#ReleaseTheMemo/FBI-DOJ Investigation Thread

[YPestis25]

Read through the memo twice. How did this memo undermine our national security?  Seems the Democrat complaints were BS. 

This is all pretty straightforward. 

The standard to receive a FISA warrant is high.  Under those standards, the Government has an obligation to present relevant facts to FISA that are favorable to the target of a warrant.  They failed to do so on 4 occasions, including the original FISA warrant and three renewals.

The Dossier was an essential piece of evidence underpinning the government's argument.  The dossier was validated by a fake new story that was also presented to the FISA.  The information derived from this dossier and fake news story was derived from political opponents of the President.  They never represented to that information to the FISA court, nor did they represent that their source was unreliable. 

The origination of the investigation is vague, but seems to have occurred because of actions by Papadopoulos.  This is not confirmed.  The FISA warrant included this information, but was not the essential enough to have had an FISA warrant issued Carter Page, because there was no evidence of conspiracy between Papadopoulos and Carter Page. 

The bolded part appears to be a major point of contention: many Dems and IC members have claimed that this is false and the unreliability of the source was imparted to the FISA court.

And it is confirmed that the investigation started with Papadopolous.

Also, note: they said they wouldn't have applied for the warrant if there was no memo. Not that the FISC wouldn't have granted it. So it could be that they had evidence that could get a warrant but saw no need to before the dossier.

Yeah that's pretty fair. The one caveat is that McCabe testified that no warrant "would have been sought without the Dossier."  That indicates to me that it would have been silly for them to attempt to obtain a FISA warrant without the Dossier cause there wasn't enough to go on. 

There's definitely a significant point being made in this memo.  I think if Dems were on the other end of this controversy they'd be screaming bloody murder that their civil rights were violated. 

Interestingly on the bolded point, Democrats are disputing that. The Democrats are also calling for a release of the transcript of McCabe's testimony.

[Crumpets]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I read this in Colbert's Trump tweet voice.

[Hollywood]

Read through the memo twice. How did this memo undermine our national security?  Seems the Democrat complaints were BS.  

This is all pretty straightforward.  

The standard to receive a FISA warrant is high.  Under those standards, the Government has an obligation to present relevant facts to FISA that are favorable to the target of a warrant.  They failed to do so on 4 occasions, including the original FISA warrant and three renewals.

The Dossier was an essential piece of evidence underpinning the government's argument.  The dossier was validated by a fake new story that was also presented to the FISA.  The information derived from this dossier and fake news story was derived from political opponents of the President.  They never represented to that information to the FISA court, nor did they represent that their source was unreliable.  

The origination of the investigation is vague, but seems to have occurred because of actions by Papadopoulos.  This is not confirmed.  The FISA warrant included this information, but was not the essential enough to have had an FISA warrant issued Carter Page, because there was no evidence of conspiracy between Papadopoulos and Carter Page.  

The bolded part appears to be a major point of contention: many Dems and IC members have claimed that this is false and the unreliability of the source was imparted to the FISA court.

And it is confirmed that the investigation started with Papadopolous.

Also, note: they said they wouldn't have applied for the warrant if there was no memo. Not that the FISC wouldn't have granted it. So it could be that they had evidence that could get a warrant but saw no need to before the dossier.

Yeah that's pretty fair. The one caveat is that McCabe testified that no warrant "would have been sought without the Dossier."  That indicates to me that it would have been silly for them to attempt to obtain a FISA warrant without the Dossier cause there wasn't enough to go on.  

There's definitely a significant point being made in this memo.  I think if Dems were on the other end of this controversy they'd be screaming bloody murder that their civil rights were violated.  

Interestingly on the bolded point, Democrats are also disputing that. The Democrats are also calling for a release of the transcript of McCabe's testimony.

Democrats are disputing everything.

They said this memo undermines national security?  It doesn't.  

Let them present their own memo, and go through the same process that Republicans went through.  They don't get special treatment.

[Sestak]

How about we just release the FISA warrant and application? That seems the only real way to settle this dispute.

