Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Post Reply
User avatar
UpstateSCHokie
Posts: 11907
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm

Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by UpstateSCHokie »

Pathetic.

This is not a complicated story. It's real simple.

A fake opposition research document (the dossier) was produced by the Hillary campaign who worked with like-minded partisans in the FBI and DOJ to use it as an excuse to get a FISA warrant so they could spy on the Trump campaign. The party in power weaponized the DOJ & FBI (not to mention the IRS) in order to prevent a political opponent from winning an election. The evidence shows there was extreme prejudice on the part of the key actors (Christopher Steele, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Peter Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Andrew McCabe, Jim Comey, and Rod Rosenstein).

So why can't the media just report this story in a simple and concise manner so their viewers can easily understand it? Oh I think we know why. Can't let low infos know the truth and jeopardize the Democrats chances in the midterms.

And yes, this is proof that there really is a "Deep State" (which only requires a few well placed partisans to be effective). And yes this is worse than Watergate because this is a blatant abuse of power for purely political reasons.

=====================================

NBC Panic Attack Peddles Spin: ‘Partisan Grenade’ Memo Could Trigger ‘Constitution Crisis’
By Curtis Houck | February 3, 2018 1:11 AM EST

Following an exhausting day of the liberal media being in a constant state of panic after the release of the Republican House Intelligence Committee memo, Friday’s NBC Nightly News pulled its weight in not emphasizing the memo’s contents but how the “politically-charged” “partisan grenade” has some claiming that this will trigger “a constitutional crisis.”

Anchor Lester Holt set the tone from the opening tease, declaring that the “wild day in Washington” was triggered by the “disputed secret memo” with “npredcented disclosures” that left the self-sanctimonious James Comey furious.

The memo led the newscast with Holt knocking the “politically-charged” memo’s release “despite warnings from the head of the FBI that it would be a mistake and tonight, he's using it as ammo in his latest salvo against his own Justice Department.” So much for the memo being a giant nothingburger as some in the media have claimed.

National correspondent Peter Alexander must have taken talking points from Democratic Congressman and media fan boy Adam Schiff (Calif.), starting his portion by fretting that the memo’s arrival “comes amid months of relentless attacks by President Trump against the very people who are leading the Russia investigation.”

He also sought to discredit the memo before outlining a single thing in the memo by blasting it as “not a legal document” or “an intelligence finding.”

Alexander bemoaned that the memo was “first leaked to conservative media outlets” then only summarized the memo and offered only one direct quote (which he then used “a Democratic source” to knock down the memo).

How original. What’s so pathetically predictable is how Democrats leaking intelligence information have faced zero scrutiny while the bar for any Republican is insurmountable.

“Democrats and the intelligence community argue the memo is inaccurate and misleading..Its release unprecedented, undercutting trust between the intelligence community and members of Congress that oversee it,” he added.

Chief White House correspondent Hallie Jackson picked up moments later, starting with a bang by dubbing the memo a “partisan grenade.” Gee, one wonders if she’ll do the same when the Schiff memo comes out.

After a soundbite from a member of Congress from each party (Democrat Jackie Speier and Republican Jim Jordan), Jackson dubiously declared: “So, is the memo evidence of an anti-Trump conspiracy or an attempt to smear the Special Counsel's Russia investigation? Depends who you ask.”

Right on cue following a Schiff soundbite, Jackson promoted the apocalyptic and reckless argument from Democrats that “the memo is filled with factual errors and could bring the U.S. to the brink of a constitutional crisis.”

Wrapping up the segment with a soundbite from moderate Republican and CNBC contributor Sara Fagen, Jackson told Holt that “Democrats want their so-called counter-memo to be released as well, but it's not clear if or when a vote on that will happen” and that, in addition to wanting their memo released, they want Nunes removed.

To see the relevant transcript from February 2's NBC Nightly News, click “expand”:

NBC Nightly News
February 2, 2018
7:00 p.m. Eastern [TEASE]

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Secret Memo Revealed]

LESTER HOLT: Tonight, that disputed secret memo revealed as President Trump overrules the FBI. What it says and doesn't say about the feds, the Trump dossier and a British spy. Unprecedented disclosures blasted by James Comey as dishonest and misleading. A wild day in Washington.

(....)

7:01 p.m. Eastern

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Secret Memo Revealed]

LESTER HOLT: But we, of course, start with the firestorm raging in Washington tonight. Hours after President Tump declassified a Republican-crafted memo that tries to make the case that the FBI played fast and loose in its gathering of evidence in the Russia investigation. The President made the politically-charged memo public despite warnings from the head of the FBI that it would be a mistake and tonight, he's using it as ammo in his latest salvo against his own Justice Department. Tonight, a look at just what that memo says and the telling glimpses it offers into how the Russia investigation is proceeding. Let's start with NBC's Peter Alexander. Peter, good evening.

PETER ALEXANDER: Hey Lester, good evening to you. The release of this memo comes amid months of relentless attacks by President Trump against the very people who are leading the Russia investigation. This memo is not a legal document, not an intelligence finding and tonight, even the President's own lawyer says it's the opinion of the Republicans who wrote it. President Trump tonight defying the FBI and Justice Department. [TO PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP] Why make this memo public?

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I think it's a disgrace what's happening in our country. A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves and much worse than that.

