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.'"

Comments

How is this news for nerds?

[cowwoc2001]

This is political mudslinging, not news for nerds.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[Deathlizard]

Political mudslinging is news for nerds now.

Just go to Gizmodo.com if you don't believe me. For a tech blog it seems like every other blog post is a "I Hate Donald Trump" Story,

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[phantomfive]

Because it's strong evidence that FISA courts are a joke and should be illegal.

Re: How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fagget n1gger shit websites. Fake news, CNN bottom bitches.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is political mudslinging, not news for nerds.

This is a fair point. It isn't really a tech topic, other than nerds are interested in more than tech I suppose.

Generally speaking. Nothing should be classified simply because it is embarrassing or politically inconvenient to get out. Also nothing should be declassified, simply to serve political ends.

Once the first memo got out, the only way to restore parity was to release the second, otherwise the first memo's selective declassification for political purposes would stand, which would be a horrible precedent.

I'm uncertain how any of this affects sources and methods, but maybe it does somehow. I do know it is inappropriate to drag peoples name through the mud until they are found guilty, which this does to some extent.

That can be overridden by a compelling public interest, though that is not unlimited. Still it would be fair game to release what you could sometime before the next election so voters can make an informed decision. Note, I said what could be released should be. Selectively cherry picking only the stuff that makes your opponent look bad is always unacceptable, particularly if you are using classified information to do it. Even with that in mind, the FBI usually should just shut up a month or so before an election unless they have something both proven and serious.

Put another way, "Was it appropriate for Comey to comment on Clinton right before the election?" Not really, not unless he found something solid, and certainly not at the same time there was an investigation into Trump's people ongoing that they weren't going to mention.

Would it have been appropriate for Comey to authorize unlimited overtime to search the new information? Sure, but if there was nothing there he should have shut up since it would be impossible for any statement like that so close to an election to not have vast political consequences that were not justified by the lack of finding anything.

I wonder if there is a technical solution to help to accurately redact information that must be redacted from classified documents prior to release. For instance, maybe some kind of neural network could be used to help correctly detect misclassified information?

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[DNS-and-BIND]

That's the sad part about this whole thing: this is the Legislative branch, exercising its oversight of the FISA court which it established. They found abuses; they are now addressing those abuses. That the Executive branch is resisting tooth and nail and telling the Legislative branch that they are not under democratic control, that is the real scandal here. The attitude seems to be, "We'll do whatever the hell we want, and if you try to tell us no, we have six ways from Sunday of getting back at you."

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Could you elaborate on what "abuses" have been found while spying on the guy who bragged about, and I quote, "serv[ing] as an informal advisor to the staff of the Kremlin", and who had previously been caught up in a Russian spy ring?

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember when SD had cool tech news. It felt fresh and fun. Well no more. This is the new and improved SD. Where you can argue about politics. Like every other news board out there or even facebook. Its amazing! /sarc

SD should look to hacker news. They have it dialed in just right on news for nerds. On the front page right now is no less than 6 political items. All meant to piss you off. It is called engagement. You are being fed this BS to keep you pissed off and coming back for more. Turn it off and and do not come back for more. It is not 'fake news' it is anger management news. Created to anger you. Do not think so? Think about how you felt when you read the headline. Did it make you happy? No it made you mad. You wanted to comment. Walk away. Remove the air from this dead .com beast. Whos new owners just want your eyeballs and engagement.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot is suffering from a lot of spambot accounts that are voting this stuff up in the firehose. Slashdot is also suffering a lot of "technical" glitches lately. The two things could be related.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[sheramil]

That's the sad part about this whole thing: this is the Legislative branch, exercising its oversight of the FISA court which it established. They found abuses; they are now addressing those abuses. That the Executive branch is resisting tooth and nail and telling the Legislative branch that they are not under democratic control, that is the real scandal here. The attitude seems to be, "We'll do whatever the hell we want, and if you try to tell us no, we have six ways from Sunday of getting back at you."

I can't see a single thing in that reply that merits inclusion on a "news for nerds" tech site, or in the original article for that matter.

Re: How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot is under new management. It's been passed along by new owners several times since Malda was involved.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

True. Slashdot lost its way a long time ago.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[DNS-and-BIND]

The DNC/Clinton machine paid for the Steele Dossier which was used as justification for FISA warrant to spy on the opposition campaign. Hillary masked her purchase through two legal proxies (one of whom pled the fifth in a deposition) and hired a foreign spy as part of gathering the intel. This is big stuff, Watergate big, I mean using Oppo Research to spy on people in the middle of an election. Watergate was just a third-rate burglary. This is 50 times what that was. This is no longer some pie-in-the-sky conspiracy. There is massive evidence, including statements from the co-conspirators, that highlights this exact operation in detail.

It is almost certain that the FBI used the dossier to get FISA court warrants to spy on Trump associates, meaning it used the opposition research of the party in power to convince a court to let it spy on the candidate of the other party - likely without telling the court of the dossier's political link.

This goes well beyond basic criminality. We're getting into serious sedition, high crimes, and treason territory here. The FBI and NSA aren't "accidentally losing" hundreds of text messages and emails because nothing is at stake.

Did you know Manafort worked for the Podesta Group in helping seal up the Uranium One deal, and the Podestas worked directly with the Russian government to do it? The smoking gun.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[PolygamousRanchKid]

This is political mudslinging, not news for nerds.

Oh, there is a lot that nerds, especially non-US ones can learn from this . . . "news".

I hate to use the word "news" these days, because doing immediately implies that it is fake. There is no "real" news these days. Everything is adulterated by political disinformation campaigns to the point of being useless. If you tossed current news stories into an AI box trained to identify news as "fake" or "real" . . . the AI box would respond with a twist on the Wolfang Pauli quote:

"That's not "real" news! It's not even "fake" news!

If you are a non-US person, you might be tended to think that the US Justice system has nothing to do with "Justice" any more and is a cesspool tool of political intrigue and maneuvering from both political parties.

Also, don't expect the US government to do anything serious in the next few years, or anything in the interest of the people. Both political parties have moved to the extremist flanks of their parties, and only act as a block in the interest of their party. Independent thinking is just plain out these days. Politics in the US is now dysfunctional . . . and you should keep that in mind when you are doing business with the US.

Expect things to happen that defy the imagination of the "Theater of the Bizarre."

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are trolling, but my answer may enlighten others.
The greatest abuse uncovered was politically driven prosecution of the opposition candidates (here, D J Trump).

It's the "insurance policy" the FBI heads talked about, referring to their Obama-sanctioned coup attempt against our new President.
It's the fact that Mueller hired 18 Clinton donors, and not a single republican. Not one.
It's the fact that Hillary Clinton's crimes (1. unauthorized release of classified info, 2. lying about it, 3. destruction of evidence (BleachBit and hammers), 4. suborning perjury (that dossier was presented to the FISA judge as a material fact)) were covered up.

The cover-up was through granting 14 of her staff members retroactive immunity, before the interviews, and without asking for any testimony in return. In contrast, D J Trump-associated people were charged with "lying to the FBI" on a technicality: one, because he said he received an email in August 2016, but in reality it was September 2016, and for deleting that email when he found it later. When the witch deleted 32K emails, that was A-OK, however...

This whole thing is very similar to the other Obama operations: IRS Louis Lerner targeting of the Republicans, pervasive warrantless spying on Americans, "Fast and Furious" "investigation", and many more. Google "Obama scandals" and judge for yourself.

Re: How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

The dossier was initiated and paid for by Republicans as part of their opposition research. After Trump won the nomination Republicans dropped it. Then Democrats started funding it as part of their opposition research. Digging up dirt on your opponent normal and unremarkable. The results of that research were the only thing noteworthy.

Re: How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Remember when SD had cool tech news

Remember when shorthand for Slashdot was /.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

The DNC/Clinton machine paid for the Steele Dossier which was used as justification for FISA warrant to spy on the opposition campaign.

It was used as a supporting piece of evidence, not the entire basis for the warrant request.

Hillary masked her purchase through two legal proxies (one of whom pled the fifth in a deposition) and hired a foreign spy as part of gathering the intel.

A foreign spy as in a formally recognized British expert in Russian affairs? Maybe she should have hired some guy named Curveball?

