House Intelligence FISA memo released: What it says

originally posted by: pavil

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...

No wonder the Dems wanted to keep this from the public. Their claims of National Security as the reason for not releasing the memo are garbage. Can't wait to see their spin on this.


The people who signed off on all the FISA requests better get used to liking hot water, because they are now officially in it up to their necks.

Let's find out who will talk and implicate others............


BOOM!

I seriously doubt anything will come of this though I could be wrong.

First off the he said she said that is going to happen because of the lack of context alone is going to be going on for months.

But the fact it has happened over and over again through many administration's abusing fisa courts is going completely missed.

In fact nunes and gowdy both chose to ignore any debate and sit on this new abuse information and yet again expand the program.

It's a classical distraction tactic. Yeah Obama probably did some shady stuff. Just like Bush, and Clinton.

Notice how the fisa act isn't being debated. It's the current abusers.

originally posted by: FamCore


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!

FISA warrants in general allow an agency to skirt the 4th amendment, and if the information used was politically motivated bias with basically zero validity I find it surprising you don't seem to think that would be important.

a reply to: Willtell

Colluding with Trump???

Do you know how morose that sounds? He is the freaking POTUS. He's not proven to do anything illegal. In fact, the evidence seems to be pointing in exactly the opposite direction.

Colluded to what? Uphold the Constitution? The HUMANITY!

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Willtell
This is just what we knew it would be

A defense of Trump by his defenders distorting reality

Like cutting up puzzle pieces to make them fit where they don’t belong.

Trump and everything he does is a LIE!

Trump and everything he touches is a LIE

Trump and everyone surrounding him is a LIAR

Your partisanship is unreal.

McCabe tetsified that there would have been no fisa warrant without the dossier.

That is a disgusting abuse of power. The fact that you and others have no problem with that is truly frightening.

If trump would use his FBI tp spy on his opponents based of a dossier he paid for that was known to not be corroborated, you would be screaming the loudest.

So what!

It’s a straw man argument.

Filled, I'm sure and loaded with distortions from a person who already has been caught colluding with, guess who?

Trump

It should be easy fro Mcacabe or the FBI to prove McCabe did not testify to that.

If he did, its game over.

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Quick question to anyone;

Do the presidential daily briefs include FISA warrant applications?

Not totally clear of how he is informed, but I am almost positive that the President would be informed as they happened.


......of course with Obama it will be " I just found out about it in the news, just like you did".

That's why Nunes was at the WH looking at records... Shall we wait for the other shoes to drop? This is being slow-rolled to everybody so there isn't a total breakdown.

a reply to: Nikola014

Ya no kidding.. how does this story of corruption threaten national security lol.

Let's be honest for a moment folks, is anyone even surprised? I bet even the hardest skeptics are not surprised. They always knew deep down in their hearts what was going on but their hatred for Trump wouldn't allow them to see past their own bias.

This should NOT be a partisan issue at all..

originally posted by: Willtell
This is just what we knew it would be

A defense of Trump by his defenders distorting reality

Like cutting up puzzle pieces to make them fit where they don’t belong.

Trump and everything he does is a LIE!

Trump and everything he touches is a LIE

Trump and everyone surrounding him is a LIAR

Bejeezus, man!

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: Xcathdra

It does not say that there was nothing else. Just that without the dossier they knew they wouldn't get it.

and with your legal background (serious and not being sarcastic), when you have information that doesnt meet probable cause to obtain a warrant, what do you have left?

The dossier was used and the circular media reporting was used (which ironically came from the dossier). If the info you have to start is not enough and the dossier was enough, and the dossier is bunk, you are left with?

nothing.

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.

Initial Read....A lot of nothing to me written in a way to get the base all excited, especially given how much I believe the writers like to cherry pick/spin things.

About the biggest premise. Which lets assume is 100% accurate for a minute. Under existing case law, they werent legally obligated to tell the FISC that unless it rendered the information itself unreliable. Which would lead me to believe in this case even if they thought he didnt like Trump, the information was reliable. I do think they should have to disclose the intentions behind the source, but this in and of itself doesnt appear to be a bombshell to me. Especially if they found the information to be accurate.

They do confirm that the "coffee boy" Papadopolous event is the one that triggered the probe.

I would like to see the FBI declassify the entire 60-100 page document. Thats where the real excitement is.

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...

Did Maxine Waters call the memo 'Racist' yet?

originally posted by: luthier


Notice how the fisa act isn't being debated.

Sounds like we have the Big Story at last.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Did Maxine Waters call the memo 'Racist' yet?

Outrageous!
This is worse than I imagined, the stuff of third world dictatorships!

I want to see criminal indictments today!

Most people will read that and be like me....

TOP SECRET?

Really?

a reply to: trb71

when you discuss people doing illegal things, how, exactly, does one "cherry pick"?

You mean only picking the worst crimes? What does that mean, to say its "cherry picked"?

originally posted by: RickinVa
Most people will read that and be like me....

TOP SECRET?

Really?

I am curious what sources and methods Democrats keep saying were a national security risk and reason not to release the memo.

I saw nothing in there to support that argument. I know the FBI made one change, to remove one persons name. but the rest?


Also - Democratic memo is 10 pages and will go through the process to release from what I am seeing.

originally posted by: Xcathdra


The dossier was used and the circular media reporting was used (which ironically came from the dossier). If the info you have to start is not enough and the dossier was enough, and the dossier is bunk, you are left with?

nothing.

The game of telephone, who is the person who schemed this up?

"Heads need to roll"