ALEXANDER: By midday, that memo, first leaked to conservative media outlets was posted by House Republicans. It accuses senior law enforcement officials of abusing their powers to spy on a former Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page, who they suspected was a foreign agent for Russia. The memo alleges the application for a warrant relies on an unverified dossier compiled by Christopher Steele, an ex-British intelligence operative, and fails to “disclose...the role of the DNC [or] Clinton campaign in funding Steele's efforts.” But tonight, a Democratic congressional source says the court was told about Steele's political bias but may not have been specifically told that the information was financed by Democrats. A former government lawyer says what matters is whether Steele knew what he was talking about, not what motivated him.

CHUCK ROSENBERG: We shouldn't be surprised when our informants, the bases for our affidavits, are less than savory.

ALEXANDER: Democrats and the intelligence community argue the memo is inaccurate and misleading. The disputed document also reveals that Trump-appointed Justice Department officials, including Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, were among those who signed off four times on renewing warrant requests, meaning the surveillance of Carter Page was producing results. Its release unprecedented, undercutting trust between the intelligence community and members of Congress that oversee it.

JEFFREY SMITH: It's that undermining of the trust which makes it enormously more difficult for the FBI and the CIA to do their jobs.

ALEXANDER: Tonight, FBI director Christopher Wray sending a message to all his employees strongly defending his agency, making clear he's not going to leave. Peter Alexander, NBC News, the White House.

HALLIE JACKSON: I'm Hallie Jackson in Washington where that four-page memo is now a partisan grenade.

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Bitter Partisan Divide Over Declassified Memo]

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSWOMAN JACKIE SPEIER (Calif.): Intent here is to shut down the investigation.

REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN JIM JORDAN (Ohio); Four times they took this dossier and dressed it all up like it was some legitimate intelligence.

JACKSON: So, is the memo evidence of an anti-Trump conspiracy or an attempt to smear the Special Counsel's Russia investigation? Depends who you ask with the man who oversees the Special Counsel under a microscope, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

TRUMP: You figure that one out.

JACKSON: Since Rosenstein oversees the Special Counsel, Democrats worry the memo will be used as a pretext to discredit and dismiss Rosenstein and ultimately end the Special Counsel investigation.

DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN ADAM SCHIFF (Calif.): They hope to help the White House in its effort to undermine the FBI, undermine Bob Mueller, throw discredit on the government, anything but look at the Russia investigation and what the Trump campaign did.

JACKSON: Democrats argue the memo is filled with factual errors and could bring the U.S. to the brink of a constitutional crisis. Some Republicans see it differently.

REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN MARK MEADOWS (N.C.): There was nothing factually inaccurate.

REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN DEVIN NUNES (Calif.): The American citizens that are represented before this court have to be protected, and the only place that can protect them is the U.S. Congress when abuses do occur.

JACKSON: Still, others in the GOP, like Susan Collins, argue the legitimate oversight function congress should have has been “tarnished by partisanship” with House Speaker Paul Ryan cautioning this memo should not be used to “impugn the integrity of the Justice system and the FBI.”

SARA FAGEN: It's really important for Republicans to take a step back and think these are public servants. [SCREEN WIPE] We need to stop and remember they're serving the country and our language and our tone needs to be measured.

JACKSON: Democrats want their so-called counter-memo to be released as well, but it's not clear if or when a vote on that will happen. The political battle on this has gotten so heated the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee is telling NBC News late tonight he thinks the top Republican should step down from that chairmanship altogether. Lester?

HOLT: Hallie Jackson at the White House tonight, thank you.


https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/cu ... ld-trigger
Image

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
User avatar
UpstateSCHokie
Posts: 11907
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by UpstateSCHokie »

VDH lays out this whole thing in beautiful and simple context. This is how every legit news outlet should be reporting on the story. It is well worth the read.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/45 ... cking-memo

And he perfectly answers the question: "is this a scandal?"
If all this is not a scandal — then the following protocols are now considered permissible in American electoral practice and constitutional jurisprudence: An incumbent administration can freely use the FBI and the DOJ to favor one side in a presidential election, by buying its opposition research against the other candidate, using its own prestige to authenticate such a third-party oppositional dossier, and then using it to obtain court-ordered wiretaps on American citizens employed by a candidate’s campaign — and do so by deliberately misleading the court about the origins and authors of the dossier that was used to obtain the warrants.
Image

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by HokieFanDC »

UpstateSCHokie wrote:VDH lays out this whole thing in beautiful and simple context. This is how every legit news outlet should be reporting on the story. It is well worth the read.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/45 ... cking-memo

And he perfectly answers the question: "is this a scandal?"
If all this is not a scandal — then the following protocols are now considered permissible in American electoral practice and constitutional jurisprudence: An incumbent administration can freely use the FBI and the DOJ to favor one side in a presidential election, by buying its opposition research against the other candidate, using its own prestige to authenticate such a third-party oppositional dossier, and then using it to obtain court-ordered wiretaps on American citizens employed by a candidate’s campaign — and do so by deliberately misleading the court about the origins and authors of the dossier that was used to obtain the warrants.
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
User avatar
UpstateSCHokie
Posts: 11907
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by UpstateSCHokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
Do you not even accept the following as fact?
Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.
And for all we know, it was the same FISA judge that approved it each time.

