FBI Dealt Blow By DC Judge; Must Address Measures Taken To Verify Steele Dossier

[CrusaderFrank]

zerohedge?


dismissed.

Jake, it happened. You can't dismiss it like a poll showing that Trump has no path to the White House

Zero Hedge
Has this Media Source failed a fact check? LET US KNOW HERE.

Share:

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information, therefore fact checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

History

Launched in 2009, Zero Hedge is a finance blog founded by Colin Lokey also known with the pseudonym “Tyler Durden,” Daniel Ivandjiiski, and Tim Backshall. According to a Bloomberg Interview the Zero Hedge founders/authors were anonymous until 2016. A Professional Service Subscription is required to read the rest of the interview from Bloomberg, however a New Yorker article also covered their history.

Zero Hedge wrote a rebuttal article regarding the Bloomberg interview that can be found here. A quote from the rebuttal reads: “Zero Hedge hired Colin when he approached us over a year ago begging for a job after he was fired with cause from Seeking Alpha, following a fight with a co-worker.”

Funded by / Ownership

The website is registered in Bulgaria under the name Georgi Georgiev, a business partner of Krassimir Ivandjiiski.

According to Rationalwiki the only writer “conclusively” identified is “Dan Ivandjiiski, who conducts public interviews on behalf of Zero Hedge.” The blog generates revenue from online advertising.
[...]

Zero Hedge - Media Bias/Fact Check



dis...



missed.

Jake, it happened. You can't dismiss it like a poll showing that Trump has no path to the White House.

Trump will use this to wipe out the seditious democrat Party this fall

you think i am jake? silly you.

Sure, Jake

 

[Dan Stubbs]

This should be good

-Geaux
-----------------------

The FBI has been dealt a major blow after a Washington DC judge ruled that the agency must respond to a FOIA request for documents concerning the bureau's efforts to verify the controversial Steele Dossier, before it was used as the foundation of a FISA surveillance warrant application and subsequent renewals.

US District Court Judge Amit Mehta - who in January sided with the FBI's decision to ignore the FOIA request, said that President Trump's release of two House Intelligence Committee documents (the "Nunes" and "Schiff" memos) changed everything.

Judge Amit Mehta
Considering that the FBI offered Steele $50,000 to verify the Dossier's claims yet never paid him, BuzzFeed has unsuccessfully tried to do the same to defend themselves in a dossier-related lawsuit, and a $50 million Soros-funded investigation to continue the hunt have turned up nothing that we know of - whatever documents the FBI may be forced to cough up regarding their attempts to verify the Dossier could prove highly embarrassing for the agency.

f Mr. Steele could get solid corroboration of his reports, the F.B.I. would pay him $50,000 for his efforts, according to two people familiar with the offer. Ultimately, he was not paid. -NYT

What's more, forcing the FBI to prove they had an empty hand will likely embolden calls to disband the special counsel investigation- as the agency's mercenary and politicized approach to "investigations" will be laid all the more bare for the world to see. Then again, who knows - maybe the FBI verified everything in the dossier and it simply hasn't leaked.

FBI Dealt Blow By DC Judge; Must Address Measures Taken To Verify Steele Dossier

This will end the whole case and would void the warrants and discovery data. Planting evidence is a bad move, and it has been done before in other FBI investigations in the past.

 

[playtime]

zerohedge?


dismissed.

Jake, it happened. You can't dismiss it like a poll showing that Trump has no path to the White House

Zero Hedge
Has this Media Source failed a fact check? LET US KNOW HERE.

Share:

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information, therefore fact checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

History

Launched in 2009, Zero Hedge is a finance blog founded by Colin Lokey also known with the pseudonym “Tyler Durden,” Daniel Ivandjiiski, and Tim Backshall. According to a Bloomberg Interview the Zero Hedge founders/authors were anonymous until 2016. A Professional Service Subscription is required to read the rest of the interview from Bloomberg, however a New Yorker article also covered their history.

Zero Hedge wrote a rebuttal article regarding the Bloomberg interview that can be found here. A quote from the rebuttal reads: “Zero Hedge hired Colin when he approached us over a year ago begging for a job after he was fired with cause from Seeking Alpha, following a fight with a co-worker.”

Funded by / Ownership

The website is registered in Bulgaria under the name Georgi Georgiev, a business partner of Krassimir Ivandjiiski.

According to Rationalwiki the only writer “conclusively” identified is “Dan Ivandjiiski, who conducts public interviews on behalf of Zero Hedge.” The blog generates revenue from online advertising.
[...]

Zero Hedge - Media Bias/Fact Check



dis...



missed.

Jake, it happened. You can't dismiss it like a poll showing that Trump has no path to the White House.

Trump will use this to wipe out the seditious democrat Party this fall

you think i am jake? silly you.

Sure, Jake

you gotta tell me why...

 

[Dan Stubbs]

zerohedge?


dismissed.

Jake, it happened. You can't dismiss it like a poll showing that Trump has no path to the White House

Zero Hedge
Has this Media Source failed a fact check? LET US KNOW HERE.

Share:

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information, therefore fact checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

History

Launched in 2009, Zero Hedge is a finance blog founded by Colin Lokey also known with the pseudonym “Tyler Durden,” Daniel Ivandjiiski, and Tim Backshall. According to a Bloomberg Interview the Zero Hedge founders/authors were anonymous until 2016. A Professional Service Subscription is required to read the rest of the interview from Bloomberg, however a New Yorker article also covered their history.

Zero Hedge wrote a rebuttal article regarding the Bloomberg interview that can be found here. A quote from the rebuttal reads: “Zero Hedge hired Colin when he approached us over a year ago begging for a job after he was fired with cause from Seeking Alpha, following a fight with a co-worker.”

Funded by / Ownership

The website is registered in Bulgaria under the name Georgi Georgiev, a business partner of Krassimir Ivandjiiski.

According to Rationalwiki the only writer “conclusively” identified is “Dan Ivandjiiski, who conducts public interviews on behalf of Zero Hedge.” The blog generates revenue from online advertising.
[...]

Zero Hedge - Media Bias/Fact Check



dis...



missed.

Hear is the server info: Route:::

10.8.8.1 (Private)
66.171.38.73 New Orleans, USA
38.122.27.121 te0-0-1-3.rcr21.msy01.atlas.cogentco.com Washington, DC, USA
154.54.81.73 be3301.ccr41.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com Houston, TX, USA
154.54.41.66 be2441.ccr31.dfw01.atlas.cogentco.com Dallas, TX, USA
154.54.28.74 be2763.ccr41.dfw03.atlas.cogentco.com Dallas, TX, USA
154.54.12.106 tata.dfw03.atlas.cogentco.com Dallas, TX, USA
209.85.172.106 Mountain View, USA
108.170.240.209 Mountain View, California, USA
108.170.228.81 Mountain View, California, USA
209.85.243.161 Mountain View, USA
216.239.56.82 Mountain View, USA
66.249.94.89 Mountain View, USA
- (unnamed)
35.227.58.252 252.58.227.35.bc.googleusercontent.com Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

 

[MisterBeale]

Jake, it happened. You can't dismiss it like a poll showing that Trump has no path to the White House

Zero Hedge
Has this Media Source failed a fact check? LET US KNOW HERE.

