ADVERTISEMENT

Schiff memo was a lie - but the Nunes memo was political half truth too

Boomboom521

Boomboom521

All-American
Mar 14, 2014
20,114
2,957
598
a pathetic political attempt to cover Trump and advance a career. I’m sure no wingnuts onnthiss board will admit it, but all of the narratives created from these lies over the last year are total Bullsh1t. I’m not saying the FBI or the Obama administration didn’t make mistakes, or that Trump collusion occurred....but I am saying the Nunes memo and the faux outrage exhibited by Nunes and Trump are complete lies.

To attempt to discredit the DOJ just to provide political cover for a man with the character of Trump? This shouldn’t be ok for anyone
 
  • Like
Reactions: Original Mountaineer1, D. Denzil Finney, CpEER and 4 others
Boomboom521 said:
a pathetic political attempt to cover Trump and advance a career. I’m sure no wingnuts onnthiss board will admit it, but all of the narratives created from these lies over the last year are total Bullsh1t. I’m not saying the FBI or the Obama administration didn’t make mistakes, or that Trump collusion occurred....but I am saying the Nunes memo and the faux outrage exhibited by Nunes and Trump are complete lies.

To attempt to discredit the DOJ just to provide political cover for a man with the character of Trump? This shouldn’t be ok for anyone
Click to expand...
Source?
 
  • Like
Reactions: lenny4wvu
Boomboom521 said:
a pathetic political attempt to cover Trump and advance a career. I’m sure no wingnuts onnthiss board will admit it, but all of the narratives created from these lies over the last year are total Bullsh1t. I’m not saying the FBI or the Obama administration didn’t make mistakes, or that Trump collusion occurred....but I am saying the Nunes memo and the faux outrage exhibited by Nunes and Trump are complete lies.

To attempt to discredit the DOJ just to provide political cover for a man with the character of Trump? This shouldn’t be ok for anyone
Click to expand...

Get back on your meds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WVU80ate, lenny4wvu and WVU82
bamaEER said:
Hopefully this ends Nunes’ career. It’s pretty blatant.
Click to expand...
I’m angry about it. I was very concerned with the potential abuses Nunes asserted, and was very eager to discover exactly the extent of the corruption. I was angry that Obama, Comey, Yates, Lynch and Rosenstein would all conspire to create such a devastating situation that empowers Trump and his ability to make himself as the one credible source in government.

But now I see.....even with the masssive amount of redactions....Nunes’ memo was a complete lie. And it’s fvcking disgusting.
 
Boomboom521 said:
Did you read the app? Nah, I bet you didn’t. Just all the conservative Bullsh1t summations. Nunes - Gowdy - and their staff ran a screen to initiate this corrupt DOJ narrative.
Click to expand...

I'm reading it. And through all the redacted material, it's clear that Source #1 is Steele and that they heavily used him as justification in the original FISA warrant. Along with a news story that they don't believe was given to that news organization by Steele, but more than likely the associate that hired him. So far, ZERO mention of the DNC or Hillary's campaign.
 
bamaEER said:
Hopefully this ends Nunes’ career. It’s pretty blatant.
Click to expand...

No it's not. Reading it... the "evidence" supporting the warrant sounds thin and it should have disclosed the ties that "a U.S.-based law firm" had.

And un-redacted version may shed more light, but Nune's assertion that the Steele was a key source is non-debatable.
 
Boomboom521 said:
I’m angry about it. I was very concerned with the potential abuses Nunes asserted, and was very eager to discover exactly the extent of the corruption. I was angry that Obama, Comey, Yates, Lynch and Rosenstein would all conspire to create such a devastating situation that empowers Trump and his ability to make himself as the one credible source in government.

But now I see.....even with the masssive amount of redactions....Nunes’ memo was a complete lie. And it’s fvcking disgusting.
Click to expand...

I’m through about a third of it. You are seeing only what you want. There is absolutely no mention that it is oppo research by Hillbag.

The sub sources below Steele were not even identified let alone verified. The dossier and Steele’s content is almost everything not redacted, and what they led with. If redaction history is any hint what was redacted protects DOJ personnel, it won’t be more evidence.

PS, Rubio is an idiot.
 
Mntneer said:
I'm reading it. And through all the redacted material, it's clear that Source #1 is Steele and that they heavily used him as justification in the original FISA warrant. Along with a news story that they don't believe was given to that news organization by Steele, but more than likely the associate that hired him. So far, ZERO mention of the DNC or Hillary's campaign.
Click to expand...
Page 16. It clearly identifies Source #1 being paid by the law firm to discredit candidate #1.
 
Mntneer said:
No it's not. Reading it... the "evidence" supporting the warrant sounds thin and it should have disclosed the ties that "a U.S.-based law firm" had.

And un-redacted version may shed more light, but Nune's assertion that the Steele was a key source is non-debatable.
Click to expand...
Nothing you can say or do for the Liberal Wing Nuts Mntneer, ........... TDS must run it’s course, along with daily meds.
 
TarHeelEer said:
I’m through about a third of it. You are seeing only what you want. There is absolutely no mention that it is oppo research by Hillbag.

The sub sources below Steele were not even identified let alone verified. The dossier and Steele’s content is almost everything not redacted, and what they led with. If redaction history is any hint what was redacted protects DOJ personnel, it won’t be more evidence.

PS, Rubio is an idiot.
Click to expand...
Actually they led with Page’s business connections and their ties to Russian organizations. They also mentioned his own interviews with FBI prior to any of the dossier being mentioned.

The Nunes memo was a lie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phil
Boomboom521 said:
Page 16. It clearly identifies Source #1 being paid by the law firm to discredit candidate #1.
Click to expand...