==========================================


Why Did the Democrats Lie So Baldly about the Memo?
By Roger L Simon February 2, 2018

Adam Schiff, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, among seemingly dozens of Democrats, not to mention half the mainstream media, had been warning us for days that the release of the memo authored by Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee would place our national security at grave risk. "Sources and methods" would be revealed.

Now that we have seen the memo, it's clear that was an absolutely bald-faced lie of the most obvious sort. Nothing in it impacts national security in the slightest. There's no mention whatsoever of any "sources and methods."

Unless they were lobotomized, those Democrats and their dependable PR team (aka the media) must have realized they were blatantly lying to the American public. Evidently, they didn't care. How're we now supposed to trust what these people say about anything? Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

Their latest meme is "cherry picking." The memo was cherry-picked and therefore to be ignored. That's like saying a murderer who has a clean driving record and is a good cook is not a murderer. Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.

So what was up here below the surface? It can't just be the "evil party" trying to live up to its nickname, although that certainly happened.

It seems this particular lie was a last line of defense — for now — against a coming potential Armageddon for their party. This memo, bad as it is, is apparently only the first of many, a small percentage of what is to come. And the Democrats know it.

Fear is operative. Maybe panic. An entire weltanschauung is under threat — jobs, friends, self-image, who knows what. If this goes on much longer and much more comes out, some Democrats -—not apparatchik Schiff, needless to say, but others — might have to face reality and say something. A few journalists (not at CNN, but maybe someplace else) might have to report the truth. It happened with Watergate. Republicans turned against Nixon. But, of course, they're "the stupid party."

But speaking of stupid, something else occurred that few are mentioning, but may be of more significance than anything. What were these FISA judges thinking who allowed for the surveillance? They actually read the Steele dossier, one would assume. Were they imbeciles or as biased as McCabe, Strzok and the rest of that seedy FBI cabal? Whether they were told that document came from the Clinton campaign or not, it read like an outtake from the back pages of the National Enquirer — and not one of the good issues (John Edwards, etc.). The dossier was ludicrous on its face, yet the supposedly great legal minds of the FISA court accepted it as what appears to be the most important evidence for the case.

Think about that.

What we need, obviously, is the old word transparency. The public needs to see the full details of what went into the FISA decisions — and we don't need to hear any of that fake palaver about national security. Everybody's security depends on the FISA court working in a one-hundred percent unbiased manner. Otherwise we're living a nightmare.

That court, and its workings, and its personnel should be a key part of any investigation going forward. New rules and regulations have to be put in place.

FINALLY: Looking good in all this is Senator Rand Paul. He warned us about our fragile privacy. Looking especially bad, the American Civil Liberties Union who are defecating on their charter. Looking even worse: Barack Obama. He led the charge to turn the intelligence agencies against the people. Looking lost — Robert Mueller. How will he get half the country to believe anything he says at this point?

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/democra ... ldly-memo/

================================
Image

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:VDH lays out this whole thing in beautiful and simple context. This is how every legit news outlet should be reporting on the story. It is well worth the read.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/45 ... cking-memo

And he perfectly answers the question: "is this a scandal?"
If all this is not a scandal — then the following protocols are now considered permissible in American electoral practice and constitutional jurisprudence: An incumbent administration can freely use the FBI and the DOJ to favor one side in a presidential election, by buying its opposition research against the other candidate, using its own prestige to authenticate such a third-party oppositional dossier, and then using it to obtain court-ordered wiretaps on American citizens employed by a candidate’s campaign — and do so by deliberately misleading the court about the origins and authors of the dossier that was used to obtain the warrants.
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
That's the effing point. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Steele wrote the dossier because he wanted to prevent Trump from becoming president. Trump was always the target.

Also, its not that all those groups ignored protocols so much as the DOJ and FBI hid very pertinent facts from the court. They had to hide Trump as the target.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by HokieFanDC »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:VDH lays out this whole thing in beautiful and simple context. This is how every legit news outlet should be reporting on the story. It is well worth the read.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/45 ... cking-memo

And he perfectly answers the question: "is this a scandal?"
If all this is not a scandal — then the following protocols are now considered permissible in American electoral practice and constitutional jurisprudence: An incumbent administration can freely use the FBI and the DOJ to favor one side in a presidential election, by buying its opposition research against the other candidate, using its own prestige to authenticate such a third-party oppositional dossier, and then using it to obtain court-ordered wiretaps on American citizens employed by a candidate’s campaign — and do so by deliberately misleading the court about the origins and authors of the dossier that was used to obtain the warrants.
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
That's the effing point. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Steele wrote the dossier because he wanted to prevent Trump from becoming president. Trump was always the target.

Also, its not that all those groups ignored protocols so much as the DOJ and FBI hid very pertinent facts from the court. They had to hide Trump as the target.
A judge approving a warrant based solely on the dossier, and having it re-authorized multiple times without further evidence gained, would be ignoring protocols.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by awesome guy »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:VDH lays out this whole thing in beautiful and simple context. This is how every legit news outlet should be reporting on the story. It is well worth the read.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/45 ... cking-memo

And he perfectly answers the question: "is this a scandal?"
If all this is not a scandal — then the following protocols are now considered permissible in American electoral practice and constitutional jurisprudence: An incumbent administration can freely use the FBI and the DOJ to favor one side in a presidential election, by buying its opposition research against the other candidate, using its own prestige to authenticate such a third-party oppositional dossier, and then using it to obtain court-ordered wiretaps on American citizens employed by a candidate’s campaign — and do so by deliberately misleading the court about the origins and authors of the dossier that was used to obtain the warrants.
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
That's the effing point. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Steele wrote the dossier because he wanted to prevent Trump from becoming president. Trump was always the target.