This is big stuff, Watergate big, I mean using Oppo Research to spy on people in the middle of an election. Watergate was just a third-rate burglary. This is 50 times what that was.

Bullshit.

Nothing about this warrant allowed for the spying of the Trump campaign and I would appreciate it if you would stop making shit up. As to this being worse than Watergate, it's pretty obvious that you have no idea what you're talking about. Watergate wasn't a "third-rate burglary" it was a clandestine operation meant to steal the opposition's plans as well as bug the Democratic Party's headquarters - but if you need to bend the facts to make your case, the truth isn't going to stop you.

This is no longer some pie-in-the-sky conspiracy. There is massive evidence, including statements from the co-conspirators, that highlights this exact operation in detail.

And yet, you supply nothing to support this conspiracy theory. Imagine that!

It is almost certain that the FBI used the dossier to get FISA court warrants to spy on Trump associates, meaning it used the opposition research of the party in power to convince a court to let it spy on the candidate of the other party - likely without telling the court of the dossier's political link.

More bullshit.

It not almost certain or any other kind of certain that this warrant was used to spy on the Trump campaign. The truth is, once Flynn was caught speaking to the Russian ambassador and discussing a quid pro quo deal, tapping the Trump phone lines became a legal and responsible action for law enforcement to take.

This goes well beyond basic criminality. We're getting into serious sedition, high crimes, and treason territory here.

Agreed, once Flynn promised the Russians he would get the sanctions lifted in return, for (what did he get again?) we passed the threshold to hit sedition, high crimes, and treason. Making a deal with the "Empire of evil" to influence an American election is treason of the highest order.

The FBI and NSA aren't "accidentally losing" hundreds of text messages and emails because nothing is at stake.

Keep flinging the bullshit, comrade, none of it is sticking to the wall. Even better, Mueller is closing the noose.

Did you know Manafort worked for the Podesta Group in helping seal up the Uranium One deal, and the Podestas worked directly with the Russian government to do it?

How about we let the liberals at Fox News explain the Uranium One deal to you before you embarrass yourself any further.

Re: How is this news for nerds?

[DNS-and-BIND]

Negative, that is fake news. Fusion GPS was contacted by a GOP member (Washington Free Beacon) for opposition research. The Steele Dossier was separate. There were two separate work contracts for Fusion GPS. The media / DNC are pushing that narrative, but it's flat out wrong. The GOP didn't ask for the Steele Dossier, they asked for separate Opposition Research. The DNC / HRC campaign started the Steele Dossier.

Robert Mueller found such strong evidence of Trump colluding with Russia that he decided to chase down a couple of tax evaders instead. Fun fact: you know who wrote the infamous WMD memo that got us into the Iraq War? Robert Mueller. Yup, the same one. The smoking gun here.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[ABEND]

The news for nerds is that the normies/pod-people are really, really illogical.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[elrous0]

At this point, everything seems to have been infected by the cancer of politics/social justice/etc.

It has infected even once sacrosanct common-ground pastimes like comic books, sports, videogames, etc. You can't even watch a football game anymore without some sports commentator or athlete jumping in to tell you how they feel about Donald Trump or the latest social cause of the week. You can't read a comic book where the lead character doesn't remind you on every other page they they're a strong lesbian-latino-trangendered-muslim who don't-need-no-man-to-help-them. You can't play a videogame that isn't tainted with protests about it being too violent, too white, too gay, not gay enough, etc. It's becoming almost impossible to escape to even one medium anymore without hearing anyone calling anyone else the most vile of epithets for disagreeing with them on politics or social issues. It's fucking exhausting.

At this point you could probably make a fortune just starting up a sports league, entertainment company, etc. that specially banned politics and social issues from its ranks. "A place where you can escape all that insane bullshit and just have fun" sounds so appealing right now.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[dwpro]

Steele Dossier which was used as justification for FISA warrant to spy on the opposition campaign

As has been publish widely but you choose to ignore, there was other justification, specifically George Papadopoulos's drunken leak and the fact that carter page himself bragging that he was an advisor to the Kremlin.

It would be a dereliction of duty for the FBI to not spy on a political campaign that is a riddled with Russian intermediaries as this one. We don't even have all the facts yet and we've had 3 people plead guilty to lying to the FBI about these Russian contacts, including the deputy campaign chairman and the man who became the national security advisor. The campaign chairman is up to his eyeballs in debt to a Russian oligarch.

However, there may be something to this Uranium one thing, we'll see.

Also, I believe they found those missing texts.

Re: How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you actually bother to read the memo? If Congress approved a war based upon a paragraph and a couple of bullet points, the failure of oversight again, falls on the Congress.

The are Article One in the Republic.

Re: How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

You said it. Couldnt have worded it better

Re: How is this news for nerds?

[Bartles]

Why won't this lie die?

Re: How is this news for nerds?

[pots]

Yes of course those were separate contracts. What the hell? Is that your counter argument? Pointing out obvious and irrelevant trivialities?

All right all right, I'll adapt the parent's claim just for you: "The research conducted for the dossier was initiated and paid for by Republicans as part of their opposition research." Really though, you should be able to figure this stuff out for yourself.

Re: How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, let me Gerry this straight...you think we need a "safe space"? Poor snowflake.

Re: How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

My understanding was the GOP hired Fusion GPS to do an opensource opposition research, the DNC expanded the scope.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[dave420]

We get it - you are scared of people around you, and want a safe space where your preconceptions of the world are not challenged, and you can turn a blind eye to systematic failures of a society which purports to be perfect.

You poor little snowflake.

Re:How is this news for nerds?

[Anonymous Coward]

TL,DR; you're offended that people are offended. Congratulations.

it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA app

[Camel Pilot]

Nunes never read the referenced document? I wonder if Nunes is a slashdot poster.

Once again GOP cherry picks and distorts the facts

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

It doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re: It doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it shows that 4 separate judges, all with documented right wing biases all found the same thing - that there was plenty of evidence to authorise surveillance of these people, and that evidence was not the kinds of crap that Nunes claims is was.

Re: It doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it means that it was SUFFICIENTLY OBFUSCATED FROM 4 JUDGES.

Since when would a Judge give the the same weight to a document PAID FOR by a party who will reap significant benefits from the investigation and is COMPLETELY UNCORROBORATED with no supporting evidence and is, AT BEST, PAID FOR 3rd party hearsay?

I'm sure the Judges are fuming.... but secret courts be secret.

Re: It doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

No. It could have also been the same judge on 4 different occasions, or the FISA court is so dysfunctional that they didn't bother to read the warrants. Which might be the case considering that 99% of warrants get approved.

In any case, it looks like Hillary used the government to obtain research into her opponent, not unlike what Nixon did at Watergate. It's just that the name of the hotel is different now.

Re: It doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

The Schiff memo shows the FBI weren't relying on the dossier to make their case - they had other evidence.

Besides it's common knowledge that legal documents don't have footnotes so that'd totally be an easy way to slip stuff past those silly old FISA judges.

Shouting doesn't make what you assert any more true.

Sounds like old news to me.

[Hal_Porter]

If they'd have got it out earlier it might have made a difference but they're a day late and a ruble short. Sad.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[RightwingNutjob]

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.

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?

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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[RightwingNutjob]

That's cute. How was he obstructing anything if he released it after one round of mutually-agreed-upon redactions?

Re: Sounds like old news to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[ClickOnThis]

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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[RightwingNutjob]

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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[ClickOnThis]

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?

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[ravenshrike]

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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[RightwingNutjob]

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.

Re: Sounds like old news to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Rightwingnutjob is a foreign shill, not an American. Even east coast Appalachian toothless uneducated fools don't make those mistakes. Mod accordingly.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

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)

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re: Sounds like old news to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

"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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re: Sounds like old news to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, you fucking moron... In the same way that Obama wasn't investigated for being a secret Muslim Kenyan based on unfounded accusations...

Re: Sounds like old news to me.

[RightwingNutjob]

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.

Re: Sounds like old news to me.

[RightwingNutjob]

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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

Re: Sounds like old news to me.

[david_thornley]

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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[RightwingNutjob]

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.

Re: Sounds like old news to me.