[Sestak]

Also, regardless of all of this, I think there are two main points:

1. The FBI may not have been completely impartial when applying for this warrant. The scope of this is being disputed by both sides; however,

2. The investigation began before the Page warrant and the dossier, meaning that point 1 does not implicate the investigation itself.

Eithwe way, not great for republicans, especially compared to the expectations they had set.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

So the whole jist of the memo, from what I gather, is that the FBI used the Steele dossier to get a FISA warrant. Not exactly a ground breaking claim.

Of course no uproar over another Trump foreign policy adviser being under surveillance for being a suspected Russian asset, lmao what a disgrace.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

Problem is once Trump releases the memo, cuck Paul Ryan thinks it'll stop there and that he can control Trump but if Trump fires Rosenstein and Mueller, cuck Ryan will keep looking the other way until it's too late

In 1933, after Hitler first election win, he needed to partner up with the center right in order to maintain power. He formed a coalition with a center rightist by the name of Franz Von Papen, an old school aristocrat. Behind closed doors Von Papen and other German industrialists laughed as they saw Hitler as a easily controllable puppet. We all saw how that worked out. Paul Ryan is the Franz Von Papen of today, the enabler to Fuhrer Drumpf.

[Yank2133]

Read through the memo twice. How did this memo undermine our national security?  Seems the Democrat complaints were BS.  

This is all pretty straightforward.  

The standard to receive a FISA warrant is high.  Under those standards, the Government has an obligation to present relevant facts to FISA that are favorable to the target of a warrant.  They failed to do so on 4 occasions, including the original FISA warrant and three renewals.

The Dossier was an essential piece of evidence underpinning the government's argument.  The dossier was validated by a fake new story that was also presented to the FISA.  The information derived from this dossier and fake news story was derived from political opponents of the President.  They never represented to that information to the FISA court, nor did they represent that their source was unreliable.  

The origination of the investigation is vague, but seems to have occurred because of actions by Papadopoulos.  This is not confirmed.  The FISA warrant included this information, but was not the essential enough to have had an FISA warrant issued Carter Page, because there was no evidence of conspiracy between Papadopoulos and Carter Page.  

The bolded part appears to be a major point of contention: many Dems and IC members have claimed that this is false and the unreliability of the source was imparted to the FISA court.

And it is confirmed that the investigation started with Papadopolous.

Also, note: they said they wouldn't have applied for the warrant if there was no memo. Not that the FISC wouldn't have granted it. So it could be that they had evidence that could get a warrant but saw no need to before the dossier.

Hmm...on a close reading, the memo says that no warrant would have been sought without the Steele dossier information.  This seems like an odd wording, and strictly construed it means that the information it contained was material to seeking the warrant -- but it doesn't say that they didn't also have that information from other sources.  So it's not correct to say that the memo says the dossier itself was a key to seeking the warrant.

Bingo.

We already knew that the dossier confirmed information that the FBI had already had themselves. Again, this is why the transcripts need to be released.

[Sestak]

Yeah, one of the big questions is this:

Was the memo...

1. A tip which set off an investigation that found more substantial evidence?

2. Direct evidence that was substantial in obtaining the warrant?

3. A corroboration of evidence already obtained by the FBI which suggested that there indeed was a reason to use that evidence to obtain the warrant?

4. A combination: A tip which contained major evidence that kicked off an investigation, which eventually corroborated a good part of the dossier.

I think 4 is probably most likely right now, but the question is; how much of the warrant relied on the dossier, and how much of the dossier was corroborated before the warrant application?

[Koharu]

So, a lot of the claims in the memo are being disputed on legal grounds. Like, the information being presented says legally one thing needs to have happened, but that's not actually how the legal system works.

Here's Seth Abramson's explanation: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/959494066840002560.html

[HisGrace]

Both parties are incredibly lucky that their opposition is as incompetent as they are.

This is not the appropriate event to play centrist.

I am almost certain the Democrats are going to bungle their response to this.