Also, its not that all those groups ignored protocols so much as the DOJ and FBI hid very pertinent facts from the court. They had to hide Trump as the target.
A judge approving a warrant based solely on the dossier, and having it re-authorized multiple times without further evidence gained, would be ignoring protocols.
They used the Yahoo article that Steele also leaked/created as corroborating evidence. It was the FBI bamboozling the court. Otherwise you're saying the dossier is legit and they did target a nobody with barely any association with Trump after breaking said association and during the end of the campaign.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by HokieFanDC »

awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:VDH lays out this whole thing in beautiful and simple context. This is how every legit news outlet should be reporting on the story. It is well worth the read.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/45 ... cking-memo

And he perfectly answers the question: "is this a scandal?"
If all this is not a scandal — then the following protocols are now considered permissible in American electoral practice and constitutional jurisprudence: An incumbent administration can freely use the FBI and the DOJ to favor one side in a presidential election, by buying its opposition research against the other candidate, using its own prestige to authenticate such a third-party oppositional dossier, and then using it to obtain court-ordered wiretaps on American citizens employed by a candidate’s campaign — and do so by deliberately misleading the court about the origins and authors of the dossier that was used to obtain the warrants.
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
That's the effing point. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Steele wrote the dossier because he wanted to prevent Trump from becoming president. Trump was always the target.

Also, its not that all those groups ignored protocols so much as the DOJ and FBI hid very pertinent facts from the court. They had to hide Trump as the target.
A judge approving a warrant based solely on the dossier, and having it re-authorized multiple times without further evidence gained, would be ignoring protocols.
They used the Yahoo article that Steele also leaked/created as corroborating evidence. It was the FBI bamboozling the court. Otherwise you're saying the dossier is legit and they did target a nobody with barely any association with Trump after breaking said association and during the end of the campaign.
Have you guys actually listened to the FBI and DOJ guys that have been on the news shows. They say that the standard is US intelligence, not oppo research, not news stories.

It's certainly possible the FBI bamboozled them, but the judge would have to be lazy or complicit.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by awesome guy »

HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:VDH lays out this whole thing in beautiful and simple context. This is how every legit news outlet should be reporting on the story. It is well worth the read.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/45 ... cking-memo

And he perfectly answers the question: "is this a scandal?"
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
That's the effing point. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Steele wrote the dossier because he wanted to prevent Trump from becoming president. Trump was always the target.

Also, its not that all those groups ignored protocols so much as the DOJ and FBI hid very pertinent facts from the court. They had to hide Trump as the target.
A judge approving a warrant based solely on the dossier, and having it re-authorized multiple times without further evidence gained, would be ignoring protocols.
They used the Yahoo article that Steele also leaked/created as corroborating evidence. It was the FBI bamboozling the court. Otherwise you're saying the dossier is legit and they did target a nobody with barely any association with Trump after breaking said association and during the end of the campaign.
Have you guys actually listened to the FBI and DOJ guys that have been on the news shows. They say that the standard is US intelligence, not oppo research, not news stories.

It's certainly possible the FBI bamboozled them, but the judge would have to be lazy or complicit.
Again, they withheld the facts of origin of the dossier and that it was unverified.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by HokieFanDC »

UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
Do you not even accept the following as fact?
Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.
And for all we know, it was the same FISA judge that approved it each time.

==========================================


Why Did the Democrats Lie So Baldly about the Memo?
By Roger L Simon February 2, 2018

Adam Schiff, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, among seemingly dozens of Democrats, not to mention half the mainstream media, had been warning us for days that the release of the memo authored by Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee would place our national security at grave risk. "Sources and methods" would be revealed.

Now that we have seen the memo, it's clear that was an absolutely bald-faced lie of the most obvious sort. Nothing in it impacts national security in the slightest. There's no mention whatsoever of any "sources and methods."

Unless they were lobotomized, those Democrats and their dependable PR team (aka the media) must have realized they were blatantly lying to the American public. Evidently, they didn't care. How're we now supposed to trust what these people say about anything? Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

Their latest meme is "cherry picking." The memo was cherry-picked and therefore to be ignored. That's like saying a murderer who has a clean driving record and is a good cook is not a murderer. Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.

So what was up here below the surface? It can't just be the "evil party" trying to live up to its nickname, although that certainly happened.

It seems this particular lie was a last line of defense — for now — against a coming potential Armageddon for their party. This memo, bad as it is, is apparently only the first of many, a small percentage of what is to come. And the Democrats know it.

Fear is operative. Maybe panic. An entire weltanschauung is under threat — jobs, friends, self-image, who knows what. If this goes on much longer and much more comes out, some Democrats -—not apparatchik Schiff, needless to say, but others — might have to face reality and say something. A few journalists (not at CNN, but maybe someplace else) might have to report the truth. It happened with Watergate. Republicans turned against Nixon. But, of course, they're "the stupid party."