Share:

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information, therefore fact checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

History

Launched in 2009, Zero Hedge is a finance blog founded by Colin Lokey also known with the pseudonym “Tyler Durden,” Daniel Ivandjiiski, and Tim Backshall. According to a Bloomberg Interview the Zero Hedge founders/authors were anonymous until 2016. A Professional Service Subscription is required to read the rest of the interview from Bloomberg, however a New Yorker article also covered their history.

Zero Hedge wrote a rebuttal article regarding the Bloomberg interview that can be found here. A quote from the rebuttal reads: “Zero Hedge hired Colin when he approached us over a year ago begging for a job after he was fired with cause from Seeking Alpha, following a fight with a co-worker.”

Funded by / Ownership

The website is registered in Bulgaria under the name Georgi Georgiev, a business partner of Krassimir Ivandjiiski.

According to Rationalwiki the only writer “conclusively” identified is “Dan Ivandjiiski, who conducts public interviews on behalf of Zero Hedge.” The blog generates revenue from online advertising.
[...]

Zero Hedge - Media Bias/Fact Check



dis...



missed.

Actually, it happened, but then they went after the personal attorney.

This is sort of old news.

Trump Lawyer Cohen Drops Suits Against BuzzFeed, Fusion GPS
BLOOMBERG


And Geaux's claim that the court ruling happened? If you don't trust Zero hedge and you want to attack the source? (A poisoning the well fallacy,) That's fine, but it is easy to do a search to find out if they are lying. Politico has the same court ruling on record, it is real.

Sorry, the story IS TRUE.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000161-9b8b-da6b-ade9-ffbfa8ff0000

i am saying that there was a CONspiracy that it was a set up to try & stop trump from getting the whitehouse & hillary is somehow behind it all.

Wow, does it matter who is behind it?

Look at your fecking signature. If you know the truth, why feed into lies?

i'm not feeding into anything.

i'll believe our intel over president grift weasel, any day of the week.

tick tock.

You are being a partisan idiot.

Back when it didn't matter, or it didn't suit you, folks like you took exactly the reverse position. The establishment, the Deep State, and the intel. community are at direct odds with the public state. They have an agenda that is in opposition to what the people want, and will do anything to maintain their power.

This is a known fact. You are really obtuse if you do not know this.

Or. . . . you are simply lying like they do. ALL THE DAMN TIME.


The intelligence community keeps lying

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan leaves a closed briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill. (Brendan Smialowski / AFP/Getty Images)


"A diplomat was once defined as someone whose job is to lie for his country. That's apparently what makes diplomats different from intelligence officers, whose function is to lie to their country.

How else can you explain why CIA Director John Brennan still has his job? Or how Director of National Intelligence James Clapper remains on the federal payroll? Or why Keith Alexander stepped down as head of the National Security Agency only when he was good and ready?

Each of them lied flagrantly to the American people about vital matters of public concern. None paid a price.

The latest example erupted last week, when the CIA's inspector general confirmed that the agency had hacked into Senate Intelligence Committee computers and read emails sent by staffers. The investigation came after U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed the surreptitious search, charging that the CIA had violated federal law and the Constitution.


At the time, Brennan rejected Feinstein's accusation, insisting that "nothing could be further from the truth."

Places far from the truth are his native land. Only after the inspector general delivered his report was Brennan forced to admit he was wrong about Feinstein's complaint — without revealing whether the falsehood was the result of dishonesty or of ignorance.

Yet President Barack Obama shrugged it all off."

 

[playtime]

zerohedge?


dismissed.

Jake, it happened. You can't dismiss it like a poll showing that Trump has no path to the White House

Zero Hedge
Has this Media Source failed a fact check? LET US KNOW HERE.

Share:

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information, therefore fact checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

History

Launched in 2009, Zero Hedge is a finance blog founded by Colin Lokey also known with the pseudonym “Tyler Durden,” Daniel Ivandjiiski, and Tim Backshall. According to a Bloomberg Interview the Zero Hedge founders/authors were anonymous until 2016. A Professional Service Subscription is required to read the rest of the interview from Bloomberg, however a New Yorker article also covered their history.

Zero Hedge wrote a rebuttal article regarding the Bloomberg interview that can be found here. A quote from the rebuttal reads: “Zero Hedge hired Colin when he approached us over a year ago begging for a job after he was fired with cause from Seeking Alpha, following a fight with a co-worker.”

Funded by / Ownership

The website is registered in Bulgaria under the name Georgi Georgiev, a business partner of Krassimir Ivandjiiski.

According to Rationalwiki the only writer “conclusively” identified is “Dan Ivandjiiski, who conducts public interviews on behalf of Zero Hedge.” The blog generates revenue from online advertising.
[...]

Zero Hedge - Media Bias/Fact Check



dis...



missed.

Hear is the server info: Route:::

10.8.8.1 (Private)
66.171.38.73 New Orleans, USA
38.122.27.121 te0-0-1-3.rcr21.msy01.atlas.cogentco.com Washington, DC, USA
154.54.81.73 be3301.ccr41.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com Houston, TX, USA
154.54.41.66 be2441.ccr31.dfw01.atlas.cogentco.com Dallas, TX, USA
154.54.28.74 be2763.ccr41.dfw03.atlas.cogentco.com Dallas, TX, USA
154.54.12.106 tata.dfw03.atlas.cogentco.com Dallas, TX, USA
209.85.172.106 Mountain View, USA
108.170.240.209 Mountain View, California, USA
108.170.228.81 Mountain View, California, USA
209.85.243.161 Mountain View, USA
216.239.56.82 Mountain View, USA
66.249.94.89 Mountain View, USA
- (unnamed)
35.227.58.252 252.58.227.35.bc.googleusercontent.com Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

& ?

 

[playtime]

Zero Hedge
Has this Media Source failed a fact check? LET US KNOW HERE.

Share:

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information, therefore fact checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

History

Launched in 2009, Zero Hedge is a finance blog founded by Colin Lokey also known with the pseudonym “Tyler Durden,” Daniel Ivandjiiski, and Tim Backshall. According to a Bloomberg Interview the Zero Hedge founders/authors were anonymous until 2016. A Professional Service Subscription is required to read the rest of the interview from Bloomberg, however a New Yorker article also covered their history.

Zero Hedge wrote a rebuttal article regarding the Bloomberg interview that can be found here. A quote from the rebuttal reads: “Zero Hedge hired Colin when he approached us over a year ago begging for a job after he was fired with cause from Seeking Alpha, following a fight with a co-worker.”

Funded by / Ownership

The website is registered in Bulgaria under the name Georgi Georgiev, a business partner of Krassimir Ivandjiiski.

According to Rationalwiki the only writer “conclusively” identified is “Dan Ivandjiiski, who conducts public interviews on behalf of Zero Hedge.” The blog generates revenue from online advertising.
[...]

Zero Hedge - Media Bias/Fact Check



dis...



missed.

Actually, it happened, but then they went after the personal attorney.

This is sort of old news.

Trump Lawyer Cohen Drops Suits Against BuzzFeed, Fusion GPS
BLOOMBERG


And Geaux's claim that the court ruling happened? If you don't trust Zero hedge and you want to attack the source? (A poisoning the well fallacy,) That's fine, but it is easy to do a search to find out if they are lying. Politico has the same court ruling on record, it is real.

Sorry, the story IS TRUE.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000161-9b8b-da6b-ade9-ffbfa8ff0000

i am saying that there was a CONspiracy that it was a set up to try & stop trump from getting the whitehouse & hillary is somehow behind it all.

