This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

The Nunes memo

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 3]

26 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/3/2018, 8:21 pm

I got to looking at this thread and noticed my OP was pretty lengthy/wordy..   So I edited it for brevity (just like my HS English teacher old Mrs Horton taught me) ......  and I think I improved it in the process).    Very Happy

View user profile

28 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/4/2018, 12:35 am


View user profile

29 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/4/2018, 9:07 am

With his memo, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) botched for a second time (remember the unmasking scandal) an attempt to discredit the intelligence community to protect President Trump in the Russia investigation. For a second time he resorted to a specious and factually defective non-scandal, hoping to play to the Trump cultists and their state TV channel, Fox News. Nunes is exceedingly terrible at this game. For example:


  • He managed to prove the dossier was not the basis of the Russia investigation; George Papadopoulos was.

    He underscored that one couldn’t possibly “spy” on the Trump campaign by getting a FISA warrant, which was kept secret during the campaign, on Carter Page — who already had left the campaign at the time the warrant was sought.

    He did not attempt to tie the FISA warrant to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III or to explain how the FISA court approved the warrant and its three extensions (which required a showing of progress in the investigation).

    He misstated former director James B. Comey’s remarks about the dossier.

    According to The Post’s reporting, his suggestion that the political nature of the dossier was withheld from the court — the central allegation in the memo — was false. (“The court that approved surveillance of a former campaign adviser to President Trump was aware that some of the information underpinning the warrant request was paid for by a political entity, although the application did not specifically name the Democratic National Committee or the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the matter. … [I]ts central allegation — that the government failed to disclose a source’s political bias — is baseless, the officials said.”)

    He never tried to prove the dossier was false or that Christopher Steele knew Fusion GPS was paid by the DNC (after it was originally engaged by the conservative Washington Free Beacon).

    He underscored that at four different points, the FISA court thought there was probable cause to conduct surveillance of Page, thereby establishing that a suspected Russian agent had in fact worked on the campaign

.

Nunes’s memo was so flimsy that even White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly told Trump it was a bust. The Post reports that Kelly told Trump that “the document was not as compelling as some of its advocates had promised Trump.” Oops.

Even Trey Gowdy is not buying into the whole Nunes memo sham:
House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) — who spent endless time on the Benghazi investigation — was the only one on the Intelligence Committee to see the underlying intelligence. He gave Nunes’s effort a failing grade. “As I have said repeatedly, I also remain 100 percent confident in Special Counsel Robert Mueller,” he tweeted. “The contents of this memo do not – in any way – discredit his investigation.” Oh.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2018/02/03/when-will-the-gop-muzzle-nunes/?utm_term=.154b8c7dac29

View user profile

30 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 10:41 am

It's been pretty funny watching the conservative propaganda units trying to pretend their damp firecracker was Hiroshima. They oversold a bunch of poorly-fabricated nothing and instead of it "making Watergate look like stealing a Snickers bar," it makes them all look like a bunch of hysterical loons who don't understand very basic things. Which, of course, is exactly what they are.

At some point they're going to figure out that Hannity is a dimwit who makes them look stupid, but so far they're resisting learning that as hard as they can. Trump is believing every damn thing FOX News tells him, because he's addicted to flattery.

What we're really seeing now is idiots who were raised on talk radio and FOX News propaganda reaching an age where they hold office now, so we have misinformed ideologues running the government... and it's not working out well. These are people who've fostered the belief that they can build bubbles where the only real facts are the ones that support them, and the truth that works against them is safe to dismiss as "fake." It's a cultish, faith-based mindset, but because there's plenty of propaganda outlets to help them support it, they've never had to challenge their own thinking. They're married to it now.

And because of his weakness for flattery, and because he's not very smart to begin with, Trump is getting all of his "intel" from FOX News, and disregarding his actual intelligence sources because they're not telling him what he wants to hear. So he's going to keep screwing up. It may fool his base, but his base were always fooled anyway. The rest of the country, and the world, aren't going to be nearly so accommodating.

