Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, December 09, 2019

A long-awaited Justice Department inspector general's report examining the FBI's investigation into possible coordination between President Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia rebuts some of conservatives' most sensational allegations about the case -- including that top FBI officials were motivated by political bias and illegally spied on Trump advisers -- but finds serious faults in other areas.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Doesn't matter.

The dumb cultists will continue to spew this kind of nonsense anyway. Because they're incapable of learning.

The smarter ones will move on to the next conspiracy theory. Because they have zero morals, values or standards.

#1 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-09 01:59 PM | Reply

IG Report: The FBI investigation was valid and credible.

Fat Nixon: See the FBI investigation was a deep state spying operation that was created by delusions of Strock and his LOVUH!

Fox News: FBI investigation was deep state attempt to overturn the election.

#2 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-12-09 02:10 PM | Reply

It would be helpful if WaPo provided a link to the actual report itself. They provided a link for an Executive Summary, but not the report itself, as far as I could tell. I guess I'll have to try Google.

#3 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 02:14 PM | Reply

Here we go:

oig.justice.gov

#4 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 02:15 PM | Reply

The smarter ones will move on to the next conspiracy theory. Because they have zero morals, values or standards.

#1 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2019-12-09 01:59 PM | REPLY

They know the Durham investigation is also going to be a big nothingberder for them. That's why Rudy is out there doing his own half-baked investigation with ------- Barr in tow.
Somebody's gotta do something to keep the boss happy!

#5 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 02:20 PM | Reply

Interesting how there is lots of speculation about wrongdoing and what will be revealed in these many investigations. Each side predicting a smoking gun, but it is always Goppers that get indicted and everyone else is found to be law abiding.

It is almost like the GOP is corrupt and projecting that corruption on to others to feed their cultists.

Actually, not almost.

#6 | Posted by bored at 2019-12-09 02:21 PM | Reply

The report is 476 pages. Gotta hand it to Horowitz - the man is thorough.

#7 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 02:24 PM | Reply

First thing that caught my eye in the Executive summary of the report:

Our review found that FBI personnel fell far
short of the requirement in FBI policy that they ensure
that all factual statements in a FISA application are
"scrupulously accurate." We identified multiple
instances in which factual assertions relied upon in the
first FISA application were inaccurate, incomplete, or
unsupported by appropriate documentation, based upon
information the FBI had in its possession at the time the
application was filed. We found that the problems we
identified were primarily caused by the Crossfire
Hurricane team failing to share all relevant information
with OI and, cons~quently, the information was not
considered by the Department decision makers who
ultimately decided to support the applications.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 02:32 PM | Reply

Mr Flynn's sentencing hearing was postponed because he was sure there would be information in this report that showed he didn't need to plea guilty.

Now, I guess, that hearing will be scheduled soon, or will the upcoming holidays delay it again?

#9 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-12-09 02:33 PM | Reply

@#4

Thanks for the link.

#10 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-12-09 02:34 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

This is the next thing to have caught my attention:

On October 31, 2016, shortly after the first FISA
application was signed, an article entitled "A Veteran
Spy Has Given the FBI Information Alleging a Russian
Operation to Cultivate Donald Trump," was published by
Mother Jones. Steele admitted to the FBI that he was a
source for the article, and the FBI closed him as a CHS
for cause in November 2016. However, as we describe
below, despite having been closed for cause, the
Crossfire Hurricane team continued to obtain
information from Steele through Ohr, who met with the
FBI on 13 occasions to pass along information he had
been provided by Steele.

Mr Flynn's sentencing hearing was postponed because he was sure there would be information in this report that showed he didn't need to plea guilty.

The Michael Flynn case has been nothing less than bizarre.

Thanks for the link.
#10 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER

You're welcome. I prefer to read it myself than listen to the talking heads try to spin its content.

#11 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 02:38 PM | Reply

Here's more:

We concluded that the failures described above
and in this report represent serious performance
failures by the supervisory and non-supervisory agents
with responsibility over the FISA applications. These
failures prevented OI from fully performing its
gatekeeper function and deprived the decision makers
the opportunity to make fully informed decisions.
Although some of the factual misstatements and
omissions we fou nd in t his review were arguably more
significant than others, we believe t hat all of them
taken together resulted in FISA applications that made
it appear that the information supporting probable
cause was stronger than was actually the case.

We identified at least 17 significant errors or
omissions in the Carter Page FISA applications, and
many additional errors in the Woods Procedures. These
errors and omissions resulted from case agents
providing wrong or incomplete infor mation to OI and
failing to flag important issues for discussion...


Wow.

#12 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 02:44 PM | Reply

More:

the use of
Ohr as a conduit between the FBI and Steele created a
relationship by proxy that should have triggered,
pursuant to FBI policy, a supervisory decision about
whether to reopen Steele as a CHS or discontinue
accepting information indirectly from him through Ohr.

#13 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 02:48 PM | Reply

Here's my first takeaway. What I've read so far has already been reported by the likes of John Solomon, Kim Strassel, Margot Cleveland, Andrew McCarthy, Paul Sperry and others. And all of their reporting has been shrugged off as right-wing, Fox News conspiracy theories. Well, at least what I've read so far, their reporting regarding Page and Papadapolous was in fact accurate.

Please note: This is only based upon what I've read thus far. I still have a LOT to dig through with this report.

#14 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 02:51 PM | Reply

More:

Despite the relevance of this material, as
described in Chapters Five and Seven, none of
Papadopoulos's statements were provided by the
Crossfire Hurricane team to the OI Attorney and Page's
statements were not provided to t he OI attorney until
June 2017, approximately ten months a~er the initial
Carter Page FISA application was granted by the FISC.

#15 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 02:57 PM | Reply

Justice Department inspector general concludes Russia probe was justified
www.axios.com


The Inspector General's report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken. It is also clear that, from its inception, the evidence produced by the investigation was consistently exculpatory."

--- Attorney General Bill Barr

"I have the utmost respect for the mission of the Office of Inspector General and the comprehensive work that went into the report prepared by Mr. Horowitz and his staff. However, our investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department. Our investigation has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S. Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report's conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened."

--- U.S. Attorney John Durham


#16 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-12-09 03:00 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Having just finished reading the Executive Summary it is pretty damning.

Justice Department inspector general concludes Russia probe was justified

That's fine. That obfuscates from what this report actually reveals - serial malfeasance at the FBI and DOJ as it pertains to how they went about with their investigation.

That an investigation is adequately predicated doesn't give the investigators carte blanche to do whatever they want.

#17 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 03:03 PM | Reply

"FISA applications that made it appear that the information supporting probable cause was stronger than was actually the case."

Get to the part where the IG says true probable cause did not exist!

That's all that really matters here, as pertains to Trump.

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-09 03:03 PM | Reply

So much for Jeff's consternation.

#19 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-12-09 03:04 PM | Reply

#ReadtheReport!

Haha. Just kidding.

#ReadP.G.Wodehouse

#20 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-12-09 03:05 PM | Reply

"Justice Department inspector general concludes Russia probe was justified"

Awkward!

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-09 03:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"That obfuscates..."

Jeff gets mad when someone else does his job.

#22 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-09 03:07 PM | Reply

That an investigation is adequately predicated doesn't give the investigators carte blanche to do whatever they want.

#17 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Goalposts are already creeping.

#23 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-09 03:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"as it pertains to how they went about with their investigation."

You had no right to discover my wrongs!

Meanwhile, Jeff will still pretend to care about the wrongs, but he'll still dedicate 20x the keystrokes to complaining about the process.

#24 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-09 03:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#24 You didn't bother to read any of the sections he posted did you? I'm sure you won't understand them anyway so you will have to wait until 9 tonight so Maddow can tell you how to spin them. She will need a week long documentary when it comes to the Durham report.

#25 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-09 03:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I knew DNC Dan would scoff at this.

#26 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 03:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Mueller said he could not exonerate Trump. Trump said Mueller totally exonerated him The IG concludes there was no political bias in the "oringes" of the Russia investigation. Trump says it was an attempted coup. This would all be humorous but for the fact Trump's cult believes every word he says.

#27 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 03:46 PM | Reply

Meanwhile, Jeff will still pretend to care about the wrongs, but he'll still dedicate 20x the keystrokes to complaining about the process.

#24 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

What were Carter Page's wrongs?

Believe it or not, the process matters a lot, ESPECIALLY when obtaining warrants to electronically surveil American citizens. FISC was created for a reason.

I would be very interested to know if these applications were handled properly would these judges have still issued the warrants?

#28 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 03:46 PM | Reply

Goalposts are already creeping.

#23 | POSTED BY JPW

Not at all.

Have you read the Executive summary yet?

#29 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 03:48 PM | Reply

This would all be humorous but for the fact Trump's cult believes every word he says.

#27 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 03:46 PM | Reply

As they are demonstrating.

#30 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 03:49 PM | Reply

You had no right to discover my wrongs!

Danforth clearly doesn't understand how the process is supposed to work. Actually, I'm guessing that he does but doesn't care due to who was being targeted and who was doing the targeting. Had this been done on W's watch to an Obama campaign member Danforth would have rightly lost his mind.

#31 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 03:50 PM | Reply

This would all be humorous but for the fact Trump's cult believes every word he says.

#27 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 03:46 PM | Reply

I'm not reacting to what Trump says. I'm reacting to what I've read so far. I'm very much looking forward to Horowitz's testimony on Wednesday.

#32 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 03:51 PM | Reply

You had no right to discover my wrongs!

What "wrongs"? and not if you do it illegally ...

Would you say the same thing with a cop planting evidence?

Carter Page has enough to file a lawsuit against Steele, Ohr, and others in the DOJ.

From Report: Our review found that FBI personnel fell far short of the requirement in FBI policy that they ensure that all factual statements in a FISA application are "scrupulously accurate."

IOW The FBI did not follow FISA procedures and lied to judges.

From Report: None of these inaccuracies and omissions were brought to the attention of OI before the last FISA application was filed in June 2017. Consequently, these failures were repeated in all three renewal applications.

I stated this Feb 2017 to TonyCut&PasteRoma and EtAl ... They stated its not possible ... here we are ....

#33 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-09 03:53 PM | Reply

The Obama administration spied on an opponents Presidential Campaign, not even dotting its Is or crossing the Ts mattered....

Sloppyly jamming it through, just like this impeachment farce.....

#34 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-09 03:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"That obfuscates..."

Jeff gets mad when someone else does his job.

#22 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Not at all. I already complimented Horowitz's thoroughness and, for now, I accept his conclusions regarding a lack of political bias surrounding the serial malfeasance with the Page FISA applications as well as his conclusion that the investigation itself was adequately predicated.

Horowitz revealed a trove of malfeasance backdropping the FISA applications and your only response is: You had no right to discover my wrongs!

Situational ethics at its finest and it's yet more proof that your nicknames are well-deserved.

#35 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 03:55 PM | Reply

The Obama administration spied on an opponents Presidential Campaign

#34 | Posted by AndreaMackris at

With the IG Report vindicating the FBI's investigation into Trump's treason with Russia, driving a spike through QAnon's "Deep State" conspiracy theory, it's a good time to remind everyone the concept of a "Deep State" was propaganda Trump adopted from Turkish dictator Erdoan. The IG report blows big holes in the GOP argument, saying the FBI did not have political bias and had information "sufficient to satisfy the low threshhold" needed to begin investigating trump campaign operatives.

#36 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 03:58 PM | Reply

You had no right to discover my wrongs!

#35 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 03:55 PM

That's not your position?

#37 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 03:59 PM | Reply

I stated this Feb 2017 to TonyCut&PasteRoma and EtAl ... They stated its not possible ... here we are ....
#33 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Everything I read in the Executive Summary (I still plan on digging into the report beyond just the summary) has been studiously reported by a number conservative writers (some of whom I mentioned above) and this reporting has either been ignored or scoffed at by the MSM.

My expectation is that they will fixate on Horowitz citing that the investigation itself was adequately predicated and either severely downplay, or more likely, flat-out ignore all of the abuses Horowitz details in his report.

#38 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 03:59 PM | Reply

What were Carter Page's wrongs?

To answer that question meaningfully it is necessary to go back "to 2013", and to a group of jaded Putin spies working deep undercover in downtown Manhattan. One of them was Viktor Podobnyy. Moscow had dispatched Podobnyy to the United States under his own name. He worked in New York under official "cover": attache to Russia's delegation to the United Nations.

In reality, Podobnyy was employed by Russia's foreign intelligence service, the SVR. Putin was the former head of the SVR's domestic counterpart, the FSB. Podobnyy's mission was to recruit Americans and to collect economic intelligence. One of his SVR colleagues was Igor Sporyshev, who was working covertly as a "trade representative." Neither man was aware that the FBI had a bug inside their SVR office. The Bureau was secretly listening to their conversations.

Sporyshev's biggest headache was finding Americans willing to become intelligence sources for Russia.

The Russian spies, however, had one promising lead. This was a guy "an energy consultant based in New York City. Unlike the women, he was eager to help. And, it appeared, keen to make money in Moscow. There was a drawback: The source "whom the FBI called "Male-1" was something of a dimwit.

The FBI intercepts record: PODOBNYY: [Male-1] wrote that he is sorry, he went to Moscow and forgot to check his inbox, but he wants to meet when he gets back. I think he is an idiot and forgot who I am. Plus he writes to me in Russian [to] practise the language. He flies to Moscow more often than I do. He got hooked on [the Russian state energy company] Gazprom, thinking that if they have a project, he could rise up. Maybe he can. I don't know, but it's obvious he wants to earn loads of money.

Podobnyy explained he intended to string Male-1 along. That meant feeding him "empty promises." Podobnyy would play up his connections to Russia's trade delegation, to Sporyshev, and pretend his SVR colleague might "push contracts" the American's way.