[RightwingNutjob]

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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[fatwilbur]

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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[dave420]

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.

Re: Sounds like old news to me.

[dave420]

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.

Re:Sounds like old news to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

because this site doesn't care about news

[Anonymous Coward]

it only cares about getting rich off bitching about Trump

I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[rsilvergun]

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?

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Hal_Porter]

Clintonâ(TM)s team spent a whopping $1 billion on the election in all â" about twice what Donald Trumpâ(TM)s campaign spent. Clinton spent $72 million on television ads in the final weeks alone

Next time she should hire those Russians who apparently spend $100K on FB ads which swung the election. She'd save 99.9% of her cash and additionally have won the election instead of losing it.

If the Dems are interested I'll set up a call with my buddy Subtle Dmitri and he'll hand over his entire arsenal of social media memes.

Including "Buff Bernie", "Satan : I win if Clinton wins, Jesus : not if I can help it" and "Not My President"

http://www.nydailynews.com/new...

Actually it looks like the Dems are already running with the later, so Dmitri wants his fee for that. Oh yeah, he's says Vladimir says thanks for the uranium.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[cold fjord]

Maybe this will cheer you up. The Russians are brining back political commisars.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[DNS-and-BIND]

The real secret was that American traitor who spilled the biggest secret to the dirty foreigners - to concentrate Russian efforts on the swing states. If only someone in Hillary's campaign had known that, she might have won Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Live and learn!

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Hal_Porter]

The DNC claim they told her those states were competitive and she ignored them

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

I guess in lieu of agreement on that both she and they have decided to blame it on Russia.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[DNS-and-BIND]

The Democrats gutted welfare at the same time they exploded the prison population, called black people 'super predators', at the same time they did NAFTA. Then they deregulated Wall Street, which crashed the economy within 10 years. That's what Democrats did. Democrats did things that Ronald Reagan could only dream about, in his wet dreams. George HW Bush couldn't pass NAFTA. It took Bill Clinton to do it. Bill Clinton gave the cover to the other corporate Democrats to go along with it. That was the beginning of the end for the working class in America.

Then the Democrats wag their finger at people with no money and no power, for not voting for a corporatist warmonger like Hillary Clinton. Why do you think the people in Michigan wouldn't vote for Hillary Clinton? Maybe because she put half of them in fuckin' prison? Because she passed NAFTA, and Barack Obama was trying to sell TPP at the top of his lungs, at the same time she was trying to get working people to vote for her? They knew what the fuck was going on! That's why half the country didn't vote. But you're going to wag your finger at the people who actually do vote? Who come out and vote their conscience? You know what voting for the lesser of two evils gets you? Donald Trump!

-- Jimmy Dore

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[DNS-and-BIND]

She didn't "ignore" them, it was quite deliberate. One of the themes that emerges from Shattered (the book of the Clinton campaign) is that the Clinton operation didn't want to make a strong play for working-class white voters in swing states. The Clintonites thought these voters were disposable.

Leftist whites wanted to be rid of the culturally conservative, economically liberal, working-class white voters whom Democrats had always represented. Upper-middle-class whites were embarrassed by these people. They felt dirty trying to get their votes. The idea was that Hillary would win and spike the football in their faces, telling them that now they were politically irrelevant and decisions could be made without their input. Not that that wasn't always the case, but under Hillary it would have been policy.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[quantaman]

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.

The problem is ignoring the Russia stuff meant that Russia was able to wage a largely unopposed disinformation and propaganda campaign during the US election. And they potentially even colluded with and compromised members of the current administration.

The Dems need to expose and confront the Russian activities, especially since the GOP is more likely to cover it up than risk losing an election.

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).

No argument that Clinton was a terrible campaigner but the two major email hacks (not to mention all the astroturfing) almost certainly had a large effect relative to the margin of victory.

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.

And if it weren't for the massive Russian smear campaign voters might have cared about the fact he was obviously lying.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Hal_Porter]

That's an interesting idea but I honestly don't think Hillary is as smart as that. She badly wanted to be POTUS and if she could have sucked up to those working class white voters to get elected and then shafted them once she was in power she'd have done it.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[DNS-and-BIND]

Read Shattered, it's in there. They wanted to win without them, they would rather die than adopt their values, even as a lie.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[nonBORG]

My opinion (as a republican, I know just saying that means I will get troll down voted.) is that if the Dems did forget Russia they may actually win the Mid terms.

I am sick of Russia crap, I think most people are sick of it. Also if the Dems win and get 60 seats they would impeach Trump, they just need to get the numbers they would decide what to impeach him for after the vote.

They seem to have lost having any identity that is not just Anti Trump.

Trump is Arrogant, rude, speaks his mind, and wrong on plenty of stuff but he is also awesome and gets stuff done. He is non political and part of that is he just says and does what he thinks. Not to keep some political lobbyists happy.

Also the market will probably crash but I am hoping after the midterms, just because of the fact that it needs a bit of a reset. The recent pull back was just normal market mechanics which went 1/2 way down to from the 50 to the 200 day moving average. Crashes are hard to predict when but I would rather have Trump steering the ship when it crashes than anyone else, he has had plenty of experience in dealing with companies that go bankrupt. He wont panic like G W Bush did.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[93 Escort Wagon]

But moreoever Trump ran as a left wing populist. He promised Health Care for all, Jobs for all, good pay for all.

Nonsense. Trump ran as the blowhard know-it-all, holding court and solving all the world’s problems from his usual barstool down at the local watering hole... and it worked.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[SuricouRaven]

Trump ran as a plain populist. Left, right... he takes those as convenience dictates. He's been more right-wing on most issues because that's what it takes to be a Republican, but his message is as simple as can be: "Vote for me, because I promise to make the world a better place for you, even if that means screwing over everyone else."

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Hal_Porter]

https://www.washingtontimes.co...

For reasons yet to be explained, she chose to put her campaign into the hands of a youngish technocrat, appropriately named Mook, whose faith lay in "data analytics," and whose computer-generated analyses apparently helped convince her that her victory depended on appealing primarily to several distinct constituencies - women, blacks, academics and gender-challenged people.

As for the deplorables, those white working men and women once thought of by Democrats as the heart and sinew of their party, they could be taken for granted; and despite warnings from seasoned politicians like her husband, who read the volatile national political mood, they were.

There's a horrible plausibility to this.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff and do more actual policy.

That's like top management of an IT company sating "I wish they'd back off the security horse and do more actual business" while thinking "F...k the customer.. what matters is World Domination and my back account."

Investigating the Russia business *is* an essential part of policy making. The policy of ensuring that the US remains an independent nation, governed by the truths its inhabitants hold to be self-evident, as opposed to by whoever is the most clever and/but nastiest outsider who holds different truths to be self-evident...

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

but he is also awesome and gets stuff done

Huh?

How's his wall looking? How's repeal of Medicare going? With Republicans controlling every branch of government.

Maybe a little less "executive time" and time spent on the golf course would help.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[drinkypoo]

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.

Nobody will go after a politician for lying because that's what they do. Fraud is SOP. But they can go after him for collusion with a foreign power, which is not SOP. In fact, it is on the border of treason. If it's with an enemy, it is treason. Russia is not our enemy, but they're not really our ally, either. It's close enough to treason to make right-wingers uncomfortable, which is why they (you) have to keep doubling down on supporting Trump. If you admit that Trump is a shitheel, you have to admit that your party is hot garbage.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks a lot for this highly informative comment, and your other ones.
It is refreshing to see a liberal with a brain, for once: someone I disagree with, but can still learn a lot from. I thought opponents like you were an extinct species.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

The Democrats gutted welfare at the same time they exploded the prison population, called black people 'super predators', at the same time they did NAFTA.

At the time NAFTA was put in place, the Republicans held both houses of congress with a veto-proof supermajority. Strike one!

Then they deregulated Wall Street, which crashed the economy within 10 years. That's what Democrats did.

The Democrats deregulated Wall Street? Seriously? Man, you are so full of it that not even the Russians would pay you to post that level of bullshit. Strike two!

It took Bill Clinton to do it. Bill Clinton gave the cover to the other corporate Democrats to go along with it. That was the beginning of the end for the working class in America.

