drobeski 3,061 Posted February 25, 2018 Claiming its all based on the dossier is wrong.McCabe testified as such. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 nope, fact Other than being weaponizing I take down a candidate (call nsidering the FISA stuff was done in late October (so late to actually not take him down and after Oagewasnt with the campaign) and zero info about the investigation leaking prior to the election. Yeah...Fact. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 421 Posted February 25, 2018 yes we disagree where one is ok with using the fisa soley to attack a political opponent and the other is not. You and I totally agree on the bolded. The problem, and it's not yours, is that Nunes has attempted to show the bolded by using Page, a guy whose Kremlin connections go back to pre-2007 and who as you know was recruited as an FSB asset, and may have still been under active investigation in March 2016. This is the absolute worst guy in the world to show what you have described. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 McCabe testified as such.Then Im sure you have a link to his testimony? Not what Devin Nunes claims he said.Because Nunes own memo didnt claim that the application was all about it...the Schiff memo certainly stated the opposite as well. And even if true...if the verified portions are what was used...there is nothing illegal about that. So you are left grasping at straws to protect Donald Trump...from things you claim he didnt do. Or you can read the memo rather than GatewayPundits view of it...because they addressed it. As Committee testimony bears out, the FBI would have continued its investigation, including against [redacted] individuals, even if it had never received information from Steele, never applied for a FISA warrant against Page, or if the FISC had rejected the application. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted February 25, 2018 You and I totally agree on the bolded. The problem, and it's not yours, is that Nunes has attempted to show the bolded by using Page, a guy whose Kremlin connections go back to pre-2007 and who as you know was recruited as an FSB asset, and may have still been under active investigation in March 2016. This is the absolute worst guy in the world to show what you have described. has the target of the fisa been charged yet ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 421 Posted February 25, 2018 has the target of the fisa been charged yet ? No, of course not. And it's a pretty simple principle that a person does not have to be guilty to properly have a Fisa order placed on him. That's not the standard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted February 25, 2018 https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/24/tying-all-the-loose-threads-together-doj-fbi-dos-white-house-operation-latitude/#more-146256 There are so many threads of information surrounding the 2016 operation to conduct political surveillance on the Trump campaign by various officials and offices within corrupt structures of government its easy to get lost. However, if we take all the various bits of information and placing them together a more clear picture emerges. The {Go Deep Threads} look like this: The FISA-702(17) About Queries; the political opposition research of Fusion-GPS and Glenn Simpson; the DOJ officials and FBI officials; Bruce and Nellie Ohr; the U.S. State Department and U.N Ambassador Samantha Power; the Clinton-Steele Dossier and Christopher Steele; the FISA Title-1 surveillance warrant; and the unmasking by former Senior White House officials: Lisa Monaco and Susan Rice. Heres the basic overview of how all those threads come together to paint a picture. The FBI group was participating in a plan to exonerate Hillary Clinton. That same FBI group was simultaneously conducting opposition research on candidate Donald Trump and the larger construct of his campaign team. Those FBI officials were allied by entities outside official government structures. The outside group were contractors. It is likely one of the contractors was Fusion-GPS or entities in contact with Fusion-GPS. {Go Deep} Advertisements Report this ad The contractors were using FBI intelligence databases to conduct opposition research searches on Trump campaign officials. This is where the use of FISA-702(16)(17) To/From and About queries comes in. {Go Deep} This FISA abuse was the allowed but unofficial process identified in early 2016 by NSA internal auditors. This is where NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers steps in on April 18th, 2016, and stops the FBI contractors from having any further access. {Go Deep} {Go Deep on NSA Rogers} No longer having access to the FBI intelligence database the group needed a workaround. Thats where DOJ official Bruce Ohr and his wife Nellie Ohr come into play. {Go Deep} Advertisements Report this ad The DOJ side of the operation was conducted within the National Security Division (John P Carlin