View user profile

31 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 11:14 am

zsomething wrote:It's been pretty funny watching the conservative propaganda units trying to pretend their damp firecracker was Hiroshima.  They oversold a bunch of poorly-fabricated nothing and instead of it "making Watergate look like stealing a Snickers bar," it makes them all look like a bunch of hysterical loons who don't understand very basic things.  Which, of course, is exactly what they are.

At some point they're going to figure out that Hannity is a dimwit who makes them look stupid, but so far they're resisting learning that as hard as they can.  Trump is believing every damn thing FOX News tells him, because he's addicted to flattery.

What we're really seeing now is idiots who were raised on talk radio and FOX News propaganda reaching an age where they hold office now, so we have misinformed ideologues running the government... and it's not working out well.   These are people who've fostered the belief that they can build bubbles where the only real facts are the ones that support them, and the truth that works against them is safe to dismiss as "fake."  It's a cultish, faith-based mindset, but because there's plenty of propaganda outlets to help them support it, they've never had to challenge their own thinking.  They're married to it now.  

And because of his weakness for flattery, and because he's not very smart to begin with, Trump is getting all of his "intel" from FOX News, and disregarding his actual intelligence sources because they're not telling him what he wants to hear.  So he's going to keep screwing up.  It may fool his base, but his base were always fooled anyway.  The rest of the country, and the world, aren't going to be nearly so accommodating.

Good post!

The only thing that I might add is the emotional investment many people who voted for Trump seem to have in him ... whatever he does is "right" because if they admitted he was "wrong" about anything at all, they feel as though they would be publicly admitting they themselves were "wrong" to have supported his candidacy.  And nobody wants to be seen as having been "wrong", even Democrats!   (this forum is a perfect example of that)  

So they cling desperately to anything that comes along that might support the idea of them having been "right" in voting for Trump ... including this ridiculous "Nunes memo" ... and remain willfully blind to any information or events that upset their sense of having been "right."   Left-leaning voters do the same thing ... it's just Trumpkins have taken it to a whole new level.

View user profile

32 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 11:48 am

If any part of Hillary's opposition research from Russia was used in front of the fisa court with it's only verification being Steele's Yahoo interview as purported... the entire process was "wrong". No one would want that constituting adequate legal burden... unless suffering from trump derangement syndrome.

View user profile

33 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 12:08 pm

PkrBum wrote:If any part of Hillary's opposition research from Russia was used in front of the fisa court with it's only verification being Steele's Yahoo interview as purported... the entire process was "wrong". No one would want that constituting adequate legal burden... unless suffering from trump derangement syndrome.

An affidavit for an arrest, search, or surveillance warrant is not intended to "prove" anyone is guilty of anything .... and certainly not to the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt."   The standard is "probable cause" .... and the Judge decides if that standard has been met based upon the information presented to him by the Agent(s) applying for the warrant.  Are you, having not even seen the affidavit or returns, saying the Judge was wrong?    Do you have any legal training 'pkr'?   If not, no worries ... neither does Congressman Nunes; he majored in agriculture (as did Rick Perry)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause wrote:Although the Fourth Amendment states that "no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause", it does not specify what "probable cause" actually means. The Supreme Court has attempted to clarify the meaning of the term on several occasions, while recognizing that probable cause is a concept that is imprecise, fluid and very dependent on context. In Illinois v. Gates, the Court favored a flexible approach, viewing probable cause as a "practical, non-technical" standard that calls upon the "factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men [...] act".1 Courts often adopt a broader, more flexible view of probable cause when the alleged offenses are serious.

View user profile

34 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 12:44 pm

If probable cause is Hillary's dossier... then the left is going to scream bloody murder when trump does it. It doesn't pass the smell test objectively. Especially when taking into account the agent's bias... leaks... texts... etc.

If this is the new norm then all bets are off.

View user profile

35 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 12:58 pm

EmeraldGhost wrote:
zsomething wrote:It's been pretty funny watching the conservative propaganda units trying to pretend their damp firecracker was Hiroshima.  They oversold a bunch of poorly-fabricated nothing and instead of it "making Watergate look like stealing a Snickers bar," it makes them all look like a bunch of hysterical loons who don't understand very basic things.  Which, of course, is exactly what they are.

