I feel like this memo is basically standard Trump. It will play with the 30% of people who love him no matter what. It either will be ignored, discussed and dismissed or ripped apart by the rest. He, and his people, without fail double down on appealing to his nutbar base. I know we like to catastrophize every thing and people love to assume this means we won't have elections anymore, but it really seems pretty dumb. His continued winning in 2020 and in midterms relies on people who are lukewarm on him continuing to think the other option is worse, and it doesn't seem like that will hold or is a winning strategy.
It's interesting that McGahn signed the cover letter. There's been a couple of leaks to various papers that were designed to make him look like a hero, and thus, likely planted by him.
The letter is pretty boilerplate, so I don't know if it suggests McGahn is complicit in the memo. But it would not surprise me if we see an article soon that talks about how McGahn tried to stop the release of the memo and only agreed to sign off on the cover letter under certain conditions.
Here’s something else silly in the Nunes memo: It’s claiming that the FBI used a Yahoo News article to “prove” to the FISA judge that the Steele Memo was real. A newspaper story in Yahoo News. Really? That’s what you want us to believe the judge used as “proof” the memo was real?
Since we've been asking the question - what was the important and classified info released in the memo, an investigator friend just pointed out that Russia now has the dates of when Carter Page was surveilled. Which means they can figure out exactly what information we learned during that time period.
Well, but the other thing about the Yahoo article BS is that the article was about Page's trip to Moscow (and the memo even presents it as such), which there are about 8 zillion sources with photo and video to corroborate. So, who cares if it was in the application? Pretty sure that's not the only documentation the FBI could find on that trip. Hell, a YouTube search shows a video of the whole speech dated July 7, 2016. I doubt this eluded the FBI.
Since we've been asking the question - what was the important and classified info released in the memo, an investigator friend just pointed out that Russia now has the dates of when Carter Page was surveilled. Which means they can figure out exactly what information we learned during that time period.
Thanks for this. It is very helpful. Along the same lines, it probably sends other messages to those in the campaign about what the FBI might have known and have evidence of and what they might now. It could embolden some people to lie or withhold stuff now that they know a little more about the surveillance.
It’d be hilarious if this turns the GOP and its base against FISA warrants. If you’re not doing something wrong what do you have to hide??? It makes us safer! Patriot Act4eva! Who cares about rights? Terrorism!!!
It’s laughable yet supremely rage inducing. Much like the last 2 years have been.
Well, to be fair I feel a little upside-down about how the narrative on the left being, "FISA is a legitimate process! Judges have to sign off, they aren't going to be fooled into allowing biased surveillance!!" Also, the "Go, FBI!!!" sentiment. I mean, I get why, but it's not like there isn't some topsy-turviness going on our side, too.
I'm sure the top people at the FBI also probably are a little WTF that Democrats are defending their honor, while people like Newt Gingrich are going on Hannity to call them corrupt and Hannity, who has the president's ear on a daily basis, says that DOJ/FBI leadership should be thrown in jail.
It’d be hilarious if this turns the GOP and its base against FISA warrants. If you’re not doing something wrong what do you have to hide??? It makes us safer! Patriot Act4eva! Who cares about rights? Terrorism!!!
It’s laughable yet supremely rage inducing. Much like the last 2 years have been.
Well, to be fair I feel a little upside-down about how the narrative on the left being, "FISA is a legitimate process! Judges have to sign off, they aren't going to be fooled into allowing biased surveillance!!" Also, the "Go, FBI!!!" sentiment. I mean, I get why, but it's not like there isn't some topsy-turviness going on our side, too.
I'm sure the top people at the FBI also probably are a little WTF that Democrats are defending their honor, while people like Newt Gingrich are going on Hannity to call them corrupt and Hannity, who has the president's ear on a daily basis, says that DOJ/FBI leadership should be thrown in jail.
Oh I agree, but I still think it's funnier because the narrative on the mainstream right has always been significantly louder on this issue, or at least that I've seen. There are fair number of liberals/Ds who have skewed hawkish on this issue.