Clinton did support NAFTA and both of us benefit from that deal, unless you live somewhere that isn't covered. The price of everything we buy has dropped substantially directly due to NAFTA. But you probably know that when you wrote that pile of shit you left here.

Jimmy Dore

Nice choice of an American sounding name, no one would ever think of you as being a political operative whereas they might have been suspicious if you had used a name like DNS-and-BIND.

Re:I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[LynnwoodRooster]

At the time NAFTA was put in place, the Republicans held both houses of congress with a veto-proof supermajority. Strike one!

AC, you whiffed it yourself. NAFTA was passed in November 1993. That was the 103rd Congress, and it was held firmly by the Democrats. In fact, the "GOP revolution" in 1995 was partly because of NAFTA passage. You're flat-out wrong, Bill Clinton had a strong majority of DEMOCRATS controlling the Senate and House, and NAFTA sailed through with their support. I won't even get into your claim about "veto-proof supermajority" which hasn't existed in Congress for decades.

The Democrats deregulated Wall Street? Seriously? Man, you are so full of it that not even the Russians would pay you to post that level of bullshit. Strike two!

Second whiff again, AC! Over 75% of all Democrats in Congress supported the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which repealed Glass-Steagall. It passed with such strong bipartisan support that Bill Clinton had to sign it - it was way beyond veto-proof. So yes, the Democrats were definitely part of the equation! Add in their weakening of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac regulations over the recommendations of President Bush (probably because they overwhelmingly received campaign donations from FM/FM), and continued to increase the debt load of FM/FM right up to the collapse, and they are just as complicit, if not more so, than the GOP.

Re: I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

Sane constitutionalist Supreme Court Justice, lowest unemployment in half century, attractive corporate tax rate that is already bringing business back home, the defeat of ISIS, lowest illegal immigration rates in 40 years, and a stock market boon that benefits all.

You don't have to like Trump, but pretending he didn't do anything in his first year is just dishonest.

Re: I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

stock market boon

Nice try, Ivan. You've earned your weekly potato ration!

Re: I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Rakarra]

Sane constitutionalist Supreme Court Justice

Gorsich isn't horrible, and I'll give Trump props for choosing a person for a position who ISN'T riddled with corruption and impropriety for once.

lowest unemployment in half century

Which has nothing to do with Trump, and continues the trend from the Obama administration. I swear, ultra-Trump-loyalists seem to paint the economy of 2016 as a hellhole.

the defeat of ISIS

This happened under Obama's watch, thank you. ISIS had lost the vast majority of the territory before Trump's 2017 inauguration.

a stock market boon that benefits all

Again, look at a graph over time of the stock market. Notice a huge difference when Trump gets into office? No?
Then again, Trump told me during his campaign that the rising stock market is false, that it's just a bubble, that the economy is terrible even if the stock market is doing well. I guess stock market numbers are only shitty when they're making someone else look good.

You don't have to like Trump, but pretending he didn't do anything in his first year is just dishonest.

Trump is maybe the best there is at taking credit for things he had nothing to do with, happened independent of his watch or even entirely before his watch, I'll give him that.

Re: I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[nonBORG]

So a Supreme court Justice and a tax break. You must be happy. Trump is awesome, if he takes credit for stuff that happens while he is President that had momentum before hand then this is just SOP. However I can choose to give him some of the credit from where I sit. Given the fact that he is kind of under siege by the progressives and their screams of xxxxxx (Russian and obstruction are the main ones.) Even not screwing all that List up is good. I would add to that list Recognizing Jerusalem as the capital. I know most are in a mess to trying and understand the whole Palestinian situation (and just follow the lead of the Jew haters) but this is a major step which just takes someone with balls. Every president promised it and only Trump delivered.

Will he build a wall? Of course. Will he deal with NK? Of course. Will he keep all his promises, I would guess that he will be keeping more than most Presidents but perhaps I am reading things from a fairly jaded point of view.

From the whole Russia point of view, you know Trump could have (and did) taken out his own face book ads. It would make zero, less than zero sense for Trump to get the Russians to take out face book ads for him for any sort of deal. Trump is a deal maker but he will not get on the losing side of a deal where he is giving more than he is getting. There is no motive to getting the Russians to help him and Trump would never admit to himself that he needed their help. He is just too arrogant, self assured etc. Apart from the fact that there is zero evidence.

Re: I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Rakarra]

So a Supreme court Justice and a tax break. You must be happy.

I'm not so happy with the tax break, because it's a giveaway with no revenue. It sure as hell isn't paying for itself, it's just a cost being passed to our kids, just like we're paying off the excesses of 30 years ago. I can't believe I appreciate the 'tax and spend' label given to the Democrats, because the current Republican mantra is "spend and go into debt." Seems like you get a shit sandwich with either.

I would add to that list Recognizing Jerusalem as the capital.

I would not. He got absolutely nothing for it. We get a ton of blowback, but they guy didn't get any friendly concessions at all. What a horrible deal, from the supposed deal-master. We are absolutely no closer to peace in that fucked-up region, and might now be even further away.

Re: I wish they'd back off the Russia stuff

[Triklyn]

i'd say on the jerusalem thing... what we got out of it is that the world didn't end. the arab world didn't explode into violence. it was recognition of the reality on the ground, and the reality was that nobody fucking cared if the US recognized jerusalem or not, not our allies, and barely a peep out of our enemies. the palestinians fumed a bit, but the sky didn't come crashing down.

think there was a survey recently, and the majority of the middle east would rather cozy up to israel than to iran. that... is something significant.

the palestinians have been holding out for the whole pie this entire time, recognizing jerusalem should be enough to shock them out of that illusion and perhaps make them realize that if they don't come to the table for something, they might end up with nothing.

they've got a lot of sympathetic countries... that will do nothing for them when push comes to shove. as nobody did anything for the ukraine. the UN is a joke.

What's going on?

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

Re:What's going on?

[Anonymous Coward]

No. They he had already been under investigation for two months when the Steele dossier came into play. The Steele dossier in turn was not relied on on its own; it was only used in one context (it raised questions about who Page met during a known meeting in Moscow) - who he met being confirmed by three separate FBI sources, sources apparently sensitive enough that they had to be redacted from the Democratic memo before it could be released.

You do realize that four separate judges signed off on the surveilance, don't you? Two appointed by George W. Bush, one by George H.W. Bush, and one by Ronald Reagan. Under an FBI and AG run by Republicans.

Damn Democrats!

Why can't they just let Carter "Previously Caught Up In a Russian Spy Ring" Page go? Why on Earth would they investigate someone who boasted on his resume of being an adviser to the Kremlin? I just can't understand it! ;)

Hillary lost

[Anonymous Coward]

It's really time for some people to get over it.

P.S. This "counter-memo" is conspicuously silent on disputing the main fact in Nunes memo that FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe's December 2017 testimony was that without the DNC, and Hillary-funded fake dossier, no FISA warrant would've been obtained. The Democrat's memo does not dispute that, but merely spins it as a "minor" component.

So, basically, the Democrats are now on record that they cannot dispute that: the Hillary campaign and the Democrat party ordered their chronies in the FBI to hire a former British spy named Christopher Steele, known for his wRussian contacts, in order to write a fake dossier; have Steele leak it to his friend reporter at Yahoo News, and then use the leaked Yahoo News story as "corroborating evidence" in order to obtain a warrant from the secret FISA court to wiretap Trump's campaign headquarters, as an "insurance policy" of some sort, according to Strzok's emailed love notes to his mistress.

And it's Trump who has a collusion problem. Of course.

Re:Hillary lost

[Anonymous Coward]

P.S. This "counter-memo" is conspicuously silent on disputing the main fact in Nunes memo that FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe's December 2017 testimony was that without the DNC, and Hillary-funded fake dossier, no FISA warrant would've been obtained

They've already publicly stated that's false many times, so why restate it again?

Hillary campaign and the Democrat party ordered their chronies in the FBI to hire a former British spy named Christopher Steele , known for his wRussian contacts, in order to write a fake dossier

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...

and then use the leaked Yahoo News story as "corroborating evidence"

Please try learning to read things before posting about them.

according to Strzok's emailed love notes to his mistress.

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?