There doesn’t need to be a response to this. The memo speaks for itself.

Well, if the various political connections to the dossier actually were disclosed they need to make that clear and provide evidence.

It also needs to be made clear that the memo only refers to "information" in the dossier, not the dossier itself. That's clear to those of us with good reading comprehension but may be lost on people who happen to stumble upon the memo online and skim it.

[Inmate Trump]

The GOP is a cancer on American society

Every person who still stands by Trump (including all of his voters) are traitors to this country.

[BlueSwan]

Read through the memo twice. How did this memo undermine our national security?  Seems the Democrat complaints were BS.  

This is all pretty straightforward.  

The standard to receive a FISA warrant is high.  Under those standards, the Government has an obligation to present relevant facts to FISA that are favorable to the target of a warrant.  They failed to do so on 4 occasions, including the original FISA warrant and three renewals.

The Dossier was an essential piece of evidence underpinning the government's argument.  The dossier was validated by a fake new story that was also presented to the FISA.  The information derived from this dossier and fake news story was derived from political opponents of the President.  They never represented to that information to the FISA court, nor did they represent that their source was unreliable.  

The origination of the investigation is vague, but seems to have occurred because of actions by Papadopoulos.  This is not confirmed.  The FISA warrant included this information, but was not the essential enough to have had an FISA warrant issued Carter Page, because there was no evidence of conspiracy between Papadopoulos and Carter Page.  

Way to believe every word of a memo that the FBI considers highly misleading. Congratulations, you win partisan hack of the day.

[HisGrace]

So, a lot of the claims in the memo are being disputed on legal grounds. Like, the information being presented says legally one thing needs to have happened, but that's not actually how the legal system works.

Here's Seth Abramson's explanation: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/959494066840002560.html

Oh god, this sounds like even more amateurish crap than I originally assumed. Nunes is such a hack.

[BlueSwan]

Both parties are incredibly lucky that their opposition is as incompetent as they are.

This is not the appropriate event to play centrist.

I am almost certain the Democrats are going to bungle their response to this.

There doesn’t need to be a response to this. The memo speaks for itself.

Well, if the various political connections to the dossier actually were disclosed they need to make that clear and provide evidence.

It also needs to be made clear that the memo only refers to "information" in the dossier, not the dossier itself. That's clear to those of us with good reading comprehension but may be lost on people who happen to stumble upon the memo online and skim it.

Most people won't even skim it. They'll just read the "OMG!! Final proof that the deep state is out to get Trump!" headlines in right wing media.

[GeorgiaModerate]

So, a lot of the claims in the memo are being disputed on legal grounds. Like, the information being presented says legally one thing needs to have happened, but that's not actually how the legal system works.

Here's Seth Abramson's explanation: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/959494066840002560.html

Very interesting thread.  Thanks for posting it.

[Hollywood]

Read through the memo twice. How did this memo undermine our national security?  Seems the Democrat complaints were BS.  

This is all pretty straightforward.  

The standard to receive a FISA warrant is high.  Under those standards, the Government has an obligation to present relevant facts to FISA that are favorable to the target of a warrant.  They failed to do so on 4 occasions, including the original FISA warrant and three renewals.

The Dossier was an essential piece of evidence underpinning the government's argument.  The dossier was validated by a fake new story that was also presented to the FISA.  The information derived from this dossier and fake news story was derived from political opponents of the President.  They never represented to that information to the FISA court, nor did they represent that their source was unreliable.  

The origination of the investigation is vague, but seems to have occurred because of actions by Papadopoulos.  This is not confirmed.  The FISA warrant included this information, but was not the essential enough to have had an FISA warrant issued Carter Page, because there was no evidence of conspiracy between Papadopoulos and Carter Page.  

Way to believe every word of a memo that the FBI considers highly misleading. Congratulations, you win partisan hack of the day.

The FBI and DOJ used political opponent opposition research to obtain a FISA warrant, and mislead the court by failing their obligation to include relevant facts.  This is in their application for a FISA warrant. This is the type of corrupt behavior that we'd expect from the government during early 1900s to violate the civil rights of left-wing groups.  

