Meanwhile, the worst allegations of his memo were the FBI neglected to inform the FISC of the political origins of the dossier and presented unverified Intel from the dossier in order to spy on the political opponent who had backed the dossier. And that McCabe testified there would have been no warrant requested without the dossier.
The "dossier" compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application...The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of—and paid by—the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information...he Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016, Yahoo Newsarticle by Michael Isikoff, which focuses on Page's July 2016 trip to Moscow. This article does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News. The Page FISA application incorrectly assesses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News. Steele has admitted in British court filings that he met with Yahoo News—and several other outlets—in September 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS. Perkins Coie was aware of Steele's initial media contacts because they hosted at least one meeting in Washington D.C. in 2016 with Steele and Fusion GPS where this matter was discussed....in September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he "was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not, being president." This clear evidence of Steele's bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files—but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications...Ohr's wife was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all of his wife's opposition research, paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign via Fusion GPS. The Ohrs' relationship with Steele and Fusion GPS was inexplicably concealed from the FISC....FBI assessed Steele's reporting as only minimally corroborated. Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was—according to his June 2017 testimony—"salacious and unverified."
Furthermore, Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.
The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok.... where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of Clinton, whom Strzok had also investigated. The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an "insurance" policy against President Trump's election.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looks pretty plain to me. Embarrassing to Democrats and their FBI allies of course but thats par for the course. Any transparency is always an embarrassment for them.
View attachment 175828
Wow, thank you. You made my point even better than I did. You quote from the Nunes memo and the part you highlighted the brightest was the memo’s claim that Comey’s summary of the dossier is that it was “salacious and unverified.” You then point out how that looks “pretty plain” to you.
You were duped by Nunes’ memo and you don’t even know it.
That’s the point. That’s why it was so wrong of the way Republicans handled this matter. It should have been investigated by an independent counsel behind closed doors to sort out. Instead, for the sake of grandstanding, Republicans decided to air our dirty laundry for the whole world to see. Even worse, they did so dishonestly by painting a false picture by mixing some facts with some half truths and some lies.
All for political gain to protect Trump who feels the Mueller noose around his neck tightening and to protect their party in an election year shaping up to be devastating for the GOP.
Which brings me back to where you (collectively) were duped. And using the example
you used. You highlighted,
“Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was—according to his June 2017 testimony—"salacious and unverified." ”
^^^ that ^^^ was NOT according to Comey’s
testimony. While Nunes cherry-picked the phrase,
”salacious and unverified,” from Comey’s testimony to create the illusion Comey was speaking of the entirety of the dossier, Comey’s
full testimony was clearly speaking of only the parts which could have potentially created an embarrassment for the president. Other reports identified that as the salacious and unverified claim that Trump paid Russian prostitutes to perform a golden shower.
I first met then-President-Elect Trump on Friday, January 6 in a conference room at Trump Tower in New York. I was there with other Intelligence Community (IC) leaders to brief him and his new national security team on the findings of an IC assessment concerning Russian efforts to interfere in the election. At the conclusion of that briefing, I remained alone with the President Elect to brief him on some personally sensitive aspects of the information assembled during the assessment.
The IC leadership thought it important, for a variety of reasons, to alert the incoming President to the existence of this material, even though it was salacious and unverified. Among those reasons were: (1) we knew the media was about to publicly report the material and we believed the IC should not keep knowledge of the material and its imminent release from the President-Elect; and (2) to the extent there was some effort to compromise an incoming President, we could blunt any such effort with a defensive briefing.
The Director of National Intelligence asked that I personally do this portion of the briefing because I was staying in my position and because the material implicated the FBI's counter-intelligence responsibilities. We also agreed I would do it alone to minimize potential embarrassment to the President-Elect. Although we agreed it made sense for me to do the briefing, the FBI's leadership and I were concerned that the briefing might create a situation where a new President came into office uncertain about whether the FBI was conducting a counter-intelligence investigation of his personal conduct.
It looks “pretty plain” to you because you’re only seeing what you want to see;
which was Nunes’ intent which is why he cherry-picked much of the contents in that memo. And your claim it’s embarrassing for Democrats and the FBI falls short of reality. Evidence of that is even before the Democrat rebuttal memo makes its way into the public domain, Tepublicans are already working furiously on a follow-up memo to their first one because their first memo clearly didn’t embarrass Democrats or the FBI. But again, that’s nothing more that you only seeing what you want to see. Pesky reality is of no concern to you.