Wow, does it matter who is behind it?

Look at your fecking signature. If you know the truth, why feed into lies?

i'm not feeding into anything.

i'll believe our intel over president grift weasel, any day of the week.

tick tock.

You are being a partisan idiot.

Back when it didn't matter, or it didn't suit you, folks like you took exactly the reverse position. The establishment, the Deep State, and the intel. community are at direct odds with the public state. They have an agenda that is in opposition to what the people want, and will do anything to maintain their power.

This is a known fact. You are really obtuse if you do not know this.

Or. . . . you are simply lying like they do. ALL THE DAMN TIME.


The intelligence community keeps lying

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan leaves a closed briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill. (Brendan Smialowski / AFP/Getty Images)


"A diplomat was once defined as someone whose job is to lie for his country. That's apparently what makes diplomats different from intelligence officers, whose function is to lie to their country.

How else can you explain why CIA Director John Brennan still has his job? Or how Director of National Intelligence James Clapper remains on the federal payroll? Or why Keith Alexander stepped down as head of the National Security Agency only when he was good and ready?

Each of them lied flagrantly to the American people about vital matters of public concern. None paid a price.

The latest example erupted last week, when the CIA's inspector general confirmed that the agency had hacked into Senate Intelligence Committee computers and read emails sent by staffers. The investigation came after U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed the surreptitious search, charging that the CIA had violated federal law and the Constitution.


At the time, Brennan rejected Feinstein's accusation, insisting that "nothing could be further from the truth."

Places far from the truth are his native land. Only after the inspector general delivered his report was Brennan forced to admit he was wrong about Feinstein's complaint — without revealing whether the falsehood was the result of dishonesty or of ignorance.

Yet President Barack Obama shrugged it all off."

'deep state'

gotta love that one...

 

[playtime]

zerohedge?


dismissed.

Jake, it happened. You can't dismiss it like a poll showing that Trump has no path to the White House

Zero Hedge
Has this Media Source failed a fact check? LET US KNOW HERE.

Share:

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information, therefore fact checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

History

Launched in 2009, Zero Hedge is a finance blog founded by Colin Lokey also known with the pseudonym “Tyler Durden,” Daniel Ivandjiiski, and Tim Backshall. According to a Bloomberg Interview the Zero Hedge founders/authors were anonymous until 2016. A Professional Service Subscription is required to read the rest of the interview from Bloomberg, however a New Yorker article also covered their history.

Zero Hedge wrote a rebuttal article regarding the Bloomberg interview that can be found here. A quote from the rebuttal reads: “Zero Hedge hired Colin when he approached us over a year ago begging for a job after he was fired with cause from Seeking Alpha, following a fight with a co-worker.”

Funded by / Ownership

The website is registered in Bulgaria under the name Georgi Georgiev, a business partner of Krassimir Ivandjiiski.

According to Rationalwiki the only writer “conclusively” identified is “Dan Ivandjiiski, who conducts public interviews on behalf of Zero Hedge.” The blog generates revenue from online advertising.
[...]

Zero Hedge - Media Bias/Fact Check



dis...



missed.

Jake, it happened. You can't dismiss it like a poll showing that Trump has no path to the White House.

Trump will use this to wipe out the seditious democrat Party this fall

you think i am jake? silly you.

Sure, Jake

yaaaaaaaa................ that what i thought. no reason/proof, just bullshit pablum from a bullshit poster.

 

[MisterBeale]

Actually, it happened, but then they went after the personal attorney.

This is sort of old news.

Trump Lawyer Cohen Drops Suits Against BuzzFeed, Fusion GPS
BLOOMBERG


And Geaux's claim that the court ruling happened? If you don't trust Zero hedge and you want to attack the source? (A poisoning the well fallacy,) That's fine, but it is easy to do a search to find out if they are lying. Politico has the same court ruling on record, it is real.

Sorry, the story IS TRUE.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000161-9b8b-da6b-ade9-ffbfa8ff0000

i am saying that there was a CONspiracy that it was a set up to try & stop trump from getting the whitehouse & hillary is somehow behind it all.

Wow, does it matter who is behind it?

Look at your fecking signature. If you know the truth, why feed into lies?

i'm not feeding into anything.

i'll believe our intel over president grift weasel, any day of the week.

tick tock.

You are being a partisan idiot.

Back when it didn't matter, or it didn't suit you, folks like you took exactly the reverse position. The establishment, the Deep State, and the intel. community are at direct odds with the public state. They have an agenda that is in opposition to what the people want, and will do anything to maintain their power.

This is a known fact. You are really obtuse if you do not know this.

Or. . . . you are simply lying like they do. ALL THE DAMN TIME.


The intelligence community keeps lying

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan leaves a closed briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill. (Brendan Smialowski / AFP/Getty Images)


"A diplomat was once defined as someone whose job is to lie for his country. That's apparently what makes diplomats different from intelligence officers, whose function is to lie to their country.

How else can you explain why CIA Director John Brennan still has his job? Or how Director of National Intelligence James Clapper remains on the federal payroll? Or why Keith Alexander stepped down as head of the National Security Agency only when he was good and ready?

Each of them lied flagrantly to the American people about vital matters of public concern. None paid a price.

The latest example erupted last week, when the CIA's inspector general confirmed that the agency had hacked into Senate Intelligence Committee computers and read emails sent by staffers. The investigation came after U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed the surreptitious search, charging that the CIA had violated federal law and the Constitution.


At the time, Brennan rejected Feinstein's accusation, insisting that "nothing could be further from the truth."

Places far from the truth are his native land. Only after the inspector general delivered his report was Brennan forced to admit he was wrong about Feinstein's complaint — without revealing whether the falsehood was the result of dishonesty or of ignorance.

Yet President Barack Obama shrugged it all off."

'deep state'

gotta love that one...

Deep state in the United States - Wikipedia

 

[playtime]

i am saying that there was a CONspiracy that it was a set up to try & stop trump from getting the whitehouse & hillary is somehow behind it all.

Wow, does it matter who is behind it?

Look at your fecking signature. If you know the truth, why feed into lies?

i'm not feeding into anything.

i'll believe our intel over president grift weasel, any day of the week.

tick tock.

You are being a partisan idiot.

Back when it didn't matter, or it didn't suit you, folks like you took exactly the reverse position. The establishment, the Deep State, and the intel. community are at direct odds with the public state. They have an agenda that is in opposition to what the people want, and will do anything to maintain their power.

This is a known fact. You are really obtuse if you do not know this.

Or. . . . you are simply lying like they do. ALL THE DAMN TIME.


The intelligence community keeps lying

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan leaves a closed briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill. (Brendan Smialowski / AFP/Getty Images)


"A diplomat was once defined as someone whose job is to lie for his country. That's apparently what makes diplomats different from intelligence officers, whose function is to lie to their country.

How else can you explain why CIA Director John Brennan still has his job? Or how Director of National Intelligence James Clapper remains on the federal payroll? Or why Keith Alexander stepped down as head of the National Security Agency only when he was good and ready?

Each of them lied flagrantly to the American people about vital matters of public concern. None paid a price.

The latest example erupted last week, when the CIA's inspector general confirmed that the agency had hacked into Senate Intelligence Committee computers and read emails sent by staffers. The investigation came after U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed the surreptitious search, charging that the CIA had violated federal law and the Constitution.