But speaking of stupid, something else occurred that few are mentioning, but may be of more significance than anything. What were these FISA judges thinking who allowed for the surveillance? They actually read the Steele dossier, one would assume. Were they imbeciles or as biased as McCabe, Strzok and the rest of that seedy FBI cabal? Whether they were told that document came from the Clinton campaign or not, it read like an outtake from the back pages of the National Enquirer — and not one of the good issues (John Edwards, etc.). The dossier was ludicrous on its face, yet the supposedly great legal minds of the FISA court accepted it as what appears to be the most important evidence for the case.

Think about that.

What we need, obviously, is the old word transparency. The public needs to see the full details of what went into the FISA decisions — and we don't need to hear any of that fake palaver about national security. Everybody's security depends on the FISA court working in a one-hundred percent unbiased manner. Otherwise we're living a nightmare.

That court, and its workings, and its personnel should be a key part of any investigation going forward. New rules and regulations have to be put in place.

FINALLY: Looking good in all this is Senator Rand Paul. He warned us about our fragile privacy. Looking especially bad, the American Civil Liberties Union who are defecating on their charter. Looking even worse: Barack Obama. He led the charge to turn the intelligence agencies against the people. Looking lost — Robert Mueller. How will he get half the country to believe anything he says at this point?

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/democra ... ldly-memo/

================================

I'll accept that it is a distinct possibility that the FBI withheld material information about the dossier and the Yahoo report.
I'm not accepting the memo as completely factual or telling the entire story. It certainly raises enough red flags to get to the bottom of it.

As for the idea that it is "dems" talking about national security interests, it is not just dems, unless you want to call Christopher Wray a dem.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by 133743Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
Do you not even accept the following as fact?
Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.
And for all we know, it was the same FISA judge that approved it each time.

==========================================


Why Did the Democrats Lie So Baldly about the Memo?
By Roger L Simon February 2, 2018

Adam Schiff, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, among seemingly dozens of Democrats, not to mention half the mainstream media, had been warning us for days that the release of the memo authored by Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee would place our national security at grave risk. "Sources and methods" would be revealed.

Now that we have seen the memo, it's clear that was an absolutely bald-faced lie of the most obvious sort. Nothing in it impacts national security in the slightest. There's no mention whatsoever of any "sources and methods."

Unless they were lobotomized, those Democrats and their dependable PR team (aka the media) must have realized they were blatantly lying to the American public. Evidently, they didn't care. How're we now supposed to trust what these people say about anything? Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

Their latest meme is "cherry picking." The memo was cherry-picked and therefore to be ignored. That's like saying a murderer who has a clean driving record and is a good cook is not a murderer. Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.

So what was up here below the surface? It can't just be the "evil party" trying to live up to its nickname, although that certainly happened.

It seems this particular lie was a last line of defense — for now — against a coming potential Armageddon for their party. This memo, bad as it is, is apparently only the first of many, a small percentage of what is to come. And the Democrats know it.

Fear is operative. Maybe panic. An entire weltanschauung is under threat — jobs, friends, self-image, who knows what. If this goes on much longer and much more comes out, some Democrats -—not apparatchik Schiff, needless to say, but others — might have to face reality and say something. A few journalists (not at CNN, but maybe someplace else) might have to report the truth. It happened with Watergate. Republicans turned against Nixon. But, of course, they're "the stupid party."

But speaking of stupid, something else occurred that few are mentioning, but may be of more significance than anything. What were these FISA judges thinking who allowed for the surveillance? They actually read the Steele dossier, one would assume. Were they imbeciles or as biased as McCabe, Strzok and the rest of that seedy FBI cabal? Whether they were told that document came from the Clinton campaign or not, it read like an outtake from the back pages of the National Enquirer — and not one of the good issues (John Edwards, etc.). The dossier was ludicrous on its face, yet the supposedly great legal minds of the FISA court accepted it as what appears to be the most important evidence for the case.

Think about that.

What we need, obviously, is the old word transparency. The public needs to see the full details of what went into the FISA decisions — and we don't need to hear any of that fake palaver about national security. Everybody's security depends on the FISA court working in a one-hundred percent unbiased manner. Otherwise we're living a nightmare.

That court, and its workings, and its personnel should be a key part of any investigation going forward. New rules and regulations have to be put in place.

FINALLY: Looking good in all this is Senator Rand Paul. He warned us about our fragile privacy. Looking especially bad, the American Civil Liberties Union who are defecating on their charter. Looking even worse: Barack Obama. He led the charge to turn the intelligence agencies against the people. Looking lost — Robert Mueller. How will he get half the country to believe anything he says at this point?

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/democra ... ldly-memo/

================================

I'll accept that it is a distinct possibility that the FBI withheld material information about the dossier and the Yahoo report.
I'm not accepting the memo as completely factual or telling the entire story. It certainly raises enough red flags to get to the bottom of it.

As for the idea that it is "dems" talking about national security interests, it is not just dems, unless you want to call Christopher Wray a dem.
The FBI says the memo is factual
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by HokieFanDC »

133743Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
Do you not even accept the following as fact?
Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.
And for all we know, it was the same FISA judge that approved it each time.

==========================================


Why Did the Democrats Lie So Baldly about the Memo?
By Roger L Simon February 2, 2018

Adam Schiff, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, among seemingly dozens of Democrats, not to mention half the mainstream media, had been warning us for days that the release of the memo authored by Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee would place our national security at grave risk. "Sources and methods" would be revealed.

