|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On February 03 2018 03:35 Danglars wrote:
Haha now I understand why everybody didn’t want this out. FISA authorization and FBI under heat now. Let’s get the rest out there to compare notes.
Oh man, US politics. This is hilarious.
We also don’t know if the FBI told the judge that the dossier was obtained through opposition research and just didn’t say which side paid for it. And we also don’t know if the judge asked for that information.
Really, the amount of things we don’t know is pretty staggering. Could likely fill 80-90 pages of a full FISA warrant request.
|
On February 03 2018 03:21 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2018 03:18 Mohdoo wrote:On February 03 2018 03:17 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:15 Gorsameth wrote:On February 03 2018 03:13 xDaunt wrote:
For all of you on the left who are confused regarding what this memo really means, let me help you out. First and foremost, the memo does not exonerate Trump or anyone else who is being investigated. Trump may still be a Russian agent who will get impeached. However, the memo does strongly suggest that the FBI abused the FISA court process for political purposes, particularly when you look at the memo in the context of all of those Strozk/Page text messages that are out there. The unavoidable conclusion is that the FBI leadership was dirty, and democrats need to halt their unabashed support for Comey, McCabe, et al. Are you talking about secret society meetings within the FBI again? I don't know whether there's a "secret society" or not, but there very clear is a strong anti-Trump political bias at the FBI. The fact that they concealed the origins of the dossier in the FISA application confirms as such. It's not even debatable anymore. If the FBI thinks Trump is compromised, wouldn't that be a good cause for bias? Maybe, but it certainly doesn't look like the FBI had such information when it applied for the FISA warrant. The real question is what have they learned since then. But here's the rub. As far as we know, there still is no concrete information showing that Trump is compromised or a Russian agent. Not one good leak showing as such despite all the other shit that has leaked. Instead, and by all accounts, Mueller is focused on obstruction of justice, which is strictly derivative to what might be a fraudulent investigation. See the problem here?
None of what you said was ever the subject of the investigation so no. Trumps seeming adoration of Putin, to the extent that he would insult America before sayimg anything bad about him, aside, there was never any real suspicion that Trump himself was secretly working for Russia only that Russia itself wanted him in power and did everything they could to make that happen including trying to coordinate we ith them.
The bigger problem is those around him. Especially in his situation where he is by far the least informed president on any issue at any time in mpdern political history the influence those around him have is that much greater. Those around him are the subjects and his desire to cover up the investigation into them is what brought him personally into it.
|
On February 03 2018 03:21 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2018 03:18 Mohdoo wrote:On February 03 2018 03:17 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:15 Gorsameth wrote:On February 03 2018 03:13 xDaunt wrote:
For all of you on the left who are confused regarding what this memo really means, let me help you out. First and foremost, the memo does not exonerate Trump or anyone else who is being investigated. Trump may still be a Russian agent who will get impeached. However, the memo does strongly suggest that the FBI abused the FISA court process for political purposes, particularly when you look at the memo in the context of all of those Strozk/Page text messages that are out there. The unavoidable conclusion is that the FBI leadership was dirty, and democrats need to halt their unabashed support for Comey, McCabe, et al. Are you talking about secret society meetings within the FBI again? I don't know whether there's a "secret society" or not, but there very clear is a strong anti-Trump political bias at the FBI. The fact that they concealed the origins of the dossier in the FISA application confirms as such. It's not even debatable anymore. If the FBI thinks Trump is compromised, wouldn't that be a good cause for bias? Maybe, but it certainly doesn't look like the FBI had such information when it applied for the FISA warrant. The real question is what have they learned since then. But here's the rub. As far as we know, there still is no concrete information showing that Trump is compromised or a Russian agent. Not one good leak showing as such despite all the other shit that has leaked. Instead, and by all accounts, Mueller is focused on obstruction of justice, which is strictly derivative to what might be a fraudulent investigation. See the problem here?
lol wtf. You are saying "maybe" the FBI would be against Trump if Trump was compromised? It's not like this was a 1 man deal. A lot of people need to be involved for this to happen. I think your assertion that the FBI didn't really have any reason to think one way or the other is strange. You don't have any reason to think the investigation is fraudulent. Everything you are saying could also be explained by the FBI legitimately believing Trump is a potential threat.