At the time, Brennan rejected Feinstein's accusation, insisting that "nothing could be further from the truth."

Places far from the truth are his native land. Only after the inspector general delivered his report was Brennan forced to admit he was wrong about Feinstein's complaint — without revealing whether the falsehood was the result of dishonesty or of ignorance.

Yet President Barack Obama shrugged it all off."

'deep state'

gotta love that one...

Deep state in the United States - Wikipedia

 

[Dragonlady]

This should be good

-Geaux
-----------------------

The FBI has been dealt a major blow after a Washington DC judge ruled that the agency must respond to a FOIA request for documents concerning the bureau's efforts to verify the controversial Steele Dossier, before it was used as the foundation of a FISA surveillance warrant application and subsequent renewals.

US District Court Judge Amit Mehta - who in January sided with the FBI's decision to ignore the FOIA request, said that President Trump's release of two House Intelligence Committee documents (the "Nunes" and "Schiff" memos) changed everything.

Judge Amit Mehta
Considering that the FBI offered Steele $50,000 to verify the Dossier's claims yet never paid him, BuzzFeed has unsuccessfully tried to do the same to defend themselves in a dossier-related lawsuit, and a $50 million Soros-funded investigation to continue the hunt have turned up nothing that we know of - whatever documents the FBI may be forced to cough up regarding their attempts to verify the Dossier could prove highly embarrassing for the agency.

f Mr. Steele could get solid corroboration of his reports, the F.B.I. would pay him $50,000 for his efforts, according to two people familiar with the offer. Ultimately, he was not paid. -NYT

What's more, forcing the FBI to prove they had an empty hand will likely embolden calls to disband the special counsel investigation- as the agency's mercenary and politicized approach to "investigations" will be laid all the more bare for the world to see. Then again, who knows - maybe the FBI verified everything in the dossier and it simply hasn't leaked.

FBI Dealt Blow By DC Judge; Must Address Measures Taken To Verify Steele Dossier

If true, and since it’s Zero Hedge, odds are it isn’t, it does not mean what you think it means. And its not the FBI who is going to be shitting themselves.

It appears that your joy is based on the belief that the FBI never paid Steele, proving the Dossier was never verified. Survey says: WRONG.

Steele was hired as an FBI source. Sources don’t provide verification on their own intel. Agents confirm intel not sources. If the source is lying, he can probably fake a document to support his lie. When intel is verified, that means that the FBI has investigated the information provided and has confirmed what the source told them.

You also seem to think that Dossier has never been verified. Survey says: WRONG.

Trump denounced the Steele dossier as fake, but many of its contents are turning out to be true

Since this piece was published, it had been confirmed that Michael Cohen did indeed go to Prague. Cohen had launched two defamation suits over this allegation and after proof was published, quietly withdrew them. That leaves the Pee Tape.

Two strikes. One more wrong answer and you’re out of the game.

You appear to believe that the FBI doesn’t want to respond to the FOI request because they used unverified information and they’ve been caught. Survey says: WRONG

The FBI doesn’t want their sources or methods revealed. Once they’re outed, they can no longer be used as sources. Their cover is blown and their lives are endangered.

That’s three strikes. You’re out of the game. As a consolation prize, you can pick up a MAGA hat on your way out the door for $20. Thank you for playing.

That is the whole freaking point.... the FBI did not verify the information before they gave it to a judge to get the FISA warrants...they lied to the judge.... they also lied when they told the judge that other news sources found the same information INDEPENDENTLY, from FBI..... those news sources were also using the Steele dossier and the FBI knew it.... they lied again....

The entire leadership of the FBI and the Department of Justice lied to Federal Judges about the source of the Steele dossier and they lied about verifying the information....anyone who signed off on those warrants presented to those judges committed felony...

Everything you’re saying here is false. The portions of the Steele Dossier used in the FISA application were verified before they were included. Very little of the Dossier was used because, at that point, they hadn't had time to verify much of it.

Not to mention, the FISA application is approximately 80 pages of information and evidence, of which the Steele information provided was less than one page. There were 79 other pages of intel and evidence.

And there were three FISA applications for Carter Page. In all, somewhere along the lines of 180 pages of intel and data. Signed off on by three different judges. You idiots keep obsessing about one page in one of these applications.

And the things you are obsessing about are all provable lies fed to you by Trump and his minions.

 

[2aguy]

This should be good

-Geaux
-----------------------

The FBI has been dealt a major blow after a Washington DC judge ruled that the agency must respond to a FOIA request for documents concerning the bureau's efforts to verify the controversial Steele Dossier, before it was used as the foundation of a FISA surveillance warrant application and subsequent renewals.

US District Court Judge Amit Mehta - who in January sided with the FBI's decision to ignore the FOIA request, said that President Trump's release of two House Intelligence Committee documents (the "Nunes" and "Schiff" memos) changed everything.

Judge Amit Mehta
Considering that the FBI offered Steele $50,000 to verify the Dossier's claims yet never paid him, BuzzFeed has unsuccessfully tried to do the same to defend themselves in a dossier-related lawsuit, and a $50 million Soros-funded investigation to continue the hunt have turned up nothing that we know of - whatever documents the FBI may be forced to cough up regarding their attempts to verify the Dossier could prove highly embarrassing for the agency.

f Mr. Steele could get solid corroboration of his reports, the F.B.I. would pay him $50,000 for his efforts, according to two people familiar with the offer. Ultimately, he was not paid. -NYT

What's more, forcing the FBI to prove they had an empty hand will likely embolden calls to disband the special counsel investigation- as the agency's mercenary and politicized approach to "investigations" will be laid all the more bare for the world to see. Then again, who knows - maybe the FBI verified everything in the dossier and it simply hasn't leaked.

FBI Dealt Blow By DC Judge; Must Address Measures Taken To Verify Steele Dossier

If true, and since it’s Zero Hedge, odds are it isn’t, it does not mean what you think it means. And its not the FBI who is going to be shitting themselves.

It appears that your joy is based on the belief that the FBI never paid Steele, proving the Dossier was never verified. Survey says: WRONG.

Steele was hired as an FBI source. Sources don’t provide verification on their own intel. Agents confirm intel not sources. If the source is lying, he can probably fake a document to support his lie. When intel is verified, that means that the FBI has investigated the information provided and has confirmed what the source told them.

You also seem to think that Dossier has never been verified. Survey says: WRONG.

Trump denounced the Steele dossier as fake, but many of its contents are turning out to be true

Since this piece was published, it had been confirmed that Michael Cohen did indeed go to Prague. Cohen had launched two defamation suits over this allegation and after proof was published, quietly withdrew them. That leaves the Pee Tape.

Two strikes. One more wrong answer and you’re out of the game.

You appear to believe that the FBI doesn’t want to respond to the FOI request because they used unverified information and they’ve been caught. Survey says: WRONG

The FBI doesn’t want their sources or methods revealed. Once they’re outed, they can no longer be used as sources. Their cover is blown and their lives are endangered.

That’s three strikes. You’re out of the game. As a consolation prize, you can pick up a MAGA hat on your way out the door for $20. Thank you for playing.

That is the whole freaking point.... the FBI did not verify the information before they gave it to a judge to get the FISA warrants...they lied to the judge.... they also lied when they told the judge that other news sources found the same information INDEPENDENTLY, from FBI..... those news sources were also using the Steele dossier and the FBI knew it.... they lied again....

