task0778
Diamond Member
First, it shines a light on what's been going on at the top of certain federal agencies that are supposed to be impartial but apparently are not, at least in some cases. In recent years we've had too many scandals in too many federal agencies, from Fast and Furious (ATF) to Lois Lerner (IRS) to Benghazi (State) to this latest mess (FBI/DOJ). Too many times we've seen what appears to be politics involved with activities and decisions made that were ideologically driven. And that shit has to stop, there's too many people in these United States that do not trust their own gov't and with good reason because even the appearance of impropriety cannot be tolerated and yet it happens. So this memo has opened up fierce dialogue about the situation and that's gotta be a good thing. Let's find out WTF was going on, let's see what the Dems say, what the Senate Judiciary Committee report says, and what the FBI/DOJ says in the coming days and weeks. Is they also an IG report too? Dunno, but let's see that too and then the Mueller investigation findings.
Here's the big deal in this particular case: some people aligned with the Obama Administration wanted to spy on their political opponents, that's what it boils down to. They knew that the Steele dossier was funded by the Democrats and was unverified, yet they used it anyway to justify the FISA warrant -- without telling the courts that Democrats paid for it and the intelligence community didn't create the document. They knew that Steele hated Trump and wanted to see him lose and yet didn't tell the court he was the source. Then, to get additional justification, they used news stories that journalists wrote where they just repeated information from Steele as if it were true.
Is all of that true? So what exactly was the FISA judge told? Anything less that EVERYTHING having to do with that dossier or with Mr Steele is unacceptable. Don't tell me what a judge assumes in litigation, this isn't litigation where one side has their say and then the other side has it's turn. In the FISA Court there's only the gov't presenting it's case, and IMHO it is incumbent on them to withhold NOTHING. To do so is to attempt to violate our civil rights and nobody should be allowing that, much less senior officials at the FBI or DOJ. If you can't get the warrant without telling the whole truth then you shouldn't get the warrant at all. And there is evidence that McCabe did testify that the FBI/DOJ wouldn't have even tried to get the FISA warrant without the Steele dossier. Some say that's not true but others say it's on the record, so we'll see.
This cannot be condoned, if even partly true. When the gov't goes to the FISA Court to get a warrant to
surveil anybody - you, me, anybody - our civil rights are at stake and that isn't a minor thing. I don't care whether the information in that dossier was true or not, and there's quite a bit of doubt about that since to this day at least parts of it remain unverified. To me, we can stop right there. I don't think the GOP memo was made up out of thin air, they got all that stuff from documents provided by the FBI/DOJ. The Dems say it's inaccurate and part's of it are not true. OK, show me; I got time. Maybe I'm wrong, won't be the 1st time. But the Dems are also starting out poorly if they want to convince anybody that the truth is on their side; after all, they already lied about that memo having any risks to national security in it. There's nothing there that compromises a damn thing, every intelligence agency in the world today already knows everything that was in the memo.
Here's the big deal in this particular case: some people aligned with the Obama Administration wanted to spy on their political opponents, that's what it boils down to. They knew that the Steele dossier was funded by the Democrats and was unverified, yet they used it anyway to justify the FISA warrant -- without telling the courts that Democrats paid for it and the intelligence community didn't create the document. They knew that Steele hated Trump and wanted to see him lose and yet didn't tell the court he was the source. Then, to get additional justification, they used news stories that journalists wrote where they just repeated information from Steele as if it were true.
Is all of that true? So what exactly was the FISA judge told? Anything less that EVERYTHING having to do with that dossier or with Mr Steele is unacceptable. Don't tell me what a judge assumes in litigation, this isn't litigation where one side has their say and then the other side has it's turn. In the FISA Court there's only the gov't presenting it's case, and IMHO it is incumbent on them to withhold NOTHING. To do so is to attempt to violate our civil rights and nobody should be allowing that, much less senior officials at the FBI or DOJ. If you can't get the warrant without telling the whole truth then you shouldn't get the warrant at all. And there is evidence that McCabe did testify that the FBI/DOJ wouldn't have even tried to get the FISA warrant without the Steele dossier. Some say that's not true but others say it's on the record, so we'll see.
This cannot be condoned, if even partly true. When the gov't goes to the FISA Court to get a warrant to
surveil anybody - you, me, anybody - our civil rights are at stake and that isn't a minor thing. I don't care whether the information in that dossier was true or not, and there's quite a bit of doubt about that since to this day at least parts of it remain unverified. To me, we can stop right there. I don't think the GOP memo was made up out of thin air, they got all that stuff from documents provided by the FBI/DOJ. The Dems say it's inaccurate and part's of it are not true. OK, show me; I got time. Maybe I'm wrong, won't be the 1st time. But the Dems are also starting out poorly if they want to convince anybody that the truth is on their side; after all, they already lied about that memo having any risks to national security in it. There's nothing there that compromises a damn thing, every intelligence agency in the world today already knows everything that was in the memo.