It's not like people should only be investigated after proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The idea that the president might be compromised is perhaps the biggest deal that could exist in this context. Of course they are going to investigate it. It feels like you are saying investigations should only ever even start once you are extremely certain someone is guilty.
|
Honestly reading from this thread, I don't know what to believe.
Was one of the reason the Trump-Russia investigation happened is because of the DNC paid document or not?
|
On February 03 2018 03:38 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2018 03:36 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On February 03 2018 03:17 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:15 Gorsameth wrote:On February 03 2018 03:13 xDaunt wrote:
For all of you on the left who are confused regarding what this memo really means, let me help you out. First and foremost, the memo does not exonerate Trump or anyone else who is being investigated. Trump may still be a Russian agent who will get impeached. However, the memo does strongly suggest that the FBI abused the FISA court process for political purposes, particularly when you look at the memo in the context of all of those Strozk/Page text messages that are out there. The unavoidable conclusion is that the FBI leadership was dirty, and democrats need to halt their unabashed support for Comey, McCabe, et al. Are you talking about secret society meetings within the FBI again? I don't know whether there's a "secret society" or not, but there very clearly is a strong anti-Trump political bias at the FBI. The fact that they concealed the origins of the dossier in the FISA application confirms as such. It's not even debatable anymore. Accepting this is true; does it even matter? The FISA application is practically a rubber stamp, do you really think it would have been denied including that origin story? It very well could. I don't know the FISA application process that well or what standards have to be met, but my gut tells me that the omissions probably are very significant, particularly if the nature of the dossier was misrepresented to the court.
There has been hundreds of thousands of FISA applications and four denials (which were later granted). I'd agree with your gut about any normal court,, but that isn't how this one works from what I've read.
|
On February 03 2018 03:38 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2018 03:36 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On February 03 2018 03:17 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:15 Gorsameth wrote:On February 03 2018 03:13 xDaunt wrote:
For all of you on the left who are confused regarding what this memo really means, let me help you out. First and foremost, the memo does not exonerate Trump or anyone else who is being investigated. Trump may still be a Russian agent who will get impeached. However, the memo does strongly suggest that the FBI abused the FISA court process for political purposes, particularly when you look at the memo in the context of all of those Strozk/Page text messages that are out there. The unavoidable conclusion is that the FBI leadership was dirty, and democrats need to halt their unabashed support for Comey, McCabe, et al. Are you talking about secret society meetings within the FBI again? I don't know whether there's a "secret society" or not, but there very clearly is a strong anti-Trump political bias at the FBI. The fact that they concealed the origins of the dossier in the FISA application confirms as such. It's not even debatable anymore. Accepting this is true; does it even matter? The FISA application is practically a rubber stamp, do you really think it would have been denied including that origin story? It very well could. I don't know the FISA application process that well or what standards have to be met, but my gut tells me that the omissions probably are very significant, particularly if the nature of the dossier was misrepresented to the court.
Your gut tells you? Or because it was mentioned in a partisan memo written by a man who had to recuse himself from the investigation because he is part of the group being investigated?
|
On February 03 2018 03:42 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2018 03:21 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:18 Mohdoo wrote:On February 03 2018 03:17 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:15 Gorsameth wrote:On February 03 2018 03:13 xDaunt wrote:
For all of you on the left who are confused regarding what this memo really means, let me help you out. First and foremost, the memo does not exonerate Trump or anyone else who is being investigated. Trump may still be a Russian agent who will get impeached. However, the memo does strongly suggest that the FBI abused the FISA court process for political purposes, particularly when you look at the memo in the context of all of those Strozk/Page text messages that are out there. The unavoidable conclusion is that the FBI leadership was dirty, and democrats need to halt their unabashed support for Comey, McCabe, et al. Are you talking about secret society meetings within the FBI again? I don't know whether there's a "secret society" or not, but there very clear is a strong anti-Trump political bias at the FBI. The fact that they concealed the origins of the dossier in the FISA application confirms as such. It's not even debatable anymore. If the FBI thinks Trump is compromised, wouldn't that be a good cause for bias? Maybe, but it certainly doesn't look like the FBI had such information when it applied for the FISA warrant. The real question is what have they learned since then. But here's the rub. As far as we know, there still is no concrete information showing that Trump is compromised or a Russian agent. Not one good leak showing as such despite all the other shit that has leaked. Instead, and by all accounts, Mueller is focused on obstruction of justice, which is strictly derivative to what might be a fraudulent investigation. See the problem here? lol wtf. You are saying "maybe" the FBI would be against Trump if Trump was compromised? It's not like this was a 1 man deal. A lot of people need to be involved for this to happen. I think your assertion that the FBI didn't really have any reason to think one way or the other is strange. You don't have any reason to think the investigation is fraudulent. Everything you are saying could also be explained by the FBI legitimately believing Trump is a potential threat.
