fact that the DOJ and fbi knew that Steele was paid for by the DNC and hillarys team, they failed to report that to the fisa court.

So what this means is that McCabe admits that there would have been no warrant without the dossier, they knew the dossier was not corroborated, and they did not tell the fisa court that the dnc and hillarys team paid for it.

If true, its an unbelievable level of corruption.

My take away, It seems the whole thing boils down to the FISA warrant being invalid because of the bias of the people connected to it.

Which isn't really a story at all. If you're being investigated by the FBI you're going to be investigated by people of all political persuasions. I fail to see how the political leanings of people connected to the dossier make it invalid, or inadmissible for use in a warrant.

I was expecting some kind of damning evidence against someone. But it's just the popular internet theories on what happened with the dossier written up by republican staffers with no supporting evidence. No wonder Trump released it without hesitation. There's nothing really there that people haven't already been talking about.

Its not just bias though.

Bias wouyld be I dont like trump, but that doesnt affect my ability to investigate him.

This is paid oppo research info from the FBI that they knew was not corroborated being used to spy on trumps team.

How do you know some of the information in the dossier wasn't corroborated by the FBI?

And how do you know the dossier was the only thing used to get the FISA warrant? Serious questions.

It seems all this hangs on the dossier being entirely false and also the only piece of information used for the FISA warrant.

Is there any evidence of either of those, beyond this memo which has no evidence to back it up?

I know because Comey admitted months later the dossier was salacious and unverified.

I know because the memo says that a separate FBI unit admitted that it was only minimally verified.

I know because Assistant director Bill Preistap said that corroboration was in its "infancy" when the fisa warrant was granted.

As far as were other things used to get the warrant.

I assume they were. But three points.

1. The first warrant against page was denied, which is almost unheard of. This shows that the dossier which was used the second time may have been the key to push it over the top.

2. The memo says that McCabe testified that there would have been no warrant without the dossier.

3. Using the dossier at all when it was not verified to spy on the people who paid for its political opponent is outrageous, even if there was other info.

They are either not smart enough to grasp what you’re saying or they’re ignoring it...


Both are equally scary.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: RadioRobert

I think you may find this interesting and not misunderstand me saying Obama is innocent (which I am not saying)

In 2002, The FISA court complained that FBI agents made more than 75 false or misleading claims to secure warrants; a top FBI counterrorism official was prohibited from ever appearing there again. The court also rebuffed Attorney General John Ashcroft’s proposal to radically transform its purpose by making it easier for prosecutors to use FISA warrants to sweep up evidence for criminal prosecutions.

www.usatoday.com...

I don't think anybody will claim FISA abuse only started in 2016. That doesn't excuse what they did to Trump and his people.

What I find most depressing;


The memo release didn't matter a tinkers damn.


The leftists still think Trump and all of us are evil.

Hillary and Obama are blessed saints.


SMH


I wonder if anything will ever change.

a reply to: AboveBoard

The initial request was in 2016 when it was denied.

That straight up went after Trump.

Then their tactic was change to guilt by association.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Using the dossier at all when it was only minimally corroborated is an absurd level of corruption.

So far, we know things such as Page was in russia is true, which was public knowledge.

Thats about it regarding page.

Seeing as how this was a known paid for oppo research by trumps opponents, the threshold for it being used as the lynchpin for a fisa warrant to spy on trumps team should have had to be very high; not a document in its infancy of being confirmed.

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: Xcathdra

You can have valid supporting evidence of a crime that does not reach probable cause. Particularly given the weight necessary in front of the FISC (in theory).
I'm not saying what they did wasn't hinky. This is a huge deal!
I am just saying we do not know that they didn't have any other supporting evidence. In fact, the simple fact we know it was denied earlier means they had other evidence to put before the court. It was deemed insufficient for the purpose. Page is familiar to the FBI before his volunteerism for Trump.

and it was Carter Page and the FISA warrant that started this. Given the lies told about the dossier (or failing to tell the judge the info was bs) his legal situation becomes a lot harder, if not damn near impossible, for Mueller to make now.

As for other evidence that is my point. The dossier was the single item used that clinched the FISA warrant. The dossier was the sole item used that resulted in the warrant being issued. Even McCabe seems to state this in his comments in the memo. Without the dossier they had nothing to obtain a warrant.

My point is the initial info was not enough to get the warrant. The dossier was enough to get a warrant. Given that which items supported which? Did the initial documents support the dossier or did the dossier stand on its own? I make this argument because the first 2 times they tried to get a FISA warrant it was denied and from what we know the information used was not related to the dossier info.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: soberbacchus

You say corroboration of the Dossier was in it's infancy. You say both the dossier was minimally "Corroborated" at the time. (Note I read both of the same things in the memo) THEN you say the Dossier "the dossier was not corroborated". Which is it?

The memo was corroborated by a news report.

The topic was Dossier, not memo.

a reply to: DBCowboy

It better damn well change.

From the FEC investigating the DNC and that party.

To cleaning house at the FBI and DOJ.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: DBCowboy

It better damn well change.

From the FEC investigating the DNC and that party.

To cleaning house at the FBI and DOJ.

How many leftists are saying, "Gee, the memo is right. We need to clean up our act and clean house!"

None.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: AboveBoard

The initial request was in 2016 when it was denied.

That straight up went after Trump.

Then their tactic was change to guilt by association.

No. He’s been under surveillance since 2014. The memo leaves that out. I wonder why??

originally posted by: DBCowboy
What I find most depressing;


The memo release didn't matter a tinkers damn.


The leftists still think Trump and all of us are evil.

Hillary and Obama are blessed saints.


SMH


I wonder if anything will ever change.

We knew the left would react in this manner and thats fine. My concern is the judicial systems response to this information and what comes of it. The only opinions that matter right now are the courts.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
What's really interesting to me is that this memo is actually marked as "Top Secret"...I am baffled at why though.

Me too. I think Nunes likes to imagine himself as secret-agent-man.

Hmmmm.
It seems to me that it was the FBI, Democratic lawmakers and the MSM that were complaining that release of the memo would compromise national security.

Now you say that Nunes thinks he is a secret agent to make light of the fact that the FBI called it super secret.