This was a strange business"Kremlin officers careening around Manhattan, spycraft involving fake umbrellas, and an American intelligence source who spent more time in Moscow than his Russian handlers. Plus espionage professionals who turned out to be suffering from ennui.

The American willing to provide information to Putin's foreign intelligence officers rented a working space at 590 Madison Avenue. The building was linked by a glass atrium to a well-known New York landmark, Trump Tower.

Male-1 had a name. At this point few had heard of him. He was Carter Page.

www.politico.com

Plenty more information at the link. Hard to believe that you've never heard about Page's affinity for Putin and Moscow along with the fact the FBI had tapes of these Russians talking about recruiting Page to be an asset. None of this is related to the Steele dossier at all.

#39 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-09 03:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You had no right to discover my wrongs!

#35 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 03:55 PM

That's not your position?

#37 | POSTED BY ZED

That's my position as long as the process is followed, which it quite clearly wasn't.

#40 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:01 PM | Reply

Actually, I'm guessing that he does but doesn't care due to who was being targeted and who was doing the targeting.

#31 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-12-09 03:50 PM | FLAG:

I have no idea. But, I'm willing to accept the conclusions. Trump and his ardent supporters clearly or not. I'm also in full support of disciplining and/or prosecuting anyone who violated the law or abused the process in obtaining the initial warrant and any of the renewals. I'm opposed to overreach by law enforcement at any level, not just when it happens to rich and powerful white men like Trump.

#41 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 04:01 PM | Reply

#39 Tony,

It really boils down to this: Were the FISA warrants to surveil Carter Page properly obtained? Based upon what I've read, they absolutely were not properly obtained.

#42 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I'm also in full support of disciplining and/or prosecuting anyone who violated the law or abused the process in obtaining the initial warrant and any of the renewals. I'm opposed to overreach by law enforcement at any level, not just when it happens to rich and powerful white men like Trump.

#41 | POSTED BY ANTON

Well, as a lefty (I regard you as center-left) you appear to be alone on this thread.

#43 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:03 PM | Reply

I stated this Feb 2017 to TonyCut&PasteRoma and EtAl ... They stated its not possible ... here we are ....

Nothing that you said is supported in the Horowitz finding, ZERO. A lower level attorney mismarked an email from a CIA official that confirmed that at one point Page had been an asset, something the FBI attorney marked as "not confirmed" in one FISA application if my memory serves correct.

Page had a long history with Russia before he was named as a Trump advisor as posted above. You likely know none of those details at all, which is what I tried to inform your ignorant ass about 2 years ago. History hasn't changed on iota.

#44 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-09 04:04 PM | Reply

#39 Nothing you just described is illegal. Fact is Carter Page had a history of being a friendly informant for the Intelligence Community and was regarded as an "idiot" by the Ruskies.

Every lefty on this thread not named Anton seems to be arguing that because the investigation itself was adequately predicated that the FBI had no constraints whatsoever because Trump and because Obama.

#45 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:06 PM | Reply

Nothing that you said is supported in the Horowitz finding

Pretty much everything Mackris said is supported by this report, at least by the Executive Summary.

#46 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:07 PM | Reply

Well, as a lefty (I regard you as center-left) you appear to be alone on this thread.

#43 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-12-09 04:03 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Another thing that I think is interesting about this is that Trump has been saying that it's those "at the top" of the FBI, DOJ, etc., who are the problem because of political motive and the "rank and file" are doing a great job. Well, Horowitz's report tends to show Trump was wrong. It looks like a "rank and file" lawyer may have been the problem in the process and had no political motive.

#47 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 04:11 PM | Reply

Is this the thread where Mackris and Jeffy cherry-pick the Summary caveats of what could have been better handled... and completely ignore the report's Conclusions?

Why, I think it could.

#48 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-09 04:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Anton,

The report excoriates both the lower level and upper echelon of the FBI and DOJ for failing to properly do their jobs as it pertained to these FISA warrants.

#49 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:12 PM | Reply

Why, I think it could.
#48 | POSTED BY CORKY

Of course it is.

Cherry picking and obfuscation are what they both excel at.

#50 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-12-09 04:13 PM | Reply

Is this the thread where Mackris and Jeffy cherry-pick the Summary caveats of what could have been better handled... and completely ignore the report's Conclusions?

Why, I think it could.
#48 | POSTED BY CORKY

You're doing exactly what I predicted the MSM would do. The report shows that the investigation itself was adequately predicated therefore the FBI's and DOJ's conduct doesn't matter. Let us completely ignore all of the malfeasance the report lays out.

#51 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:14 PM | Reply

#51

Ignoring the Conclusions of the report and whining about the problems detailed in the Summary THAT DID NOT CHANGE THE CONCLUSIONS.... is still just whining about the report.

#52 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-09 04:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

You had no right to discover my wrongs!

#35 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 03:55 PM

That's not your position?

#37 | POSTED BY ZED

That's my position as long as the process is followed, which it quite clearly wasn't.

#40 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:01 PM | Reply

I think your position is to obscure larger truths in trivia.

#53 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Carter Page cont.

In March 2016 candidate Trump met with the Washington Post's editorial board. At this point it seemed likely that Trump would clinch the Republican nomination. Foreign affairs came up. Who were the candidate's foreign policy advisers? Trump read five names. The second was "Carter Page, PhD." Given Trump's obvious lack of experience of world affairs, this was a pivotal job.

One former Eurasia Group colleague said he was stunned when he discovered Page had mysteriously become one of Trump's foreign policy advisers. "I nearly dropped my coffee," he told me. The colleague added: "We had wanted people who could engage in critical analysis of what's going on. This is a guy who has no critical insight into the situation. He wasn't a smart person."

Page's real qualification for the role, it appeared, had little to do with his restless CV. What appeared to recommend him to Trump was his boundless enthusiasm for Putin and his corresponding loathing of Obama and Clinton. Page's view of the world was not unlike the Kremlin's. Boiled down: the United States' attempts to spread democracy had brought chaos and disaster.

In July 2016 Page went back to Russia, in a trip approved by the Trump campaign. There was keen interest. Page was someone who might give sharper definition to the candidate's views on future US"Russian relations. Moscow sources suggest that certain people in the Russian government arranged Page's visit. "We were told: Can you bring this guy over?'" one source said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

One of Russia's top private universities, the New Economics School, invited Page to give a public lecture. This was no ordinary event but the prestigious commencement address to its class of graduating students. The venue was Moscow's World Trade Center.

Shaun Walker, the Guardian's Russia correspondent, had attended an event given by Page the previous evening. He described Page's PowerPoint presentation as "really weird." "It looked as if it had been done for a Kazakhstan gas conference," Walker said. "He was talking about the United States' attempts to spread democracy, and how disgraceful they were."

Page was Trump's leading Russia expert. And yet in the question-and-answer session it emerged that Page couldn't really understand or speak Russian. Those seeking answers on Trump's view of sanctions were disappointed. "I'm not here at all talking about my work outside of my academic endeavor," Page said. At the end, Walker said, Page was "spirited off."

Clearly, Page was reluctant to give any clues about a Trump administration's Russia policy or how Trump might succeed in strengthening ties where Obama and George W. Bush had both failed.

So what was he doing in Moscow?

The real purpose of Page's trip was clandestine. He had come to meet with the Kremlin. And in particular with Igor Sechin. Sechin was a former spy and, more importantly, someone who commanded Putin's absolute confidence. He was in effect Russia's second most powerful official, its de facto deputy leader.

In 2014 Page had written a sycophantic piece that lauded Sechin for his "great accomplishments." In a blog for Global Policy, Page wrote that Sechin had done more to advance U..S.-Russian relations than anybody in decades. Sechin was a wronged Russian statesman, in Page's view, unfairly punished and sanctioned by the Obama White House.

This was the backdrop to Page's Moscow trip.

Yeah, nothing at all the FBI might find suspicious about a Trump foreign policy advisor now under a different light of scrutiny due to the exposure of a Russian counteritelligence operation to disrupt the US presidential election, right?

#54 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-09 04:18 PM | Reply

Ignoring the Conclusions of the report and whining about the problems detailed in the Summary THAT DID NOT CHANGE THE CONCLUSIONS.... is still just whining about the report.

#52 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-09 04:16

Why is CORKY wrong, JEFF?

And why is it, really, that Donald Trump appeals to you?

#55 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:18 PM | Reply

--54 | Posted by tonyrom

Another russian-novel length cut-and-paste from Tony Tolstoy.

#56 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-12-09 04:23 PM | Reply

Ignoring the Conclusions of the report and whining about the problems detailed in the Summary THAT DID NOT CHANGE THE CONCLUSIONS.... is still just whining about the report.

#52 | POSTED BY CORKY

You're cherry-picking the conclusions that best fit your preferred narrative and are ignoring the conclusions that are inconvenient.

He noted serious malfeasance regarding how these warrants were obtained. I'm very curious to have him explain how he concluded that political bias wasn't a factor and I'm curious to hear whether or not he took into account the results of other investigations he conducted - the Hillary email investigation (which resulted in a criminal referral for McCabe) as well as the investigation into Comey's actions.

And why is it, really, that Donald Trump appeals to you?

#55 | POSTED BY ZED

Trump doesn't appeal to me. Why is it you feel that because a Trump campaign staffer was targeted it is OK for the FBI to improperly obtain a FISA warrant to spy on him?

#57 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:23 PM | Reply

#54

Nobody on this thread is making the argument that the investigation itself wasn't properly predicated. AGAIN, just because the FBI had adequate reason to conduct a counter-intelligence investigation doesn't mean they get to throw away the rulebook governing how they go about investigating their subject. Why is Anon the only lefty on this thread who understands this?

#58 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:25 PM | Reply

- it is OK for the FBI to improperly obtain a FISA warrant to spy on him?

Which we know from the Conclusions of the Report never happened... not matter what the rational of the reporter was.

#59 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-09 04:26 PM | Reply

I am leaning toward agreeing with Jeff. Any evidence of a crime that was collected by illegal or illegitimate means is always thrown out in court, no matter how meaningful to the case or what it proves. The Dems need to move ahead with the Ukraine issue and only mention the Russian connection as far as to say there is a pattern of behavior (they can prove the contacts even if they cant prove meaningful cooperation). We cannot trust Trump to not do it again. He would clearly do anything he can to cheat his way to a second term and an effort must be made to secure our elections.

#60 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-12-09 04:26 PM | Reply

The report shows that the investigation itself was adequately predicated therefore the FBI's and DOJ's conduct doesn't matter. Let us completely ignore all of the malfeasance the report lays out.

#51 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-12-09 04:14 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Adequately predicated means in compliance with the law and in accordance with DOJ and FBI policies. There is a low threshold requirement for these warrants. How many Republicans thought this law was a great idea to "keep us safe" in the War on Terror? How many similar laws have been in place to fight the War on Drugs (to the serious detriment of racial minority groups)?

This is a bit like when Democrats complain about "tax loopholes" that benefit the filthy rich and Republicans rightly point out that "loopholes" are just the law and the filthy rich are just doing what the law permits. If the investigation was adequately predicated, it was adequately predicated. Trump loses that argument outright.

#61 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 04:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

that never happened.

#62 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-09 04:28 PM | Reply

Timeline of Carter Page's Contacts with Russia [Updated]

July 7 and 8, 2016 " Page gives a rambling Power Point presentation and Q&A on "the future of the world economy" in Moscow, and the next day, gives the commencement address for the New Economic School at the World Trade Center, criticizing U.S. policy toward Russia for being too harsh.

Page later testifies to the House Intel Committee that he met with Russian Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich, an interaction he briefly characterized as an exchange of pleasantries after the New Economic School address. He adds there was "no substantive content" in any of his interactions with Russian officials during his trip to Moscow. Page also testifies that he met with Andrey Baranov, Rosneft's head of investor relations and a senior aide to Rosneft CEO Igor Sechin.

Page denies meeting with Rosneft CEO Sechin himself, who is a close Putin ally and is subject to U.S. sanctions.

July 20, 2016 " Page meets with Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak on the sidelines of the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio. In spite of this meeting, Page continues to deny publicly that he met with any Russian officials during the 2016 campaign.

Aug. 29, 2016 " Sen. Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) writes a letter to then-FBI Director James Comey calling for an investigation into evidence suggesting that Russia may try to manipulate the results of the 2016 election. In it, he indirectly refers to Carter Page's speech in Moscow criticizing U.S. sanctions policy toward Russia.

Looks like quite a bit of probable cause to me, but hell, what do I know?

#63 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-09 04:29 PM | Reply

Having now read the Executive Summary, this report actually is slightly more damning than the whitewash I thought it was going to be, but the real fireworks are going to happen when Durham releases his report.

People don't realize that Inspector General investigators are only capable of interviewing individuals in the Department of Justice. They cannot access information from other federal government agencies or compel anyone outside of DOJ to be interviewed. Further, the IG can only recommend that people be prosecuted within the DOJ and only after referral to an outside prosecutor, in this case Durham.

Durham's investigative authority is broad and unlike the Inspector General, he has the ability to prosecute if he finds criminal activity or the IG refers it to him. His office is capable of issuing subpoenas outside of the Department of Justice, to individuals throughout the federal government, overseas and to coordinating criminal agencies.

Durham's report is due in the next month or so, and he issued a very rare public statement today about the IG report:

"I have the utmost respect for the mission of the Office of Inspector General and the comprehensive work that went into the report prepared by Mr. Horowitz and his staff. However, our investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department. Our investigation has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S. Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report's conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened."

This was the last thing that various Persons of Interest in Durham's investigation wanted to hear today.

#64 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-09 04:30 PM | Reply

I meant to say counterintelligence investigation, not warrants. But, you get the point.

#65 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 04:30 PM | Reply

#63 |

Which obviously outweighed the caveats noted in the Summary.