The entire leadership of the FBI and the Department of Justice lied to Federal Judges about the source of the Steele dossier and they lied about verifying the information....anyone who signed off on those warrants presented to those judges committed felony...

Everything you’re saying here is false. The portions of the Steele Dossier used in the FISA application were verified before they were included. Very little of the Dossier was used because, at that point, they hadn't had time to verify much of it.

Not to mention, the FISA application is approximately 80 pages of information and evidence, of which the Steele information provided was less than one page. There were 79 other pages of intel and evidence.

And there were three FISA applications for Carter Page. In all, somewhere along the lines of 180 pages of intel and data. Signed off on by three different judges. You idiots keep obsessing about one page in one of these applications.

And the things you are obsessing about are all provable lies fed to you by Trump and his minions.

You don't know what you are talking about, they were not verified when they were presented to the Judges, comey himself testified to that when he went to congress. The Dossier was the primary document used to secure the warrants, and they used the press reports based on the dossier as allegedly independent verification that the information actually existed... and didn't tell the judge that the stories in the press they were quoting came from the same source they were using, the exact same source, the steele dossier.

You guys are not following the actual story, you are ignoring what really happened.

 

[Dragonlady]

Zero Hedge
Has this Media Source failed a fact check? LET US KNOW HERE.

Share:

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information, therefore fact checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

History

Launched in 2009, Zero Hedge is a finance blog founded by Colin Lokey also known with the pseudonym “Tyler Durden,” Daniel Ivandjiiski, and Tim Backshall. According to a Bloomberg Interview the Zero Hedge founders/authors were anonymous until 2016. A Professional Service Subscription is required to read the rest of the interview from Bloomberg, however a New Yorker article also covered their history.

Zero Hedge wrote a rebuttal article regarding the Bloomberg interview that can be found here. A quote from the rebuttal reads: “Zero Hedge hired Colin when he approached us over a year ago begging for a job after he was fired with cause from Seeking Alpha, following a fight with a co-worker.”

Funded by / Ownership

The website is registered in Bulgaria under the name Georgi Georgiev, a business partner of Krassimir Ivandjiiski.

According to Rationalwiki the only writer “conclusively” identified is “Dan Ivandjiiski, who conducts public interviews on behalf of Zero Hedge.” The blog generates revenue from online advertising.
[...]

Zero Hedge - Media Bias/Fact Check



dis...



missed.

Actually, it happened, but then they went after the personal attorney.

This is sort of old news.

Trump Lawyer Cohen Drops Suits Against BuzzFeed, Fusion GPS
BLOOMBERG


And Geaux's claim that the court ruling happened? If you don't trust Zero hedge and you want to attack the source? (A poisoning the well fallacy,) That's fine, but it is easy to do a search to find out if they are lying. Politico has the same court ruling on record, it is real.

Sorry, the story IS TRUE.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000161-9b8b-da6b-ade9-ffbfa8ff0000

i am saying that there was a CONspiracy that it was a set up to try & stop trump from getting the whitehouse & hillary is somehow behind it all.

Wow, does it matter who is behind it?

Look at your fecking signature. If you know the truth, why feed into lies?

i'm not feeding into anything.

i'll believe our intel over president grift weasel, any day of the week.

tick tock.

You are being a partisan idiot.

Back when it didn't matter, or it didn't suit you, folks like you took exactly the reverse position. The establishment, the Deep State, and the intel. community are at direct odds with the public state. They have an agenda that is in opposition to what the people want, and will do anything to maintain their power.

This is a known fact. You are really obtuse if you do not know this.

Or. . . . you are simply lying like they do. ALL THE DAMN TIME.


The intelligence community keeps lying

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan leaves a closed briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill. (Brendan Smialowski / AFP/Getty Images)


"A diplomat was once defined as someone whose job is to lie for his country. That's apparently what makes diplomats different from intelligence officers, whose function is to lie to their country.

How else can you explain why CIA Director John Brennan still has his job? Or how Director of National Intelligence James Clapper remains on the federal payroll? Or why Keith Alexander stepped down as head of the National Security Agency only when he was good and ready?

Each of them lied flagrantly to the American people about vital matters of public concern. None paid a price.

The latest example erupted last week, when the CIA's inspector general confirmed that the agency had hacked into Senate Intelligence Committee computers and read emails sent by staffers. The investigation came after U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed the surreptitious search, charging that the CIA had violated federal law and the Constitution.


At the time, Brennan rejected Feinstein's accusation, insisting that "nothing could be further from the truth."

Places far from the truth are his native land. Only after the inspector general delivered his report was Brennan forced to admit he was wrong about Feinstein's complaint — without revealing whether the falsehood was the result of dishonesty or of ignorance.

Yet President Barack Obama shrugged it all off."

Apparently so did the Senate. Show us where the recommendations of firing or censure from the Senate can be found.

 

[2aguy]

This should be good

-Geaux
-----------------------

The FBI has been dealt a major blow after a Washington DC judge ruled that the agency must respond to a FOIA request for documents concerning the bureau's efforts to verify the controversial Steele Dossier, before it was used as the foundation of a FISA surveillance warrant application and subsequent renewals.

US District Court Judge Amit Mehta - who in January sided with the FBI's decision to ignore the FOIA request, said that President Trump's release of two House Intelligence Committee documents (the "Nunes" and "Schiff" memos) changed everything.

Judge Amit Mehta
Considering that the FBI offered Steele $50,000 to verify the Dossier's claims yet never paid him, BuzzFeed has unsuccessfully tried to do the same to defend themselves in a dossier-related lawsuit, and a $50 million Soros-funded investigation to continue the hunt have turned up nothing that we know of - whatever documents the FBI may be forced to cough up regarding their attempts to verify the Dossier could prove highly embarrassing for the agency.

f Mr. Steele could get solid corroboration of his reports, the F.B.I. would pay him $50,000 for his efforts, according to two people familiar with the offer. Ultimately, he was not paid. -NYT

What's more, forcing the FBI to prove they had an empty hand will likely embolden calls to disband the special counsel investigation- as the agency's mercenary and politicized approach to "investigations" will be laid all the more bare for the world to see. Then again, who knows - maybe the FBI verified everything in the dossier and it simply hasn't leaked.

FBI Dealt Blow By DC Judge; Must Address Measures Taken To Verify Steele Dossier

If true, and since it’s Zero Hedge, odds are it isn’t, it does not mean what you think it means. And its not the FBI who is going to be shitting themselves.

It appears that your joy is based on the belief that the FBI never paid Steele, proving the Dossier was never verified. Survey says: WRONG.

Steele was hired as an FBI source. Sources don’t provide verification on their own intel. Agents confirm intel not sources. If the source is lying, he can probably fake a document to support his lie. When intel is verified, that means that the FBI has investigated the information provided and has confirmed what the source told them.

You also seem to think that Dossier has never been verified. Survey says: WRONG.

Trump denounced the Steele dossier as fake, but many of its contents are turning out to be true

Since this piece was published, it had been confirmed that Michael Cohen did indeed go to Prague. Cohen had launched two defamation suits over this allegation and after proof was published, quietly withdrew them. That leaves the Pee Tape.

Two strikes. One more wrong answer and you’re out of the game.