There doesn't seem to be a way aournd this

[cold fjord]

Obama DOJ Wouldn’t Have Sought FISA Warrant on Trump Advisor Without Clinton-Campaign-Funded Dossier

Then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe testified in the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in December that the Obama Administration Justice Department would not have sought a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to put surveillance on volunteer Trump campaign advisor Carter Page without a dossier that had been funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, according to a memorandum released by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

The application for the FISA warrant did not inform the FISA court that approved the warrant that the DNC and Clinton campaign had been involved in financing the dossier that provided information used in the application.

Re: There doesn't seem to be a way aournd this

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re: There doesn't seem to be a way aournd this

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Common sense

[Anonymous Coward]

How can Republican law makers have 0?

Mueller Time

[PopeRatzo]

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.

Re:Mueller Time

[Tulsa_Time]

None of which is about Collusion with Russia to affect the election.

Re:Mueller Time

[PopeRatzo]

None of which is about Collusion with Russia to affect the election.

The indictments of the 16 Russian people and organizations are exactly about collusion. They were all about building a conspiracy case.

I'm old enough to remember when Republicans said, "There were crimes committed, but President Nixon knew nothing about it!"

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

Worthless convictions that don't mean anything.

Manafort's conviction has nothing to do with Trump.

I think it was Flynn who plead guilty because he was going bankrupt.

Re:Mueller Time

[NicknameUnavailable]

The indictments of the 16 Russian people and organizations are exactly about collusion.

Ahahahahaha, no. That's the complete [former] Russian population of 4chan. They're just a bunch of autistic trolls.

Re:Mueller Time

[DNS-and-BIND]

These FISA court abuses are 50 times bigger than Watergate. Hillary essentially bought a FISA warrant to spy on her opponent. The FISA court was lied to by the FBI and DOJ in order to secure a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. What would you say if this had happened in a third world country? "Shrug, business as usual for that kind of place." Yeah, exactly. This is why it's 50 times bigger than Watergate.

I love how suddenly - after being solidly anti-law enforcement for decades, up to and including violent riots and the premeditated murder of police officers - the Left is suddenly in love with the FBI (wtf). They defend it fiercely against clear evidence of the kind of abuse they always claimed was going on. How did criminals with badges suddenly become great a pillar of Our Values? Oink, oink, I smell bacon. The Left defending the pigs. We are really through the looking glass here.

Re:Mueller Time

[Hal_Porter]

Those Russians that got indicted will never be tried because Russia won't extradite them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

None of those charged are in custody, according to Peter Carr, a spokesman for the special counselâ(TM)s office. Russia does not allow its citizens to be extradited to the United States to face trial, so it is unlikely the individuals will be turned over, but the indictment probably will prevent them from traveling outside Russia.

So the only point indicting them was so it looked like the investigation was going somewhere and people like you could say "22 indictments so far" instead of "9 indictments so far".

Still look what Rosenstein said when it happened :

https://www.realclearpolitics....

Now, there is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.

I.e. you can't use the indictment of a bunch of Russians, in Russia who posed as Americans to attack Trump.

Re:Mueller Time

[bongey]

Indictments of twitter trolls, downright laughable. Also two the 'trolls' didn't even work for the troll farm during the period that Mueller has accused them off. Mueller indictments of Russians is complete joke.It's all about saving the face of the FBI for spying on parts of campaign during an election, so Mueller is going to charge someone with a crime

Watch 5-8 years from now all the charges will be thrown out for illegal searches and prosecutor misconduct, just like in all the Enron cases.

Re:Mueller Time

[PopeRatzo]

Manafort's conviction has nothing to do with Trump.

Manafort hasn't been convicted yet, and the indictment unsealed this week have a lot to do with Trump. Manafort was in deep in debt to some very dangerous Russians and tried to help them in their war with the Ukraine while he was Trump's campaign manager. And THEN he had the RNC change their party platform making it more friendly to Russia. And then had his flunky Rick Gates commit bank fraud to try to get out from under.

So, two possibilities: either 1) Trump had to know all this was going on, or 2) Trump had no clue about the guy he hired to chair his campaign and that's even worse because those are the kinds of useful idiots the Russians love to cultivate.

I realize you guys will defend Trump to the last breath, because if he goes down, it shakes your entire worldview. But Trump is already the administration with the most indictments and convictions and officials resigning in disgrace in history. He's crooked and he's losing his mojo.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

Because you said so...

Re:Mueller Time

[PopeRatzo]

Those Russians that got indicted will never be tried because Russia won't extradite them.

They don't have to be tried. The indictments form the outline of conspiracy charges against people in the US who can be charged.

Now, there is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity.

Notice the part that says, "this indictment"? There have been new indictments coming every few days now. New guilty pleas. New Trump officials (and former Trump officials) cooperating with Mueller.

Every time there are new indictments, the alt-right hollers, "IS THAT ALL HE HAS?" as if the investigation was over. The investigation is going to go on for a long time and the Russian indictments create a shield around Mueller, protecting him from Trump firing him. The shit has barely started hitting the fan, and it's fun watching you all rationalizing and minimizing and pretending it's not happening. Oh, it's happening all right, and when it's over there will be a smoking crater where the Trumpublicans used to be.

Re:Mueller Time

[ScentCone]

I'm old enough to remember when Republicans said, "There were crimes committed, but President Nixon knew nothing about it!"

The question is, are you intelligent enough to see that that's a completely ridiculous comparison? The two situations have nothing to do with one another. Never mind your carefully avoiding the fact that the indictments of the Russians was explicitly accompanied by them telling you that nobody worked with them, wittingly. Which conspiracy is it that you're alleging that involves nobody actually working with the people indicted? You're also, in your indictment count, including indictments that have exactly zero to do with the period of time Trump was a candidate, let alone anything to do with collusion. Manafort's dodgy reporting on his earlier activities not only don't have anything to do with Trump or his campaign, they don't even have anything to do with Russians trying to influence the election. Again, which campaign conspiracy is it you're talking about? Was there some sort of time travel involved?

Meanwhile, you keep tap dancing right past the fact that the Dem memo doesn't even attempt to refute the central parts of the Republican memo: that the FISA judge was NOT told who spent money on the Russian fiction compiled by Steele (Hillary and the DNC), and more importantly, the Dems aren't contradicting the other memo's revelation that the FBI asserted there wouldn't have been any FISA request at all, without the novella that Hillary paid Steele to get Russian help writing. You want a conspiracy? Lift up that rock and look under it.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

These FISA court abuses are 50 times bigger than Watergate.

This is what happens when you are 50 times dumber than the average Russian.
You believe using footnotes is worse than theft.

Re:Mueller Time

[DNS-and-BIND]

You know who Manafort was working for when he did all that dodgy Ukranian shit? The Podesta Group! That's right, the same one! You can't make this shit up, people. Here's the smoking gun. Manafort was campaign manager for a couple of months because he had convention experience. The Podesta Group was hired by Paul Manafort on behalf of foreign clients because the company was perceived to have a direct line to powerful politicians, like Hillary Clinton.

The chairman of one major presidential campaign colluded with a brother of the *other* major presidential campaign chairman to enrich themselves by secretly advancing the interests of a foreign adversary. That happened. That's "the swamp" everyone is saying needs to be drained.

On April 12, 2017, The Podesta Group, Inc. disclosed to the DOJ omission of statements and falsification of at least five FARA reports. The Podesta Group, Inc. failed to identify as a foreign agent acting on behalf of "European Centre of a Modern Ukraine" (Manafort) between April 18, 2012 - April 30, 2014

I mean, it's just amusing. After MILLIONS spent, the primary focus of Mueller's investigation has NOTHING to do with Trump/Russia collusion! Mueller is doing offshore wires done by Manafort in 2012 and 2013. I thought this was supposed to be about the 2016 election?

If the FBI knew that Manafort was a Ukranian money launderer in 2014, why wouldn't they tell Trump unless they were going to blackmail him with that information?

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

You can make it up. In fact over at 4chan we did make it up. It's just that these people are so corrupt that they keep proving our wildest theories true. It's now a race to the bottom with us making up crazy conspiracy theories, and the clintonites proving them true.