At some point they're going to figure out that Hannity is a dimwit who makes them look stupid, but so far they're resisting learning that as hard as they can.  Trump is believing every damn thing FOX News tells him, because he's addicted to flattery.

What we're really seeing now is idiots who were raised on talk radio and FOX News propaganda reaching an age where they hold office now, so we have misinformed ideologues running the government... and it's not working out well.   These are people who've fostered the belief that they can build bubbles where the only real facts are the ones that support them, and the truth that works against them is safe to dismiss as "fake."  It's a cultish, faith-based mindset, but because there's plenty of propaganda outlets to help them support it, they've never had to challenge their own thinking.  They're married to it now.  

And because of his weakness for flattery, and because he's not very smart to begin with, Trump is getting all of his "intel" from FOX News, and disregarding his actual intelligence sources because they're not telling him what he wants to hear.  So he's going to keep screwing up.  It may fool his base, but his base were always fooled anyway.  The rest of the country, and the world, aren't going to be nearly so accommodating.

Good post!

The only thing that I might add is the emotional investment many people who voted for Trump seem to have in him ... whatever he does is "right" because if they admitted he was "wrong" about anything at all, they feel as though they would be publicly admitting they themselves were "wrong" to have supported his candidacy.  And nobody wants to be seen as having been "wrong", even Democrats!   (this forum is a perfect example of that)  

So they cling desperately to anything that comes along that might support the idea of them having been "right" in voting for Trump ... including this ridiculous "Nunes memo" ... and remain willfully blind to any information or events that upset their sense of having been "right."   Left-leaning voters do the same thing ... it's just Trumpkins have taken it to a whole new level.

Right...it's so easy to get emotionally involved in Drumpf's "inspiring message".



And, it's only become worse since he took office. Now, he's openly defied Congress on the Russian sanctions bill, which had almost unanimous support from both houses.

View user profile

36 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 1:08 pm

We should all please take a moment and consider our commitment to framing our ideas/belief/word-view in red or blue.  No shades of grey allowed.   When you do that you're interfering with some people's access to money & power without having to go out & compete in the free market for a real job or to start a real business.

This has been a public service announcement from your friendly national military-political-industrial complex.   Now get back to work all of you!

Laughing



Last edited by EmeraldGhost on 2/5/2018, 8:59 pm; edited 1 time in total

View user profile

37 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 1:36 pm

http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/372233-nunes-memo-raises-question-did-fbi-violate-woods-procedures

For all the debate over the House Republican memo pointing to alleged misconduct by some current and former FBI and Justice Department officials, one crucial point hasn’t gotten the attention it deserves.

And it relates in an unexpected way to special counsel Robert Mueller.

The point is: There are strict rules requiring that each and every fact presented in an FBI request to electronically spy on a U.S. citizen be extreme-vetted for accuracy — and presented to the court only if verified.

There’s no dispute that at least some, if not a great deal, of information in the anti-Trump “Steele dossier” was unverified or false. Former FBI director James Comey testified as much himself before a Senate committee in June 2017. Comey repeatedly referred to “salacious” and “unverified” material in the dossier, which turned out to be paid political opposition research against Donald Trump funded first by Republicans, then by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign.


Presentation of any such unverified material to the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court to justify a wiretap would appear to violate crucial procedural rules, called “Woods Procedures,” designed to protect U.S. citizens.

Yet Comey allegedly signed three of the FISA applications on behalf of the FBI. Deputy Director Andrew McCabe reportedly signed one and former Attorney General Sally Yates, then-Acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein each reportedly signed one or more.

Woods Procedures

Woods Procedures were named for Michael Woods, the FBI official who drafted the rules as head of the Office of General Counsel’s National Security Law Unit. They were instituted in April 2001 to “ensure accuracy with regard to … the facts supporting probable cause” after recurring instances, presumably inadvertent, in which the FBI had presented inaccurate information to the FISA court.

Prior to Woods Procedures, “[i]ncorrect information was repeated in subsequent and related FISA packages,” the FBI told Congress in August 2003. “By signing and swearing to the declaration, the headquarters agent is attesting to knowledge of what is contained in the declaration.”

It’s incredible to think of how many FBI and Justice Department officials would have touched the multiple applications to wiretap Trump campaign adviser Carter Page — allegedly granted, at least in part, on the basis of unverified and thus prohibited information — if normal procedures were followed.