You appear to believe that the FBI doesn’t want to respond to the FOI request because they used unverified information and they’ve been caught. Survey says: WRONG

The FBI doesn’t want their sources or methods revealed. Once they’re outed, they can no longer be used as sources. Their cover is blown and their lives are endangered.

That’s three strikes. You’re out of the game. As a consolation prize, you can pick up a MAGA hat on your way out the door for $20. Thank you for playing.

That is the whole freaking point.... the FBI did not verify the information before they gave it to a judge to get the FISA warrants...they lied to the judge.... they also lied when they told the judge that other news sources found the same information INDEPENDENTLY, from FBI..... those news sources were also using the Steele dossier and the FBI knew it.... they lied again....

The entire leadership of the FBI and the Department of Justice lied to Federal Judges about the source of the Steele dossier and they lied about verifying the information....anyone who signed off on those warrants presented to those judges committed felony...

Everything you’re saying here is false. The portions of the Steele Dossier used in the FISA application were verified before they were included. Very little of the Dossier was used because, at that point, they hadn't had time to verify much of it.

Not to mention, the FISA application is approximately 80 pages of information and evidence, of which the Steele information provided was less than one page. There were 79 other pages of intel and evidence.

And there were three FISA applications for Carter Page. In all, somewhere along the lines of 180 pages of intel and data. Signed off on by three different judges. You idiots keep obsessing about one page in one of these applications.

And the things you are obsessing about are all provable lies fed to you by Trump and his minions.

Here, the truth....

Carter Page FISA Applications: FBI Used Steele Dossier | National Review

Nor did the FBI and Justice Department inform the court that Steele’s allegations had never been verified. To the contrary, each FISA application — the original one in October 2016, and the three renewals at 90-day intervals — is labeled “VERIFIED APPLICATION” (bold caps in original). And each one makes this breathtaking representation:

The FBI has reviewed this verified application for accuracy in accordance with its April 5, 2001 procedures, which include sending a copy of the draft to the appropriate field office(s).

In reality, the applications were never verified for accuracy.

What ‘Verify’ Means
Consider this: The representation that the FBI’s verification procedures include sending the application to “appropriate field offices” is standard in FISA warrant applications. It is done because the FBI’s Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DIOG) mandates that the bureau “ensure that information appearing in a FISA application that is presented to the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] has been thoroughly vetted and confirmed.” (See House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes March 1, 2018, letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions, embedded here.) The point is to assure the court that the FBI has corroborated the allegations in the warrant application in the usual way.

A hypothetical shows how this works. Let’s say that X, an informant, tells the FBI in Washington that Y, a person in St. Louis, told him that Z, the suspect, is plotting to rob the bank.

X’s story is unverified; he doesn’t know anything firsthand about Z — he only knows what Y has told him. Obviously, then, the FBI does not instantly run to court and seek a warrant against Z. Instead, the bureau sends an investigative “lead” from headquarters in Washington to the FBI field office in St. Louis. FBI agents in St. Louis then go find and interview Y. Based on that interview, the FBI gathers supporting information (perhaps physical surveillance of Z, scrutiny of available documents and records about Z, etc.). Only then, after debriefing the witness with competent knowledge, do the Justice Department and FBI seek a warrant against Z from the court. In the application, they explain to the judge that they have verified X’s information by interviewing Y and then corroborating Y’s version of events. In fact, if they get solid enough information about Z from Y, there may be no reason even to mention X, whose tip to the FBI was sheer hearsay.

But that is not what happened with the Carter Page FISA

--------

In each Carter Page FISA warrant application, the FBI represented that it had “reviewed this verified application for accuracy.” But did the bureau truly ensure that the information had been “thoroughly vetted and confirmed”? Remember, we are talking here about serious, traitorous allegations against an American citizen and, derivatively, an American presidential campaign.

When the FBI averred that it had verified for accuracy the application that posited these allegations, it was, at best, being hyper-technical, and thus misleading. What the bureau meant was that its application correctly stated the allegations as Steele had related them. But that is not what “verification” means. The issue is not whether Steele’s allegations were accurately described; it is whether they were accurate, period. Were the allegations thoroughly vetted and confirmed by proof independent of Steele before being presented to the FISA court — which is what common sense and the FBI’s own manual mean by “verified”?

No, they were not.

There Is No Reason to Believe the Redactions Corroborate Steele


I have been making this point for months. When I made it again in a Fox and Friends interview on Sunday morning, critics asked how I could say such a thing when the warrants are pervasively redacted — how could I be so sure, given all we concededly don’t know, that the redactions do not corroborate Steele?
In each Carter Page FISA warrant application, the FBI represented that it had “reviewed this verified application for accuracy.” But did the bureau truly ensure that the information had been “thoroughly vetted and confirmed”? Remember, we are talking here about serious, traitorous allegations against an American citizen and, derivatively, an American presidential campaign.

When the FBI averred that it had verified for accuracy the application that posited these allegations, it was, at best, being hyper-technical, and thus misleading. What the bureau meant was that its application correctly stated the allegations as Steele had related them. But that is not what “verification” means. The issue is not whether Steele’s allegations were accurately described; it is whether they were accurate, period. Were the allegations thoroughly vetted and confirmed by proof independent of Steele before being presented to the FISA court — which is what common sense and the FBI’s own manual mean by “verified”?

No, they were not.

There Is No Reason to Believe the Redactions Corroborate Steele
I have been making this point for months. When I made it again in a Fox and Friends interview on Sunday morning, critics asked how I could say such a thing when the warrants are pervasively redacted — how could I be so sure, given all we concededly don’t know, that the redactions do not corroborate Steele?
In each Carter Page FISA warrant application, the FBI represented that it had “reviewed this verified application for accuracy.” But did the bureau truly ensure that the information had been “thoroughly vetted and confirmed”? Remember, we are talking here about serious, traitorous allegations against an American citizen and, derivatively, an American presidential campaign.

When the FBI averred that it had verified for accuracy the application that posited these allegations, it was, at best, being hyper-technical, and thus misleading. What the bureau meant was that its application correctly stated the allegations as Steele had related them. But that is not what “verification” means. The issue is not whether Steele’s allegations were accurately described; it is whether they were accurate, period. Were the allegations thoroughly vetted and confirmed by proof independent of Steele before being presented to the FISA court — which is what common sense and the FBI’s own manual mean by “verified”?

No, they were not.

There Is No Reason to Believe the Redactions Corroborate Steele
I have been making this point for months. When I made it again in a Fox and Friends interview on Sunday morning, critics asked how I could say such a thing when the warrants are pervasively redacted — how could I be so sure, given all we concededly don’t know, that the redactions do not corroborate Steele?
warrants.

 

[MisterBeale]

Wow, does it matter who is behind it?

Look at your fecking signature. If you know the truth, why feed into lies?

i'm not feeding into anything.

i'll believe our intel over president grift weasel, any day of the week.

tick tock.

You are being a partisan idiot.

Back when it didn't matter, or it didn't suit you, folks like you took exactly the reverse position. The establishment, the Deep State, and the intel. community are at direct odds with the public state. They have an agenda that is in opposition to what the people want, and will do anything to maintain their power.

This is a known fact. You are really obtuse if you do not know this.

Or. . . . you are simply lying like they do. ALL THE DAMN TIME.


The intelligence community keeps lying

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan leaves a closed briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill. (Brendan Smialowski / AFP/Getty Images)


"A diplomat was once defined as someone whose job is to lie for his country. That's apparently what makes diplomats different from intelligence officers, whose function is to lie to their country.