Jeff is saying that the cop who caught the bank robber wasn't wearing his badge on the correct side of his shirt at the time.

#66 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-09 04:32 PM | Reply

James Comey
@Comey

FYI: I offered to go on Fox & Friends to answer all questions. I can't change their viewers on Donald Trump but hoped to give them some actual facts about the FBI. They booked me for tomorrow at 8 am. They just cancelled. Must have read the report.

#67 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-12-09 04:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Trump doesn't appeal to me.

#57 | Posted by JeffJ at

You defend him almost more than anyone and you have adopted this death by a thousand cuts approach whenever something not favorable to Trump appears.

If memory serves, this report was supposed to blow Trump's enemies out of the water. Why keep pretending that it did?

#68 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:32 PM | Reply

Adequately predicated means in compliance with the law and in accordance with DOJ and FBI policies. There is a low threshold requirement for these warrants....

Did you read the executive summary? Adequately predicated means they had proper means to launch an investigation. They still have rules, laws and guidelines that give guidance as to what they can and cannot do in terms of how they conduct their investigation. Just because they had the green light doesn't mean they can improperly obtain FISA warrants, which they clearly did. Believe it or not, that is a huge problem.

#69 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:32 PM | Reply

And why is it, really, that Donald Trump appeals to you?

Trump has nicer legs than Hitler and bigger ---- than Cher.

#70 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-12-09 04:33 PM | Reply | Funny: 5

If memory serves, this report was supposed to blow Trump's enemies out of the water. Why keep pretending that it did?

#68 | POSTED BY ZED

I'm not. My prediction was the report would be a dud for the GOP. While, this doesn't blow Trump's enemies out of the water, it exposes a LOT of serial malfeasance and misfeasance. Far more than I was expecting. Whilst I've read all of the dogged reporting about this by the likes of McCarthy, Solomon, et al, I did so with a healthy degree of skepticism. Well, their reporting was accurate as it pertained to these FISA warrants. I know you and others want to downplay all of this, but it's a far bigger deal than you realize. Wednesday is going to be very interesting.

#71 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:35 PM | Reply

but the real fireworks are going to happen when Durham releases his report.

#64 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-09 04:30 PM

I keep hearing things like this.

I'll tell you what it looks like, it looks like Trumpism is desperate to manufacture a scandal to somehow immunize the most corrupt president in American history from a reckoning on his behavior.

#72 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:35 PM | Reply

- bigger ---- than Cher.

lol, Lee.... Dolly Parton is jealous of Trump's ----.

#73 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-09 04:36 PM | Reply

My prediction was the report would be a dud for the GOP.

#71 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019

And so, JEFF.....Is it?

#74 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:37 PM | Reply

Jeff is saying that the cop who caught the bank robber wasn't wearing his badge on the correct side of his shirt at the time.

#66 | POSTED BY CORKY

Did Snoofy coach you on that comment?

That is some awfully bad equivalence.

It's also situational ethics. No way you'd take this approach had the FBI improperly obtained FISA warrants to spy on a member of the Obama campaign.

#75 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:37 PM | Reply

Did you read the executive summary?

Did you?

"As we describe in the report, all of the investigative actions taken by the Crossfire Hurricane team, from the date the case was opened on July 31 until October 21 (the date of the first FISA order) would have been permitted whether the case was opened as a Preliminary or Full Investigation.

Lisa Page...did not play a role in the decision to open Crossfire Hurricane or the four individual cases. While Strzok was directly involved in the decisions to open Crossfire Hurricane and the four individual cases, he was not the sole, or even the highest-level, decision maker as to any of those matters.

We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decisions to open the four individual investigations."

#76 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-09 04:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This was the last thing that various Persons of Interest in Durham's investigation wanted to hear today.

#64 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Agreed.

#77 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:39 PM | Reply

No way you'd take this approach had the FBI improperly obtained FISA warrants to spy on a member of the Obama campaign.

#75 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019

Was Obama spying on Trump, JEFF?

#78 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:39 PM | Reply

Did you?

Yes. You, like so many others, seem to be cherry-picking it.

Here's the deal - yes, it's very important that the investigation was adequately predicated, according to Hororwitz.

Yes, it's very important that he concludes that political bias isn't the explanation for all of the malfeasance he uncovered.

It's ALSO very important that the FISA warrants to spy on Carter Page were improperly obtained.

#79 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:41 PM | Reply

"The fact that the FBI believed Steele had been retained to conduct political opposition research did not require the FBI, under either DOJ or FBI policy, to ignore his reporting. The FBI regularly receives information from individuals with potentially significant biases and motivations, including drug traffickers, convicted felons, and even terrorists. The FBI is not required to set aside such information; rather, FBI policy requires that it critically assess the information. We found that after receiving Steele's reporting, the Crossfire Hurricane team began those efforts in earnest...

We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI's decision to seek FISA authority on Carter Page."

#80 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-09 04:42 PM | Reply

Was Obama spying on Trump, JEFF?

#78 | POSTED BY ZED

The FBI improperly obtained FISA warrants to spy on Carter Page.

#81 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:42 PM | Reply

Did you read the executive summary? Adequately predicated means they had proper means to launch an investigation. They still have rules, laws and guidelines that give guidance as to what they can and cannot do in terms of how they conduct their investigation. Just because they had the green light doesn't mean they can improperly obtain FISA warrants, which they clearly did. Believe it or not, that is a huge problem.

#69 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-12-09 04:32 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Did you read the executive summary? Adequately predicated means they had proper means to launch an investigation.

#69 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-12-09 04:32 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Yes ... and they lacked a political motive which is exactly the opposite of what Trump has been saying for years. This was not a "Deep State" coup to "overthrow an election."

Of course there can be issues related to abuse of process. That doesn't mean this was a coup. Trump is full of it.

#82 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 04:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Was Obama spying on Trump, JEFF?

#78 | POSTED BY ZED

The FBI improperly obtained FISA warrants to spy on Carter Page.

#81 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019

You weren't asked that. Want another shot?

#83 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:44 PM | Reply

The whole "insurance policy" narrative and the "Lisa, Lisa .... I love you Lisa" rally speech from Trump are total b.s.

#84 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 04:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Of course there can be issues related to abuse of process....

#82 | POSTED BY ANTON

That's my key takeaway. You are the only lefty on this thread who understands that this actually matters.

and they lacked a political motive

I want to hear Horowitz explain how he reached that conclusion.

#85 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:45 PM | Reply

You weren't asked that. Want another shot?

#83 | POSTED BY ZED

The FBI, which ultimately answered to Obama at the time, spied on Carter Page and they improperly obtained FISA warrants to do so.

#86 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:46 PM | Reply

Jeff thinks firemen should let a building burn down while they investigate a faulty alarm system.

#87 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-09 04:47 PM | Reply


#85 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019

Was there a coup attempt against Trump, JEFF?

#88 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:47 PM | Reply

The whole "insurance policy" narrative and the "Lisa, Lisa .... I love you Lisa" rally speech from Trump are total b.s.

#84 | POSTED BY ANTON

Strzok and Page were heavily involved in Crossfire Hurricane and they had an extremely intense negative bias against Trump and his campaign.

That's why Mueller promptly removed them from his team when he learned of the content of their text messages.

#89 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:48 PM | Reply

The FBI, which ultimately answered to Obama at the time, spied on Carter Page and they improperly obtained FISA warrants to do so.

#86 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019

I'm asking you, JEFF, if you believe in the Deep State. You know, the thing Trump lied about over and over and over again?

#90 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:49 PM | Reply

Was there a coup attempt against Trump, JEFF?

#88 | POSTED BY ZED

Not that I'm aware of.

Jeff thinks firemen should let a building burn down while they investigate a faulty alarm system.

#87 | POSTED BY JOE

Joe thinks it's OK for the FBI to improperly obtain FISA warrants as long as the subject has ties to Trump or the GOP.

#91 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:49 PM | Reply

Are you running for public office or something, JEFF? Don't want a record of your beliefs for posterity?

#92 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:50 PM | Reply

Zed,

I'm not a fan of the term "Deep state."

Why are you gaslighting?

#93 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:50 PM | Reply

That's my key takeaway. You are the only lefty on this thread who understands that this actually matters.

#85 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-12-09 04:45 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

I think others are focused more specifically on the IG's conclusions because they completely destroy the Hannity, Limbaugh, Trump nonsense about a Deep State conspiracy.

Also, I think people on the political left are quite aware of the potential abuse from law enforcement. It's the right that usually prides itself on backing "the Blue" and giving law enforcement the benefit of the doubt, perhaps too often.

#94 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 04:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Was there a coup attempt against Trump, JEFF?

#88 | POSTED BY ZED

Not that I'm aware of.

#91 | Posted by JeffJ

Can't bring yourself to accept the truth that the answer is NO?

#95 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:51 PM | Reply

I'm not a fan of the term "Deep state."

#93 | Posted by JeffJ at

What do you call it?

#96 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:52 PM | Reply

Also, I think people on the political left are quite aware of the potential abuse from law enforcement....

#94 | POSTED BY ANTON

Based on this thread I wouldn't be so sure about that.

#97 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:54 PM | Reply

Since the Russian issue is not politically feasible, this whole discussion is that much twaddle, except the conclusions poke a hole in another of Illegitimate President Bucket of ----- lies and obfuscations.

IOW who gives a ---- about issues with the process, since the process is going nowhere? However, the conclusion was that the investigation was legitimate SHOULD just shut the idiots up. It won't, cause they're idiots, but it should.

#98 | Posted by truthhurts at 2019-12-09 04:55 PM | Reply

I don't call it anything. I already said I'm not a fan of that term. I need proof of activities that would fall into that category, not allegations or conspiracy theories.

#99 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:55 PM | Reply

Strzok and Page were heavily involved in Crossfire Hurricane and they had an extremely intense negative bias against Trump and his campaign.
That's why Mueller promptly removed them from his team when he learned of the content of their text messages.

#89 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-12-09 04:48 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

All of this amounts to nothing, except to show that Robert Mueller ran a tight ship in his investigation (which, according to Mueller, expressly did not exonerate the liar in the Oval Office).

Lisa Page said Trump is an "idiot" and a "douche." Truth is an absolute defense.

Do you think the FBI is a hotbed of left-wing radicalism? Seriously?

#100 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 04:56 PM | Reply

IOW who gives a ---- about issues with the process...

Anybody who cares about abusing the FISA application process in order to surveil a US citizen.

#101 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:57 PM | Reply

Do you think the FBI is a hotbed of left-wing radicalism? Seriously?

#100 | POSTED BY ANTON

No. I also allow for the possibility that Strzok and Page checked their own personal biases at the door and didn't allow it to influence their work.

#102 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:58 PM | Reply

I need proof of activities that would fall into that category, not allegations or conspiracy theories.

#99 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 04:55 PMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

All sane, patriotic men do.

But allegations and conspiracy theories are what Donald Trump hands us.

#103 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-09 04:59 PM | Reply

Carter Page was surveilled under FISA warrants going back to information first obtained in 2013 for the reasons posted in #39.

In 2013, Russian spies tried to recruit Page as an intelligence source, and Page passed documents to an agent of Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service. A CNN report published in Aug. 4, 2017. The 61st paragraph of the report reads:

"Page had been the subject of a secret intelligence surveillance warrant since 2014, earlier than had been previously reported, US officials briefed on the probe told CNN."

On Feb. 2, 2018, the New York Times' annotation of the Nunes memo states, "In accusing the F.B.I. of omitting important information, this memo's critics say the memo itself omits crucial context: other evidence that did not come from Mr. Steele, much of which remains classified. For example, it makes no note of the fact that Mr. Page attracted the F.B.I.'s interest in 2013, when agents came to believe that Russian spies were trying to recruit him. The F.B.I. obtained a FISA wiretap order then, as well, according to a person familiar with the matter" (emphasis added).]

www.justsecurity.org

2016 was not Page's first surveillance warrant. The fact that he was surveilled before due to suspicious contact with Russians surely played an undisclosed role in his 2016 warrant that has never been publicly confirmed due to its classification, and that it undermines the BS that Jeff and desperate Trump apologists keep trying to sell.

#104 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-09 05:00 PM | Reply

No. I also allow for the possibility that Strzok and Page checked their own personal biases at the door and didn't allow it to influence their work.

#102 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-12-09 04:58 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

It happens every day among career professionals in the United States government; i.e., those people constantly mocked by Republicans for being "faceless, unelected, bureaucrats."

Meanwhile, our elected public officials are still pretending there is such a thing as a "perfect phone call."

#105 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 05:01 PM | Reply

"That obfuscates..."

Jeff gets mad when someone else does his job.

#22 | Posted by Danforth

Or when someone uses a word that forces him to stop and look it up before he can continue with his screed.

OCU

#106 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-12-09 05:07 PM | Reply

Tony,

Read the report. It cites all sorts of malfeasance in the FISA process. Every three months a new application has to be submitted.

#107 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 05:07 PM | Reply

I also allow for the possibility that Strzok and Page checked their own personal biases at the door and didn't allow it to influence their work.

How generous of you to "allow" for something that the OIG just said is the case.

#108 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-09 05:07 PM | Reply

It's not OK to improperly obtain a FISA warrant. Why is that Anton is the only one of you who understands this?

#109 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 05:09 PM | Reply

James Comey
@Comey

So it was all lies. No treason. No spying on the campaign. No tapping Trumps wires. It was just good people trying to protect America.

#110 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-12-09 05:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Tony,

Read the report

You read it Jeff, not just the summary. Read the actual content. It undermines your assertions with facts.

An FBI counterintelligence agent in NYFO (NYFO CI Agent) with extensive experience in Russian matters told the OIG that Carter Page had been on NYFO's radar since 2009, when he had contact with a known Russian intelligence officer (Intelligence Officer 1). According to the EC documenting NYFO's June 2009. interview with Page, Page told NYFO agents that he knew and kept in regular contact with Intelligence Officer 1 and provided him with a copy of a non-public annual report from an American company.