Re:Mueller Time

[SuricouRaven]

Neither option looks very good for them:
1. Trump worked with Russian intelligence to gain an advantage in the election.
or
2. Trump's campaign worked with Russian intelligence, but Trump himself was kept in the dark about what his own campaign was doing.

Trump's response so far has been to divert the issue: He claims that all the evidence against him is fabricated by a conspiracy within the FBI - and not only he he not working with Russia,but Hillary is a Russian secret agent charged with stealing the country's uranium.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't even understand what they did that was illegal.
Is it illegal for Russians to post things on twitter that are for or against politicians in the US?
I'm pretty sure many Europeans posted pro Bernie things on facebook and twitter.
And probably anti Clinton things was well.

Re: Mueller Time

[Hal_Porter]

I suppose you could get them for breaking campaign finance law.

Then again Hillary broke campaign finance law by using her law firm as a proxy to pay Steele.

http://thehill.com/opinion/cam...

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

13 indictments against foreign Nationals that will NEVER be tried.

And process crimes abut lying to the FBI about minor issues that have NOTHING to do with Trump or ANY 'collusion'.

Trump has nothing to worry about.

Re:Mueller Time

[Mashiki]

Notice the part that says, "this indictment"? There have been new indictments coming every few days now. New guilty pleas. New Trump officials (and former Trump officials) cooperating with Mueller.

Yeah and you know what they stem from? From when Muller was working for the Podesta group(the guy who ran Hillary's Campaign). AKA this is what is called a fishing expedition. Because Muller didn't/failed to properly disclose, and the people had no knowledge they can be indicted because "ignorance of the law is no excuse" unless you're Hillary Clinton with your own private email server and you've got buddies inside the agency who can 'shift' the wording on memo's to make it far less serious. Or Loretta Lynch using an alias in order to cover her tracks, avoid legal requirements for retention and so on.

Re:Mueller Time

[drinkypoo]

Indictments of twitter trolls, downright laughable.

Have you noticed how many members of Trump's administration have already pled guilty and are now working with Mueller? Those are not twitter trolls. Those are people close to trump, working under his authority and direction.

Re:Mueller Time

[tomhath]

Have you noticed how many members of Trump's administration have already pled guilty and are now working with Mueller?

Please list them. Not former campaign staffers who where fired by Trump for unethical dealings, but people who are or were members of the administration.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

And the podesta group has the SAME NAME as someone on Clinton's campaign! WOW! ....... Although, he didn't work for them.

So one was political campaign manager who has been indicted, and another was some scummy (but left-leaning) lobbyist group? Who was better at keeping out the corruption? The guy who's right-hand man, and "coffee boy but actually really important on foreign affairs" and so many others in their campaign? Or the one who happens to have the same last name as a scummy group?

Did you know Disney has ties to Trump? Yup. DONALD Trump. DONALD Duck... Think about it! ....

idiot

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is important because they illegally told people to vote for Trump on Facebook. That is treason.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice try but all these indictments have been for process crimes. Which might not even stand up in a court of law. Nothing to do with russia. Move along.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude they had no ties whatsoever. They even admitted in the indictments! My god you people are relentless.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

You're getting your smears mixed up. Mueller never worked for or with Podesta.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

Bill Clinton was impeached for getting a blow job and lying about it. Not sure you win there buddy.

Re:Mueller Time

[PopeRatzo]

Nice try but all these indictments have been for process crimes.

No, they are not "all for process crimes". Money laundering is not a process crime. Bank fraud is not a process crime.

Do you know another way to describe a "process crime"? A crime.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is important because they illegally told people to vote for Trump on Facebook. That is treason.

>implying implications
Read the Constitution. Treason is the only crime specifically described.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

Mueller got carte blanche and is using it. It should not matter to him, as an FBI official, if Manafort was working for the Dems, Reps or Greens or whatever.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

And the investigation was about the Whitewater land deal....a consensual (though inappropriate) sexual incident led to his impeachment, but not his conviction and removal.

I'm thinking the evidence is piling a little higher with this special counsel though....if the Republicans ever find their spine and actual patriotism (country vs party).

Re:Mueller Time

[david_thornley]

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Watergate was about Nixon using illegal means to sabotage the Democratic Presidential campaigns, including helping a lightweight get nominated. Fudging some warrant applications is small potatoes compared to that, assuming the fudging did happen.

It appears that the FBI and DoJ provided the appropriate information to the FISA court. Heck, by the things the Nunes memo didn't say, it was obvious that the FBI investigation was clean and professional.

The Left, as a whole, is against having police officers shoot unarmed people and get off with nothing more than a paid vacation. It has been against the militarization of the police. It doesn't like the way immigration law is currently being enforced - for example, it creates a class of potential victims that can't talk to the police. This is not being anti-law enforcement, unless your idea of law enforcement is a boot in the face.

Re:Mueller Time

[PopeRatzo]

AKA this is what is called a fishing expedition.

Quite a successful fishing expedition, I'd say. Already five convictions and 22-plus indictments. Rick Gates was just convicted of crimes committed while he was in the White House, a little over three weeks ago. Even the President himself now has his lawyers trying to negotiate a way that he can avoid speaking directly to Mueller. Unfortunately, there's no way for Trump to avoid speaking to a grand jury.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

I like the WAY you capitalize certain WORDS to let us all know you're into CONSPIRACY theories, that were DEBUNKED by liberal networks like FOX.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

The obvious fear you're showing isn't helping your case. You KNOW you're wrong; you contradicted yourself several times in that diatribe. Your cognitive dissonance is in real danger right now, and you know it.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that anyone with two brain cells to rub together can easily debunk those imgur and youtube links you just posted right? My 10 year old kid just did on his smartphone.

Re:Mueller Time

[Anonymous Coward]

The mistake you make is assuming Democrats are leftists. The entire world knows America is much further to the right than most any country on the planet, and Democrats are pretty far right authoritarian, only slightly less right than Republicans.

Trump wishes that, too. As do the Russians (nt)

[Brannon]

nt

Re:Trump wishes that, too. As do the Russians (nt)

[RightwingNutjob]

Russia stands to gain when Americans are bickering amongst themselves. I'd say it's in their interest for us to keep tearing eachother a new one over it as it is in the Dems letting up. Winski-Winski, comrades!

Misdirection Success

[SuperKendall]

It must be pretty awesome for Trump to see how many people are focused on this Russian Snipe Hunt while he and the GOP just trucking along with changes to the government.

Twenty-two indictments so far. Five convictions, and counting.

And fuck-all of an effect on anything real.

Yay! Political junk talk on Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re: Yay! Political junk talk on Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Says the Republican trying to sweep the truth under the rug (as usual).

They are trying to do what?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

If you turn /. into HuffPo I'll become /pol/

[Anonymous Coward]

Which one of you n*gger fagg*t mods thought it was a good idea to vote for Hillary? A no-fly zone in Syria would've lead to war with Russia - I was supposed to vote for that? I voted against that war and you're still pushing for it via the heeb-infused mass media - why? Why do you so desperately want to fight Russia? Didn't your overlords see enough corpses during the Holomodor? Oh, the Bolsheviks weren't Jewish - you're sure about that, nerd? Hillary decapitated Libya for threatening to abandon the gold standard, you endorse that and you think you're on the right side of history? We came, we saw, he died! A-ha-ha-ha-ha!

Oh, you voted for the socialist kike instead? My apologies - you wanted to starve to death, not die in a nuclear holocaust. You voted for a man who endorsed the creature I described above AFTER it came to light the DNC had rigged your primary in her favor - you voted for a waste of skin. "Sorry goyim, no refunds!" - Bernie Sanders AND Jill Stein.

President Trump grabbed a pussy, are you mad because he grabbed you?

Filter error: Lameness filter encountered - oy vey, hate speech, shut it down

Nunes did not - and advertised that

[Anonymous Coward]

The DOJ and FBI refused to comply with the House Oversignt comittee, even ignoring lawful subpoenas (this is getting into scary territory for a Constitutional Republic when unelected bureaucrats who despise their elected leaders refuse to obey them).