The FBI’s complex, multi-layered review is designed for the very purpose of preventing unverified information from ever reaching the court. It starts with the FBI field offices.

According to former FBI agent Asha Rangappa, who wrote of the process last year in JustSecurity.org, the completed FISA application requires approval through the FBI chain of command “including a Supervisor, the Chief Division Counsel (the highest lawyer within that FBI field office), and finally, the Special Agent in Charge of the field office, before making its way to FBI Headquarters to get approval by (at least) the Unit-level Supervisor there.”

At FBI headquarters, an “action memorandum” is prepared with additional facts culled by analytical personnel assigned to espionage allegations involving certain foreign powers.

Next, it goes to the Justice Department “where attorneys from the National Security Division comb through the application to verify all the assertions made in it,” wrote Rangappa. “DOJ verifies the accuracy of every fact stated in the application. If anything looks unsubstantiated, the application is sent back to the FBI to provide additional evidentiary support – this game of bureaucratic chutes and ladders continues until DOJ is satisfied that the facts in the FISA application can both be corroborated and meet the legal standards for the court. After getting sign-off from a senior DOJ official (finally!).”

There’s more

But there are even more reviews and processes regarding government applications for wiretaps designed to make sure inaccurate or unverified information isn’t used.

In November 2002, the FBI implemented a special FISA Unit with a unit chief and six staffers, and installed an automated tracking system that connects field offices, headquarters, the National Security Law Branch and the Office of Intelligence, allowing participants to track the process during each stage.

Starting March 1, 2003, the FBI required field offices to confirm they’ve verified the accuracy of facts presented to the court through the case agent, the field office’s Chief Division Counsel and the Special Agent in Charge.

All of this information was provided to Congress in 2003. The FBI director at the time also ordered that any issue as to whether a FISA application was factually sufficient was to be brought to his attention. Personally.

Who was the director of the FBI when all of this careful work was done?

Robert Mueller.

Perhaps ironically, Mueller isn’t in charge of the investigation examining the conduct of FBI and Justice Department officials and whether they followed the rules he’d carefully implemented 15 years before. Instead, Mueller is leading the probe into Russia’s alleged illegal connections with Trump associates. Congress is looking at the wiretap process.

With so much information still classified, redacted and — in some cases — withheld, there is much we don’t know. Perhaps we will eventually learn that there’s a good reason unverified material was given to the court. Maybe there was no violation of rules or processes.

But there’s a reason Woods Procedures exist in the first place. They aren’t arcane rules that could have been overlooked or misunderstood by the high-ranking and seasoned professionals working under the Obama and Trump administrations who touched the four Carter Page wiretap applications and renewals. And unless they’ve secretly been lifted or amended, Woods Procedures aren’t discretionary.

In the past, when the FBI has presented inaccuracies to the FISA court, it’s been viewed so seriously that it’s drawn the attention of the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility, which investigates Justice Department attorneys accused of misconduct or crimes in their professional functions.

View user profile

38 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 2:38 pm

"...BY SHARYL ATTKISSON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR..."

Fired by CBS, claimed her computer was hacked.  Lied.

https://crooksandliars.com/2014/10/busted-sharyl-attkissons-hacked-video

"...Busted!
A sharp-eyed commenter over at Media Matters observed that Attkisson's video was shot during the Valerie Harper debut on Dancing With the Stars in September, 2013. Here's what WiscoJoe observes:

Attkisson shot this video on or sometime after September 16, 2013. The episode of "Dancing with the Stars" that is playing in the background features Valerie Harper dancing a Foxtrot to "Some Kind of Wonderful" and first aired live on the evening of that date.

According to Attkisson's own timeline her computer was 'hacked' in October 2012, she came forward with this allegation in May 2013, but then waited until September 2013 to take video 'evidence.'

Has Ms. Attkisson provided an explanation of when this video was taken or why she waited for a year, and until after she went forward with public allegations, to take video documentation of her computer being 'hacked'? Is this the standard of investigative journalism that she was doing while at CBS? If that's the case it may explain why she no longer works there..."