NYFO CI agents believed that Carter Page was "passed" from Intelligence Officer 1 to a successor Russian intelligence officer {Intelligence Officer 2) in 2013 and that Page would continue to be introduced to other Russian intelligence officers in the future. 181 In June 2013, NYFO CI agents interviewed Carter Page about these contacts. Page acknowledged meeting Intelligence Officer 2 following an introduction earlier in 2013. When agents intimated to Carter Page during the interview that Intelligence Officer 2 may be a Russian intelligence officer, specifically, an "SVR" officer, Page told them. he believed in "openness" and because he did not have access to classified information, his acquaintance with Intelligence Officer 2 was a "positive" for him.

In January 2015, three Russian intelligence officers, including Intelligence Officer 2, were charged in a sealed complaint, and subsequently indicted, in the Southern District of New York (SDNY) for conspiring to act in the United States as unregistered agents of the Russian Federation. 182 The indictment referenced Intelligence Officer 2's attempts to recruit "Male-1" as an asset for gathering
intelligence on behalf of Russia.

On March 2, 2016, the NYFO CI Agent and SDNY Assistant United States Attorneys interviewed Carter Page in preparation for the trial of one of the indicted Russian intelligence officers. During the interview, Page stated that he knew he was the person referred to as Male-1 in the indictment and further said that he had identified himself as Male-1 to a Russian Minister and various Russian officials at a
United Nations event in "the spirit of openness." The NYFO CI Agent told us she returned to her office after the interview and discussed with her supervisor opening a counterintelligence case on Page based on his statement to Russian officials that he believed he was Male-1 in the indictment and his continued contact with Russian intelligence officers.

#111 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-09 05:34 PM | Reply

The FBI's NYFO CI squad supervisor (NYFO CI Supervisor) told us she believed she should have opened a counterintelligence case on Carter Page prior to March 2, 2016 based on his continued contacts with Russian intelligence officers; however, she said the squad was preparing for a big trial, and they did not focus on Pa.ge until he was interviewed again on March 2. She told us that after the March 2 interview, she called CD's Counterespionage Section at FBI Headquarters to determine whether Page had any security clearances and to ask for guidance as to what type of investigation to open on Page.

On April 6, 2016, NYFO opened a counterintelligence - investigation on Carter Page under a code name the FBI assigned to him (NYFO investigation) based on his contacts with Russian intelligence officers and his statement to Russian officials that he was "Male-1" in the SDNY indictment. (pgs. 61,62,63)

I'll find it in a minute, but one of the "malfeasances" was that an FBI attorney remarked on an email confirming that Page's contacts with the CIA noted above were given in the context of him being an "asset" for them, apparently this attorney looked at the content of Page's remarks and his obvious deference to the Russian's entreaties to him as benign, the attorney wrote on the email copy that Page was "not confirmed" as a CIA asset, which indeed was not his call to make. But look at the information on which he made that decision. As wrong as it might be, the call wasn't based on bias, it was likely based on the FBI's own evidentiary belief that Page was likely a useful idiot if not a Russian asset himself.

#112 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-09 05:34 PM | Reply

According to the August 17 Memorandum, an employee of the other agency assessed that Page "candidly described his contact
with" Intelligence Officer 1 to the other agency. Thus, the FBI relied upon Page's contacts with Intelligence Officer 1, among others, in support of its probable cause statement, while failing to disclose to 01 or the FISC that (1) Page had been approved as an operational contact by the other agency during a five-year period that overlapped with allegations in the FISA application, (2) Page had disclosed to
the other agency contacts that he had with Intelligence Officer 1 and certain other individuals, and (3) the other agency's employee had given a positive assessment of Page's candor. The FBI also did not engage with the other U .5. government agency to understand what it meant for Page to have been approved as an operational contact, whether Page interacted with Russian intelligence officers at
the behest of the other agency or with the intent to assist the U.S. government, and the breadth of the other agency's information concerning Page's interactions with Intelligence Officer 1, all information that would have been highly relevant to the FISC's probable cause determination.

Omitted Page's prior relationship with another U.S. government agency, despite being reminded by the other agency in June 2017,
prior to the filing of the final renewal application, about Page's past status with that other agency; instead of including this information in the final renewal application, the FBI OGC Attorney altered an email from the other agency so that the email stated that Page was "not a source" for the other agency, which the FBI affiant relied upon in signing the final renewal application;

Omitted evidence indicating that Page played no role in the Republican platform change on Russia's annexation of Ukraine as alleged in Steele Report 95, which was inconsistent with a factual assertion relied upon to support probable cause in all four FISA applications.

These are substantive issues worthy of rebuke if not charges. But the consensus of the report only questions how these issues would have impacted the courts' decision. It does not assert that the decisions would have definitely have been changed, but the judges should have been given the material for consideration.

Very fair assessment.

#113 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-09 05:49 PM | Reply

"Meanwhile, Jeff will still pretend to care about the wrongs, but he'll still dedicate 20x the keystrokes to complaining about the process."

My apologies.

^20x should be 200x. Or 2000x; only time will tell.

#114 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-09 05:57 PM | Reply

So Ivanka and Steele are old friends and there were Pro-Trump agents that were ecstatic about Trump winning the election. Trump, Hannity conspiracy theories are bunk.

#115 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-12-09 06:05 PM | Reply

We identified at least 17 significant errors or
omissions in the Carter Page FISA applications, and
many additional errors in the Woods Procedures. These
errors and omissions resulted from case agents
providing wrong or incomplete infor mation to OI and
failing to flag important issues for discussion...

Wow.

#12 | Posted by JeffJ

That's only a WOW if you can compare it to the typical number of errors you'd find in any investigation that you went through with a fine toothed comb. You'd need that number to conclude that 17 errors is a "wow".

Trump's cult has been saying for years that it will be proven the whole thing was a hoax. This concludes the opposite. The investigation was warranted, just not procedurally perfect.

#116 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-09 06:18 PM | Reply

Now republicans can stop worrying about who called the cops on trump's 2016 crimes, and focus on who called them on his 2019 crimes. Never once caring about the actual crimes. But gotta find out why the cops were called.

#117 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-09 06:20 PM | Reply

You know what's so odd? The Democrats seem to accept the results of most investigations without launching many duplicate ones if the conclusions are not what they want them to be.

Not a single Democrat has called for another investigation of Russia's incursion into the 2016 election to counter the Mueller probe, but the Republicans are now 6 investigations deep into Benghazi, and 2 deep into investigating the investigators of 2016. As Speaks notes, with the expansive nature of the FBI Russia investigations, and the dozens of indictments stemming from it, likely thousands of witnesses spoken with and millions upon millions of pages of documents produced, finding 17 procedural errors is fairly remarkable just on the premise of human error, much less intentional bias.

Usually when you find someone willing to take shortcuts in one area for the purpose of influencing an outcome many more threads of corrupt intent often accompany them. That doesn't appear to be the case here. While short of perfection, the vast majority of actors seem to have taken their duty seriously and in a collective unbiased manner as they've been trained to do.

If only the same could be said about the President who continues to lie and besmirch his own agency's reputation for having the audacity of investigating his campaign's confluence with a Russian counterintel operation ordered by Putin himself.

#118 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-09 06:38 PM | Reply

#118

On numerous occasions I've posted the Mueller report by the numbers. It would be stupid to call for another Russia collusion investigation. Republicans didn't call for additional investigations after the Starr report. The Durham criminal investigation was launched well before this report was released. Also IG reports are very limited in scope. Apples/oranges with the Mueller report

#119 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 06:51 PM | Reply

#116

Surely you can substantiate that.

#120 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 06:52 PM | Reply

#119 - maybe not after the Starr report but how many Benghazi?

Honestly, rightfully or not, the Russia thing isnt going to get any traction. Time to move on.

#121 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2019-12-09 06:55 PM | Reply

And why is it, really, that Donald Trump appeals to you?
Trump has nicer legs than Hitler and bigger ---- than Cher.

POSTED BY LEE_THE_AGENT AT 2019-12-09 04:33 PM | REPLY

It's about destroying Obama's legacy above all else which Trump is doing in spades.

#122 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-12-09 07:01 PM | Reply

Another alt-right (R)tarded talking point dies!

#123 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-12-09 07:06 PM | Reply

On numerous occasions I've posted the Mueller report by the numbers. It would be stupid to call for another Russia collusion investigation.

#119 | Posted by JeffJ

That would NOT be stupid, given how limited the actual investigation was. Mueller never got to interview the subject of his investigation, and was not allowed to look into his finances or his history of connections with russia. Furthermore, the entire thing was overseen and wrapped up by republicans who wanted it to just go away.

#124 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-09 07:16 PM | Reply

Jesus H, Tony.

All you did was C/P a bunch of stuff that says the FBI had adequate predicate to open a counter-intelligence investigation into Page.

I AM NOT DISPUTING THAT!

What I'm pointing out is that serious malfeasance occurred in the process of conducting said investigation. You have yet to dispute that because the IG report doesn't provide the fodder for doing so.

#125 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 07:18 PM | Reply

#116

Surely you can substantiate that.

#120 | Posted by JeffJ

How? YOU are the one who should substantiate it, if you're going to say 17 errors is a "wow!" How many errors would be found in the typical investigation if gone over with a fine tooth comb? You need that number in order to conclude that 17 is a "wow" result.

If I told you there was 17 inches of snow last night, would you say "WOW!" or would you say, "well where do you live and how much does it usually snow there?" If I said Malibu, then that's a WOW, if I say Buffalo, then it's not WOW at all.

#126 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-09 07:20 PM | Reply

The FISA application for Carter Page.

They'd been investigating him since at least 2013. The FISA application was a continuation of an already in-progress investigation. Making the claim that the timing of the FISA application was based on the Steele memos is a stretch. When you got nothing, keep digging. You just might find a blue dress this time while you're ignoring that our country was attacked by Russia and the president helped it to happen. Traitors.

#127 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-09 07:22 PM | Reply

It would be stupid to call for another Russia collusion investigation.

No it wouldn't be if the OLC memo was deemed legally irrelevant and witnesses and evidence had to be produced under threat of prison or sanction. The end result would be completely different and much more comprehensive.

But that isn't going to happen.

Horowitz's investigation IS the investigation of the investigators. Just who outside of the FBI is alleged to have done something illicit that would have altered its findings or influenced how it conducted the investigations? If Durham has found foreign sources in conflict, how does this materially alter Horowitz' findings which are domestically based?

Durham is going to alter Horowitz' conclusions on the origin of the US-based investigations? Makes no logical sense whatsoever. What Durham is going to find is more Russia disinformation that will excite Barr and Trump and try to sully Horowitz' work. It's as obvious as day, or Durham will too come back with very little.

#128 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-09 07:25 PM | Reply

#125

The Deep State sure is incompetent.

#129 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-12-09 07:25 PM | Reply

Traitors.

It makes you wonder what kind of America do they want.

#130 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-12-09 07:28 PM | Reply

#121

I agree regarding Benghazi but those were congressional investigations that don't have any where near the resources a special counsel has.

#131 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 07:34 PM | Reply

#124. The Mueller report was limited in scope?

You're joking, right?

#132 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 07:35 PM | Reply

#126

You act like the "mistakes" the IG found were akin to simple process errors.

On Wednesday Horowitz testifies before the Senate. Hopefully that will bring some additional clary.

#133 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 07:37 PM | Reply

Interesting:

Michael Weiss @michaeldweiss

Page was working with a USG agency to make "operational contact" with Russian spies. Then he went to work for the Trump campaign. Did he tell the campaign this? And does this make him a victim of the 'deep state' or an exponent of it? Asking for a non-MAGA friend.

#134 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-09 07:38 PM | Reply

Also interesting:

Michael Weiss @michaeldweiss

So the Australian ambo/High Commissioner to the UK Alexander Downer didn't drop a dime to the US on GP's comment until after WikiLeaks released the hacked DNC correspondence. He therefore wasn't relying on idle scuttlebutt; what GP told him turned out to be true.

Another pro-Trump allegation debunked here. Crossfire Hurricane was started on July 31, 2016. The FBI team involved in it was not made aware of Steele's reporting until almost two months later. The Steele Dossier cannot have kick-started this investigation[.]

#135 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-09 07:41 PM | Reply

#127

From my reading a FISA warrant request on Page was denied. The following request included info from the Steele dossier (with all of the malfeasance the IG laid out on his report) and the second request was approved.

#136 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 07:42 PM | Reply

The Mueller report was limited in scope?

Yes. Considering Trump had several other ongoing investigation Mueller was unable to go after.

Don't worry, Jeff. I'm sure everyone still believes you're a #NeverTrumper.

You're hearts not in it, but your head's all the way up his arse.

#137 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-12-09 07:43 PM | Reply

Michael Weiss @michaeldweiss

More on Page. He passed non-public information to a Russian spy, but was in regular touch with a USG agency (not the FBI) and passed along information to its representatives, too. Despite this, Page was long on the FBI's New York field office's CI radar.

So Page just passed along to this US government agency information about what he did or saw or who he spoke to of his own accord. He wasn't instrumentalized on the agency's behalf to gather intelligence or spy for the US. Noteworthy distinction. More like an informant.

And this is no doubt why the FBI was still suspicious of him. If, say, the CIA was pumping him for information he gathered in the course of his business dealings, but they weren't running him, he might still have been compromised or recruited by the RIS, making it a CI matter.

Truly, this is jaw-dropping. Page was told by the FBI that he was meeting with known Russian intelligence officers, one of whom was then arrested for espionage and recorded at the rezidentura discussing... Carter Page. He continued to meet with them "in the spirit of openness."

