FISA memo set to end collusion investigation

[Farmer77]

Just now, Lilly said:

If there's no evidence of criminal Russian collusion then the screaming fiasco we've been seeing kind of has to be contrived...what else could it be? 

In my opinion what we know about Russian attempts to influence the election, combined with the sheer number of Trump associates who have lied about their contacts with Russia, is enough to believe we need to investigate. 

Throw in things like Carter Page's previous relationship with Russian agents and Popodopolous' bragging and I simply don't see how our intelligence agencies could not at least look into it. 

[.ZZ.]

9 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Ha...there goes the notion that Mr Steele is above reproach in all this. 

Yes, and I will invite "those on the other side of the fence" to provide "evidence" and the ever-popular "You made the claim and you have the burden to prove it"

[+DieChecker]

5 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

So you're saying the underpinning of the GOP philosophy is to start wars but send the poor to fight them? Yikes the party definitely has changed, I mean I know that was the result but damn to come out and say it . Hell even RINO McCain went and fought when he clearly didn't have to. 

Where did I say wars? I support Defense and defending out allies and interests. You don't? You don't believe in defending allies?

The poor always end up in the military, AND usually are better off for it. I did 4 years and got $40k for college out of it. Is that screwing the poor?

Yes, McCain did serve as a Navy Aviator, not as a foot soldier. Still some elitism there, I'm afraid. Plus, John's dad and grandpa were 4 star admirals, so it was unlikely he would have gotten away with skipping out.

Quote

I was raised in the GOP, even worked for the GOP On both of W's campaigns. While my views have shifted away from any party I had the most faith in the GOP up until Trump.

 

To a degree, I agree with you. I still feel like defending Trump though, because the other side is just trying to tear him down due to Granny Clinton's loss. I feel that this is just a bump in the GOP president list. I seriously do not think a president like Trump will happen again. Or, if it does then the End of Days can't be too far ahead. At least the end of the nation as we know it anyway. 

Quote

Its weird but honestly seeing the moral majority supporting a prodigious liar and friend of a pedophile , as well as seeing the party of patriots support a draft dodger, as well as watching the party who fought years for tort reform support the most litigious man in America truly makes me sad. 

Clinton was friends with the same peophile, I think. I do agree that Trump is far from whom I'd rather have in office. However, I am of the opinion that you work with what you've got. And Trump has so far done well by Conservatives. Tax cuts, Obamacare, Supreme Court. All would not have happened without a GOP in office. Look back at last summer. They, the left siding Media, and the Democrats, said that Tax Reform would never, ever, come about. Yet 6 months later, there it was and signed. I feel the same about immigration. Trump will have something signed before the end of next year. The Wall will be a reality. Things that Conservatives care about are getting done. 

Lots of people have the "America First" sentiment. A desire to pull back from the world. And Trump's making that happen too. Whether that is a good thing, or bad, will be up to History to determine.

 

[+DieChecker]

4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

In my opinion what we know about Russian attempts to influence the election, combined with the sheer number of Trump associates who have lied about their contacts with Russia, is enough to believe we need to investigate. 

Throw in things like Carter Page's previous relationship with Russian agents and Popodopolous' bragging and I simply don't see how our intelligence agencies could not at least look into it. 

I agree things should be investigated. I'd even support putting some of them behind bars, or forcing them out of government. However the constant Circus of the thing in the Media, and the constant leaks, are beyond putting up with.

What should have been behind closed doors in the FBI orbit alone, has been politically weaponized by the media.

Edited February 7, 2018 by DieChecker

[Farmer77]

28 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

 

So, the Nunes memo was released, right? Which assets and what apparatus was exposed? 

Did not those who released it do what should have been done before releasing it? How is this even an argument?

 

We were discussing the democrat memo. Supposedly it has a bunch which needs to be redacted. 

I hell and the FBI have been saying all along it looks like the Nunes memo was carefully crafted to show facts which without context place the investigation in a bad light.

That context most likely requires releasing classified information. Lilly was saying she wanted all of the info released in the post I was responding to. 