It’d be hilarious if this turns the GOP and its base against FISA warrants. If you’re not doing something wrong what do you have to hide??? It makes us safer! Patriot Act4eva! Who cares about rights? Terrorism!!!
It’s laughable yet supremely rage inducing. Much like the last 2 years have been.
Well, to be fair I feel a little upside-down about how the narrative on the left being, "FISA is a legitimate process! Judges have to sign off, they aren't going to be fooled into allowing biased surveillance!!" Also, the "Go, FBI!!!" sentiment. I mean, I get why, but it's not like there isn't some topsy-turviness going on our side, too.
I'm sure the top people at the FBI also probably are a little WTF that Democrats are defending their honor, while people like Newt Gingrich are going on Hannity to call them corrupt and Hannity, who has the president's ear on a daily basis, says that DOJ/FBI leadership should be thrown in jail.
Yeah. I will even admit that without knowing anything else, the FBI probably should have put in the FISA application info about how Steele was working for Trump's political opponent. I don't know if I'd say it's "highly relevant" or "critical," but I feel like it's the right thing to do. If the shoe were on the other foot, and it was the Trump administration trying to get a FISA warrant on Adam Schiff, and cited as one of several pieces of evidence the basis of some research paid for by the RNC, that is information a judge should have to be able to ask necessary questions.
Given all the other corroborating evidence, I highly doubt it would have made a difference and it seems to me like the warrant was well justified. But FISA is problematic, and I am only going to back it if there are extraordinarily high standards followed. Something doesn't have to be corrupt or tainted to be imperfect. They didn't use best practices here. We should be a little more measured in our defense of the FBI and FISA.
But it is not inconsistent to say that best practices were not used here, but that the GOP is completely ridiculous at the same time.
Wait— parachute pants have zippers? I always thought they were elastic or drawstring or something.
Not the point, I know, but still... mind blowing.
That's the joke! Lol.
Parachute pants definitely had zippers. They were just pants made of parachute fabric. There may have been some without, but the ones I remember having had zippers. Hammer pants did not have zippers.
allabtthat, please re-think posting that person's rantings from FB. You said that person is mentally ill, that their family has been trying and failing to get him/her help, and that it's a "tragic" situation. Then why are you posting those things for all to gawk at?
litebright, point taken. I’ll admit to not thinking too hard about it previously because their FB postings are all public, but I hear what you’re saying. I wasn’t intending it to come across as ‘let’s all gawk at this person’ and I feel like an ass that it did. I’m sorry.
I am seeing Twitter chatter from reporters and attorneys that now that 45 has confirmed the existence of this FISA warrant, the contents should be subject to FOIA. If that's true, this is about to get messy for some folks.
I am seeing Twitter chatter from reporters and attorneys that now that 45 has confirmed the existence of this FISA warrant, the contents should be subject to FOIA. If that's true, this is about to get messy for some folks.
Yes my understanding is that Trump declassified the info so the memo could be released which would make it public and an FOIA request could be made
Well, to be fair I feel a little upside-down about how the narrative on the left being, "FISA is a legitimate process! Judges have to sign off, they aren't going to be fooled into allowing biased surveillance!!" Also, the "Go, FBI!!!" sentiment. I mean, I get why, but it's not like there isn't some topsy-turviness going on our side, too.
I'm sure the top people at the FBI also probably are a little WTF that Democrats are defending their honor, while people like Newt Gingrich are going on Hannity to call them corrupt and Hannity, who has the president's ear on a daily basis, says that DOJ/FBI leadership should be thrown in jail.
Yeah. I will even admit that without knowing anything else, the FBI probably should have put in the FISA application info about how Steele was working for Trump's political opponent. I don't know if I'd say it's "highly relevant" or "critical," but I feel like it's the right thing to do. If the shoe were on the other foot, and it was the Trump administration trying to get a FISA warrant on Adam Schiff, and cited as one of several pieces of evidence the basis of some research paid for by the RNC, that is information a judge should have to be able to ask necessary questions.