And you wonder why the FBI pushed mightily for that FISA warrant, despite warnings about blowback. Page exhibited 'Burn After Reading' levels of stupidity.

twitter.com

#138 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-09 07:44 PM | Reply

makes you wonder what kind of America do they want.

A Soviet Style Oligarchy.

#139 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-12-09 07:45 PM | Reply

#126

How? You are the one making the claim. The onus is on you to substantiate it. You are engaging in speculation.

#140 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 07:46 PM | Reply

And of course Trump is already telling lies about the report.

He claims "This was an overthrow of government. This was an attempted overthrow, and a lot of people were in on it and they got caught" even though the report says nothing of the sort.

#141 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2019-12-09 07:48 PM | Reply

#138

None of that justifies the malfeasance this report lays out. Being suspicious of ANYONE doesn't greenlight the FBI to improperly obtain a FISA warrant.

The goal-post moving is incredible.

#142 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 07:52 PM | Reply

#141 Trump is a jackass. That doesn't make it OK for the FBI to impropriety obtain a FISA warrant.

#143 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 07:53 PM | Reply

#143 Trump is a criminal and a conman and should be impeached.

#144 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2019-12-09 08:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#144

That is your opinion. Again, that doesn't justify the FBI improperly obtaining a FISA warrant

#145 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 08:07 PM | Reply

"Justice Department inspector general concludes Russia probe was justified"

Awkward!
#21 | POSTED BY SNOOFY
.
.
.
(AWKWARDNESS INTENSIFIES)

#146 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-09 08:10 PM | Reply

Before the report was released, Michael Tomasky predicted how wingnuttia would respond. Let's see if any of what he said applies here on the DR, shall we?

From his article (paywall warning):

Will reality stop the Trumpists? It never has. They'll turn to three (at least!) tried and true methods of the demagogue.

One: They'll dump on Inspector General Michael Horowitz. Well-known deep-stater, etc etc. Don't buy it...

Two: They'll try to characterize the findings as bombshells anyway. I obviously don't know as I write what the findings will be, but it sounds as if they're likely to be violations of procedure of the type that probably happen a lot of the time, because we live in an imperfect world where investigations are conducted by imperfect people with imperfect information making the best judgments they can. People can make mistakes and still not be guilty of advancing a conspiracy against the president.

Three: They'll just lie. They'll dismiss the report as propaganda and keep on saying the same things they've been saying. Trump will certainly do that. And as long as he does it, his apologists will do it too.

#147 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-09 08:11 PM | Reply

Again, that doesn't justify the FBI improperly obtaining a FISA warrant

No it doesn't, but you know what it also doesn't affect?

All the indictments, all the testimony, all the evidence of crimes and nefarious activities related to the Trump campaign and Russia, the fact that Trump asked Russia to get Hillary's missing emails to which they tried a mere 5 hours later, in fact every single thing that had nothing to do with Carter Page or related to Carter Page that these investigations uncovered and discovered.

Can you name one thing tied to Carter Page's surveillance that predicated anything else related to the investigational findings and legal proceedings poisoned by the improper FISA warrant?

It's irrelevant to the veracity of the investigation and it's findings. It's a hair in the soup unless you have evidence otherwise.

It cannot and will not compromise the underlying rationale for investigating Russia which was the reason the whole thing began.

#148 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-09 08:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Joe DiGenova: IG report will be devastating' for Obama holdovers as indictments loom

www.bizpacreview.com

IG Report Is Being Circulated Inside And Outside' Of The DOJ And Finds That FISA Warrants Were Illegally Obtained

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) appeared on "Hannity" on Monday night and said he expects the report to find that the FBI actions were illegal. Jordan is the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee and a member of the House Judiciary Committee. Fox News Gregg Jarrett said he "absolutely" agreed.

On Monday, Washington lawyer and former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova told Washington's WMAL that, "I can report categorically that the inspector general has found that all four FISA warrants were illegal. They were based on false information supplied to the FISA Court. And Michael Horowitz has concluded that all four FISA warrants were illegal."
www.redstate.combeing-circulated-inside-outside'-doj'-finds-fisa-warrants-illegally-obtained/

#149 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-09 08:30 PM | Reply

Obama's FBI willfully misled FISA court to commit political surveillance' of Trump: Report

Solomon said the early buzz suggests that the Obama FBI intentionally acted in a corrupt and biased manner to illegally spy on Trump campaign aides.

"[There's going to be] the emergence of very strong evidence that the FBI knowingly and willfully misled the FISA Court," Solomon said. "And the US intelligence agencies may have also been involved in what Bill Barr calls political surveillance.' It's a term I've never heard before. He chooses his words clearly. The term political surveillance" could become very popular this fall."
www.bizpacreview.com

#150 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-09 08:31 PM | Reply

Regarding posts #149 & 150: Who is moving the goal posts?

#151 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-09 08:36 PM | Reply

Trump is a criminal and a conman and should be impeached.
#144 | POSTED BY JOHNNY_HOTSAUCE

That is your opinion.
#145 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

No. That's a fact. The only reason Trump isn't in jail is he can afford good lawyers.

Keep carrying that water #NeverTrump, partyline voter.

#152 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-12-09 08:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#124. The Mueller report was limited in scope?

You're joking, right?

#132 | Posted by JeffJ

Absolutely. You dont call not interviewing the subject and not being able to look into his finances or history with russia being limited in scope?

If you're going to say it wasn't limited in scope, then you are not using the same english language that normal people do.

#153 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-09 08:40 PM | Reply

"Do you think the FBI is a hotbed of left-wing radicalism? Seriously?
#100 POSTED BY ANTON"

No, it is a hotbed of 'state-ism' and permanent bureaucracy. The people in the Intel Community, etc think they know better than the elected officials and know that they will likely outlast them - they are in it for a career while a president will get 8 years. Thus, they are more interested in implementing their agenda than the president's agenda. The issue with that is that there people are un-elected and basically unaccountable as the pace of investigation is so slow that they know they can wait out the current office holder.

I think the inevitable result will be mass firings and not having any hold over from the permanent state - this is not in the best interest of the country but has become a necessity due to the current crop of bad actors. My bet would be after Trump wins 2020, there is a mass culling in these agencies followed by hiring people he trusts to actually implement his agenda. When the Democrats eventually win again - 2024, 2028 - the same mass culling will occur. The level of Deep State (Permanent State) interference vs. Trump was truly shocking and unprecedented. Like most things, Trump didn't know what he was walking into - I would assume he thought that rationale, patriotic people would put the country over their personal bias....he was dead wrong and is paying the price for that. Thus, I would expect mass firing will come after the 2020 election to no repeat that mistake.

#154 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-12-09 08:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#154 | Posted by iragoldberg

"Their agenda" is enforcing the law and protecting the country. But yes, if you are in trumps cult, I can see why that agenda would upset you.

#155 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-09 09:03 PM | Reply

#153. Do you need me to reproduce the numbers?

No investigation has infinite resources.

Compare/contrast the resources that Mueller had vs what Horowitz had. They are not even remotely compatible.

#156 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 09:14 PM | Reply

#147

Conjecture. The assumption that malfeasance of this magnitude is commonplace is ridiculous and quite frankly is an insult to the very institution you all are desperate to defend.

#157 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 09:16 PM | Reply

#153. Do you need me to reproduce the numbers?

No investigation has infinite resources.

Compare/contrast the resources that Mueller had vs what Horowitz had. They are not even remotely compatible.

#156 | Posted by JeffJ

haha yeah, we'd like to find out if the president is a russian asset, but it's not really worth the money.
1 trillion dollar per year military budget? Oh yeah sure no problem here ya go.

Got anything better?

#158 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-09 09:20 PM | Reply

fishpaw durham report will come to nothing when are you ignorant right wingers going to understand spygate is crap your guy is a punk the only one getting in trouble are trump and his ignorant supporters stone manafort and gates and flynn where is the inditaments of comey brennan and clapper nowhere to be found what are you snowflakes going to do when the durham report comes to nothing

#159 | Posted by jake3533 at 2019-12-09 09:26 PM | Reply

iragoldberg your opinion is not fact spygate is crap trump is going to lose

#160 | Posted by jake3533 at 2019-12-09 09:28 PM | Reply

""Their agenda" is enforcing the law and protecting the country.
#155 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY"

Great to see you have so much faith...now, is that what they did under Hoover? What about when the framed up the anthrax guy or said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction? In those instances, were they just 100% incompetent or was their goal something other than "enforcing the law and protecting the country"?

#161 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-12-09 09:29 PM | Reply

#147
Conjecture.

"Before the report was released, Michael Tomasky predicted how wingnuttia would respond."

It was a prediction, written before the report was released. Looks to me like he nailed it. Looks to me like the "conjecture" was accurate, and it relates to you, specifically. Your arguments were predictable.

#162 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-09 09:30 PM | Reply

IRAGOLDBERG trump will not win reelection you think the masses like him your wrong trump is guilty there are rules and you righties deserve everything that you get when the politics turns back around which it will

#163 | Posted by jake3533 at 2019-12-09 09:32 PM | Reply

"IRAGOLDBERG trump will not win reelection
#163 | POSTED BY JAKE3533"

We have very different world views, mine is the polar opposite. I think my view is supported by the current polling and betting lines, yours is supported by faith. We will see who is right in a year.

#164 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-12-09 09:35 PM | Reply

You had no right to discover my wrongs!
What "wrongs"? and not if you do it illegally ...
Would you say the same thing with a cop planting evidence?
Carter Page has enough to file a lawsuit against Steele, Ohr, and others in the DOJ.
From Report: Our review found that FBI personnel fell far short of the requirement in FBI policy that they ensure that all factual statements in a FISA application are "scrupulously accurate."
IOW The FBI did not follow FISA procedures and lied to judges.
From Report: None of these inaccuracies and omissions were brought to the attention of OI before the last FISA application was filed in June 2017. Consequently, these failures were repeated in all three renewal applications.
I stated this Feb 2017 to TonyCut&PasteRoma and EtAl ... They stated its not possible ... here we are ....
#33 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRI the IG REPORT is out there was no criminal nor spying guess what trump and his supporters can not do whatever they want there are rules there was know lying to judges you will lose and durham will be no better

#165 | Posted by jake3533 at 2019-12-09 09:39 PM | Reply

"the IG REPORT is out there was no criminal nor spying guess what trump and his supporters can not do whatever they want there are rules there was know lying to judges you will lose and durham will be no better
#165 | POSTED BY JAKE3533 "

The investigation into spying and whether the malfeasance constituted a crime will be a determination made by Durham and Barr - that was not in the scope of the IG - who has no subpoena power or ability to compel testimony from anyone that has left the FBI, so basically, the whole corrupt cabal.

#166 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-12-09 09:46 PM | Reply

Lieberg/Sheeple making another wrong prediction.
His Ruskie arse predicting a Benedict Donald win 2020 is the kiss of political death for his Orange Fuhrer and guarantees he won't win in 2020. Can't wait for his spin where his (R)tards get swept out of congress and the whitehouse.

#167 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-12-09 09:49 PM | Reply

This is hilarious. Dolt 45's cult has been telling us for months on end how DEVASTATING this IG report was going to be in exposing the Deep State's attempted coup.

But, it didn't do that.

So, the goalpost has moved. Now we have to wait until the REAL investigation is completed by Durham.

Where will they go after the Durham investigation makes them look like dupes again? I'd invite them back to reality, but I don't think they'll take the invitation.

#168 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 09:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- I think my view is supported by the current polling

RCP Average 10/17 - 11/21 -- -- 52.0 42.1 Biden +9.9
SUSA 11/20 - 11/21 3850 RV 1.7 52 39 Biden +13
Emerson 11/17 - 11/20 1092 RV 2.9 49 51 Trump +2
NBC/WSJ 10/27 - 10/30 720 RV 3.7 50 41 Biden +9
ABC/WP 10/27 - 10/30 876 RV 4.0 56 39 Biden +17
FOX News 10/27 - 10/30 1040 RV 3.0 51 39 Biden +12
IBD/TIPP 10/24 - 10/31 863 RV 3.5 53 43 Biden +10
CNN 10/17 - 10/20 892 RV 4.0 53 43 Biden +10
All General Election: Trump vs. Biden Polling Data

www.realclearpolitics.com

Why people are always pointing and laughing at Ima Goldbrick

Thinking, nor reality, is his forte.

#169 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-09 09:56 PM | Reply

"His Ruskie arse predicting a Benedict Donald win 2020"

And 20% of the black vote!

Bwahahahahahahahaha!

#170 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-09 10:01 PM | Reply

"Dolt 45's cult has been telling us for months on end how DEVASTATING this IG report was going to be in exposing the Deep State's attempted coup.
#168 | POSTED BY ANTON"

You are the one moving the goalposts. I don't think you will find a single example of someone stating the IG report would be devastating - that is why you heard the collective cheer from the right and sound of diapers filling on the left when it was announced Durham was investigating and turned it into a criminal probe. But, if you want delude yourself into thinking it is clear sailing - go ahead. I think the Durham/Barr reaction to the IG report is all you need to know.

#171 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-12-09 10:01 PM | Reply

"Why people are always pointing and laughing at Ima Goldbrick

He puts the MORE in moron.

#172 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-09 10:01 PM | Reply

"And 20% of the black vote!
Bwahahahahahahahaha!
#170 | POSTED BY DANFORTH "

You need another kicking over your inability to use Excel and the 34.5% number for black support? Unless the Dems draft Oprah, 20% will be the low end.

#173 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-12-09 10:02 PM | Reply

Ira,

That's goofy. Google it. Just seven days ago there were multiple reports of Trump himself saying the IG report would be devastating. I'm sure he was getting this "information" during his nightly pillow talk with Hannity.

#174 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-09 10:06 PM | Reply

"You need another kicking over your inability to use Excel

I admitted I was wrong. I also passed on noting it took you an hour to find the file yourself.

"Unless the Dems draft Oprah, 20% will be the low end."