Because the House is lead by timid Republican establishment pick Paul Ryan, the House chose to negotiate with the DOJ and FBI rather than fight them, and in the negotiations it was deterimined that only 1 House Republican and 1 House Democrat would be allowed to read the FISA stuff. Nunes chose to have Trey Gaudy, a lawyer and former prosecutor with lots of experience filing and reading such documents, be the Republican who would go read the docs. Gaudy went and read them and reported on their contents to Nunes. This has never been a secret - it was discussed very publicly on C-SPAN at the time for those of us who care about our Republic to monitor.

It's pretty funny to see the Democrats use that as a ploy to try to trick the public, which they apparently think are all idiots, into thinking something wrong happened in the way Nunes handled this. It's just like the bogus ethics charges they filed against him that got him off the case for months until the ethics comittee had to admit there was nothing and Nunes could go back to work on this case. Smoke and mirrors to distract an inattentive public.

I urge everybody to do what literate and responsible citizens should do:
1. Read the Nunes memo (The Republican one the Democrats spent weeks arguing on TV should never be published because it would endanger the nation)
2. Read the Schiff memo (this Democrat one that tries to spin the story, but actually fails to answer any of the Nunes memo)
3. If you fail to see what a complete joke the Democrat memo is on your own, then go read the Nunes response that takes it apart line-by-line. the Nunes response does not need to twist anything, it just points out all the things the Schiff memo fails to answer and the things the Schiff memo gutlessly implies but does not actually assert in an attempt to mislead the uninformed.

Re:Nunes did not - and advertised that

[Anonymous Coward]

The DOJ and FBI refused to comply with the House Oversignt comittee, even ignoring lawful subpoenas (this is getting into scary territory for a Constitutional Republic when unelected bureaucrats who despise their elected leaders refuse to obey them).

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.

It's just like the bogus ethics charges they filed against him that got him off the case for months until the ethics comittee had to admit there was nothing and Nunes could go back to work on this case

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.

I urge everybody to do what literate and responsible citizens should do:
1. Read the Nunes memo... 2. Read the Schiff memo ... read the Nunes response

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:

However, four times DOJ repeated to the FISA Court (FISC) an incorrect assessment that Steele had not been a source for an earlier, September 2016 Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff. In May 2017, before the final renewal application, Steele admitted in a publicly-available U.K. court filing to personally briefing numerous U.S. media outlets, including Yahoo News, in September 2016

Damn the FBI for not using their FBI Time Machine to go

Re: Nunes did not - and advertised that

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Slashdot editor bias

[Anonymous Coward]

...is showing again.

Come the revolution you seek, you'll be the second against the wall.

Neither memo should be released

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re: Neither memo should be released

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, if Hillary Clinton was President, we would now be in a ground war in Syria fighting on the side of ISIS.

That natural gas pipeline western interests want to run across Syria, that the Russians oppose, is that big of a deal for Hillarys globalist backers.

Re: Neither memo should be released

[Anonymous Coward]

Shut up, Ivan. Nobody gives a frack about your petty squabbles over Syria.

However, thanks for helping out with Trump, if you did; so far there seems to be zero evidence of Trump-Russia collusion, or Russian meddling actually making a difference in the election.
But at least thanks for your intentions: Trump is on track to becoming the most epic president we ever had; he is actually on track to Making America Great Again, doing it under-budged and ahead of schedule.

Re: Neither memo should be released

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it possible to downmod a post below -1?

You keep using that word [collusion]...

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think it means what you think it means.

The Meuller indictment of the Russians EXPLICITLY says the Americans they were involved with did not know they were Russians! *POOF* There goes the idea of "collusion" which by definitiion requires the parties involved to be aware of the scheme.

Oh, and in case you are a little slow on the uptake, NEWSFLASH: Russia is a sovereign country and the US and Russia do not easily extradite eachothers' citizens. In other words: These indictments are political documents meant to help Meuller and his team of lawyers who gave money to both the Hillary and Obama campaigns APPEAR to have found SOMETHING as a little red meat for the hungry left wing base, but these Russians will NEVER see a day in a US court, and they therefore will NEVER be squeezed and used as witnesses, etc. This is just a PR move. Every time Trump seems to have a good week, Meuller and his team either leak something to the press to stir-up anti-Trump headlines (an easy play to hit Trump, but none of them ever go any further) or they indict somebody Trump knows or somebody Trump used to employ but for something completely unrelated to Meuller's supposed mission of investigating Trump-Putin collusion.

In case you've had your head in the sand, the Judge in the Flynn case was removed, and the new judge is the one who the FBI lied to in the Senator Stevens case. This judge asked a few uncomfortable questions of the Meuller team, and *POOF* Flynn's sentencing date was cancelled and now his guily plea is being withdrawn - it seems the FBI lied to the courts and Flynn and his lawyers (internally, FBI docs apparently indicate the FBI knew Flynn did not lie to them, but they convinced him they had the dirt on him and were going to bankrupt him and then go after his son, so he plead guilty, and the judge is mighty angry).

Re:You keep using that word [collusion]...

[PopeRatzo]

Flynn's sentencing date was cancelled and now his guily plea is being withdrawn

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.

Re: You keep using that word [collusion]...

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:You keep using that word [collusion]...

[Mashiki]

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.

Re: You keep using that word [collusion]...

[Anonymous Coward]

When you're part of the extremist right, everyone is a leftist.

Re: You keep using that word [collusion]...

[Anonymous Coward]

URL please.

Everyone but you seems to think it's true.

Re:You keep using that word [collusion]...

[PopeRatzo]

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.

Nope. When the new judge took over the case on December 7, 2017, his clerk filed a standard Brady boilerplate order. It was later corrected with the section removed.

This whole story about "Flynn's new judge is going to exonerate him" was started by the right-wing Trumpist rag The Federalist. It was never true.

 

Re: You keep using that word [collusion]...

[PopeRatzo]

URL please.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Re: You keep using that word [collusion]...

[Anonymous Coward]

When you're part of the extremist left, everyone is a right winger.

Re:You keep using that word [collusion]...

[Mashiki]

Then why don't you explain to everybody why the judge has demanded exculpatory evidence be presented and the FBI is stonewalling.

Re:You keep using that word [collusion]...

[PopeRatzo]

Then why don't you explain to everybody why the judge has demanded exculpatory evidence be presented and the FBI is stonewalling.

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...

Re:You keep using that word [collusion]...

[Mashiki]

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.

Re:You keep using that word [collusion]...

[PopeRatzo]

The washington post article is factually wrong, this wasn't caused by the clerk.

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.

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[bongey]

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.

Laundry Room Politics

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Playing semantics

[Koby77]

"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.

Re:Playing semantics

[Wizardess]

My understanding is that only one person on the committee was allowed to see the FISA documentation. So how does Schiff make claims about the contents of the documentation and substantiate those claims? That rather damages the thrust if his memo. He then cites some statements by people, themselves under suspicion for wrongdoing in the FBI, to justify a collection of other claims.

{^_^}

Re:Playing semantics

[Anonymous Coward]

The FBI *did* include information about the political motivation of the Steele dossier. From the warrant application:

"FBI speculates that the identified U.S. person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate #1's campaign."

Schiff's memo argues that the terminology used was due to an FBI policy of not unmasking intelligence targets or sources.

https://www.usatoday.com/story...

Re:Playing semantics

[Anonymous Coward]

Who dug the dirt isn't "the problem", dumbass. The problem is there was dirt to dig in the first place.

Re:Playing semantics

[tomhath]

The FBI *did* include information about the political motivation of the Steele dossier

"was likely looking for information" is not the same as "was hired by Candidate #2"

Re:Playing semantics

[Anonymous Coward]

What makes you think the FBI knew the source of Steele's funding at the time of the warrant application? Fusion GPS never told Steele so he couldn't have told the FBI.

Even if they did know, why would it be a problem? I'm sure 99% of informants have an axe to grind, and there's nothing wrong with a warrant whose sole source is a paid informant working for the target's enemy.

For example, let's say that I am a gang member who goes into enemy territory to steal some guns but I discover where they're hiding some drugs. I can sell that information to the police (or use it to reduce my sentence) as a way to punish my enemy. That information can be used to get a search warrant, and that warrant will be valid if it is sufficiently detailed ("30 bricks of coke, wrapped in white tape, in the bottom drawer of the filing cabinet behind the desk" rather than "there's drugs in the office") and matches known information (e.g. the drugs are in a known safe house).