Law enforcement officials and prosecutors are officers of the court first and foremost and have an independent duty to conduct their investigations and prosecutions fairly, regardless of what they think of the suspect/defendant. This is a fundamental principle of our justice system. Misrepresenting stuff to a court (or concealing relevant, exonerating, information) is emblematic of the type of bias that is not permissible.
It's not like people should only be investigated after proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The idea that the president might be compromised is perhaps the biggest deal that could exist in this context. Of course they are going to investigate it. It feels like you are saying investigations should only ever even start once you are extremely certain someone is guilty.
Of course not. However, the 4th Amendment very clearly requires that law enforcement meet certain criteria before investigating an individual or otherwise impacting their rights. The FBI may have a very large 4th Amendment problem here with regards to the FISA application.
|
The double standards when comparing to the Clinton email scandal almost make me puke. The GOP is heading in a very scary direction!
|
On February 03 2018 03:47 MrUniverse wrote:
Honestly reading from this thread, I don't know what to believe.
Was one of the reason the Trump-Russia investigation happened is because of the DNC paid document or not?
Short answer. No
Long answer. Also No
|
On February 03 2018 03:47 MrUniverse wrote:
Honestly reading from this thread, I don't know what to believe.
Was one of the reason the Trump-Russia investigation happened is because of the DNC paid document or not?
Most likely no.
We have multiple intelligence allies of the US forwarding information about a connection between Trump's team and Russia.
|
The memo fails its ultimate purpose. If you want to put the FISA process under scrutiny, well, I guess this sort of helps, assuming you believe its assessment of intel is honest, although it purports things that have been sort of dis-proven.
Firing Rod Rosenstein over this, which is the real reason it released, is not going to fly too well. This memo... it just doesn't really say anything.
Carter Page was under surveillance long before the dossier. So... And it makes the assumption that the dossier itself is verbotten material because a democrat once touched it. It's a lot of ridiculous claims that don't even need the underlying intel to fail an actual scrutiny-test.
|
On February 03 2018 03:38 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2018 03:36 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On February 03 2018 03:17 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:15 Gorsameth wrote:On February 03 2018 03:13 xDaunt wrote:
For all of you on the left who are confused regarding what this memo really means, let me help you out. First and foremost, the memo does not exonerate Trump or anyone else who is being investigated. Trump may still be a Russian agent who will get impeached. However, the memo does strongly suggest that the FBI abused the FISA court process for political purposes, particularly when you look at the memo in the context of all of those Strozk/Page text messages that are out there. The unavoidable conclusion is that the FBI leadership was dirty, and democrats need to halt their unabashed support for Comey, McCabe, et al. Are you talking about secret society meetings within the FBI again? I don't know whether there's a "secret society" or not, but there very clearly is a strong anti-Trump political bias at the FBI. The fact that they concealed the origins of the dossier in the FISA application confirms as such. It's not even debatable anymore. Accepting this is true; does it even matter? The FISA application is practically a rubber stamp, do you really think it would have been denied including that origin story? It very well could. I don't know the FISA application process that well or what standards have to be met, but my gut tells me that the omissions probably are very significant, particularly if the nature of the dossier was misrepresented to the court.
There is just as much to support that theory as there is to support the theory that it was used as nothing more than a reference that outside sources had confirmed much of there findings and again no one has really been able to dispute the content of said dossier.
As an hypothetical example if a girl I jist broke up with says I'm hiding a dead body in my basement and police get a warrant to search my house based on that, I don't then get to complain after you find the body that you only started this because my biased ex said something.
|
On February 03 2018 03:47 MrUniverse wrote:
Honestly reading from this thread, I don't know what to believe.