head). {Go Deep} The DOJ-NSD could use the NSA/FBI database and pass information to, and receive information from, Nellie Ohr. Nellie was hired by Fusion-GPS immediately after Admiral Rogers shut down the FBI contractor use of the system. Nellie would be the go-between. The problem was that any information from within the FISA searches could not be directly used by the FBI because they would likely have to explain how they gained it and all search queries were illegal. This is where Fusion-GPS hires the retired British MI6 officer Christopher Steele. The FBI needed to launder the intelligence product: Chris Steele would be the laundry for the intelligence information pulled from the U.S. system. Unauthorized FISA-702(16)(17) results were passed on to Christopher Steele, likely by Nellie Ohr. Steele would then wash the intelligence product, repackage it into what became known as his Dossier, and pass it back to the FBI small group as evidence for use in their counterintelligence operation which began in July 2016 [ intentionally without congressional oversight {Go Deep}]. Evidence of this laundry process is found in a significant search query result that was actually a mistake. The faulty intelligence mistake was the travel history of Michael Cohen, a long-time Trump lawyer. The FISA search turned up a Michael Cohen traveling to Prague. It was the wrong Michael Cohen. However, that mistaken result was passed on to Chris Steele and it made its way into the dossier. Absent of a FISA search, theres no other way Christopher Steele could identify a random Michael Cohen traveling to Prague. Advertisements Report this ad The Cohen mistake created a trail from Chris Steele to the FISA database. {Go Deep} All of the unauthorized FISA-702 search queries, To From(16) and/or About(17), of the NSA/FBI database were returning results. Those results were raw intelligence. That raw intelligence needed unmasking, thats where the Department of State (DoS) comes in. The U.N. Ambassador is part of the DoS. Samantha Power stated she wasnt doing the daily unmasking identified by the House Intelligence Committee investigation {Go Deep}. Someone, or a group of people, within the State Department, were doing unmasking requests presumably using Ms. Powers authority. The collaborative process by officials within the State Department, as outlined and supported by Senator Chuck Grassley and his investigation, explains why those officials were also communicating with Christopher Steele. {Go Deep} The assembled but highly compartmentalized reports from the DOJ-NSD, FBI-Counterintelligence, Department of State, Office of National Intelligence (Clapper) and CIA (Brennan), was then constructed to become part of President Obamas Daily Intelligence Briefing. Thats where National Security Adviser Susan Rice comes in and her frequent unmasking of the assembled intelligence product. {Go Deep} Advertisements Report this ad The Obama PDB was then redistributed internally to more than three dozen administration officials who POTUS Obama allowed to access his PDB. This includes the heads of DOJ, DOJ-NSD, FBI, FBI-counterintel, CIA, DoS, ODNI, NSA and Pentagon. The distribution of the PDB was how each disparate member of the administration, the larger intelligence apparatus, knew of the ongoing big picture without having to assemble together for direct discussion therein. Thats Lisa Monaco and Operation Latitude: . Advertisements Report this ad Additionally, remember this from the FBI? January 31st, 2018, [] With regard to the House Intelligence Committees memorandum, the FBI was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo the day before the committee voted to release it. As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memos accuracy. FBI Asst. Director Michael Kortan (aka text message Mike), the head of the FBI Public Affairs Office was the one who wrote it. Kortan was part of the scheme team. FBI Director Christopher Wray fired him the following week. {Go Deep} So now you know. Ill stop there, but hopefully that part helped. a little, maybe. Oh, Hi Adam Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 ConservativeTreehouse Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted February 25, 2018 ConservativeTreehouse must burn your ass that not only are they not going to get Trump, but that their crimes backfired and a going to leave the little legacy Obama has in tatters. You chose the side of criminals, you must be proud. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted February 25, 2018 Schiffs memo not even on CNNs front page. Even they know to stay away from that joke. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EternalShinyAndChrome 3,880 Posted February 25, 2018 must burn your ass that not only are they not going to get Trump, but that their crimes backfired and a going to leave the little legacy Obama has in tatters. You chose the side of criminals, you must be proud. You bet it burns his ass. The constant way Slo lies, moves the goalposts and misrepresents facts underscores that. He's the perfect marionette to the DNC/MSNBC/CNN plantation puppeteers. They tell him what to say - and he says it. No questions asked. Ever. Like the Schiff memo - it wasn't even public for 15 seconds and Slo was on here defending it as if it was from Jesus Christ himself. He didn't even zealously question it like he did the Nunes memo. Not even once. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimmySmith 2,782 Posted February 25, 2018 Claiming its all based on the dossier is wrong.No dossiet no warrant. Trying to peddle otherwise based on the timeline is a fool's erramd. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 7,171 Posted February 25, 2018 Check out who posted in this thread and the post counts. Wow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 must burn your ass that not only are they not going to get Trump, but that their crimes backfired and a going to leave the little legacy Obama has in tatters. You chose the side of criminals, you must be proud. No...alternate reality of the places you visit doesnt burn my ass. Ive chosen no side of criminals...youre reaching hard here. As usual. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 You bet it burns his ass. The constant way Slo lies, moves the goalposts and misrepresents facts underscores that. He's the perfect marionette to the DNC/MSNBC/CNN plantation puppeteers. They tell him what to say - and he says it. No questions asked. Ever. Like the Schiff memo - it wasn't even public for 15 seconds and Slo was on here defending it as if it was from Jesus Christ himself. He didn't even zealously question it like he did the Nunes memo. Not even once. Literally none of what you wrote here is true. Go away troll Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 No dossiet no warrant. Trying to peddle otherwise based on the timeline is a fool's erramd. This is factually inaccurate. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted February 25, 2018 Keep in mind the Democratic memo did NOT refute the Gowdy/Nunes memo concerning McCabe's closed door testimony the FISA warrant wouldn't have been sought without the Dossier. Schiff contested that assertion but didn't refute it in his memo. The Dems are trying to difuse a bomb that's already gone off. Frankly the look ridiculous. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EternalShinyAndChrome 3,880 Posted February 25, 2018 Literally none of what you wrote here is true. Go away troll Of course it's true, troll boy. That's not even debatable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casual Observer 597 Posted February 25, 2018 You and I totally agree on the bolded. The problem, and it's not yours, is that Nunes has attempted to show the bolded by using Page, a guy whose Kremlin connections go back to pre-2007 and who as you know was recruited as an FSB asset, and may have still been under active investigation in March 2016. This is the absolute worst guy in the world to show what you have described. You're conveniently neglecting to mention that Page was an FBI asset, who participated in a sting of sorts against Russians that were trying to recruit him, culminating in the prosecution of those Russians. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 Of course it's true, troll boy. That's not even debatable. Yet you cant back it up with any actual examples. Odd how that works. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 421 Posted February 25, 2018 You're conveniently neglecting to mention that Page was an FBI asset, who participated in a sting of sorts against Russians that were trying to recruit him, culminating in the prosecution of those Russians. Here's the actual pleading document from 2015. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/04/04/world/europe/document-U-S-Accuses-Three-Russians-of-Spying.html?mtrref=mobile.nytimes.com&gwh=8BFE4FE872AF28C0B3326078FFA58922&gwt=pay He makes his appearance on page 12. If Page had been an FBI asset in a sting they would have to say that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted February 25, 2018 Here's the actual pleading document from 2015. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/04/04/world/europe/document-U-S-Accuses-Three-Russians-of-Spying.html?mtrref=mobile.nytimes.com&gwh=8BFE4FE872AF28C0B3326078FFA58922&gwt=pay He makes his appearance on page 12. If Page had been an FBI asset in a sting they would have to say that. wait, you're not insuating that the FBI played by the rules , are you ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 421 Posted February 25, 2018 wait, you're not insuating that the FBI played by the rules , are you ? >>"Over the past half year, I have had the privilege to serve as an informal advisor to the staff of the Kremlin in preparation for their Presidency of the G-20 Summit next month, where energy issues will be a prominent point on the agenda," the letter reads.