[ExpandMyMind]

2 hours ago, Tiggs said:

If it wasn't going to be on the up and up -- then you really don't need to wait to get a FISA warrant to do it in the first place, do you?

You'd just do it.
 

Standard of proof within the FISC is "probable cause", not "beyond reasonable doubt". Steele's credentials do a lot of heavy lifting for him.

As Nunes hasn't listed it -- we still don't even know what the probable cause was.
 

That's what Nunes almost claims. He doesn't actually claim that the parts of the Steele Dossier used are uncorroborated. He claims that a Yahoo News article within the application doesn't corroborate it.

I suspect that the Yahoo news article wasn't meant to corroborate the dossier. I suspect it was there to show that information was leaking into the public domain, so time would be of the essence to avoid Page destroying any evidence.

The Dems already outright stated that this wasn't true. The Yahoo article wasn't presented as part of the application for anything related to Steel. This is just another example of Nunes distorting the realities of the situation.

[+DieChecker]

2 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

We were discussing the democrat memo. Supposedly it has a bunch which needs to be redacted. 

I hell and the FBI have been saying all along it looks like the Nunes memo was carefully crafted to show facts which without context place the investigation in a bad light.

That context most likely requires releasing classified information. Lilly was saying she wanted all of the info released in the post I was responding to. 

I've not looked at it yet. I'll give it a gander later today.

Why would it be released if it contained information that would cause problems with assets? To score political points? I hope those in charge of blanking out such things are above that 3rd grade level tactic.

[Merc14]

1 hour ago, Tiggs said:

You've yet to provide any actual evidence that:

a: Any member of the Trump team was improperly unmasked.
b. Any member of the Trump team was surveilled under a FISA warrant.
c. The Steele Dossier insurance plan conspiracy has any basis in reality.

a .  Right from the horse's mouth  https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/13/politics/susan-rice-house-investigators-unmasked-trump-officials/index.html

BTW, this is common knowledge now so am astounded that you are still asking for evidence.  Truly ridiculous.

b.  Carter Page was a member of the Trump team

c.  This is suspected and there are three committees trying to prove it.   Once again, when participating in these forum discussions we all assume that after 100+ pages, many of which you have posted on, you are asking for evidence of something that is common knowledge.  Most everyone else on this thread knows that the committees are examining this issue.  Your refusal to even consider it as a possibility is a you thing and your reasons for refusing that it is a possibility is puzzling but the fact that it is not proved, yet, does not eliminate the possibility that it is true.  Of course, if you choose to close your eyes, put your fingers in your ears and la la la la to yourself endlessly it is no sweat off my brow. 

[ExpandMyMind]

1 hour ago, Merc14 said:

When Nixon's guys robbed the Watergate hotel they weren't looking for signs of criminal activity they were looking for campaign intel?   Much of this FISA surveillance and unmasking of trump's team was to gather intel on his campaign and set up an insurance policy with the Steele dossier but when he won it transitioned into finding anything they could impeach over, or at least bring the articles of impeachment.

Are you trying to set a record for the most conspiracy theories concocted in a year? If so, good job.

[Farmer77]

3 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Where did I say wars? I support Defense and defending out allies and interests. You don't? You don't believe in defending allies?

I definitely do, to an extent, that extent is a couple hundred billion less than either major political party believes though. 

[Farmer77]

2 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

This is suspected and there are three committees trying to prove it.  

 

The committee should be investigating something suspected, not trying to prove it.  

[+DieChecker]

1 minute ago, Farmer77 said:

I definitely do, to an extent, that extent is a couple hundred billion less than either major political party believes though. 

I, myself, support cutting back the Defense budget. We could do with a smaller force, with much better weapons. While reducing the Deficit and Debt.

[Farmer77]

5 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I've not looked at it yet. I'll give it a gander later today.

Why would it be released if it contained information that would cause problems with assets? To score political points? I hope those in charge of blanking out such things are above that 3rd grade level tactic.

Trump has not yet announced if he will release it or not. 