***********

Nothing but lies from this shoddy "reporter".

View user profile

39 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 2:57 pm

What part do you disagree with? The woods procedure? Failsafes? Guidelines? Oversight?

View user profile

40 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 3:12 pm

View user profile

41 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 3:36 pm

Last week’s bot message: #ReleaseTheNunesMemo

This week’s bot message
#SuppressTheSchiffMemo
David Frum

View user profile

42 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 4:12 pm

polecat wrote:Last week’s bot message: #ReleaseTheNunesMemo

This week’s bot message
#SuppressTheSchiffMemo
David Frum




No if's and's or bots about it.

View user profile

43 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 6:11 pm

PkrBum wrote:What part do you disagree with? The woods procedure? Failsafes? Guidelines? Oversight?

S P I N

View user profile

44 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 6:17 pm




In weekend tweets, Trump confirms White House released Nunes memo in effort to shutter Russia probe



Donald J. Trump
✔️
@realDonaldTrump
Great jobs numbers and finally, after many years, rising wages- and nobody even talks about them. Only Russia, Russia, Russia, despite the fact that, after a year of looking, there is No Collusion!

6:26 PM - Feb 3, 2018
32,324 32,324 Replies 29,376 29,376 Retweets 129,366 129,366 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Donald J. Trump
✔️
@realDonaldTrump
“The four page memo released Friday reports the disturbing fact about how the FBI and FISA appear to have been used to influence the 2016 election and its aftermath....The FBI failed to inform the FISA court that the Clinton campaign had funded the dossier....the FBI became....

6:40 PM - Feb 3, 2018
27,954 27,954 Replies 35,887 35,887 Retweets 123,929 123,929 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Donald J. Trump
✔️
@realDonaldTrump
...a tool of anti-Trump political actors. This is unacceptable in a democracy and ought to alarm anyone who wants the FBI to be a nonpartisan enforcer of the law....The FBI wasn’t straight with Congress, as it hid most of these facts from investigators.” Wall Street Journal

6:53 PM - Feb 3, 2018
33,835 33,835 Replies 34,832 34,832 Retweets 124,149 124,149 likes


https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/2/4/1738683/-In-weekend-tweets-Trump-confirms-White-House-released-Nunes-memo-in-effort-to-shutter-Russia-probe?detail=emaildkre

and:

(Huffpo)

Donald Trump Jr. Says The GOP Memo His Dad Declassified Is ‘A Little Bit Of Sweet Revenge’

“There is a little bit of sweet revenge in it for me and certainly probably the family,” he said.

***********

"The family" isn't the brightest bunch.

View user profile

45 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 6:49 pm

Floridatexan wrote:
PkrBum wrote:What part do you disagree with? The woods procedure? Failsafes? Guidelines? Oversight?

S P I N

Partisanship... you would agree with all of those things and much more if it were a dem on the block.

View user profile

46 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 6:51 pm


View user profile

47 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 8:51 pm


View user profile

48 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 9:11 pm

PkrBum wrote:What part do you disagree with? The woods procedure? Failsafes? Guidelines? Oversight?

Well, I, for one, disagree with your contention that all appropriate internal rules and guidelines were not followed ... and as far as I'm concerned the Nunes memo provides scant evidence to suspect any might not have been.
How's that!

View user profile

49 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 9:21 pm


View user profile

50 Re: The Nunes memo on 2/5/2018, 9:55 pm

EmeraldGhost wrote:
PkrBum wrote:What part do you disagree with? The woods procedure? Failsafes? Guidelines? Oversight?

Well, I, for one, disagree with your contention that all appropriate internal rules and guidelines were not followed ... and as far as I'm concerned the Nunes memo provides scant evidence to suspect any might not have been.
How's that!

Weak... I think that it's highly unlikely that there was full disclosure as to the origin/veracity of the dossier.

Look at the lengths that fusion one went to in an effort to withhold the financing of it.

The fact that there's a secret court with secret oversight that's used by govt to spy on it's citizens is enough for me to say something's implicitly wrong. I don't care that they used it on Trump or Micky mouse... I disagree with it on principle.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/read-the-full-text-of-the-nunes-memo/552191/

View user profile

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 3]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum