Slashdot Mirror
House Democrats' Counter-Memo Released, Alleging Major Factual Inaccuracies (vox.com)
Long-time Slashdot reader Rei writes: Three weeks ago, on a party-line vote, the U.S. House Intelligence Committee voted to release a memo from committee chair and Trump transition team member Devin Nunes. The "Nunes Memo" alleged missteps by the FBI in seeking a FISA warrant against Trump aide Carter Page; a corresponding Democratic rebuttal memo was first blocked from simultaneous release by the committee, and subsequently the White House. Tonight, it has finally been released.
Among its many counterclaims: the Steele Dossier, only received in September, did not initiate surveilance of Page which began in July; the Steele dossier was only one, minor component of the FISA application, and only concerning Page's Moscow meetings; Steele's funding source and termination was disclosed in the application; and a number of other "distortions and misrepresentations that are contradicted by the underlying classified documents". Perhaps most seriously, it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA application which his memo criticized.
Vox argues the memo proves that no one was misled when the surveillance was authorized. "The FBI clearly states right there in the FISA application that they believe Steele was hired to find dirt on Trump... After the Schiff memo was released on Saturday, House Republicans released a document rebutting its core claims. Their response to this damning citation is -- and I am not making this up -- that the vital line in which the FBI discloses the information about Steele was 'buried in a footnote.'"
Among its many counterclaims: the Steele Dossier, only received in September, did not initiate surveilance of Page which began in July; the Steele dossier was only one, minor component of the FISA application, and only concerning Page's Moscow meetings; Steele's funding source and termination was disclosed in the application; and a number of other "distortions and misrepresentations that are contradicted by the underlying classified documents". Perhaps most seriously, it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA application which his memo criticized.
Vox argues the memo proves that no one was misled when the surveillance was authorized. "The FBI clearly states right there in the FISA application that they believe Steele was hired to find dirt on Trump... After the Schiff memo was released on Saturday, House Republicans released a document rebutting its core claims. Their response to this damning citation is -- and I am not making this up -- that the vital line in which the FBI discloses the information about Steele was 'buried in a footnote.'"
This is political mudslinging, not news for nerds.
Nunes never read the referenced document? I wonder if Nunes is a slashdot poster.
So happy so see that the Democrats called them on their dishonest bullshit. The Republicans have made it standard procedure to have one idiot spout off a lie, then the rest of him start saying the same crap citing the first moron as a valid source, until pretty soon the whole wingnut echo chamber is reverbrating with the misinformation was. Hopefully someone "leaks" the unredacted version.
What the footnote shows is that the judge is either biased or he was careless enough to not review that aspect of the secret court filing, or that the republicans are right - that it was purposefully arranged so the judge would not see it.
It is a rich target for investigation, which the Justice Department needs to do while we are trying to ferret out the Russians.
it only cares about getting rich off bitching about Trump
and do more actual policy. The right wing corporate Dems seem to be trying to use this to try and win voters back without actually implementing populist policy (Medicare for All, universal college, a New New Deal, $15 min wage, ending the 8 wars, etc, etc). It's not going to work. Maybe if they were as good a fearmongering as the Republicans are, but they're not. Instead we're gonna get another 4 years of Trump + Republican Congress. Probably another big market crash out of all the deregulation that's going on right now.
Trump won for two reasons. First, Hilary took victory for granted and didn't campaign in the swing states (she always was an arrogant bitch). But moreoever Trump ran as a left wing populist. He promised Health Care for all, Jobs for all, good pay for all. He promised the government wouldn't just stand idle while the working class got slapped around by the Invisible Hand. Sure, he lied through his teeth. But when your opponent promised basically nothing, well, like the man said, what have you got to lose?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
So the DNC paid a British Spy to get dirt from Russian spies and that was used as one of the basis for FISA surveillance?
Yeah. It's almost as if the President was obstructing the release of information from one side in a corrupt attempt at self-preservation.
#MAGA
Mueller Ain't Goin' Away
How can Republican law makers have 0?
Twenty-two indictments so far. Five convictions, and counting.
Over 100 Trump officials who have been unable to pass FBI background checks, including the President's son-in-law.
It took over 2 years for the Watergate investigation to nail Nixon. Special Prosecutor Mueller's been at it only 10 months.
You are welcome on my lawn.
That's cute. How was he obstructing anything if he released it after one round of mutually-agreed-upon redactions?
nt
This isn't news for nerds, nor stuff that matters.
There isn't even a "right" or "wrong". It's just political junk talk for people who are into that sort of thing.
Total rubbish. Even a crappy Google or Bitcoin article would be better than this horse plop.
These politicians are trying to justify and make acceptable the decisions of an organization that just allowed 17 kids to be killed. There are no words for their hubris. They were given 4 Snapchat UIDs and they couldn't take 5 minutes to check them. At this point, they could deliver ice cream to my house and I would tell them to go pound salt.
The rebuttal simply asserts that neither yahoo nor Steele were the original source of the evidence - in fact that a warrant was issued even before the Steele dossier was a thing, because the FBI has substantial evidence that Page was a Russian spy years ago.
Further: Even if they included Page's response to Steele's leaks published by Yahoo instead of using the Yahoo to corroborate Steele ( someone RTFM for me...is that part of the GOP claim rebutted?) that's still smells like fruit of the forbidden tree to me. If the cops are investigating you for something and leak to the press that you've done all sorts of crazy shit, then use your public denials as grounds for a warrant to search your house...that wouldn't hold water at trial, would it?
From page 7 of the Democratic memo (emphasis in the original):
In its Court filings, DOJ made proper use of news coverage. The Majority falsely claims that the FISA materials "relied heavily" on a September 23, 2016 Yahoo! News article by Michael Isikoff and that this article "does not corroborate the Steele Dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself." In fact, DOJ referenced Isikoff's article, alongside another article the Majority fails to mention, not to provide separate corroboration for Steele's reporting, but instead to inform the Court of Page's public denial of his suspected meetings in Moscow, which Page also echoed in a September 25, 2016 letter to FBI Director Comey. [remainder of paragraph is redacted.]
It was Steele, not the FBI or DOJ, who leaked Page's story to the press. Steele was fired by the FBI in October 2016 because of that. Is any subsequent investigation of Page fruit from a poison tree? I'd say no. Keep in mind that Page had been on the FBI's radar (and in FISA warrants) for a long time before Steele leaked anything to the press.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Is any subsequent investigation of Page fruit from a poison tree? I'd say no.
If I were playing devil's advocate, I might press against that point. If Page's letter is dated Sept 25 in reply to a published news article dated Sept 23, then you could make the case the letter and the article are one and the same. Meaning Steele leaked, and Page denied once in public and once in the letter. We'd need the full FISA filing to understanding the reasoning for seeking the warrant and the extent to which public denials triggered by the leak that wasn't known to originate from the dossier was an argument in favor of the warrant.
And I could also argue that until the FBI discovered Steele was the leeker and cut him loose, their implicit trust of him made him leaking tantamount to the FBI leaking. That's a stretch but not a huge stretch. Would need more information to put it in context.
So it's not quite as bad as Nunes played it up to be, but it's not clear from this rebuttal that the DOJ is completely in the clear either.
This is specifically refuted by the document this article is about, so what is the point of posting. In fact, even the GOP is subsequent statements have agreed that the source of the information was disclosed to the judges. Making that part of the statement unquestionably false.
I see where you're going with this, but I think your argument depends entirely on whether the granting of the FISA renewal was because of Page's denial of the Moscow meetings. I think it's pretty clear it wasn't -- the DOJ simply disclosed it, without making it part of their argument for the warrant. Besides, it doesn't pass the smell-test. How could a denial of an activity possibly be grounds for investigating someone about it?
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
...is showing again.
Come the revolution you seek, you'll be the second against the wall.
1. Nunes Mk II memo (he tried the same thing this time last year) tipped off the Moscow spies as to the dates of the warrants for their surveillance. He did this right before indictments, and clearly was politically trying to save Trump. That memo should never have been released.
2. Democrats releasing the contradictory information, what did they expect? Of course Trump would redact it to bits to cover his ass. Again it should never have been released.
What should happen now is a FISA warrant should be issued against Trump and he should be cleared or prosecuted quickly. All the surveillance data is already recorded, they can go back and look at it. It he really did meet the Russians in 2013 to discuss his upcoming candidacy and their help, then that will be the recorded set which can be looked at if a FISA arrant is issued.
Manasfort is accused by buying politicians, and Republicans need to clear house of their 'Nunes' figures too. FFS, he's using NSA and CIA data on Russia for political points. Russia just attack USA, physically with bullets in Syria, they were not Russian 'mercenaries' if they had orders from Moscow, they were deniable soldiers. Republicans need to expel a few bad apples and move on.
Neither of those things is true. Flynn's guilty plea is still there and in force, and the new judge on the Flynn case has clarified his request and completely debunked the news that turned up in the alt-right media last week.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The 'Nunes didn't read FISA application' is fucking RED HERRING from HELL. Trey Gowdy WROTE the FUCKING thing and GOP has been clear on this since the start.
Are you honestly trying to say that Schiff, who is the ranking democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, wouldn't know exactly what type of information would get redacted? Pull the other one, it's got bells on. If the redacted information was information that shouldn't have been redacted Schiffy would be howling from the rooftops about the redactions. He's not, which means every piece of redacted info in that memo which he demanded be released was there solely to provide cover for useful idiots like you. As for Mueller not going away, that would be evident to anyone who watched his hounding of Steven Hatfill.
IANAL but a denial delivered to the press in general and to the FBI in particular would indicate that you're not going to get what you need volunteered to you, so you need a warrant. If you're the one who's forced the denial to happen, and then use it to back up the need for the warrant, then that might not be kosher.
So like I said...that part's not as bad as Nunes pumped it up to be, but the Dems aren't exactly knocking it out of the park in the other direction from what I see. The next point is noted somewhere down below which is McCabe's testimony that the dossier is what sealed the deal for the DOJ to ask for the warrant to start with.
It seems like the US politics is rapidly devolving into laundry room politics. Notes after notes of proper conduct and arguments over who's turn was it and who the hell fucked up my clothes appear in laundry room walls when ladies over certain age, of varying levels of accomplishment and different culture and social status start using the same shared laundry room of the apartment complex.
"The FBI clearly states right there in the FISA application that they believe Steele was hired to find dirt on Trump
This was not a contention of the Nunes Memo. The problem was that the FBI knew that the Steele dossier was paid for by Hillary Clinton and the DNC, and the FBI knew about it, yet hid those facts from the FISA court, a major ethical breakdown to say the least.
Rightwingnutjob is a foreign shill, not an American. Even east coast Appalachian toothless uneducated fools don't make those mistakes. Mod accordingly.
Yes, the FBI, that famously Democratic institution (pop quiz: identify the last Democratic director of the FBI). Getting their warrant signed off by four judges - two appointed by George W. Bush, one by George H.W. Bush, and one by Reagan, in that bastion of liberalness, the FISA courts.
The FBI states that it has met all of the subpoenas issued to it (even other House Republicans refused to sign onto Nunes's threatening subpoena letter). “We disagree with the chairman’s characterization and will continue to work with congressional committees to provide the information they request consistent with our national security responsibilities.” The FBI has given the committee hundreds of pages of requested documents and cleared McCabe and Strzok to testify.
Yeah, it's totally ethical for a Trump transition team member to investigate the Trump administration for events that occurred before, during and after the transition. Totally. Nunes totally deserves an ethics prize.
Wow - we're in total agreement! Except it amazes me how a person with more than two brain cells could reach the conclusions you have after doing so. Literally every key complaint made in the original Nunes memo was false or highly misleading. "FISA application was fundamentally built on the dossier" becomes "started months before the dossier was even received, and it only made up a minor portion of the FISA application, and with multiple unrelated corroborating sources". "News article based on information from Steele was used to back up the Steele dossier" becomes "Multiple news articles cited only in the context of quoting Carter Page's response to claims about him". "Courts were not informed about Steele's funding and termination" becomes "FBI was proactive in keeping the court up to date with all information related to Steele, including funding and termination". And on and on and on.
And here we have the Nunes response memo literally confirming the rebuttals. We've gone from "The FISA court wasn't informed!" to "The font size was too small when they wrote ''The FBI speculates that the identified U.S. Person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate #1's campaign"! Sneaky, sneaky FBI and their sneaky, sneaky font sizes! Heck, the Nunes response memo to the Democratic memo starts out by confirming that the investigation started in July 2016 (and offers no rebuttal to the claim that the Steele dossier wasn't received until September), arguing that the investigation was "then fueled" by the dossier. Apparently "then" is a two month gap against the self-described "adviser to the Kremlin". My favourite part of the reponse-response is #3:
Damn the FBI for not using their FBI Time Machine to go
That is just misdirection Nunes was part of a committee, they could only pick one guy to read it and the committee decided the best guy to read it, he then analysed it for the committee.
Just bringing this up shows that you are not caring about facts just in winning an argument. Nunes did and is doing a great job. The democrats seem to not know what their job is.
You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.
specifically refuted by the document
Refuted means there is specific evidence that the GOP memo was wrong. This document does not present that, it presents an opinion that the GOP memo was incorrect, it does not refute it.
The only way to get to the truth of the matter is to declassify the actual FISA memo itself and put it out for everyone to read for themselves.
You mean this Trey Gowdy?
Funny that the memo - and the response to the Democratic rebuttal - act as though the dossier is some core part of the Russia investigation, something that Gowdy fundamentally disagrees with. Where's your source that Gowdy "WROTE the FUCKING thing"? Because here's what I find Nunes himself saying:
But hey... "wrote it" vs. "took notes", no real difference... And clearly the memo reflects Gowdy's view that the dossier has little significance to the Russia investigation as a whole! (/snark)
Before now, I’ve strongly disliked Nunez - but now I’m warming to him a little.
#DeleteChrome
So this "me too" memo the Democrats drafted in defense of their practices is supposed to be factual and free of lies? Yea, right.
It's out now.
Oh, wait... can Republicans read at all?
Sent from my iPhone, with love from St Petersburg
The president held off on the release because of national security concerns raised by the FBI and DOJ themselves.
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=4375762-White-House-Letter-On-Democratic-Memo-Feb-9-2018 (last page)
Step back and look at what is going on.
Clinton started the Russian story as a distraction from the email server and the Clinton-DNC collusion revelation.
At same time, Clinton campaign, paid for dirt from Russia on Trump which indirectly started investigation of Trump campaign.
Russians were in fact trying to create conflict in election (as they had attempted in previous elections). Note that in recent revelations it is known that Russians and bots are still attempted to create conflict by fanning conspiracy theories and fear from the left and right ( recent shooting as example).
After election, Obama said Russians were hacking, issues sanctions. After election is important.
I just hope that as part of Mueller investigation
- the full scope of the continuing interference of Russian operatives is revealed
- the Genesis of the investigation is made known.
Otherwise if the investigation only reveals that rich people are evading taxes, then it is useless.
Replying to myself to add:
Case in point: a point by point rebuttal of the Democrat memo by the House Intelligence Committee: https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/democrat_memo_charge_and_response.pdf
This is a big deal for the Democrats. Big enough for heavy players to drop by Slashdot to plop down rebuttals as ACs like the above comment. Where there is smoke there is fire.
Take the fucking politics off slashdot.
It's attracts the dregs and sullies this fantastic site.
They've already publicly stated that's false many times, so why restate it again?
Hey, I can write political fan-fiction too! "Julian Assange and the NRA ordered their chronies in UKIP to launch a Brexit campaign to give Trump talking points!" How's that? Hmm, needs vampires...
Please try learning to read things before posting about them.
Strzok, the guy who advocated for and wrote the "Comey Memo" that cost Clinton several points in the polls right before the election? That guy?
That is just misdirection Nunes was part of a committee, they could only pick one guy to read it and the committee decided the best guy to read it, he then analysed it for the committee.
Gowdy was the only republican to read the FISA applications. IOW Gowdy is the only source Nunes has for his claims. Gowdy does not assert the same claims as Nunes' memo.
So Nunes asserts claims for which he has no source. Claims that have now been refuted by actual facts.
They played a game of semantics. The Nunes memo claimed that the FISA court has not been informed that the Clinton campaign was (part of) the funding behind the research that led to the Steele dossier.
That is technically correct. Only now we have learned that the FBI *did* inform the FISA court that the dossier was produced by political adversaries. The did not use the name *Clinton*, but did quote the source as political.
Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
You won't have egg on your face because in the long term you are just a psuedonymn on a blog and can disapper when history shows you were just a leftist crapflooder here.
Neither of those things is true. Flynn's guilty plea is still there and in force, and the new judge on the Flynn case has clarified his request and completely debunked the news that turned up in the alt-right media last week.
Not what happened. The plea is in-force, but the new judge that replaced the previous one because of a CoI demanded that the muller investigation produce the exculpatory evidence in the case that by law they were required to produce. Instead of doing that and continuing to stonewall this judge, they then opened another indictment in another jurisdiction(aka judge shopping) about 30mi outside of DC, effectively to have him fight two cases on two different fronts. The guy is basically bankrupt from fighting the first case, and Muller seems to be going out of his way to ensure that he can't mount any legal defense because he can't afford to.
Om, nomnomnom...
I read both memos, and I would side with the GP (...833), whose comment is much more on-point compared to the P (...971). In my personal opinion, ShariaBlue P is a weasel.
Then again, I might be just biased, as I am a Conservative, although I did my best to be both fair and objective.
Vox was founded by Markos (Kos) Moulitsas, it has no credibility as a news outlet. It lives down in the mud with Huff Post and USA Today.
When you're part of the extremist right, everyone is a leftist.
Before now, I’ve strongly disliked Nunez - but now I’m warming to him a little.
Ignorance is so endearing, isn't it?
It might have also made a difference if we had any new information in there. The fact that the FBI included paid-for oppo research for a FISA warrant is the potential scandal, not the and level of overtness in the filing.
Am I to understand that because the dossier was paid-for by the opposition party, that should preclude it from being considered as evidence? By the same logic, evidence for a murder should be ignored if the evidence was included as part of paid for document authored by anyone? Is that the point you're trying to make?
Further: Even if they included Page's response to Steele's leaks published by Yahoo instead of using the Yahoo to corroborate Steele ( someone RTFM for me...is that part of the GOP claim rebutted?) that's still smells like fruit of the forbidden tree to me.
Interesting that you know the term "fruit of the forbidden tree" but have no real understanding of what the term means.
If the cops are investigating you for something and leak to the press that you've done all sorts of crazy shit, then use your public denials as grounds for a warrant to search your house...that wouldn't hold water at trial, would it?
Actually, yes it would. Thanks for asking, though.
And just to be clear: Manafort and the rest of them are a sleezes who deserve what's coming to them, but it doesn't excuse the FBI operating outside the law to get at them.
And yet, when Manafort's attorneys filed to get the charges dismissed, using much of the same 'legal' argument as you just provided, the judge laughed them out of the courtroom. Just to be clear, you have asserted that the FBI has no idea what's illegal and then seem to believe that the judge who is in charge of Manafot's case is also incompetent while you have such a keen legal mind that you can misuse legal terminology to make arguments which are patently absurd.
"Clinton started the Russian story"
The only way Clinton started the Russian story was by making Putin angry enough to interfere in the US election. We will probably never know whether he would have deployed his hackers, spies, troll armies and Trump-puppet against another opponent.
Tell me again how great democracy is, when we all know that people in groups have trouble coming up with coherent answers to any question more complex than "what restaurant should we go to for lunch?" Clearly the Left is trying to conceal the fact that they launched a politically-motivated investigation, sort of like how they used the IRS to suppress Right-wing groups.
Alternative Right.
that's still smells like fruit of the forbidden tree to me.
Here. Educate yourself.
When you're done reading that explanation (which is written by an actual lawyer), please go over to Khan Academy and check out their grammar videos.
URL please.
Everyone but you seems to think it's true.
I would like to read it and compare the responses but there doesn't seem to be a slashdot post on the release of the original memo.
Why is that?
If this is News for Nerds, wouldn't the original memo be as important?
Slashdot does strive to be an objective source for news and not a propagandist rag, right?
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Claiming it was produced by request of Clinton would have been a lie.
It was initially opposition research funded by Trump's GOP opponents in the primaries. Clinton picked it up after Trump won the primaries and the GOP nominees stopped paying.
I think you mean here that Trey Gowdy does not think that the memo invalidates the Muller probe. I personally think Gowdy is one of the people who will do and say what is right without considering politics. Gowdy does agree with the memo just not implications that it invalidates the Muller investigation. Gowdy would tell you not to make conclusions but wait until all testimony has been heard. Trey Gowdy believes that the FISA warrants were not done correctly or legally (he would say there are some serious questions that need to be answered and it should be investigated.)
Nunes relying on Gowdy is actually better than Nunes reading he material himself. So back to my point Nunes not reading the source document is just fud being thrown at the memo. However this is the democratic game it seems ignore facts and try and make up FUD.
Comey tells Trump that the document is salacious and unverified and then signs off that it is factual and verified to the court, does anyone see a problem?
If I present to the market a report on your product saying it is crap and at the bottom there is a "*source from market data." But the actual source is your direct competitor who is trying to discredit you with lies and false information do you see a difference.
Lets go further they did not verify anything except the guy (forgot his name) flew to Russia, is this enough to produce as court evidence? Remember Steele produced this dossier with a personal motivation that he hates Trump and would do anything to make sure he is not elected, as well as getting paid indirectly by the DNC, he was sending it to the papers etc. is this foreign election tampering?
Nunes, Gowdy and most of the world know that this was not correct method to get a warrant, lets move on it will either be investigated as a crime or not.
Remember when Trump said they had tapped his phones and everyone laughed well no one is laughing about that now.
You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.
You didn’t read my sig, I take it. Oh well, it’s a bad joke if it has to be explained...
#DeleteChrome
Please. Stop lying.
Yes, you fucking moron... In the same way that Obama wasn't investigated for being a secret Muslim Kenyan based on unfounded accusations...
When you're part of the extremist left, everyone is a right winger.
RightwingNutjob has been posting for over a decade. If he's a foreign shill, he must be one of them "deep cover" spooks you read about, comrade.
Your link is about Mueller. I said nothing about Mueller. I said the scandal is DOJ surveillance Page in the first place. Page could very well argue that evidence collected against him from the wiretapping is inadmissible without running afoul of what your link says.
This congressional memo or their new-found hero Comey? Pick one because they conflict with each other, or pick two to live in an alternate reality where two both conflicts are true.
The fact that the FBI included paid-for oppo research for a FISA warrant is the potential scandal, not the and level of overtness in the filing.
How so? I don't understand why that is a scandal. Someone hires someone to dig up dirt on someone, that dirt makes it to the FBI. The FBI looks at it, and decides that there is something there or not, comparing it to the other things they have evidence on. Then, they go to the FISA court, and say here are all these things, we want to spy on them. The court decides.
Which part of that is the scandal? If the FBI has some information that comes from a dodgy source, then they have to take it with a grain of salt. Do you think that they did not? That they somehow completely ignored the person or group that gave them the information, despite the fact that taking that information into account is their bread and butter? It would seem that the FBI gets biased information all the time, from people with an axe to grind or to settle old scores. They have to evaluate it and decide if it is worthwhile or not; in this case, it was another piece in an already damning puzzle. Why would this be different from any other case?
I don't see a sig for you, I'm also not logged in, that could be why
Replying to myself to add:
Case in point: a point by point rebuttal of the Democrat memo by the REPUBLICAN House Intelligence Committee Members: https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/democrat_memo_charge_and_response.pdf
Corrected it for you. The Democratic members put together the original rebuttal to the Nunes memo (so named as he was the one pushing for it to begin with to distract from the actual facts).
Re: "None of which is about Collusion with Russia to affect the election."
Sure! Just keep telling yourself that; you can convince yourself and anyone else who wants to believe it.
Prosecutors and investigators have to be careful. What they can prove and what they cannot prove is very important. The most recent indictments they said that there were "unwitting" U.S. accomplices. That's because they cannot yet prove there were "witting" U.S. accomplices, at least not yet. In short they only allege what they think they can prove, they slowly break down the defenses of the accused, and they try to make deals to get more information.
In All the President's Men there was a relevant moment. Deep Throat is talking to the reporters, who published a story they went too far out on a limb about. The story was weak, it was flawed. Deep Throat says (paraphrasing here), "you have to be careful, go step by step. Make a mistake and they take comfort from that. You can sink the whole enterprise by being too aggressive."
When that happened the Nixon administration pounced and claimed that the entire story was a fabrication and those reporters were irresponsible and should be stopped.
Mueller is trying (and succeeding) to not make that mistake. He can easily expand the charges, the circle of accused, and the range of allegations. That can be done at any time. Make a move prematurely though and the guilty will try to take full advantage, to take the heat off.
Guilty people routinely deny, cover up and lie. They wish to avoid having to pay for their illegal activities, this isn't exactly news. It is the investigator's art to break through the deception and learn the truth. One key technique is to start with a smaller accusation that can be proved and work your way up to more serious charges.
Actually, as far as I can tell both memos are factual. The Nunes memo is simply playing games around the facts. It claimed that the FISA court was not notified that the dossier had been prepared by Steele, working for Fusion GPS, to dig up dirt on Republicans. The Democrat memo claims that the FBI redacted actual names and used arbitrary designations, and disclosed everything relevant that way. The Nunes memo also claims that a certain news article didn't corroborate the dossier, and never actually claimed that the FBI claimed it corroborated it.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
The wiretapping was based on legal warrants, and predated the mention of the Steele dossier. There's no way Page is going to be able to overturn those warrants, so the wiretapping evidence is admissible.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
The appearance of impropriety comes from the fact that the DOJ was under the direction of a political appointee from one party, the wiretap warrant was against the candidate of the opposing party motivated in part by the political operation of the party in power, all within the context of the very same political appointee appearing to downgrade a concurrent investigation into wrongdoing by the candidate from her own party running for the same office.
Again...you'd have to have more information to determine one way or the other. And that brings us to the next point: this was a secret warrant. If all of this were playing out in open court...it'll fix itself with disinfecting sunshine. A lot of the concern here comes from the fact that all of this stuff is secret and being secret in a justice system meant to be skewed in favor of the accused, it is controversial and subject to extra scrutiny and concern over improper behavior. You might well be right, but surely you appreciate the concerns at play here.
I don't see a sig for you, I'm also not logged in, that could be why
Huh. You learn something new about Slashdot every day. Who says stories like this are useless!
Reading through the top modded comments in this thread, there are lots of posts like this from people who seem almost excited by the fact Trump will eventually be charged.
I don't really get this (btw I'm not a US citizen). Is it just because you don't like the decisions he makes? Or is it because he doesn't act as bureaucratic as the typical candidate? The way I see it is he bullshits as much as any other politician, but I feel far more confident when Trump says something that he isn't straight up lying to our faces. He may change his opinion on matters, as is good when new information comes about. I know the media parrots this as lying or flipping, but I see it as what should happen if the person in charge isn't purely ideological about things.