Now that we have seen the memo, it's clear that was an absolutely bald-faced lie of the most obvious sort. Nothing in it impacts national security in the slightest. There's no mention whatsoever of any "sources and methods."

Unless they were lobotomized, those Democrats and their dependable PR team (aka the media) must have realized they were blatantly lying to the American public. Evidently, they didn't care. How're we now supposed to trust what these people say about anything? Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

Their latest meme is "cherry picking." The memo was cherry-picked and therefore to be ignored. That's like saying a murderer who has a clean driving record and is a good cook is not a murderer. Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.

So what was up here below the surface? It can't just be the "evil party" trying to live up to its nickname, although that certainly happened.

It seems this particular lie was a last line of defense — for now — against a coming potential Armageddon for their party. This memo, bad as it is, is apparently only the first of many, a small percentage of what is to come. And the Democrats know it.

Fear is operative. Maybe panic. An entire weltanschauung is under threat — jobs, friends, self-image, who knows what. If this goes on much longer and much more comes out, some Democrats -—not apparatchik Schiff, needless to say, but others — might have to face reality and say something. A few journalists (not at CNN, but maybe someplace else) might have to report the truth. It happened with Watergate. Republicans turned against Nixon. But, of course, they're "the stupid party."

But speaking of stupid, something else occurred that few are mentioning, but may be of more significance than anything. What were these FISA judges thinking who allowed for the surveillance? They actually read the Steele dossier, one would assume. Were they imbeciles or as biased as McCabe, Strzok and the rest of that seedy FBI cabal? Whether they were told that document came from the Clinton campaign or not, it read like an outtake from the back pages of the National Enquirer — and not one of the good issues (John Edwards, etc.). The dossier was ludicrous on its face, yet the supposedly great legal minds of the FISA court accepted it as what appears to be the most important evidence for the case.

Think about that.

What we need, obviously, is the old word transparency. The public needs to see the full details of what went into the FISA decisions — and we don't need to hear any of that fake palaver about national security. Everybody's security depends on the FISA court working in a one-hundred percent unbiased manner. Otherwise we're living a nightmare.

That court, and its workings, and its personnel should be a key part of any investigation going forward. New rules and regulations have to be put in place.

FINALLY: Looking good in all this is Senator Rand Paul. He warned us about our fragile privacy. Looking especially bad, the American Civil Liberties Union who are defecating on their charter. Looking even worse: Barack Obama. He led the charge to turn the intelligence agencies against the people. Looking lost — Robert Mueller. How will he get half the country to believe anything he says at this point?

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/democra ... ldly-memo/

================================

I'll accept that it is a distinct possibility that the FBI withheld material information about the dossier and the Yahoo report.
I'm not accepting the memo as completely factual or telling the entire story. It certainly raises enough red flags to get to the bottom of it.

As for the idea that it is "dems" talking about national security interests, it is not just dems, unless you want to call Christopher Wray a dem.
The FBI says the memo is factual
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press ... hpsci-memo

"The FBI takes seriously its obligations to the FISA Court and its compliance with procedures overseen by career professionals in the Department of Justice and the FBI. We are committed to working with the appropriate oversight entities to ensure the continuing integrity of the FISA process.

With regard to the House Intelligence Committee’s memorandum, the FBI was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo the day before the committee voted to release it. As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy."
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by awesome guy »

HokieFanDC wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
Do you not even accept the following as fact?
Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.
And for all we know, it was the same FISA judge that approved it each time.

==========================================


Why Did the Democrats Lie So Baldly about the Memo?
By Roger L Simon February 2, 2018

Adam Schiff, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, among seemingly dozens of Democrats, not to mention half the mainstream media, had been warning us for days that the release of the memo authored by Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee would place our national security at grave risk. "Sources and methods" would be revealed.

Now that we have seen the memo, it's clear that was an absolutely bald-faced lie of the most obvious sort. Nothing in it impacts national security in the slightest. There's no mention whatsoever of any "sources and methods."

Unless they were lobotomized, those Democrats and their dependable PR team (aka the media) must have realized they were blatantly lying to the American public. Evidently, they didn't care. How're we now supposed to trust what these people say about anything? Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

Their latest meme is "cherry picking." The memo was cherry-picked and therefore to be ignored. That's like saying a murderer who has a clean driving record and is a good cook is not a murderer. Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.

So what was up here below the surface? It can't just be the "evil party" trying to live up to its nickname, although that certainly happened.

It seems this particular lie was a last line of defense — for now — against a coming potential Armageddon for their party. This memo, bad as it is, is apparently only the first of many, a small percentage of what is to come. And the Democrats know it.

Fear is operative. Maybe panic. An entire weltanschauung is under threat — jobs, friends, self-image, who knows what. If this goes on much longer and much more comes out, some Democrats -—not apparatchik Schiff, needless to say, but others — might have to face reality and say something. A few journalists (not at CNN, but maybe someplace else) might have to report the truth. It happened with Watergate. Republicans turned against Nixon. But, of course, they're "the stupid party."

But speaking of stupid, something else occurred that few are mentioning, but may be of more significance than anything. What were these FISA judges thinking who allowed for the surveillance? They actually read the Steele dossier, one would assume. Were they imbeciles or as biased as McCabe, Strzok and the rest of that seedy FBI cabal? Whether they were told that document came from the Clinton campaign or not, it read like an outtake from the back pages of the National Enquirer — and not one of the good issues (John Edwards, etc.). The dossier was ludicrous on its face, yet the supposedly great legal minds of the FISA court accepted it as what appears to be the most important evidence for the case.