Was one of the reason the Trump-Russia investigation happened is because of the DNC paid document or not?
When the DNC pays for polling services, the polling services would be useless if they gave democrat-slanted data. It wouldn't be useful. When you are campaigning, you need to know what is and is not true. If the DNC wanted some made up shit, they could just make shit up. You wouldn't need to hire a reputable spy.
Furthermore, Steele was already considered a good idea by Republicans prior to being hired by Democrats. And Steele already had a long, trusting relationship with other intelligence agencies throughout the years. Republicans hired Steele because they wanted correct information. Democrats did the same thing.
Really, just think. There are millions of other situations where political parties try to collect information. They don't want their polling companies to say they have 80% when they actually have 50%. They need to know how to plan. This idea that the money coming from democrats means Steele's work is shitty doesn't make sense and has a wealth of history showing the opposite. It would be a waste of money. No one does that.
|
The memo also claims that the renewal of the FISA warrant was filed because of the dossier. What it does not say is that the FBI would have let the warrant expire if they had not received the dossier or if the FBI was already collecting evidence to renew the warrant. It is silent on that subject.
|
On February 03 2018 03:48 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2018 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:36 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On February 03 2018 03:17 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:15 Gorsameth wrote:On February 03 2018 03:13 xDaunt wrote:
For all of you on the left who are confused regarding what this memo really means, let me help you out. First and foremost, the memo does not exonerate Trump or anyone else who is being investigated. Trump may still be a Russian agent who will get impeached. However, the memo does strongly suggest that the FBI abused the FISA court process for political purposes, particularly when you look at the memo in the context of all of those Strozk/Page text messages that are out there. The unavoidable conclusion is that the FBI leadership was dirty, and democrats need to halt their unabashed support for Comey, McCabe, et al. Are you talking about secret society meetings within the FBI again? I don't know whether there's a "secret society" or not, but there very clearly is a strong anti-Trump political bias at the FBI. The fact that they concealed the origins of the dossier in the FISA application confirms as such. It's not even debatable anymore. Accepting this is true; does it even matter? The FISA application is practically a rubber stamp, do you really think it would have been denied including that origin story? It very well could. I don't know the FISA application process that well or what standards have to be met, but my gut tells me that the omissions probably are very significant, particularly if the nature of the dossier was misrepresented to the court. Your gut tells you? Or because it was mentioned in a partisan memo written by a man who had to recuse himself from the investigation because he is part of the group being investigated?
I highly doubt that there is anything in the memo that is patently untrue. What is more likely is that there are additional, material facts that were omitted. So when the memo says that the FBI concealed the origins of the dossier to the court, I think it is safe to assume that that statement is accurate. As an attorney, I can tell you that it is a big no no to conceal material information like that from a court, which is why my gut tells me that there's a 4th Amendment problem here. The question is whether the FBI presented any other corroborating information.
|
On February 03 2018 03:47 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2018 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:36 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On February 03 2018 03:17 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:15 Gorsameth wrote:On February 03 2018 03:13 xDaunt wrote:
For all of you on the left who are confused regarding what this memo really means, let me help you out. First and foremost, the memo does not exonerate Trump or anyone else who is being investigated. Trump may still be a Russian agent who will get impeached. However, the memo does strongly suggest that the FBI abused the FISA court process for political purposes, particularly when you look at the memo in the context of all of those Strozk/Page text messages that are out there. The unavoidable conclusion is that the FBI leadership was dirty, and democrats need to halt their unabashed support for Comey, McCabe, et al. Are you talking about secret society meetings within the FBI again? I don't know whether there's a "secret society" or not, but there very clearly is a strong anti-Trump political bias at the FBI. The fact that they concealed the origins of the dossier in the FISA application confirms as such. It's not even debatable anymore. Accepting this is true; does it even matter? The FISA application is practically a rubber stamp, do you really think it would have been denied including that origin story? It very well could. I don't know the FISA application process that well or what standards have to be met, but my gut tells me that the omissions probably are very significant, particularly if the nature of the dossier was misrepresented to the court. There has been hundreds of thousands of FISA applications and four denials (which were later granted). I'd agree with your gut about any normal court,, but that isn't how this one works from what I've read.