Correct, but no mention of the ties that law firm had with Candidate #2. Unless that is, that information is in the redacted portions.

Sorry, but so far, this release does nothing to change the Nunes memo. Go back and re-read the Nunes memo.
 
TarHeelEer said:
Candidate #1. Did they explicitly state Candidate #2?
Click to expand...
They explicitly stated the law firm that did the actual hiring, and even went as far to explicitly state that the purpose was to discredit the candidate.

This application was approved by anRepublican appointed Judge.
 
Boomboom521 said:
Actually they led with Page’s business connections and their ties to Russian organizations. They also mentioned his own interviews with FBI prior to any of the dossier being mentioned.

The Nunes memo was a lie.
Click to expand...

I think you need to review Nunes memo. You are FOS so far in this.
 
Boomboom521 said:
Actually they led with Page’s business connections and their ties to Russian organizations. They also mentioned his own interviews with FBI prior to any of the dossier being mentioned.

The Nunes memo was a lie.
Click to expand...

That's not the evidence supporting the warrant. That's historical information about the target. Hence, "Section III. A. Page's Connections to Russia and the RIS" and not "Section III. B. Page's Coordination with Russian Government Officials on 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Influence Activities." Big difference between those sections. B is the pudding to justify the warrant.
 
Boomboom521 said:
They explicitly stated the law firm that did the actual hiring, and even went as far to explicitly state that the purpose was to discredit the candidate.

This application was approved by anRepublican appointed Judge.
Click to expand...

AGAIN... they don't state the ties or connections with the law firm and what should have been "Candidate #2". For all they know it could have been my lawyer hiring Steele to try and discredit Trump. It's a BIG omission.
 
Mntneer said:
Sorry, but so far, this release does nothing to change the Nunes memo. Go back and re-read the Nunes memo.
Click to expand...
I know you are of sound mind, BUT, I hope it didn’t take you long to realize these Wing Nuts are desperate.
 
Mntneer said:
Correct, but no mention of the ties that law firm had with Candidate #2. Unless that is, that information is in the redacted portions.

Sorry, but so far, this release does nothing to change the Nunes memo. Go back and re-read the Nunes memo.
Click to expand...
It absolutely does.
 
The redacted portions of the application could shed different light, but the un-redacted portions are thin. Also, I would love to know who the "Supervisory Special Agent" that signed the Verification page was.

And looking at the names on the "Certification" page.... man, this whole FISA process... should be overhauled IMO.
 
Mntneer said:
AGAIN... they don't state the ties or connections with the law firm and what should have been "Candidate #2". For all they know it could have been my lawyer hiring Steele to try and discredit Trump. It's a BIG omission.
Click to expand...
First: you don’t know if that was actually an omission.
Second: the application clearly identifies the law firm as seeking to discredit the candidates campaign. Even if the DNC was not mentioned (and let’s be clear, Republicans were using Fusion prior to Clinton for information on Trump), the app in no way misleads the court by omitting that the source was paid and unbiased.
 
Mntneer said:
The redacted portions of the application could shed different light, but the un-redacted portions are thin. Also, I would love to know who the "Supervisory Special Agent" that signed the Verification page was.

And looking at the names on the "Certification" page.... man, this whole FISA process... should be overhauled IMO.
Click to expand...
Remember, a FISA approval is only temporary....the renewals must prove to have been producing legitimate information. This FISA against Page was renewed either 2 or 3 times.
 
Boomboom521 said:
First: you don’t know if that was actually an omission.
Second: the application clearly identifies the law firm as seeking to discredit the candidates campaign. Even if the DNC was not mentioned (and let’s be clear, Republicans were using Fusion prior to Clinton for information on Trump), the app in no way misleads the court by omitting that the source was paid and unbiased.
Click to expand...

So what if it identifies the firm as a law firm seeking to discredit the candidate. For all a judge knows it could be Jackie Chiles hiring Source #1. By omitting the source of "Source #1" you paint a different picture than if you say, "Source #1 was paid for a by a law firm that has close ties to the DNC and Hillary Clinton, hired in an attempt to influence the election."
 
Boomboom521 said:
Remember, a FISA approval is only temporary....the renewals must prove to have been producing legitimate information. This FISA against Page was renewed either 2 or 3 times.
Click to expand...

And the FBI is supposed to follow Woods Procedure. That doesn’t mean crap.
 
Boomboom521 said:
Sure, ok. That’s legit, but this application in no way at all confirms the Bullsh1t narrative that the Page application was bogus, and the FISA court was misled.
Click to expand...

Without being able to read the entire application un-redacted, we will never know. But it seems to me that the courts were asked to grant a warrant on thin grounds, more thin that I originally thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

30CAT

Before the Durham report, TV networks allowed Russiagate booster Adam Schiff to claim 'evidence' of collusion

Replies
3
Views
120
Off-Topic Discussion Board
roadtrasheer
R
30CAT

Durham reports shows Pedo-Joe & Obama knew truth of Trump collusion hoax but kept silent

Replies
1
Views
50
Off-Topic Discussion Board
roadtrasheer
R
WVU82

Deception by Redaction: More FBI FISA Abuses, This Time Using Fake News in the Washington Post

Replies
0
Views
367
Off-Topic Discussion Board
WVU82
WVU82
WVU82

The FBI is Now a Democrat SuperPAC

Replies
0
Views
79
Off-Topic Discussion Board
WVU82
WVU82
WVU82

SpyGate 101: A Primer On The Russia Collusion Hoax’s Years-long Plot To Take Down Trump

Replies
2
Views
81
Off-Topic Discussion Board
WVU82
WVU82
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back