If the memo is misleading, release the FISA warrant application.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Let's get not distracted from the real issue here: Devin Nunes' resignation is already about six months overdue and the clock continues to count.

The memo itself is obviously some poorly fabricated bullsh**t designed to descredit the DOJ's investigations into the Trump administration's wrongdoings. But even before that fabricated bullsh**t there were already enough grounds for Devin Nunes' resignation.

[Hollywood]

Let's get not distracted from the real issue here: Devin Nunes' resignation is already about six months overdue and the clock continues to count.

The memo itself is obviously some poorly fabricated bullsh**t designed to descredit the DOJ's investigations into the Trump administration's wrongdoings. But even before that fabricated bullsh**t there were already enough grounds for Devin Nunes' resignation.

Irony - the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.  Exhibit A above. 

[Crumpets]

The FBI and DOJ used political opponent opposition research to obtain a FISA warrant,

There's a reason it's called opposition "research" and not "opposition divination." That research had sources which should be judged on their own merit, and the course of the investigation since this FISA renewal shows that they almost certainly do have merit.

and mislead the court by failing their obligation to include relevant facts.

This is disputed by pretty much everyone with knowledge of the situation not named Devin Nunes, including whether they were actually obligated to include this at all. Obviously we won't know who is right unless the full application is released.

This is in their application for a FISA warrant.

What is? Their acknowledgement of not including Steele's political background? That doesn't make any sense.

This is the type of corrupt behavior that we'd expect from the government during early 1900s to violate the civil rights of left-wing groups.  

Sure, but on what side? Lying to obstruct an investigation into corruption is just as bad as lying to initiate an investigation into corruption. And even if Trump himself is exonerated, there are already two guilty pleas and two additional arrests. This is not a frivolous investigation by any stretch.

If the memo is misleading, release the FISA warrant application.

Absolutely. #ReleaseTheApplication

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

The GOP is a cancer on American society

Every person who still stands by Trump (including all of his voters) are traitors to this country.

Yeah, Special K, you are "special" 

[Doimper]

The GOP is a cancer on American society

Every person who still stands by Trump (including all of his voters) are traitors to this country.

Yeah, Special K, you are "special" 

Wow, what a limp, insipid reply. Trump supporters really are low-energy.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Read https://lawfareblog.com/dubious-legal-claim-behind-releasethememo for an explanation of why even if the FBI didn't provide information about the dossier's funding or Steele's alleged biases to the FISA Court...it doesn't invalidate the warrant.

[HisGrace]

There's a reason it's called opposition "research" and not "opposition divination." That research had sources which should be judged on their own merit, and the course of the investigation since this FISA renewal shows that they almost certainly do have merit.

This is what I've always thought. Even though the argument for the dossier being a political hit piece is pretty skant, so what if it is? Look at the merits of the individual claims made in the dossier. Conservatives have this obsession these days with claiming "bias" as a gotcha type thing, but that's essentially just shooting the messenger. If something is inaccurate, the issue is that it was inaccurate, not that there might have been bias involved. Conversely, if something is accurate, claiming bias doesn't undo that.

At this point, I don't think anyone (aside from people directly involved in the investigation who may have enough information by now for all we know) can say whether or not the most significant claims made by Steele are accurate, hence the need for the investigation.

[ProudModerate2]

Info gathered and reported by CNN.

Rep. Adam Schiff — the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee who has produced the competing memo to the Nunes memo — has laid out his concerns with the GOP document.

• The GOP memo alleges McCabe said "no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information." Schiff said that statement does not represent what McCabe told the House Intelligence Committee, and he said McCabe told the panel the "genesis of the investigation" did not begin with the dossier.
• Schiff also said that it is "not accurate" that the secret court was NOT aware of Steele's political motivations. He said the court was aware that there was a "likely political motivation" behind Steele. He also said it is normal in FISA applications not to name individuals who may be sources of information.