I think his decision will be telling. Thus far everyone is believing that the WH wants transparency but I would bet the memo doesn't get released for "national security reasons" or as you mentioned comes out with just about everything redacted. 

I read a conspiracy theory earlier that said Trump may deny the release of the memo just so he can arrest Schiff or someone else if they leak it. 

If anything all of this is at least great theater. 

[ExpandMyMind]

25 minutes ago, Lilly said:

You know what...how about just this: If strong irrefutable 'slam dunk' evidence ever does come forth that Trump committed criminal collusion with Russia in order to subvert and steal the 2016 election I will gladly join the lynch mob and call for Trump's immediate resignation and full prosecution. 

However, if Mueller comes up with only incidental crimes (no criminal Russian collusion to subvert and steal the 2016 election) then will everyone just up and admit the whole Russia thing was contrived? Or, will this just keep going on and on? 

I think I know the answer, but what the heck I still wanted to ask. 

I think you'll find that Mueller is treating this like a RICO case. He's been working from the very bottom to the top. With all the GOP pressure to discredit him that's been going on - which is absolutely ridiculous when you actually look at the man's career - it's looking like he's trying to lock down the easiest of the the charges: obstruction. Once he has Trump on these, his investigation will be untouchable, allowing him to spend as much time as is needed looking for evidence of other crimes.

Why on earth you seem to think that you or any other citizen has a right to know anything about evidence he might or might not have on Trump is beyond me. You've said on numerous occassions "put up or shut up". This isn't how criminal investigations have ever worked. You have zero right to any information.

[Gromdor]

Just now, ExpandMyMind said:

I think you'll find that Mueller is treating this like a RICO case. He's been working from the very bottom to the top. With all the GOP pressure to discredit him that's been going on - which is absolutely ridiculous when you actually look at the man's career - it's looking like he's trying to lock down the easiest of the the charges: obstruction. Once he has Trump on these, his investigation will be untouchable, allowing him to spend as much time as is needed looking for evidence of other crimes.

Why on earth you seem to think that you or any other citizen has a right to know anything about evidence he might or might not have on Trump is beyond me. You've said on numerous occassions "put up or shut up". This isn't how criminal investigations have ever worked. You have zero right to any information.

Quite true.  This is actually to protect to accused from a trial by public (lynch mob).  It would be impossible for Trump to get a fair trial with an impartial jury if the FBI or Mueller literally had to prove he was guilty before it even went to court.

[ExpandMyMind]

39 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Ha...there goes the notion that Mr Steele is above reproach in all this. 

For what reason would he attend? Was he legally obliged to do so?

[Lilly]

23 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

 

Why on earth you seem to think that you or any other citizen has a right to know anything about evidence he might or might not have on Trump is beyond me. 

Guess what...eventually we will absolutely have the right to know what Mueller finds out and exactly what the evidence actually is. You see here in the USA it's the people who run things, not the FBI. Glad to clear this up for you. 

[ExpandMyMind]

3 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Guess what...eventually we will absolutely have the right to know what Mueller finds out and exactly what the evidence actually is. You see here in the USA it's the people who run things, not the FBI. Glad to clear this up for you. 

Yes, at the end of the investigation. You seem to be under the impression that you have a right to that information any time you decide. You see, there in the US, that's not how things operate.

[Merc14]

58 minutes ago, Tiggs said:

Because your "common knowledge" is different from mine.

The House Intelligence Committee subpoenaed the FBI and Department of Justice for documents about a controversial dossier that linked President Trump to Russia.

The committee issued the two identical subpoenas on Aug. 24, requesting that both agencies hand over documents containing information about the dossier, the FBI’s relationship to its author and whether the FBI had supported an opposition research project against Trump in the last months of the 2016 presidential campaign, the Washington Examiner reported Tuesday.

Source: The Hill

The documents were subpoenaed from the DOJ and the FBI. The IG Investigation is an entirely separate thing.

Once again, so what?   The info the IG has turned over now melds with teh info that the HPSCI received from the FBI and DoJ?