I'd hold you to that, but we both know you'll be gone like a fart in the wind after next November.

#175 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-09 10:06 PM | Reply

"I admitted I was wrong."

Being wrong is an hourly occurrence for you.

"I also passed on noting it took you an hour to find the file yourself.
#175 | POSTED BY DANFORTH "

How do you figure? I told you how to do it from the start but you were too incompetent to know how to use Excel. Because it took you one hour to figure out how to download an excel file and switch tabs does not mean it took me an equivalent time period.

#176 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-12-09 10:11 PM | Reply

"I told you how to do it from the start "

No you didn't. You hemmed and hawed from the start. It was many posts later you finally gave any semblance of a link. Go look at the time stamps, Lieburg.

#177 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-09 10:14 PM | Reply

So far, the best defense for the FISA malfeasance is a completely unsubstantiated "it happens all of the time."

#178 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 10:28 PM | Reply

#178 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

The old - we are just incompetent, not political despite all 17 documented cases of errors/omissions fall in the same direction.

But, the bigger issue is that ANY FALSE STATEMENT to the FISA court should result in a 'go directly to jail' card as FISA warrants are the most abusive thing the government has at its investigative arsenal with a 99% approval rate predicated on the ASSUMED FACTUAL/COMPLETE/CORROBORATED evidence submitted to get them authorized.

#179 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-12-09 10:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#179

Yes, Ira. This is being treated like a meter maid writing a parking ticket 34 seconds before the meter has expired.

#180 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 10:41 PM | Reply

So far, the best defense for the FISA malfeasance is a completely unsubstantiated "it happens all of the time."
#178 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Along with the one sideness of the mistakes;

The strange thing fro my perspective is, if it does "happen all the time" doesn't even that concern them?

#181 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-09 10:44 PM | Reply

#181

I made a similar point a few posts up. It's amazing to me that in their zeal to justify this they have to paint the very people they are trying to defend as grossly incompetent pretty much all of the time.

#182 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 10:48 PM | Reply

"But, the bigger issue is that ANY FALSE STATEMENT to the FISA court should result in a 'go directly to jail' card"

Now why didn't the GOP write and Trump sign a law making that happen when they had control of Congress from 2016-2018?

The answer... is the same answer to why they didn't fund a Wall.

#183 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-09 10:51 PM | Reply

"It's amazing to me that in their zeal to justify this"

Their zeal?

It's the IG's report. The one you've been waiting for with bated breath.

The IG says the investigation was justified.

Maybe someday you'll accept the IG's conclusion that it was alllllllllll justified.

#184 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-09 10:54 PM | Reply

#148 Nailed it. Jeff is bitching about Carter Page because it's the only thing he can bitch about. He had to find something, like a good little "non-trump supporter."

#185 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-09 11:10 PM | Reply

- The IG says the investigation was justified.

Would you just stop with the facts?

"Facts don't go 'round here, law dog."

#186 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-09 11:13 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Keep grasping at those straws! Double and triple down, you're guaranteed to win!

#187 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-12-09 11:15 PM | Reply

"Facts don't go 'round here, law dog."

Yeah I heard you the first time.

Priceless.

#188 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-12-09 11:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Ah'm yur huckleberry.....

#189 | Posted by Corky at 2019-12-09 11:39 PM | Reply

"Ah'm yur huckleberry.....
#189 | POSTED BY CORKY"

You misspelled -----------.

#190 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-12-09 11:47 PM | Reply

#148 Nailed it. Jeff is bitching about Carter Page because it's the only thing he can bitch about. He had to find something, like a good little "non-trump supporter."

#185 | POSTED BY JOE

Whatever. You can't refute my point so you resort to ad hominem, per usual.

#191 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 11:48 PM | Reply

- The IG says the investigation was justified.

Would you just stop with the facts?

"Facts don't go 'round here, law dog."

#186 | POSTED BY CORKY

For the umpteenth time - that the IG concluded that the investigation itself was properly predicated (a conclusion that appears to be in dispute by Durham) does NOT justify throwing out the rulebook as it pertains to obtaining FISA warrants, as is clearly the case here, as laid out by the IG report.

#192 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 11:50 PM | Reply

Can anybody here make the case, based upon what is in this report, that the Carter Page FISA warrants were properly obtained. Tony has provided plenty of c/p t suggest that grounds were sufficient to ask for the warrants to be granted. That the FBI had grounds to seek these warrants doesn't absolve the FBI from following proper procedures to obtain them.

#193 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-09 11:54 PM | Reply

JeffJ and fellow Trumpers moving the goal posts.

www.youtube.com

#194 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-09 11:59 PM | Reply

Sure JPW remember the "whistleblower" ....

LOL

#195 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 12:09 AM | Reply

"It really boils down to this: Were the FISA warrants to surveil Carter Page properly obtained? Based upon what I've read, they absolutely were not properly obtained."

Isn't this basically SOP of how surveillance works in the US that Snowden blew the whistle on? Yes, there should definitely be consequences for those who got caught playing fast and loose with the rules, regardless of which agency they work for or which administration it occurs under.

#196 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-12-10 12:09 AM | Reply

You can't refute my point so you resort to ad hominem, per usual.
#191 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Seems to be a trend by the DRleft for oh .. about 3 years.

#197 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 12:10 AM | Reply

Isn't this basically SOP of how surveillance works in the US that Snowden blew the whistle on?

No.

#198 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 12:10 AM | Reply

#194 | POSTED BY JPW

Actually, I've been consistent.

I'm not surprised that you'd feign objectivity only to scoff at well-documented malfeasance obtaining a FISA warrant by an opposition party to spy on an opponent's campaign.

The implications are far bigger than merely spying on Carter Page vis a vis an improperly obtained FISA warrant:

This convention is referred to as the "two-hop" rule, and, like many provisions of surveillance law, has come in for criticism by civil libertarians. The original FISA was passed in 1978, before the internet age. After 9/11, information technology enabled surveillance operators under the Patriot Act, which complemented and in some ways overlapped FISA surveillance, to inaugurate a "three-hop" rule exploiting computer-networked communications to look well beyond the first-order contacts of a central subject (under Patriot Act surveillance, a terror suspect). This was done via presidential order and came as an unwelcome surprise to the public when the practice was revealed, and initially dubbed "warrantless wiretapping," in 2005.

Subsequent efforts to rein in intelligence-community hopping resulted in some restrictions on the margins, but ultimately in the codification of post-9/11 practice, which was framed as aiming to prevent a terror attack on the US homeland. In 2008, with the FISA Amendments Act, Congress effectively authorized the three-hop rule used under the Patriot Act"although that point was understood by the public only in hindsight, following the revelations about surveillance practices made by National Security Agency (NSA) contract worker Edward Snowden.


www.tabletmag.com

This is why FISC was created in the first place. It was set up to prevent not only the very abuses laid out by the IG report but also the snowballing of the initial abuses as a means for far broader surveillance due to the "Hop rule."

Maybe you should stick to petri dishes...

#199 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 12:10 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Yes, there should definitely be consequences for those who got caught playing fast and loose with the rules, regardless of which agency they work for or which administration it occurs under.

Its a poisoning of all the evidence gathered...

You don't just throw the book at the cop for planting evidence ... you remove all evidence ascertained by the violation.

#200 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 12:12 AM | Reply

Yes, there should definitely be consequences for those who got caught playing fast and loose with the rules, regardless of which agency they work for or which administration it occurs under.

#196 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

Yep. Buried in all of the noise and partisan spin, this is precisely what Horowitz uncovered and it's going to come into focus on Wednesday. I freely admit, I was not expecting this out of the IG report. Although I was fully versed in all of this because it has been extensively covered by certain RW pundits/journalists and echoed by more careful analysts like Sharyl Attkisson, I was highly skeptical that this was Mueller Russian Collusion 2.0.

#201 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 12:15 AM | Reply

Sure JPW remember the "whistleblower" ....

LOL

#195 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Yup.

What about them?

Or have you already moved on to wholesale denial of what the past two months have revealed?

Never mind. Don't bother showing your stupidity and gullibility by admitting the answer is "yes".

#202 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:15 AM | Reply

Its a poisoning of all the evidence gathered...

You don't just throw the book at the cop for planting evidence ... you remove all evidence ascertained by the violation.

#200 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Bears repeating.

#203 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 12:16 AM | Reply

Actually, I've been consistent.

I'm not surprised that you'd feign objectivity only to scoff at well-documented malfeasance obtaining a FISA warrant by an opposition party to spy on an opponent's campaign.

LOL ---- off.

You're predictably moving from "was the investigation properly predicated?" to "oh my god it wasn't done correctly!!".

After months of proper predication talk you're glossing over the womp womp of that to complain about how the sausage is made.

And it stated explicitly there wasn't spying. So again, ---- off.

I knew righties wouldn't be honest for schit about this report. The only consistency is they're assuming everybody is as stupid as they are and don't remember the last two months of hype.

#204 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:18 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You don't just throw the book at the cop for planting evidence ... you remove all evidence ascertained by the violation.

#200 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Of course that's what you want you corrupt POS.

You'll gladly act as if the last two months didn't happen. Must be exhausting carrying all that sewage for the orange schitheap.

#205 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:20 AM | Reply

Bears repeating.

#203 | Posted by JeffJ

Always knew you didn't mean a word you said about "let the chips fall where they may".

You even feigned indignation when people laughed at that assertion.

And yet who's right? Those who saw through that gossamer thing charade.

#206 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:21 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

LOL ---- off.

My wife is asleep.

You're predictably moving from "was the investigation properly predicated?" to "oh my god it wasn't done correctly!!".

That is a HUGE ------- strawman and you absolutely cannot Hans your way into even remotely substantiating that claim.

After months of proper predication talk you're glossing over the womp womp of that to complain about how the sausage is made.

I've been consistent that unless I see otherwise, the investigation was adequately predicated. Any kind of eye-torturing review of my posting history bears this out.

And it stated explicitly there wasn't spying. So again, ---- off.

FISA warrants authorize spying. Carter Page was absolutely spied on.

I knew righties wouldn't be honest for schit about this report. The only consistency is they're assuming everybody is as stupid as they are and don't remember the last two months of hype.

#204 | POSTED BY JPW

Jesus H! Look in the mirror. You are either a ------- hack, or you are drive-by blogging (I am often guilty of this). If it's the latter, please scroll up and torture your eyes and read through my posts on this thread. I am not even remotely doing what you are accusing me of doing. Quit being a lazy-ass and do your homework.

#207 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 12:26 AM | Reply

Always knew you didn't mean a word you said about "let the chips fall where they may".

You even feigned indignation when people laughed at that assertion.

And yet who's right? Those who saw through that gossamer thing charade.

#206 | POSTED BY JPW

Have you read through this thread or are you drive-by blogging?

Please be honest.

#208 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 12:28 AM | Reply

Hey Jeff,

I didn't bother slogging through this entire thread (read the first 30 or so posts, maybe?). Did you bother posting this excerpt?

We did not find informat ion in FBI or Department ECs, emails, or other documents, or through witness testimony, indicating that any information other than the FFG information was relied upon to predicate the opening of t he Crossfire Hurricane investigation. Although not mentioned in the EC, at the time, FBI officials involved in opening the investigation had reason to believe that Russia may have been connected to t he Wikileaks disclosures that occurred earlier in July 2016, and were aware of information regarding Russia's efforts to interfere with the 2016 U.S. elections. These officials, though, did not become aware of Steele's election reporting until weeks later and we therefore determined that Steele's reports played no role in the Crossfire Hurr icane opening.

Ooops. So much for the Steele Dossier being the genesis of the investigation and the conspiracy theories associated with that thread of thought.

#209 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:29 AM | Reply

LOL no I didn't read the entire thread.

200 posts? Most of which is likely goal post moves and garage? No thanks.

#210 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:30 AM | Reply

As we describe in the report, all of the investigative actions taken by the Crossfire Hurricane team, from the date the case was opened on July 31 --- il October 21 (the date of the first FISA order) would have been permitted whether the case was opened as a Preliminar y or Full I nvest igation.

#211 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:33 AM | Reply

LOL no I didn't read the entire thread.

Of course you didn't.

200 posts? Most of which is likely goal post moves and garage? No thanks.

#210 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2019-12-10 12:30 AM

Yet you authoritatively attack my stances without having actually havingn read them, by your own admission. And you claim to be a scientist? I thought that field required objectivity, research, first-hand knowledge....you claim to know what I've said without even bothering to read what I've actually said. That is pathetically embarrassing.

Here's a challenge for you:

Ditch your preconceptions. Ditch your biases. Challenge me based upon what I've actually said, not what you've imagined I've said.

#212 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 12:37 AM | Reply

As we describe in the report, all of the investigative actions taken by the Crossfire Hurricane team, from the date the case was opened on July 31 --- il October 21 (the date of the first FISA order) would have been permitted whether the case was opened as a Preliminar y or Full I nvest igation.

#211 | POSTED BY JPW

I have never disputed that. For F sake. Scroll up and address what I've actually said.

As a self-described scientist, with all that this word entails in regards to other issues, like politics, I shouldn't have to restate, for clarity's sake, what is already screamingly-evident based upon the bulk of my other comments on this thread.

Do your work.

#213 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 12:42 AM | Reply

That is pathetically embarrassing.

What's pathetically embarrassing is challenging me by pulling my profession into it when I directly quoted you misrepresenting what the report says.

Have I finished reading the summary? No. I started reading it ten minutes ago.

But previously released info and what I've read so far makes it clear that a. the investigation was initiated based on legit reasons (ie it wasn't political) and that b. nobody "spied" on the Trump campaign.

So drop the faux indignation and hollow chest thumping. I quoted you. You were wrong. Own it.

#214 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:43 AM | Reply

I'm still wondering what the relevance of all this is. Who specifically does this affect who's been prosecuted in court based on the evidence collected by the specific warrants in question?