How else can you explain why CIA Director John Brennan still has his job? Or how Director of National Intelligence James Clapper remains on the federal payroll? Or why Keith Alexander stepped down as head of the National Security Agency only when he was good and ready?

Each of them lied flagrantly to the American people about vital matters of public concern. None paid a price.

The latest example erupted last week, when the CIA's inspector general confirmed that the agency had hacked into Senate Intelligence Committee computers and read emails sent by staffers. The investigation came after U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed the surreptitious search, charging that the CIA had violated federal law and the Constitution.


At the time, Brennan rejected Feinstein's accusation, insisting that "nothing could be further from the truth."

Places far from the truth are his native land. Only after the inspector general delivered his report was Brennan forced to admit he was wrong about Feinstein's complaint — without revealing whether the falsehood was the result of dishonesty or of ignorance.

Yet President Barack Obama shrugged it all off."

'deep state'

gotta love that one...

Deep state in the United States - Wikipedia

The Deep State has nothing to do with elected representatives. That is the whole problem. derp derp derp . . . .

Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’
Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’ | Monmouth University Polling Institute | Monmouth University

1. Which of the following words best describes how you feel about Washington – angry, dissatisfied, satisfied, happy?

TREND: March
2018 Dec.
2017 May
2017 Sept.
2016*

Angry 22% 20% 25% 20%

Dissatisfied 59% 60% 54% 66%

Satisfied 12% 12% 16% 9%

Happy 4% 3% 2% 3%

(VOL) Don’t know 3% 6% 2% 2%

(n) (803) (806) (1,002) (802)

* Registered voters

1. As it stands right now, do you think that unelected or appointed officials in the federal government have too much influence in determining federal policy or is there the right balance of influence between elected and unelected officials?

March
2018

Unelected or appointed officials have
too much influence 60%

Right balance of influence between
elected and unelected officials 26%

(VOL) Don’t know 14%

(n) (803)

1. Are you very familiar, somewhat familiar, or not familiar with the term Deep State as it applies to the federal government?

March
2018

Very familiar 13%

Somewhat familiar 24%

Not familiar 63%

(n) (803)

1. The term Deep State refers to the possible existence of a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy. Do you think this type of Deep State in the federal government definitely exists, probably exists, probably does not exist, or definitely does not exist?

March
2018

Definitely exists 27%

Probably exists 47%

Probably does not exist 16%

Definitely does not exist 5%

(VOL) Don’t know 5%

(n) (803)

1. How worried are you about the U.S. government monitoring your activities or invading your privacy – very worried, somewhat worried, not too worried, or not at all worried?

March
2018

Very worried 23%

Somewhat worried 30%

Not too worried 24%

Not at all worried 22%

(VOL) Don’t know 1%

(n) (803)

1. Do you think the U.S. government currently monitors or spies on the activities of American citizens, or does it not do this? [If YES: Do you think this is widespread or not widespread?]

March
2018

Yes, widespread 53%

Yes, not widespread 29%

No, does not monitor or spy 14%

(VOL) Don’t know 4%

(n) (803)

1. If the U.S. government ever monitors or spies on American citizens do you think its reasons are usually justified, sometimes justified, or rarely justified?

March
2018

Usually justified 18%

Sometimes justified 53%

Rarely justified 26%

(VOL) Never justified 2%

(VOL) Don’t know 2%

(n) (803)

 

[MisterBeale]

 

[Geaux4it]

We are seeing the corruption with 20/20 vision

-Geaux

 

[playtime]

i'm not feeding into anything.

i'll believe our intel over president grift weasel, any day of the week.

tick tock.

You are being a partisan idiot.

Back when it didn't matter, or it didn't suit you, folks like you took exactly the reverse position. The establishment, the Deep State, and the intel. community are at direct odds with the public state. They have an agenda that is in opposition to what the people want, and will do anything to maintain their power.

This is a known fact. You are really obtuse if you do not know this.

Or. . . . you are simply lying like they do. ALL THE DAMN TIME.


The intelligence community keeps lying

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan leaves a closed briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill. (Brendan Smialowski / AFP/Getty Images)


"A diplomat was once defined as someone whose job is to lie for his country. That's apparently what makes diplomats different from intelligence officers, whose function is to lie to their country.

How else can you explain why CIA Director John Brennan still has his job? Or how Director of National Intelligence James Clapper remains on the federal payroll? Or why Keith Alexander stepped down as head of the National Security Agency only when he was good and ready?

Each of them lied flagrantly to the American people about vital matters of public concern. None paid a price.

The latest example erupted last week, when the CIA's inspector general confirmed that the agency had hacked into Senate Intelligence Committee computers and read emails sent by staffers. The investigation came after U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed the surreptitious search, charging that the CIA had violated federal law and the Constitution.


At the time, Brennan rejected Feinstein's accusation, insisting that "nothing could be further from the truth."

Places far from the truth are his native land. Only after the inspector general delivered his report was Brennan forced to admit he was wrong about Feinstein's complaint — without revealing whether the falsehood was the result of dishonesty or of ignorance.

Yet President Barack Obama shrugged it all off."

'deep state'

gotta love that one...

Deep state in the United States - Wikipedia

The Deep State has nothing to do with elected representatives. That is the whole problem. derp derp derp . . . .

Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’
Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’ | Monmouth University Polling Institute | Monmouth University

1. Which of the following words best describes how you feel about Washington – angry, dissatisfied, satisfied, happy?

TREND: March
2018 Dec.
2017 May
2017 Sept.
2016*

Angry 22% 20% 25% 20%

Dissatisfied 59% 60% 54% 66%

Satisfied 12% 12% 16% 9%

Happy 4% 3% 2% 3%

(VOL) Don’t know 3% 6% 2% 2%

(n) (803) (806) (1,002) (802)

* Registered voters

1. As it stands right now, do you think that unelected or appointed officials in the federal government have too much influence in determining federal policy or is there the right balance of influence between elected and unelected officials?

March
2018

Unelected or appointed officials have
too much influence 60%

Right balance of influence between
elected and unelected officials 26%

(VOL) Don’t know 14%

(n) (803)

1. Are you very familiar, somewhat familiar, or not familiar with the term Deep State as it applies to the federal government?

March
2018

Very familiar 13%

Somewhat familiar 24%

Not familiar 63%

(n) (803)

1. The term Deep State refers to the possible existence of a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy. Do you think this type of Deep State in the federal government definitely exists, probably exists, probably does not exist, or definitely does not exist?

March
2018

Definitely exists 27%

Probably exists 47%

Probably does not exist 16%

Definitely does not exist 5%

(VOL) Don’t know 5%

(n) (803)

1. How worried are you about the U.S. government monitoring your activities or invading your privacy – very worried, somewhat worried, not too worried, or not at all worried?

March
2018

Very worried 23%

Somewhat worried 30%

Not too worried 24%

Not at all worried 22%

(VOL) Don’t know 1%

(n) (803)

1. Do you think the U.S. government currently monitors or spies on the activities of American citizens, or does it not do this? [If YES: Do you think this is widespread or not widespread?]

March
2018

Yes, widespread 53%

Yes, not widespread 29%

No, does not monitor or spy 14%

(VOL) Don’t know 4%

(n) (803)

1. If the U.S. government ever monitors or spies on American citizens do you think its reasons are usually justified, sometimes justified, or rarely justified?