I don't doubt that the most FISA applications are granted, but here's my question: is the reason for this frequency of approval a function of the legitimacy of the applications in question or a flaw in the application process? Stated another way, due to a lack of oversight and accountability (particularly an adversarial nature to the process), are people's rights being violated by the FISA process? I don't know the answer to that question, but the House memo strongly suggests that the matter needs to be looked into.
|
On February 03 2018 03:52 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2018 03:48 Gorsameth wrote:On February 03 2018 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:36 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On February 03 2018 03:17 xDaunt wrote:On February 03 2018 03:15 Gorsameth wrote:On February 03 2018 03:13 xDaunt wrote:
For all of you on the left who are confused regarding what this memo really means, let me help you out. First and foremost, the memo does not exonerate Trump or anyone else who is being investigated. Trump may still be a Russian agent who will get impeached. However, the memo does strongly suggest that the FBI abused the FISA court process for political purposes, particularly when you look at the memo in the context of all of those Strozk/Page text messages that are out there. The unavoidable conclusion is that the FBI leadership was dirty, and democrats need to halt their unabashed support for Comey, McCabe, et al. Are you talking about secret society meetings within the FBI again? I don't know whether there's a "secret society" or not, but there very clearly is a strong anti-Trump political bias at the FBI. The fact that they concealed the origins of the dossier in the FISA application confirms as such. It's not even debatable anymore. Accepting this is true; does it even matter? The FISA application is practically a rubber stamp, do you really think it would have been denied including that origin story? It very well could. I don't know the FISA application process that well or what standards have to be met, but my gut tells me that the omissions probably are very significant, particularly if the nature of the dossier was misrepresented to the court. Your gut tells you? Or because it was mentioned in a partisan memo written by a man who had to recuse himself from the investigation because he is part of the group being investigated? I highly doubt that there is anything in the memo that is patently untrue. What is more likely is that there are additional, material facts that were omitted. So when the memo says that the FBI concealed the origins of the dossier to the court, I think it is safe to assume that that statement is accurate. As an attorney, I can tell you that it is a big no no to conceal material information like that from a court, which is why my gut tells me that there's a 4th Amendment problem here. The question is whether the FBI presented any other corroborating information.
And as a lawyer you should know you can take any statement and twist it out of context and without additional information to mean anything without ever strictly lying.
|
On February 03 2018 03:40 Plansix wrote:We also don’t know if the FBI told the judge that the dossier was obtained through opposition research and just didn’t say which side paid for it. And we also don’t know if the judge asked for that information. Really, the amount of things we don’t know is pretty staggering. Could likely fill 80-90 pages of a full FISA warrant request.
This is the reason the full application must be released. The FBI needs to show that it sufficiently briefed the court about the background and reliability of the dossier, as it understood fully at the time. The FBI also needs to show that further information was presented that shows the dossier wasn’t the lynchpin of the application (and hey Page looks pretty dirty). Democrats are hoping the FBI didn’t mislead the court as much as Nunes alleges, and the application continues with multiple proofs of foreign conspiracy that are good enough to independently convince the court to grant surveillance.
Fun times.
|
On February 03 2018 03:50 Leporello wrote:
The memo fails its ultimate purpose. If you want to put the FISA process under scrutiny, well, I guess this sort of helps, assuming you believe its assessment of intel is honest, although it purports things that have been sort of dis-proven.
Firing Rod Rosenstein over this, which is the real reason it released, is not going to fly too well. This memo... it just doesn't really say anything.
Carter Page was under surveillance long before the dossier. So... And it makes the assumption that the dossier itself is verbotten material because a democrat once touched it. It's a lot of ridiculous claims that don't even need the underlying intel to fail an actual scrutiny-test.
Isn't the ultimate purpose of the memo to control what the public conversation is for the past week and presumably the next few days? I think it's been quite successful in that.
|
On February 03 2018 03:47 MrUniverse wrote:
Honestly reading from this thread, I don't know what to believe.
Was one of the reason the Trump-Russia investigation happened is because of the DNC paid document or not?
No, and the document was originally paid for by republicans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