Also, how does U.S. vs Leon factor into this?

Is the implication that this is in any way related to the impeachment hearings?

#215 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-12-10 12:47 AM | Reply

That is a HUGE ------- strawman and you absolutely cannot Hans your way into even remotely substantiating that claim.

LOL going with the bluff while holding a 2 and 8 off suit hand?

FISA warrants authorize spying. Carter Page was absolutely spied on.

Oh Jesus Christ are you going to go off into those semantic weeds again?

Simply being monitored for legitimate law enforcement purposes is NOT being spied on.

And for the sake of argument, lets say he was "spied on". Are you positing that anybody working for a Presidential campaign can't be monitored by law enforcement no matter the strength of the evidence lest they be "spied on"? If not, then why are you bothering to make such a stupid comment?

#216 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:48 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

For example, then Counterintelligence Div ision (CD) Assistant Director (AD) E.W. "Bill" Priestap, who approved the case opening, told us that the combination of t he FFG informat ion and the FBI 's ongoing cyber int rusion investigation of the July 2016 hacks of the Democratic Nat ional Committee's (DNC) emails, created a cou nterintelligence concern that the FBI was "obligated" to investigat e. Priestap stated that he considered w hether the FBI shou ld conduct defensive briefings for the Trump campaign but ultimately decided that providing such briefings created t he risk that "if someone on the campaign was engaged with the Russians, he/she would very likely change his/her tact ics and/or otherwise seek to cover-up his/her activities, thereby prevent ing us from finding the truth." We did not identify any Department or FBI policy t hat applied to t h is decision and therefore determined that the decision was a judgment call that Department and FBI policy leaves to the discretion of FBI officials. We also concluded that, u nder the AG Guidelines and the DIOG, t he FBI had an authorized purpose when it opened Crossfire Hurricane to obtain information about, or protect against, a national security threat or federal crime, even though the investigation also had t he pot ent ial to impact constitutionally protected activity.

Emphasis mine.

Holy. ----. Schit. Dude.

Read that. As many times as necessary.

There was sufficient information to warrant the investigation and the information was serious enough that the FBI had the authority to investigate despite civil rights concerns and that they had to withhold briefings from the Trump campaign for fear that it would undermine the investigation.

This is what you support, righties? This is what you want in your elected officials?

#217 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:54 AM | Reply

There was sufficient information to warrant the investigation

You confuse "warranted" with authorize ... of course they have the authority .... was it warranted?

Read it again..

#218 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 12:59 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

n this review, we fou nd that, while Lisa Page attended some of the discussions regarding the opening of the investigations, she did not play a role in the decision to open Crossfire Hurricane or the four individual cases. We further found that while Strzok was directly involved in the decisions to open Crossfire Hurricane and the four individual cases, he was not the sole, or even the highest-level, decision maker as to any of those matters. As not ed above, then CD AD Priestap, Strzok's supervisor, was the official who ultimately made the decision to open the investigation, and evidence reflected that this decision by Priestap was reached by consensus after multiple days of discussions and meetings that included Strzok and other leadership in CD, the FBI Deputy Director, the FBI General Counsel, and a FBI Deputy General Counsel.

I hope the two of them sue the orange off that schitheap.

Along with every right wing mouth piece of repeated and hyped that garbage.

We concl uded that Pr iestap's exercise of d iscretion in opening the investigation was in compliance with Department and FBI policies, and we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced his decision.

Oops there goes months of Hannity conspiracy theories. Not that that matters to righties.

#219 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:59 AM | Reply

What's pathetically embarrassing is challenging me by pulling my profession into it when I directly quoted you misrepresenting what the report says.

Except you did no such thing, as evidenced here:

Have I finished reading the summary? No. I started reading it ten minutes ago.

So, you've barely read the summary (which I admit is as far as I've gotten so far) but, can authoritarively state that not only I am misrepresenting what it says - without actually knowing what it says because you haven't read it yet - you also somehow know that I'm misrepresenting what is in it based not upon what I've actually said about it (you scoffed at scrolling through this thread to actually understand where I'm at) but based upon positions you've falsely assigned to me.

This is comical.

#220 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 12:59 AM | Reply

You confuse "warranted" with authorize ... of course they have the authority .... was it warranted?

Read it again..

#218 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Read below (above this...).

Evidence was sufficient to fulfill FBI and DOJ policies and no evidence of political bias was found.

Face it, Papadiculous was busted red handed and his stupidity brought this all on himself and Trump.

#221 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 01:01 AM | Reply

Oh Jesus Christ are you going to go off into those semantic weeds again?

Simply being monitored for legitimate law enforcement purposes is NOT being spied on.

And for the sake of argument, lets say he was "spied on". Are you positing that anybody working for a Presidential campaign can't be monitored by law enforcement no matter the strength of the evidence lest they be "spied on"? If not, then why are you bothering to make such a stupid comment?

#216 | POSTED BY JPW

You are clearly drive-by blogging.

You are SO far off-base...

#222 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 01:01 AM | Reply

Evidence was sufficient to fulfill FBI and DOJ policies and no evidence of political bias was found. - JPW

You CLEARLY have not even perused the IG report.

#223 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 01:02 AM | Reply

but, can authoritarively state that not only I am misrepresenting what it says - without actually knowing what it says because you haven't read it yet

That information has been known for days.

You directly contradicted info that was released days ago.

And confirmed in the summary of the report, which I have quoted.

Just stop digging. Seriously.

www.youtube.com

#224 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 01:03 AM | Reply

You are clearly drive-by blogging.

You are SO far off-base...

#222 | Posted by JeffJ

Oh please explain. How so?

#225 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 01:04 AM | Reply

You CLEARLY have not even perused the IG report.

#223 | Posted by JeffJ

LOL as I post sections of it with emphasis.

How much scotch have you had tonight?

#226 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 01:04 AM | Reply

Evidence was sufficient to fulfill FBI and DOJ policies and no evidence of political bias was found. - JPW

Yet, the report cites all sorts of malfeasance/misfeasance during the course of obtaining FISA warrants.

It's contradictory to say the least.

Horowitz will testify before the Senate on Wednesday. Hopefully his testimony will provide some clarity.

#227 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 01:05 AM | Reply

We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decisions t o open the four individual investigat ions

What's that you said...

You CLEARLY have not even perused the IG report.

#223 | Posted by JeffJ

You know the evidence better than the guy who wrote the report?

Damn those deep state guys are gooooooooood.

#228 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 01:06 AM | Reply

Oh please explain. How so?

#225 | POSTED BY JPW

Because you've grossly misrepresented what I've said to the point of being dishonest. As it pertains to the IG report a Venn Diagram has far more overlap than differential, yet your reaction to the margins strongly suggests you are drive-by blogging.

How much scotch have you had tonight?

#226 | POSTED BY JPW

Sadly, none. A glass of wine with dinner and gin and tonic as nightcap. I'm ending the night with your breakfast, minus the raw egg shot-gunned with a Tall-Boy of beer.

#229 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 01:10 AM | Reply

You know the evidence better than the guy who wrote the report?

The report was clear ..

It's not so much that the FBI opened up an investigation on the Trump campaign. The bar was low.

It's that the FBI buried information that should otherwise have warranted ending the investigation much earlier than it was.

Instead the lobbied for a special council ..

The Fruit of the poisonous tree, the Mueller evidence is inadmissible.

Its perfectly clear to a logical individual.

#230 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 01:11 AM | Reply

Damn those deep state guys are gooooooooood.

#228 | POSTED BY JPW

Dude. Scroll up. Please. You are slaying dragons and unicorns that simply don't exist.

#231 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 01:13 AM | Reply

The FISA applications were PERFECT!
The FBI investigations were beautiful.

Very legal and very cool.

#232 | Posted by bored at 2019-12-10 01:31 AM | Reply

The Fruit of the poisonous tree, the Mueller evidence is inadmissible.

Its perfectly clear to a logical individual.

#230 | Posted by AndreaMackris

It's not a court of law, sport.

And what I've read so far says no such thing.

Regarding omissions and inaccuracies in info provided for FISA applications it's clear the chapters themselves need to be read as the context is all but omitted in the executive summary.

For instance, of course Page is going to deny knowing or meeting the Russian oligarchs. If solid evidence exists of this meeting with them then it's immaterial that he denied knowing them. That sort of detail is lacking in the summary.

#233 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 01:39 AM | Reply

and gin and tonic as nightcap.

In the winter?!?!?

Too light for the cold, blustery nights of December IMO.

#234 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 01:40 AM | Reply

It's not a court of law, sport.

Not yet ....

#235 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 01:59 AM | Reply

And what I've read so far says no such thing.

The report is clear...

Team Mueller pursued an obstruction case against Trump - when they knew the underlying investigation was based on lies, omissions, and altered evidence.

#236 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 02:00 AM | Reply

I said this in Feb 2017 .....

You've been wrong ever since... sport.

#237 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 02:00 AM | Reply

Team Mueller pursued an obstruction case against Trump - when they knew the underlying investigation was based on lies, omissions, and altered evidence.

#236 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Too many words to regurgitate the same lame talking point that obstruction can't occur if no underlying crime occurred.

Still wrong. Still lame.

I said this in Feb 2017 .....

You've been wrong ever since... sport.

#237 | Posted by AndreaMackris

LOL sure thing. Is that why you lie so much? Because you're right?

#238 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 02:02 AM | Reply

of course Page is going to deny knowing or meeting the Russian oligarchs.

This is all irrelevant ... Page was in communication with the CIA .... this was deliberately omitted in the original FISA and subsequent renewals.

Again fruit of the poisonous tree ...

#239 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 02:03 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Is that why you lie so much? Because you're right?
#238 | POSTED BY JPW

Lie? About what have I lied about?

#240 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 02:04 AM | Reply

Too many words to regurgitate the same lame talking point that obstruction can't occur if no underlying crime occurred.

I am not worried about obstruction because it never happened.

Again read whats written, not what you believe.

#241 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 02:05 AM | Reply

Lie? About what have I lied about?

#240 | Posted by AndreaMackris

LOL what haven't you lied about?

Just because you're unaware...

I am not worried about obstruction because it never happened.

Go to bed old man.

#242 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 02:15 AM | Reply

The report is clear...
The investigations were justified and conducted without bias.

Criminals were brought to justice in spite of Trumps criminal obstruction.

#243 | Posted by bored at 2019-12-10 02:18 AM | Reply

The best thing that may come of this investigation is the newly found interest of Trumpers in the rights of the accused and their concern for abuse of process by law enforcement.

The other members of Black Lives Matter welcome you into their movement and look forward to you taking a knee with them during the national anthem this Sunday.

#244 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-10 05:20 AM | Reply

Presumably the bar for what is considered acceptable "process" is lower when considering a possible national security threat.

Just saying.

#245 | Posted by truthhurts at 2019-12-10 07:18 AM | Reply

The entire handwringing and crocodile tears being shed on behalf of Carter Page and the Trump campaign is one of the sickest jokes I've ever witnessed in my 60 years on Earth. While the FBI investigation into Russia's counterintel operation that reached into contacts and persons inside Donald Trump's presidential campaign was NEVER PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGED PRIOR TO THE ELECTION, every single day from June on, Donald Trump used his bully pulpit to excoriate Hillary Clinton based on US-based information illegally stolen BY RUSSIA, released through Wikileaks and falsely amplified as criminal acts by Trump!

Harry Reid tried to get the FBI to admit that they had open Russia investigations which touched on the Trump campaign but nothing was ever close to being confirmed but for the leaks surrounding Obama's attempt to coordinate a united rebuke of Russia's attempts without any bias or malice toward either party's candidates. But to do so at that time would have undercut Trump's chief message that the stolen Wikileaks disclosures were the primary reason Hillary was unfit for office - even if there was no mention of any coordination with the Russian's efforts at all.

The main gist being, Hillary Clinton not once, but TWICE, was subjected to public excoriations by the FBI over emails which was actively used by her opponent as the foundational justification for defeating her. At the same time the Trump campaign was being supported on multiple fronts by a foreign counterintel operation designed to sow domestic electoral chaos and undermine support for Clinton as Trump used their assistance as the basis of his campaign message.

Trump nor Trumpers were ever politically nor legally harmed by public FBI disclosures during the entirety of the 2016 campaign and this fact keeps getting ignored. If there were a conspiracy to have harmed the Trump campaign it's shelf life expired on 11/09/16. After that point, ongoing investigations were predicated on finding out if illegal or illicit actions were undertaken during the course of the campaign - which is nominally the rationale behind any and all investigations into possible wrongdoing by those under a reasonable suspicion of having committed same.

#246 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-10 07:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Andrea understands what happened just as well as the rest of us do but she isn't willing to accept the truth because it doesn't support her political agenda. She's simply a liar and a shill for Trump. I usually read her posts for the comedic value but not for the truth because I know it won't be there.

#247 | Posted by danni at 2019-12-10 07:51 AM | Reply

Susan Hennessey @Susan_Hennessey (Lawfare Executive Editor)

Even if we were to accept that the Carter Page FISA application was hopelessly defective (it wasn't but conceding for argument sake), information related to Page occupies a grand total of 7 out of 448-pages of the Mueller Report.