Given all the other corroborating evidence, I highly doubt it would have made a difference and it seems to me like the warrant was well justified. But FISA is problematic, and I am only going to back it if there are extraordinarily high standards followed. Something doesn't have to be corrupt or tainted to be imperfect. They didn't use best practices here. We should be a little more measured in our defense of the FBI and FISA.
But it is not inconsistent to say that best practices were not used here, but that the GOP is completely ridiculous at the same time.
It seems likely that Steele didn’t know who financed the research. He was hired by Fusion GPS, and as I understand it, the funding behind that changed a few times.
Yeah. I will even admit that without knowing anything else, the FBI probably should have put in the FISA application info about how Steele was working for Trump's political opponent. I don't know if I'd say it's "highly relevant" or "critical," but I feel like it's the right thing to do. If the shoe were on the other foot, and it was the Trump administration trying to get a FISA warrant on Adam Schiff, and cited as one of several pieces of evidence the basis of some research paid for by the RNC, that is information a judge should have to be able to ask necessary questions.
Given all the other corroborating evidence, I highly doubt it would have made a difference and it seems to me like the warrant was well justified. But FISA is problematic, and I am only going to back it if there are extraordinarily high standards followed. Something doesn't have to be corrupt or tainted to be imperfect. They didn't use best practices here. We should be a little more measured in our defense of the FBI and FISA.
But it is not inconsistent to say that best practices were not used here, but that the GOP is completely ridiculous at the same time.
It seems likely that Steele didn’t know who financed the research. He was hired by Fusion GPS, and as I understand it, the funding behind that changed a few times.
Schiff released a statement saying (among other things): “The Majority suggests that the FBI failed to alert the court as to Mr. Steele’s potential political motivations or the political motivations of those who hired him, but this is not accurate. "
Well, to be fair I feel a little upside-down about how the narrative on the left being, "FISA is a legitimate process! Judges have to sign off, they aren't going to be fooled into allowing biased surveillance!!" Also, the "Go, FBI!!!" sentiment. I mean, I get why, but it's not like there isn't some topsy-turviness going on our side, too.
I'm sure the top people at the FBI also probably are a little WTF that Democrats are defending their honor, while people like Newt Gingrich are going on Hannity to call them corrupt and Hannity, who has the president's ear on a daily basis, says that DOJ/FBI leadership should be thrown in jail.
Yeah. I will even admit that without knowing anything else, the FBI probably should have put in the FISA application info about how Steele was working for Trump's political opponent. I don't know if I'd say it's "highly relevant" or "critical," but I feel like it's the right thing to do. If the shoe were on the other foot, and it was the Trump administration trying to get a FISA warrant on Adam Schiff, and cited as one of several pieces of evidence the basis of some research paid for by the RNC, that is information a judge should have to be able to ask necessary questions.
Given all the other corroborating evidence, I highly doubt it would have made a difference and it seems to me like the warrant was well justified. But FISA is problematic, and I am only going to back it if there are extraordinarily high standards followed. Something doesn't have to be corrupt or tainted to be imperfect. They didn't use best practices here. We should be a little more measured in our defense of the FBI and FISA.
But it is not inconsistent to say that best practices were not used here, but that the GOP is completely ridiculous at the same time.
YES. The FBI has been and continues to be problematic. (A plug for Vox's Worldly podcast, as they had a great episode on the FBI not too long ago. Yes, I basically get all my news from podcasts these days because I can listen while I work.) But that doesn't mean that this particular investigation wasn't warranted and that all these efforts to discredit the FBI aren't just a political hack job. But I'm not ready to be all RAH RAH FBI! in general.
It seems likely that Steele didn’t know who financed the research. He was hired by Fusion GPS, and as I understand it, the funding behind that changed a few times.
Schiff released a statement saying (among other things): “The Majority suggests that the FBI failed to alert the court as to Mr. Steele’s potential political motivations or the political motivations of those who hired him, but this is not accurate. "
I love Adam Schiff. I love the House Intelligence Committee. I am really impressed with how measured their responses are and how they really strive to inform without resorting to hyperbole. I trust this characterization of the underlying intelligence.