To date there hasn't bee any evidence of anything unreasonable from Trump's family, although it's sure true Washington is full of slimy people on both sides. It also sure seems like the Democrats were using some federal departments not fully honestly.. so this point should be recognized and the Democrats rightly berated. The election result definitely surprised some people in the Democrats and now their dirty laundry is being aired. Both parties have people we're finding are not honest, so let's root them all out. Finding glee in this is simply because you hope your person gets elected next time around. Sore losers if you ask me - the party I strongly support didn't win our last election, but I can still keep things civil.
Maybe because he's dangerous and not doing anything with any competence? It's not a question of even liking his position or not - he can't keep his position straight over the course of hours, let alone a presidency.
The glee is in seeing a dangerous idiot who campaigned to be not corrupt being nailed to the wall by the corruption they encourage.
Judging by the memos, it seems the republicans are hell-bent on misrepresenting what happened. The judges involved are all right-leaning and appointed by republicans. The "smoking gun" timeline they purport is factually incorrect, which doesn't help this seemingly-desperate attempt at misdirection seem legitimate.
Why is this such an issue now, though? Where were all these shrill voices proclaiming this guy's innocence when others were in front of these courts? It seems rather convenient to decry the system when "your guy" is being hammered by it.
The way I see it is he bullshits as much as any other politician, but I feel far more confident when Trump says something that he isn't straight up lying to our faces. He may change his opinion on matters, as is good when new information comes about. I know the media parrots this as lying or flipping, but I see it as what should happen if the person in charge isn't purely ideological about things.
GP AC here. If you knew ANYTHING about him that wasn't part of his self-written press you'd be terrified. He bullshits engages in hypocrisy far more than ANY other politician I have ever paid attention to in my life nor read about in our history. He doesn't change his opinion based on new information and reason, as you imply, he does so because it frame shim as a hero in some imagined way. In his "Art of the Deal" book, which I read as a kid ($1 in the discount section) he brags about ripping off his investors (fake construction activity section). He thinks it makes him seem smart, it appalled me.
This grifter got four "medical deferments" from the Vietnam draft due to "bone spurs" on his heel. He couldn't recall which heel when questioned about it. And today/yesterday this coward claimed he would have charged in, unarmed, and handled the most recent* shooter. He is a dangerous maniac and I wouldn't put it past him to fire a missile at NK in an attempt to just change the headline from his inevitable impeachment. That's not an exaggeration for affect. You might think we Americans aren't dumb enough to vote in an actual half wit, but you'd be wrong. The republicans in congress are derelict in their duty to restrain the office of the president and the whole world may pay for it.
There were more than Nunes' account, and the claims are not supported by any other source than Nunes saying so. So by only allowing Nunes' account to go out, they are obstructing justice because they are refusing to release any other information that doesn't support their claims.
Fucking nutjob.
no, your trolling is purely to keep "on message" for the orange cheeto haired one and wind up your fellow idiots so they don't stray off message and start looking for themselves.
Then why don't you explain to everybody why the judge has demanded exculpatory evidence be presented and the FBI is stonewalling.
Om, nomnomnom...
It's all explained in the link I provided earlier. I'll put it here again. The judge's clerk used outdated boilerplate text to file the original "Brady order" in the case. It has since been refiled and the judge has clarified. If the FBI were "stonewalling", the judge would have already thrown the case out. Flynn has plead guilty and his guilty plea stands. He is cooperating with the Mueller investigation. What you're looking for starts about half-way through the article below.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
You are welcome on my lawn.
In his latest adventure, "BLoAtBie" the balloon body gets set to raid ALL pizzashops in San Lius Obispo in retaliation for being BANNED from ALL pizzashops for LIFE due to his "condition" (no dick fatboy, lol) https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QqAn6jRY748/UP906Z4OONI/AAAAAAAAMBw/4UJL1sLYx2E/s1600/Gun+Nut+Article+for+Bell+of+Lost+Souls2.jpg/ in the state of California!
* The StarShip Enterprise TRIED to drag him away w/ a tractor beam but the SHEER MASS of all that LARD was just TOO MUCH!
(Capt. Kirk: "Scotty, we've got to save the earth from the excessive gravity well PULL of 'bloatby' mass!" Scotty: "I canna do it cap'n! The engines are BUCKLING!!!" - RoTfLmAo!)
STAY TUNED for the conclusion of this epic tale of gross obesity in our next episode (lol) - when BLOATBIE balloon body PopeFATZO evolves into "BLoAtaSauRuS REX" (no, not due to gamma ray exposure but rather excessive PIZZA intake (lmao)).
APK
P.S.=> Bloatbie - please: Do us ALL a favor & save us your 'chatter' fatboy! The particles of pizza are flying out w/ your foaming @ the mouth SPITTLE as you prattle mindlessly! Now STFU & GO EAT A SALAD you fat disgusting monstrosity (ah, smell that PIZZA! The crust & delicious sauce + mouthwatering toppings you'll FOREVER be DENIED due to your lazy FATGUT life & lack of discipline)... apk
That's not what's happening in the case though. The washington post article is factually wrong, this wasn't caused by the clerk. This shouldn't be a surprise that he article is wrong either, since most reporters on legal matters haven't spent even 1 day in a law 101 class. If you did you'd also already know why this is happening. This was caused by new evidence being discovered by the defense and the FBI refusing to turn it over as required by law so the defendant can have a *complete defense*. The FBI is stonewalling go read the latest briefs, they're refusing to turn over evidence to the defense which is required by law. This isn't an isolated case, it has also happened in the Bundy case. You realize what happened in that one don't you? That was an in-force guilty plea at the time as well...
This isn't even touching on the modified 302s, and "lost" email and text messages. There's incomplete chains of evidence, there's lost chains of evidence, there's failure to disclose by law.
Om, nomnomnom...
The Wall Street Journal has confirmed, as has Ken White over at Popehat. The filing has nothing to do wiht "new evidence being discovered by the defense". You have been lied to by the Trump dead-enders at The Federalist.
In other news, 30 people in the Trump administration, including the President's son-in-law, have lost their security clearance because they couldn't pass a background check, that same son-in-law got loans totaling over $150,000,000.00 after meeting with companies while working as a senior presidential advisor, and Robert Mueller is looking into the president's rather unique finances (which Trump previously said was a "red line"). Also, the president's longest serving-staffer and communications director just resigned a day after giving secret testimony to the intelligence committee and admitting to "white lies" on the president's behalf and Trump just called for guns to be confiscated without due process. And, there have now been FIVE convictions stemming from the Mueller investigation.
All those things happened this week, and it's only Wednesday. Mishiki, your god-emperor Trump is in an uncontrolled skid, and it's glorious to watch. The net is tightening, and his performance at the "bi-partisan meeting with members of congress on gun control" shows that he's cracking like the vinyl upholstery in a '78 Matador.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Answer 3 questions & prove a things you say about yourself: 1.) Are you paid off by Soros to spew crap https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11729899&cid=56102973/ & https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11669511&cid=56024869/ or are those 2 links just you lying?
2.) You're a PhD in English (lol - a degree for idiots) & you were a "pwufessuh" (those who can DO, those who CAN'T, teach fatzo)??
3.) You're a martial artist (lol, maybe in the old Ninja Gaiden game) too??
On that 3rd one - just to let you TRY PROVE IT fairly?
Come try prove that w/ me directly fatboy - you're the RICH MAN, take a flight here & we'll see what's what on that - No weapons, just man to man (you're no man though).
No threat either: Who'd I 'threaten'? YOU, you FAKE NAME for a FAKE LIE OF A LIFE Mooley - you're all LIES & not even REAL behind your FAKE NAME for your FAKE LIE of a "life", lol.
You called the 1st lady a whore today https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11801469&cid=56198439/ ?
Your ALLEGED WIFE's a whore MOOLEY https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11806784&cid=56202673/ so let her read that you no balls (& certainly no dick per your photo) punk.
Bugs Bunny's better than you & I'm challenging a fake in yourself. A grotesque DELUSIONAL liar & mere caricature in yourself (just like bugs bunny), nothing more.
* By the way: CNN & Anderson Cooper disappearing nose greenscreen work is ALL ANYONE NEEDS TO SEE about "Cock Nozzle Network", lol!
APK
P.S.=> Either way you answer, you're cornered (like the "RATZO" you are): You're either a LIAR or you're a 'souled-out' traitor PopeFATZO!
Do I blame you? Yes!
HOWEVER:
I understand your motives (desperation) & what makes you a perfect candidate for Soros hiring you (He goes for easily paid off disgruntled losers & heroin/meth junkies looking for 'fix' $) You're so FAT & UGLY you deformed MUTANT https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QqAn6jRY748/UP906Z4OONI/AAAAAAAAMBw/4UJL1sLYx2E/s1600/Gun+Nut+Article+for+Bell+of+Lost+Souls2.jpg// you need money to TRY to get laid (& even THEN, you get zero)... apk