The Memo Release Thread

I thought this was going to be a big deal. I think it is.

But we still have everyone who doesn't like Trump saying this is false, so nothing really has changed.


*shrugs*

Just goes to show what people really believe in.

And it ain't truth or justice.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Yep even Comey is tweeting the same thing. Funny how lawyers know enough about weasels to give facts about them.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I don't think it's necessarily false, but it does appear that it does not say what may think it says.

In fact, it appears to show exactly the opposite of what many claimed it would. It states the dossier was not used to get the warrants.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: DBCowboy

I don't think it's necessarily false, but it does appear that it does not say what may think it says.

In fact, it appears to show exactly the opposite of what many claimed it would. It states the dossier was not used to get the warrants.

seriously?

WOW you people are literally crazy!!

a reply to: GuidedKill

They really do live in an alternative reality.

It's a good thing, ultimately being on the wrong side of all of this will shatter their perfect little world.

The left are only expediting their own rapid political demise here.

a reply to: Assassin82

Also, I feel like numerous guilty verdicts are the only way we can ever rebuild trust and faith in BOTH our government and justice system.

I think prosecutions for the proper and appropriate crimes -- which would seem to be many -- are only the beginning. We cannot trust any government or justice system in which we have no power.

We must return to transparency, the burden of proof must be on government for anything and everything they do, and the citizens must have investigatory powers and the authority to charge offending officials.

The media doesn’t count...journalistic integrity will never return.

I'm sure many people thought the same during the days of "Yellow Journalism," but with strict standards, the Fourth Estate regained its credibility... for a while. But that requires the people to demand excellence and nothing less. And, unfortunately, as journalistic standards fell away, instead of demanding better, the people picked sides. The integrity of the people has to be part of the equation.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: DBCowboy

I don't think it's necessarily false, but it does appear that it does not say what may think it says.

In fact, it appears to show exactly the opposite of what many claimed it would. It states the dossier was not used to get the warrants.

I’m in a place/position where I can’t really look at the whole memo and decipher it completely. Could you elaborate on that for me?

I’m looking at the memo as a presumptuous accusation that may or may not lead to a congressional investigation or special counsel to verify or condemn its merit.

originally posted by: Willtell
You poor deceived folks are just listening to one distorted side of the story.

This same guy, the dishonorable Nunes, was caught colluding with Trump


He most likely colluded with Trump and designed this distorted memo.

A partisan memo of a political hack is NOT evidence of anything

Like when Debbie Wasserman Schultz did Hillary’s dirty work and made sure to keep Bernie Sanders from winning the primary?

a reply to: Assassin82

The claim being made was that the Steel dossier was used to get the FISA warrants and that is proof of wrongdoing on the part of the DoJ.

The memo states, and I am paraphrasing, that the dossier was considered and used to further the investigation in to certain matters, which is not illegal or corrupt in and of itself, but it was not used in the actual application for those warrants.

Which debunks a very popular talking point.

Now it appears, from what I have read, that the new narrative that is building is that there would never had been a FISA warrant had the dossier not been created.

That could be very well true, but that does not mean what occurred was illegal or sign of corruption. The DoJ/FBI simply followed a lead and it took the investigation where it lead.

The sands are quickly shifting and it's interesting to see it happen in real time.

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: DBCowboy

I don't think it's necessarily false, but it does appear that it does not say what may think it says.

In fact, it appears to show exactly the opposite of what many claimed it would. It states the dossier was not used to get the warrants.

seriously?

WOW you people are literally crazy!!

It was stated that the Dossier was not used in the application for warrants.

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

Guess I'll take crazy over stupid.

originally posted by: Willtell
You [snip] folks are just listening to one distorted side of the story.

Not exactly. The other side has had their say too. And now that the memo is released to the public, they can address it freely.

This same guy, the dishonorable Nunes, was caught colluding with Trump

If they were "colluding" to get around massive entrenched criminal corruption, then I'm okay with that. I'm willing to wait and see how this plays out. Especially with the IG report.

A partisan memo of a political hack is NOT evidence of anything

True. But we both know there is far more information and presumably evidence to come. It's not over yet.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: DBCowboy

I don't think it's necessarily false, but it does appear that it does not say what may think it says.

In fact, it appears to show exactly the opposite of what many claimed it would. It states the dossier was not used to get the warrants.

seriously?

WOW you people are literally crazy!!

It was stated that the Dossier was not used in the application for warrants.

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

Guess I'll take crazy over stupid.

www.foxnews.com...

The memo pointed out that in December 2017, then FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe testified that “no surveillance warrant would have been sought” from the FISA court “without the Steele dossier information.”

The memo also shows that Steele was eventually cut off from the FBI for being chatty with the media. It says he was terminated in October 2016 as an FBI source “for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations—an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI.” 

originally posted by: ausername
a reply to: Ahabstar

Nicely done!

THE seed is planted.

Reading recent posting on logic....that seed didn’t take long to bear fruit at all.

originally posted by: ausername

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: DBCowboy

I don't think it's necessarily false, but it does appear that it does not say what may think it says.

In fact, it appears to show exactly the opposite of what many claimed it would. It states the dossier was not used to get the warrants.

seriously?

WOW you people are literally crazy!!

It was stated that the Dossier was not used in the application for warrants.

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

Guess I'll take crazy over stupid.

www.foxnews.com...

The memo pointed out that in December 2017, then FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe testified that “no surveillance warrant would have been sought” from the FISA court “without the Steele dossier information.”

The memo also shows that Steele was eventually cut off from the FBI for being chatty with the media. It says he was terminated in October 2016 as an FBI source “for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations—an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI.” 

Ok. That does not address what I said.

a reply to: Ahabstar

Incredibly entertaining to watch isn't it?

a reply to: introvert

Whatever man. I can't help you. Best of luck

a reply to: introvert

It was stated that the Dossier was not used in the application for warrants.

I think you misunderstood... or please explain what I'm misunderstanding.

The article states that the dossier "formed an essential part" of all the FISA applications, but its political origins were "excluded" from the FISA applications.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Democrats were saying that the memo would damage national security.

Anyone see how yet?

Not even close.

Nor do I see it ending the Mueller probe since it also doesn't lay out any reason for ending it.

It also lays out carter page was not the launching point of the investigation.

a reply to: luthier

The probe will end soon. Memo was for public. Mueller was given more.

Gowdy: Nunes memo does not discredit Mueller probe in any way

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: luthier

The probe will end soon. Memo was for public. Mueller was given more.

Sure. If you say so.