Quote

I'm only aware of Rice unmasking three Trump associates  -- Flynn, Bannon & Kushner -- during a single unmasking request, in order to ascertain who United Arab Emirates crown prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan met in New York, after flying in without announcing his visit (which is the normal protocol).

Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

You asked for " Any member of the Trump team was surveilled under a FISA warrant. " and I gave you some, or are you saying she unmasked people that weren't surveilled through a FISA surveillance?   How does that work?  There are many more according to reports.

 

[Lilly]

To be specific it will all go to a Grand Jury. Which means we might even know information before it's all over. BTW, I live here in the USA  and I've actually taught US Civics classes. 

See here:https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/03/what-is-a-grand-jury-trump-russia-mueller-investigation-215458

Quote

the work that grand juries do is secret, which means that grand jurors—who are ordinary citizens chosen at random and vetted by the federal district court—cannot share what is happening before the grand jury. Federal rules also prevent prosecutors from disclosing what happens before the grand jury. But those same rules permit witnesses to disclose what happened, and people who receive grand jury subpoenas are usually not prohibited from disclosing their contents. That means that we will likely continue to hear media reports about witnesses and documents sought by Mueller and his team...

[ExpandMyMind]

4 minutes ago, Lilly said:

To be specific it will all go to a Grand Jury. Which means we might even know information before it's all over. BTW, I live here in the USA  and I've actually taught US Civics classes. 

See here:https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/03/what-is-a-grand-jury-trump-russia-mueller-investigation-215458

So what exactly is it about this case that makes you think you have a right to say "put up or shut up"? Why do you think that you have a right to put a timeframe on a criminal investigation? I mean, you're obviously the expert on the subject, so surely there must be some justification for your perceived entitlement.

[Lilly]

7 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

So what exactly is it about this case that makes you think you have a right to say "put up or shut up"? Why do you think that you have a right to put a timeframe on a criminal investigation? I mean, you're obviously the expert on the subject, so surely there must be some justification for your perceived entitlement.

I have an absolute right to my opinion. I think Mueller needs to take it to a Grand Jury (that's the 'putting up' part). Or, if the evidence isn't good enough for a Grand Jury (after a year of FBI investigation and another year of the special prosecution team) then he needs to wrap it up and let it go (that's the 'shut up' part).

I never said I was an expert or even a lawyer, I said I've taught Civics classes (also US Citizenship classes) But, I know enough to know how things work here in my own country. Please take whatever issue you have with my opinion elsewhere. Everyone is entitled to express their own opinion as long as they remain civil and function with the parameters of UM rules. 

[ExpandMyMind]

Just now, Lilly said:

I have an absolute right to my opinion. I think Mueller needs to take it to a Grand Jury (that's the 'putting up' part). Or, if the evidence isn't good enough for a Grand Jury (after a year of FBI investigation and another year of the special prosecution team) then he needs to wrap it up and let it go (that's the 'shut up' part).

I never said I was an expert or even a lawyer, I said I've taught Civics classes (also US Citizenship classes) But, I know enough to know how things work here in my own country. Please take whatever issue you have with my opinion elsewhere. Everyone is entitled to express their own opinion as long as they remain civil and function with the parameters of UM rules. 

So there is no justification. You basically just think he should hurry up because that's what you want. 

Good luck with that.

[Lilly]

1 minute ago, ExpandMyMind said:

So there is no justification. You basically just think he should hurry up because that's what you want. 

Good luck with that.

I seriously doubt you "know what I want".

But, one thing is for sure, this will all play out eventually. 

[ExpandMyMind]

18 minutes ago, Lilly said:

 

Everyone is entitled to express their own opinion as long as they remain civil and function with the parameters of UM rules. 

Yes, well, the problem with that is that conspiracy theories used to be relegated to the actual conspiracy section. Now the entire Republican philosophy is almost entirely based on conspiracy theories, so now people are forced to debate and debunk the most ridiculous claims in the actual politics forum.

Tell me, who do you believe killed Seth Rich?