The information in the Page warrant wasn't just "Steele claims Page is working with the Russians". It was more like "Steele claims Page met with known Kremlin associates Igor Sechin and Igor Divyekin, and we believe him because Steele is a reliable source, Page claims ties to the Kremlin, and we knew he was in Russia on the dates of the claimed meetings." The actual warrant application contained a laundry list of reasons to believe Page was working as a Russian agent in addition to the Steele info, and the three renewals further prove the accuracy of the info.

dom

Re:Playing semantics

[apoc.famine]

And that's a) counter to the established facts, and b) now discredited based on the contents of this new memo.

Having read both, it's pretty impressive how terribly written and sloppy Nunes' was, and how decently well written and comprehensive this one is. Given the lack of detail in Nunes', it seems pretty clear that his was the more creatively cherry-picked of the two.

I'm honestly a little confused why Nunes would produce such obvious garbage. Didn't think the other side would get a rebuttal, or figured it wouldn't matter, since the right is immune to facts that go against their scary fantasy world?

Re:Playing semantics

[Anonymous Coward]

How exactly did the FBI hide information from the FISA court when the FBI put the information in the FISA application?

This is a major logical breakdown to say the least.

Re:Playing semantics

[tricorn]

Your understanding is wrong.

Re:Playing semantics

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty much. It's tactics, rather than strategy. They could boost the "Russia is a liberal hoax" story for a few news cycles before the response could get out, so they did. Many people are probably only going to remember the original story and forget that the response memo indicated the Nunes' memo was full of lies. After all they only need to keep seducing people into their fantasy worlds until they have enough to win the next election...

Adam Schiff is a hack

[Uberbah]

The author of the Dem response memo, Adam Schiff, is so full of shit that if he told you Barack Obama is black, you'd want to ask for a DNA test just to be sure. He's one of the loudest proponents of the idea that Russia handed the election to Trump - but Schiff just voted to give Trump incredible powers to spy on Americans without warrants. And rather than look a camera in the eye and back up any of claims specifically, he breaks out his McCarthy act on a right-wing news show.

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[nonBORG]

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.

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean this Trey Gowdy?

“There is a Russia investigation without a dossier,” Gowdy said. “The dossier has nothing to do with the meeting in Trump Tower. The dossier has nothing to do with an email sent by Cambridge Analytica. The dossier really has nothing to do with George Papadopoulos’ meeting in Great Britain. It also doesn’t have anything to do with obstruction of justice. So, there is going to be a Russia probe even without a dossier.”

Gowdy, who is not seeking reelection, remained resolute about the need for an investigation and pronounced himself “100 percent” behind Mueller. “Look, Russia tried to interfere with our election in 2016 with or without a dossier.”

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:

Hours after the memo came out on Friday, Nunes gave an interview on Fox News during which anchor Bret Baier asked him if he wrote the memo. "Yes," Nunes replied, saying other Republican lawmakers, like House Oversight Committee chair Trey Gowdy, also contributed.

"Did you read the actual FISA applications," Baier asked, referring to the documents that the memo cites in part as evidence of improper conduct by US law-enforcement officials.

"No, I didn't," Nunes said, before adding that Gowdy was part of a designated group that reviewed the intelligence, took notes, and reported it back to committee members.

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)

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[93 Escort Wagon]

Before now, I’ve strongly disliked Nunez - but now I’m warming to him a little.

Re:Once again GOP cherry picks and distorts the fa

[Anonymous Coward]

So this "me too" memo the Democrats drafted in defense of their practices is supposed to be factual and free of lies? Yea, right.

Republicans can't read footnotes!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's out now.

Oh, wait... can Republicans read at all?

Sent from my iPhone, with love from St Petersburg

Re:Once again GOP cherry picks and distorts the fa

[Anonymous Coward]

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

GTFO

[Anonymous Coward]

Take the fucking politics off slashdot.

It's attracts the dregs and sullies this fantastic site.

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[benjymouse]

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.

ShareBlue trolls never sleep: the money's too good

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Daily Kos (a.k.a. Vox) mudslinging

[tomhath]

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.

Re: Daily Kos (a.k.a. Vox) mudslinging

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't matter who reports it if the report is accurate (it is). If you don't believe it read the source document yourself - it's only 10 pages.

Re:Daily Kos (a.k.a. Vox) mudslinging

[dave420]

Ad hominem. Try to attack the news, not the person giving it. If it's so biased and broken as you claim, that should be easy.

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[Anonymous Coward]

Before now, I’ve strongly disliked Nunez - but now I’m warming to him a little.

Ignorance is so endearing, isn't it?

More than that...

[Anonymous Coward]

Carter Page was the Trump campaign operative whose closeness to Russia was grounds for FISA. Page offered Russia the removal of sanctions in exchange for a stake in Rosneft. Rosneft took the deal and sold the share to Glencore and Qatar which are big supporters of the Democratic Party, not Trump. As it turns out, Carter Page was that close to Russia because Carter Page was an undercover FBI operative in Russia for years before he joined the campaign. He was making up grounds to charge candidate Trump with treason or impeach him as President.

Because of privacy regulations, the NSA intercepts had been written or "masked" to hide the identities of anyone they intercepted. They were given identifiers like "Person A", "Person B", etc. Susan Rice obtained their real names and someone sent the unmasked intercepts to the desk of Hillary Clinton.

The Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee know all of this. The corporate media knows all of this. They are so deeply invested in Hillary Clinton that they refuse to acknowledge it.

The Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee also appointed a family of Pakistani spies to run their computer network. They sent sensitive information back to Pakistan until one of the spies saw something so disturbing that he turned himself into the Capitol police. This family was employed by DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Congressman Xavier Becerra who is now the Attorney General of California. That is another story that the corporate media is ignoring.

The stupid party versus the evil party

[alternative_right]

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.

Re:The stupid party versus the evil party

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think it is politically motivated because Trump acts like either 1) they got dirt on him or 2) they paid him off. He will berate anybody with gusto, even Republicans he needs to accomplish basic policy goals. That is, anybody EXCEPT Russians especially Putin. The Right is always crying about what victims they are, even when they control both houses of Congress, the Executive branch, and the Judicial branch. Right now they're feeling all victimized as big corporations end their discount programs with the NRA while funerals still take place from the nation's latest mass murder tragedy. When the Right cries I tend not to listen. They are completely tone deaf.

Re:The stupid party versus the evil party

[david_thornley]

The Steele investigation was politically motivated. What's wrong with that? It was presented to the FISA court, and the court was informed that the information was from a politically motivated investigation. The court could take that into account. Just because someone has ulterior motives doesn't make what they find necessarily untrue.

As far as I can tell, what happened with the IRS was that it was hit with lots of right-wing groups claiming non-profit status and not looking like they were legally non-profit, and the IRS worked on the ones they thought more likely to get tax-exempt status. The selection process of who to examine first was arguably unfair.

Where's the slashdot story on the original memo?

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[nonBORG]

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.

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[93 Escort Wagon]

You didn’t read my sig, I take it. Oh well, it’s a bad joke if it has to be explained...

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[Bartles]

Please. Stop lying.

Who do the Dems Believe?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[bongey]

Yep you really are an idiot, there really is NO Nunes memo, the press is calling it the Nunes memo because Nunes is the chair. Which is the VERY fucking defintion of RED HERRING, claiming since Nunes didn't read the FISA application how could the Nunes be correct? Because Nunes NEVER FUCKING WROTE IT and MADE NO CLAIM to have written the memo. Repeat after me there is NO Nunes memo.

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see a sig for you, I'm also not logged in, that could be why

Re:Once again GOP cherry picks and distorts the fa

[Anonymous Coward]

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).

Step By Step

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Once again GOP cherry picks and distorts the fa

[david_thornley]

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.

Re:it accuses Nunes of having never read the FISA

[Anonymous Coward]

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!

He refused to release anything else, dumbass

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

What about the trump appearance of impropriaty?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

The adventures of "BLoAtBie" (alias PopeFatzo)

[Anonymous Coward]

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

PopeFATZO let's see who lies... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

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