March
2018

Usually justified 18%

Sometimes justified 53%

Rarely justified 26%

(VOL) Never justified 2%

(VOL) Don’t know 2%

(n) (803)

cheney was the deep state when W. was in the whitehouse & kelly is more than likely running the show now.... our intel are the good guys here , & your president is a russian asset.

tick tock...

 

[MisterBeale]

You are being a partisan idiot.

Back when it didn't matter, or it didn't suit you, folks like you took exactly the reverse position. The establishment, the Deep State, and the intel. community are at direct odds with the public state. They have an agenda that is in opposition to what the people want, and will do anything to maintain their power.

This is a known fact. You are really obtuse if you do not know this.

Or. . . . you are simply lying like they do. ALL THE DAMN TIME.


The intelligence community keeps lying

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan leaves a closed briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill. (Brendan Smialowski / AFP/Getty Images)


"A diplomat was once defined as someone whose job is to lie for his country. That's apparently what makes diplomats different from intelligence officers, whose function is to lie to their country.

How else can you explain why CIA Director John Brennan still has his job? Or how Director of National Intelligence James Clapper remains on the federal payroll? Or why Keith Alexander stepped down as head of the National Security Agency only when he was good and ready?

Each of them lied flagrantly to the American people about vital matters of public concern. None paid a price.

The latest example erupted last week, when the CIA's inspector general confirmed that the agency had hacked into Senate Intelligence Committee computers and read emails sent by staffers. The investigation came after U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed the surreptitious search, charging that the CIA had violated federal law and the Constitution.


At the time, Brennan rejected Feinstein's accusation, insisting that "nothing could be further from the truth."

Places far from the truth are his native land. Only after the inspector general delivered his report was Brennan forced to admit he was wrong about Feinstein's complaint — without revealing whether the falsehood was the result of dishonesty or of ignorance.

Yet President Barack Obama shrugged it all off."

'deep state'

gotta love that one...

Deep state in the United States - Wikipedia

The Deep State has nothing to do with elected representatives. That is the whole problem. derp derp derp . . . .

Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’
Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’ | Monmouth University Polling Institute | Monmouth University

1. Which of the following words best describes how you feel about Washington – angry, dissatisfied, satisfied, happy?

TREND: March
2018 Dec.
2017 May
2017 Sept.
2016*

Angry 22% 20% 25% 20%

Dissatisfied 59% 60% 54% 66%

Satisfied 12% 12% 16% 9%

Happy 4% 3% 2% 3%

(VOL) Don’t know 3% 6% 2% 2%

(n) (803) (806) (1,002) (802)

* Registered voters

1. As it stands right now, do you think that unelected or appointed officials in the federal government have too much influence in determining federal policy or is there the right balance of influence between elected and unelected officials?

March
2018

Unelected or appointed officials have
too much influence 60%

Right balance of influence between
elected and unelected officials 26%

(VOL) Don’t know 14%

(n) (803)

1. Are you very familiar, somewhat familiar, or not familiar with the term Deep State as it applies to the federal government?

March
2018

Very familiar 13%

Somewhat familiar 24%

Not familiar 63%

(n) (803)

1. The term Deep State refers to the possible existence of a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy. Do you think this type of Deep State in the federal government definitely exists, probably exists, probably does not exist, or definitely does not exist?

March
2018

Definitely exists 27%

Probably exists 47%

Probably does not exist 16%

Definitely does not exist 5%

(VOL) Don’t know 5%

(n) (803)

1. How worried are you about the U.S. government monitoring your activities or invading your privacy – very worried, somewhat worried, not too worried, or not at all worried?

March
2018

Very worried 23%

Somewhat worried 30%

Not too worried 24%

Not at all worried 22%

(VOL) Don’t know 1%

(n) (803)

1. Do you think the U.S. government currently monitors or spies on the activities of American citizens, or does it not do this? [If YES: Do you think this is widespread or not widespread?]

March
2018

Yes, widespread 53%

Yes, not widespread 29%

No, does not monitor or spy 14%

(VOL) Don’t know 4%

(n) (803)

1. If the U.S. government ever monitors or spies on American citizens do you think its reasons are usually justified, sometimes justified, or rarely justified?

March
2018

Usually justified 18%

Sometimes justified 53%

Rarely justified 26%

(VOL) Never justified 2%

(VOL) Don’t know 2%

(n) (803)

cheney was the deep state when W. was in the whitehouse & kelly is more than likely running the show now.... our intel are the good guys here , & your president is a russian asset.

tick tock...

How to Beat a Manipulator
How to Beat a Manipulator

 

[playtime]

'deep state'

gotta love that one...

Deep state in the United States - Wikipedia

The Deep State has nothing to do with elected representatives. That is the whole problem. derp derp derp . . . .

Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’
Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’ | Monmouth University Polling Institute | Monmouth University

1. Which of the following words best describes how you feel about Washington – angry, dissatisfied, satisfied, happy?

TREND: March
2018 Dec.
2017 May
2017 Sept.
2016*

Angry 22% 20% 25% 20%

Dissatisfied 59% 60% 54% 66%

Satisfied 12% 12% 16% 9%

Happy 4% 3% 2% 3%

(VOL) Don’t know 3% 6% 2% 2%

(n) (803) (806) (1,002) (802)

* Registered voters

1. As it stands right now, do you think that unelected or appointed officials in the federal government have too much influence in determining federal policy or is there the right balance of influence between elected and unelected officials?

March
2018

Unelected or appointed officials have
too much influence 60%

Right balance of influence between
elected and unelected officials 26%

(VOL) Don’t know 14%

(n) (803)

1. Are you very familiar, somewhat familiar, or not familiar with the term Deep State as it applies to the federal government?

March
2018

Very familiar 13%

Somewhat familiar 24%

Not familiar 63%

(n) (803)

1. The term Deep State refers to the possible existence of a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy. Do you think this type of Deep State in the federal government definitely exists, probably exists, probably does not exist, or definitely does not exist?

March
2018

Definitely exists 27%

Probably exists 47%

Probably does not exist 16%

Definitely does not exist 5%

(VOL) Don’t know 5%

(n) (803)

1. How worried are you about the U.S. government monitoring your activities or invading your privacy – very worried, somewhat worried, not too worried, or not at all worried?

March
2018

Very worried 23%

Somewhat worried 30%

Not too worried 24%

Not at all worried 22%

(VOL) Don’t know 1%

(n) (803)

1. Do you think the U.S. government currently monitors or spies on the activities of American citizens, or does it not do this? [If YES: Do you think this is widespread or not widespread?]

March
2018

Yes, widespread 53%

Yes, not widespread 29%

No, does not monitor or spy 14%

(VOL) Don’t know 4%

(n) (803)

1. If the U.S. government ever monitors or spies on American citizens do you think its reasons are usually justified, sometimes justified, or rarely justified?

March
2018

Usually justified 18%

Sometimes justified 53%

Rarely justified 26%

(VOL) Never justified 2%

(VOL) Don’t know 2%

(n) (803)

cheney was the deep state when W. was in the whitehouse & kelly is more than likely running the show now.... our intel are the good guys here , & your president is a russian asset.

tick tock...

How to Beat a Manipulator
How to Beat a Manipulator

lol...

& she's gonna get the last laugh from all of this....