Think about that.

What we need, obviously, is the old word transparency. The public needs to see the full details of what went into the FISA decisions — and we don't need to hear any of that fake palaver about national security. Everybody's security depends on the FISA court working in a one-hundred percent unbiased manner. Otherwise we're living a nightmare.

That court, and its workings, and its personnel should be a key part of any investigation going forward. New rules and regulations have to be put in place.

FINALLY: Looking good in all this is Senator Rand Paul. He warned us about our fragile privacy. Looking especially bad, the American Civil Liberties Union who are defecating on their charter. Looking even worse: Barack Obama. He led the charge to turn the intelligence agencies against the people. Looking lost — Robert Mueller. How will he get half the country to believe anything he says at this point?

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/democra ... ldly-memo/

================================

I'll accept that it is a distinct possibility that the FBI withheld material information about the dossier and the Yahoo report.
I'm not accepting the memo as completely factual or telling the entire story. It certainly raises enough red flags to get to the bottom of it.

As for the idea that it is "dems" talking about national security interests, it is not just dems, unless you want to call Christopher Wray a dem.
The FBI says the memo is factual
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press ... hpsci-memo

"The FBI takes seriously its obligations to the FISA Court and its compliance with procedures overseen by career professionals in the Department of Justice and the FBI. We are committed to working with the appropriate oversight entities to ensure the continuing integrity of the FISA process.

With regard to the House Intelligence Committee’s memorandum, the FBI was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo the day before the committee voted to release it. As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy."
Of course, they look awful
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote: I'll accept that it is a distinct possibility that the FBI withheld material information about the dossier and the Yahoo report.
I'm not accepting the memo as completely factual or telling the entire story. It certainly raises enough red flags to get to the bottom of it.

As for the idea that it is "dems" talking about national security interests, it is not just dems, unless you want to call Christopher Wray a dem.
It says so in the memo and the FBI confirmed the facts within it (while stating it was missing context). There is no missing context when the memo says those details weren't included in the FISA warrant.

This disagreement boils down to you choosing to believe the word of people we've established as political hacks and liars.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
Do you not even accept the following as fact?
Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.
And for all we know, it was the same FISA judge that approved it each time.

==========================================


Why Did the Democrats Lie So Baldly about the Memo?
By Roger L Simon February 2, 2018

Adam Schiff, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, among seemingly dozens of Democrats, not to mention half the mainstream media, had been warning us for days that the release of the memo authored by Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee would place our national security at grave risk. "Sources and methods" would be revealed.

Now that we have seen the memo, it's clear that was an absolutely bald-faced lie of the most obvious sort. Nothing in it impacts national security in the slightest. There's no mention whatsoever of any "sources and methods."

Unless they were lobotomized, those Democrats and their dependable PR team (aka the media) must have realized they were blatantly lying to the American public. Evidently, they didn't care. How're we now supposed to trust what these people say about anything? Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

Their latest meme is "cherry picking." The memo was cherry-picked and therefore to be ignored. That's like saying a murderer who has a clean driving record and is a good cook is not a murderer. Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.

So what was up here below the surface? It can't just be the "evil party" trying to live up to its nickname, although that certainly happened.

It seems this particular lie was a last line of defense — for now — against a coming potential Armageddon for their party. This memo, bad as it is, is apparently only the first of many, a small percentage of what is to come. And the Democrats know it.

Fear is operative. Maybe panic. An entire weltanschauung is under threat — jobs, friends, self-image, who knows what. If this goes on much longer and much more comes out, some Democrats -—not apparatchik Schiff, needless to say, but others — might have to face reality and say something. A few journalists (not at CNN, but maybe someplace else) might have to report the truth. It happened with Watergate. Republicans turned against Nixon. But, of course, they're "the stupid party."

But speaking of stupid, something else occurred that few are mentioning, but may be of more significance than anything. What were these FISA judges thinking who allowed for the surveillance? They actually read the Steele dossier, one would assume. Were they imbeciles or as biased as McCabe, Strzok and the rest of that seedy FBI cabal? Whether they were told that document came from the Clinton campaign or not, it read like an outtake from the back pages of the National Enquirer — and not one of the good issues (John Edwards, etc.). The dossier was ludicrous on its face, yet the supposedly great legal minds of the FISA court accepted it as what appears to be the most important evidence for the case.

Think about that.

What we need, obviously, is the old word transparency. The public needs to see the full details of what went into the FISA decisions — and we don't need to hear any of that fake palaver about national security. Everybody's security depends on the FISA court working in a one-hundred percent unbiased manner. Otherwise we're living a nightmare.

That court, and its workings, and its personnel should be a key part of any investigation going forward. New rules and regulations have to be put in place.

FINALLY: Looking good in all this is Senator Rand Paul. He warned us about our fragile privacy. Looking especially bad, the American Civil Liberties Union who are defecating on their charter. Looking even worse: Barack Obama. He led the charge to turn the intelligence agencies against the people. Looking lost — Robert Mueller. How will he get half the country to believe anything he says at this point?