<< - Carter Page. http://time.com/5132126/carter-page-russia-2013-letter/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,249 Posted February 25, 2018 Russians spent 46,000 on facebook ads Trump and Hillary combined for 81,000,000 on facebook ads GRR RUSSIA MEDDLING Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 Russians spent 46,000 on facebook ads Trump and Hillary combined for 81,000,000 on facebook ads GRR RUSSIA MEDDLING Thats a great point...if the only thing claimed Russia did was spend in Facebook ads. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 wait, you're not insuating that the FBI played by the rules , are you ? No insinuating needed. By all appearances based on fact...they did in the case of FISA applications regarding Carter Page. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimmySmith 2,782 Posted February 25, 2018 Check out who posted in this thread and the post counts. Wow. sho bot. Denying logic for 70 pages. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,249 Posted February 25, 2018 Thats a great point...if the only thing claimed Russia did was spend in Facebook ads. its supposedly the ads that swayed the voting idiots Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 sho bot. Denying logic for 70 pages. No...actually posting facts and logic. You should try it once in your life. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 its supposedly the ads that swayed the voting idiots Why do you continue to post things nobody is asserting? Link to anyone claiming Facebook ads alone swayed the voting? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimmySmith 2,782 Posted February 25, 2018 No...actually posting facts and logic. You should try it once in your life.sorry sho bot, this page is typical of your nonsense. Not a fact on it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casual Observer 597 Posted February 25, 2018 Here's the actual pleading document from 2015.https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/04/04/world/europe/document-U-S-Accuses-Three-Russians-of-Spying.html?mtrref=mobile.nytimes.com&gwh=8BFE4FE872AF28C0B3326078FFA58922&gwt=pay He makes his appearance on page 12. If Page had been an FBI asset in a sting they would have to say that. You can't really tell who is referenced on page 12 and they do not need to name him in this document and that's pretty obvious by looking at all the references to Agent 1 or Female 1 and Female 2. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 sorry sho bot, this page is typical of your nonsense. Not a fact on it. Then you should be able to refute what Ive stated. But you cant. My posts have been factual and fact based. If you disagree...show it...show what Ive got wrong. But you cant...very telling. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted February 25, 2018 >>"Over the past half year, I have had the privilege to serve as an informal advisor to the staff of the Kremlin in preparation for their Presidency of the G-20 Summit next month, where energy issues will be a prominent point on the agenda," the letter reads.<< - Carter Page. http://time.com/5132126/carter-page-russia-2013-letter/ sounds like a bad guy! Charges ? Or was this at a time of more flexibility or maybe some resetting so it wasn't bad ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 421 Posted February 25, 2018 You can't really tell who is referenced on page 12 and they do not need to name him in this document and that's pretty obvious by looking at all the references to Agent 1 or Female 1 and Female 2. Page was "Male-1." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casual Observer 597 Posted February 25, 2018 Page was "Male-1." Ok great, but you can't tell that by looking at the document. If that is him, then he is a cooperating witness in a sting of sorts against some Russian agents, which makes him an FBI asset. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cdub100 3,851 Posted February 25, 2018 Thats a great point...if the only thing claimed Russia did was spend in Facebook ads. Slow tard is right. They also had 11 twitter trolls. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 421 Posted February 25, 2018 sounds like a bad guy! Charges ? Or was this at a time of more flexibility or maybe some resetting so it wasn't bad ? No, he wasn't charged, he cooperated. And he's been interviewed by Mueller for 10 hours supposedly, maybe he's cooperating now, maybe not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted February 25, 2018 Slow tard is right. They also had 11 twitter trolls. This is also factually inaccurate. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 421 Posted February 25, 2018 Ok great, but you can't tell that by looking at the document. If that is him, then he is a cooperating witness in a sting of sorts against some Russian agents, which makes him an FBI asset. Being caught up in an espionage investigation is not a "sting." Page himself described himself as a Kremlin advisor. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