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/democra ... ldly-memo/

================================

I'll accept that it is a distinct possibility that the FBI withheld material information about the dossier and the Yahoo report.
I'm not accepting the memo as completely factual or telling the entire story. It certainly raises enough red flags to get to the bottom of it.

As for the idea that it is "dems" talking about national security interests, it is not just dems, unless you want to call Christopher Wray a dem.
The FBI says the memo is factual
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press ... hpsci-memo

"The FBI takes seriously its obligations to the FISA Court and its compliance with procedures overseen by career professionals in the Department of Justice and the FBI. We are committed to working with the appropriate oversight entities to ensure the continuing integrity of the FISA process.

With regard to the House Intelligence Committee’s memorandum, the FBI was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo the day before the committee voted to release it. As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy."
IE," it's factual but you don't see the context of how baaad we thought Trump was."
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by 133743Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
It's simple, as long as you accept that the FBI, DOJ, including people like Rod Rosenstein, and 4 FISC judges decided to ignore all the protocols in order to get a FISA warrant on a person who was a nobody on the Trump campaign, and was no longer involved at all with the campaign.

If all that is true, it's a huge deal.

I'm skeptical.
Do you not even accept the following as fact?
Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.
And for all we know, it was the same FISA judge that approved it each time.

==========================================


Why Did the Democrats Lie So Baldly about the Memo?
By Roger L Simon February 2, 2018

Adam Schiff, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, among seemingly dozens of Democrats, not to mention half the mainstream media, had been warning us for days that the release of the memo authored by Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee would place our national security at grave risk. "Sources and methods" would be revealed.

Now that we have seen the memo, it's clear that was an absolutely bald-faced lie of the most obvious sort. Nothing in it impacts national security in the slightest. There's no mention whatsoever of any "sources and methods."

Unless they were lobotomized, those Democrats and their dependable PR team (aka the media) must have realized they were blatantly lying to the American public. Evidently, they didn't care. How're we now supposed to trust what these people say about anything? Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

Their latest meme is "cherry picking." The memo was cherry-picked and therefore to be ignored. That's like saying a murderer who has a clean driving record and is a good cook is not a murderer. Whatever else happened, the FBI clearly used a slanderous fictional document to get a FISA ruling to surveil Carter Page without telling the court the document was a pack of lies paid for by the Clinton campaign and written by a creepy spy with old-line Soviet connections. And they did it multiple times.

So what was up here below the surface? It can't just be the "evil party" trying to live up to its nickname, although that certainly happened.

It seems this particular lie was a last line of defense — for now — against a coming potential Armageddon for their party. This memo, bad as it is, is apparently only the first of many, a small percentage of what is to come. And the Democrats know it.

Fear is operative. Maybe panic. An entire weltanschauung is under threat — jobs, friends, self-image, who knows what. If this goes on much longer and much more comes out, some Democrats -—not apparatchik Schiff, needless to say, but others — might have to face reality and say something. A few journalists (not at CNN, but maybe someplace else) might have to report the truth. It happened with Watergate. Republicans turned against Nixon. But, of course, they're "the stupid party."

But speaking of stupid, something else occurred that few are mentioning, but may be of more significance than anything. What were these FISA judges thinking who allowed for the surveillance? They actually read the Steele dossier, one would assume. Were they imbeciles or as biased as McCabe, Strzok and the rest of that seedy FBI cabal? Whether they were told that document came from the Clinton campaign or not, it read like an outtake from the back pages of the National Enquirer — and not one of the good issues (John Edwards, etc.). The dossier was ludicrous on its face, yet the supposedly great legal minds of the FISA court accepted it as what appears to be the most important evidence for the case.

Think about that.

What we need, obviously, is the old word transparency. The public needs to see the full details of what went into the FISA decisions — and we don't need to hear any of that fake palaver about national security. Everybody's security depends on the FISA court working in a one-hundred percent unbiased manner. Otherwise we're living a nightmare.

That court, and its workings, and its personnel should be a key part of any investigation going forward. New rules and regulations have to be put in place.

FINALLY: Looking good in all this is Senator Rand Paul. He warned us about our fragile privacy. Looking especially bad, the American Civil Liberties Union who are defecating on their charter. Looking even worse: Barack Obama. He led the charge to turn the intelligence agencies against the people. Looking lost — Robert Mueller. How will he get half the country to believe anything he says at this point?

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/democra ... ldly-memo/

================================

I'll accept that it is a distinct possibility that the FBI withheld material information about the dossier and the Yahoo report.
I'm not accepting the memo as completely factual or telling the entire story. It certainly raises enough red flags to get to the bottom of it.

As for the idea that it is "dems" talking about national security interests, it is not just dems, unless you want to call Christopher Wray a dem.
The FBI says the memo is factual
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press ... hpsci-memo

"The FBI takes seriously its obligations to the FISA Court and its compliance with procedures overseen by career professionals in the Department of Justice and the FBI. We are committed to working with the appropriate oversight entities to ensure the continuing integrity of the FISA process.

With regard to the House Intelligence Committee’s memorandum, the FBI was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo the day before the committee voted to release it. As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy."
When questioned after reviewing the memo at the WH, Director Wray said that the memo was factual.
User avatar
jmac610
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:53 am

Re: Media using DNC talking pts & chewbacca defense for memo

Post by jmac610 »

"we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy."

(like, the fact we thought Hill would win and no one would ever have seen any of this)
Post Reply