#248 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 07:59 AM | Reply

"Page was in communication with the CIA .... this was deliberately omitted in the original FISA and subsequent renewals.
Again fruit of the poisonous tree ... "

Good thread on the import and possible reasons behind the Page omission:

Asha Rangappa @AshaRangappa_ (Fmr FBI Special Agent, lawyer)

But that's not the issue, Steve. The problem here is that exculpatory evidence was not even shared internally, and in particularly to the senior agents and lawyer(s) at OI who would be the affiants and sign-offs on the order 1/

They need this info precisely to know what is material to the evidence they are presenting as PC and to be able to swear to the accuracy of the application. It affects their credibility with the court (and, in this case, with the public) 2/

It does seem egregious to me to rely on contacts with foreign intel as a part of PC and not to know, let alone disclose, that those contacts may have been at the request of a sister agency (?!). That jumped out at me more than any of the Steele stuff 3/

The fact that it was not motivated by bias or was an "abuse" seems right " I suspect it had more to do with 1) closely held investigation; 2) different entities involved within Bureau; 3) perceived urgency of situation; 4) general bureaucratic inefficiency 4/

But this should not happen and the process is designed so that it doesn't happen. I believe in process, and that the process is what gives legitimacy, so when gaps are uncovered they need to be fixed and we should acknowledge that.

BTW, I will emphasize (again) that this particular FISA was one technique, used in one case, in a much, much larger investigation that largely didn't involve Page. Using it to discredit the whole Russia investigation is a fallacy (which I am sure GOP will have no problem doing)


twitter.com

#249 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 08:17 AM | Reply

Keep in mind, the CI case on Page predated the Steele dossier:

Andrew Prokop @awprokop

An explanation of how the Russia investigation went from Papadopoulos to Manafort/Page/Flynn:

Strzok went to London, and heard it wasn't clear whether Papadopoulos had talked to Russians himself.

So they wondered, who did? And those 3 others had Russian ties / travel history

Carter Page quickly "rose to the top" of that list.

The FBI's NY field office had opened a separate counterintel case on Page back on April 6, 2016, he'd been on their radar for a while. Crossfire Hurricane took it over on August 10.

twitter.com

#250 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 09:02 AM | Reply

Keep in mind, the CI case on Page predated the Steele dossier:

Andrew Prokop @awprokop

An explanation of how the Russia investigation went from Papadopoulos to Manafort/Page/Flynn:

Strzok went to London, and heard it wasn't clear whether Papadopoulos had talked to Russians himself.

So they wondered, who did? And those 3 others had Russian ties / travel history

Carter Page quickly "rose to the top" of that list.

The FBI's NY field office had opened a separate counterintel case on Page back on April 6, 2016, he'd been on their radar for a while. Crossfire Hurricane took it over on August 10.

twitter.com

#251 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 09:02 AM | Reply

and gin and tonic as nightcap.
----
In the winter?!?!?
Too light for the cold, blustery nights of December IMO.

#234 | POSTED BY JPW A

Shortly after I got married I had a gin and tonic (Tanqueray) and my wife commented that it smelled like a Christmas tree.

About 5 years ago we sort of started a tradition that between Thanksgiving and Christmas we'd drink "Christmas trees".

For whatever reason it really works for us. The funny thing is that outside of this 1 month period we don't drink them at all.

#252 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 09:32 AM | Reply

I see the spin cycle is still in motion.

The incessant need to defend the indefensible really is laughable.

No way to defend the gross misconduct of the FBI/DOJ under Obama.

#253 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 09:34 AM | Reply

Jonathan Turley just penned a scathing op-ed about this.

All of the headlines, sans 1, at RealClearPolitics excoriate the Obama FBI/DOJ based on what this IG report confirmed.

The only outlier was an op-ed written by none other than James Comey.

#254 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 09:35 AM | Reply

Weird, huh?:

Brad Heath @bradheath

DOJ's Inspector General says that in 2016, "several" people connected to Donald Trump or working on his campaign who also happened to be FBI informants. (The FBI didn't use them in its investigation.)

Trump's campaign intersected with a few people who were already FBI informants. One "held a position in the Trump campaign." Another "had a potential opportunity for a private meeting with candidate Trump." Officials decided not to use those informants in the Russia probe.

twitter.com

#255 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 09:36 AM | Reply

The Inspector General's 'Witch Hunt' Report: A Quick and Dirty Analysis

Today, Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz declared in more than 450 pages that the "Witch Hunt" narrative was nonsense. Yes, the investigation had problems"some of them serious. But the problems were not political in character. There was no effort to "get" candidate Trump. There was no "insurance policy." There was no coup. There was no treason.

There was, rather, a properly predicated investigation that began when the FBI has always said it began and because of the information the FBI has always said triggered it. The investigation used proper investigative techniques. And while there were errors along the way, a degree of sloppiness that warrants addressing seriously, the inspector general does not find that any authorized surveillance was illegal.

www.lawfareblog.com

#256 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 09:39 AM | Reply

"The incessant need to defend the indefensible really is laughable."

Democrats look at Trump and the GOP and think that everyday, except, since the stakes are so high, no one on the left is laughing.

#257 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 10:01 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I see the spin cycle is still in motion"

HARHAR

this is where Mr. "I will wait for the IG report", and "I don't do conspiracies" craps over every he doesn't like in the IG report and spins conspiracies as rational

what a puttz

#258 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-12-10 10:26 AM | Reply

Its a poisoning of all the evidence gathered...

In criminal law, maybe, but even then if enough evidence is also gathered from other sources then the fruit of the poisonous tree becomes irrelevant.

And that's in a criminal scenario. Impeachment is a more lenient standard. We know what Trump has done and that's all that matters.

Besides, Trumpers always tell me Russia was a big nothingburger. So why do you care that the evidence which "completely exonerated" your cult leader was tainted by process violations?

#259 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 10:36 AM | Reply

The Inspector General's 'Witch Hunt' Report: A Quick and Dirty Analysis
Today, Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz declared in more than 450 pages that the "Witch Hunt" narrative was nonsense. Yes, the investigation had problems"some of them serious. But the problems were not political in character. There was no effort to "get" candidate Trump. There was no "insurance policy." There was no coup. There was no treason.
There was, rather, a properly predicated investigation that began when the FBI has always said it began and because of the information the FBI has always said triggered it. The investigation used proper investigative techniques. And while there were errors along the way, a degree of sloppiness that warrants addressing seriously, the inspector general does not find that any authorized surveillance was illegal.
www.lawfareblog.com

#256 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY AT 2019-12-10 09:39 AM | FLAG:

He didn't use the word "nonsense." He does not have the tools that Durham has and Durham in a rare comment yesterday said he disagreed with some of the IG's analysis. I'm sure he said this because Durham has access to more intel than the AG. Tomorrow's senate hearing should be interesting and if you actually read the report Carter Page should sue the pants off alot of people including many in the media who ruined his life based on false claims. This was a huge abuse of power and people will pay.

#260 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 10:56 AM | Reply

So why do you care that the evidence which "completely exonerated" your cult leader was tainted by process violations?

#259 | POSTED BY JOE

It's interesting that given your law background you are so cavalier about this.

I'm guessing you are fully aware as to the rationale behind the creation of FISC.

You are likely aware that all sorts of guardrails are in place to prevent FISA abuse.

It takes WAY more than a mere "process violation" to get a FISA warrant approved when the available evidence doesn't support its issuance.

What happened here was deliberate.

And that's in a criminal scenario

Crossfire Hurricane and the Mueller probe weren't criminal investigations. They were counter-intelligence investigations.

#261 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 10:56 AM | Reply

I wonder if Carter Page told Trump he had previous interactions with the CIA? He didn't mention it in interviews or online as far as I know. Does Trump now think Page was part of the deep state plot out to get him?

#262 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 11:00 AM | Reply

#261 To knowingly use evidence that you know is false, which is undisputed, to get a FISA warrent not once but three times is a major problem. This also proves that Brennon lied before congress. What happened to others who supposidely lied to congress recently? Jail time? Brennon deserves to be behind bars.

#263 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 11:02 AM | Reply

To knowingly use evidence that you know is false, which is undisputed, to get a FISA warrent not once but three times is a major problem

Even if that's an accurate description of what happened, like i said:
(1) If sufficient evidence was also gathered from other sources who were not connected to the FISA warrants then it doesn't matter:
(2) This is a criminal legal theory which doesn't necessarily apply to impeachment proceedings;
(3) The FISA warrants in question have nothing to do with what Trump is being impeached for today; and
(4) Trumpers claim all the evidence proves that Trump was innocent so you shouldn't be in the business of trying to disqualify evidence or call it tainted.

#264 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 11:07 AM | Reply

I'm guessing one of these people might be Felix Sater, who worked with Michael Cohen on the so-called Ukrainian peace plan, but I don't know who the other(s) would be:

Brad Heath @bradheath

DOJ's Inspector General says that in 2016, "several" people connected to Donald Trump or working on his campaign who also happened to be FBI informants. (The FBI didn't use them in its investigation.)

Trump's campaign intersected with a few people who were already FBI informants. One "held a position in the Trump campaign." Another "had a potential opportunity for a private meeting with candidate Trump." Officials decided not to use those informants in the Russia probe.

#265 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 11:09 AM | Reply

(1) If sufficient evidence was also gathered from other sources who were not connected to the FISA warrants then it doesn't matter:

The "salacious and unverified" Steele Dossier was a key piece to all of the FISA warrants. The first request to surveil Page was denied - that first request did not contain anything from the Steele dossier. Given that, it's pretty safe to assume that had FISC not been mislead about the Steele dossier the Obama-lead FBI never would have been given the green light to spy on Page.

Again, that you appear to be totally fine with this abuse is surprising given your legal background.

#266 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 11:19 AM | Reply

If sufficient evidence was also gathered from other sources who were not connected to the FISA warrants then it doesn't matter:

It does ....

Its just like a cop planting evidence ... the fruits of a poisonous tree

This is a criminal legal theory which doesn't necessarily apply to impeachment proceedings;

Sure as hell does .... during the trial the evidence can be ruled inadmissible.

The FISA warrants in question have nothing to do with what Trump is being impeached for today; and

All part of the same tree.

Trumpers claim all the evidence proves that Trump was innocent so you shouldn't be in the business of trying to disqualify evidence or call it tainted.

He is ... just want to completely destroy your case of BS as any good patriot would do.

#267 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 11:22 AM | Reply

#266 That's not a response to my post in any way. Read it again if you have to.

#268 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 11:31 AM | Reply

#268

I get that. My argument is that this IG report makes it very clear that serious abuses took place in obtaining the FISA warrants to surveil Page and you seem to be fine with it.

#269 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 11:36 AM | Reply

Joe,

Your argument really belongs on the Trump impeachment thread, not this thread.

#270 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 11:37 AM | Reply

To knowingly use evidence that you know is false, which is undisputed, to get a FISA warrent not once but three times is a major problem
Even if that's an accurate description of what happened, like i said:
(1) If sufficient evidence was also gathered from other sources who were not connected to the FISA warrants then it doesn't matter:
(2) This is a criminal legal theory which doesn't necessarily apply to impeachment proceedings;
(3) The FISA warrants in question have nothing to do with what Trump is being impeached for today; and
(4) Trumpers claim all the evidence proves that Trump was innocent so you shouldn't be in the business of trying to disqualify evidence or call it tainted.

#264 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2019-12-10 11:07 AM | FLAG:

1) The FISA warrent was obtained because of the Steel dossier, that was the evidence that was vouched for and presented.
2)-4) Not linking it to impeachment, separate investigation.

This is a case of the sitting Administration and Presidential candidate using the CIA and FBI to influence and ultimately over turn and election. Problem for them was they thought they would not get caught and they would not have if Clinton had won and Trump was thrown out of office before Barr got involved.

#271 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 11:40 AM | Reply

#269 +#271

Ok. Let's say Carter Page should not have been surveilled.

Now what?

#272 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-10 11:44 AM | Reply

#271

Your conclusions are completely contrary to the conclusions in the IG report. There was no political motivation in the "oringes" of the investigation; no effort to overturn the election. Saying otherwise 10,000 times won't make it true.

#273 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-10 11:47 AM | Reply

"3) The FISA warrants in question have nothing to do with what Trump is being impeached for today"

Thank you. This answers one of the questions I raised in #215.

#274 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-12-10 11:48 AM | Reply

I see the spin cycle is still in motion.

The incessant need to defend the indefensible really is laughable.

No way to defend the gross misconduct of the FBI/DOJ under Obama.

#253 | Posted by JeffJ

You don't think anyone is genuinely surprised to see you drop your facade, do you?

#275 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 11:48 AM | Reply

This was a huge abuse of power and people will pay.

#260 | Posted by fishpaw

Clinging to the old talking points are we?

Old habits die hard I guess.

#276 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 11:50 AM | Reply

the Obama-lead FBI never would have been given the green light to spy on Page.

LOL God you're going to pathetic depths to spin spin spin.

Don't ever claim to be waiting for an outcome every again because you've prove, quite clearly, that you have no interest in reality.

#277 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 11:53 AM | Reply

The FISA warrants in question have nothing to do with what Trump is being impeached for today; and

All part of the same tree.

Yeah, the Trump is a Putin sycophant who is likely compromised and has abused his office to keep that as hidden as possible tree.

Drink up, sycophant. More kool aid is being mixed as we speak.

#278 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 11:54 AM | Reply

using the CIA and FBI to influence and ultimately over turn and election.

Pure garbage.

If it were meant to influence the election there would have been announcements of the investigation during the actual election.

You know, like the ones about the investigation into Hillary's emails.

As for overturning the election, Trump has earned what he's getting. Sorry you're to pathetically stupid and gullible to see it.

#279 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 11:56 AM | Reply

If it were meant to influence the election there would have been announcements of the investigation during the actual election.

Steele was paid to go to the media by Clinton and FBI (p369), with its "dossier" during the election....

As for overturning the election, Trump has earned what he's getting.

No he doesn't, he has done nothing wrong.

Sorry you're to pathetically stupid and gullible to see it.

What is pathetic and gullible is that Democrats are willing to burn down any institution or tradition of governance when they don't win.

Its becoming painfully obvious to the rest of the nation.

#280 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-10 12:06 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

I wonder if the next inspectors general report will be this well excepted.
Somehow I don't think it will.

#281 | Posted by homerj at 2019-12-10 12:15 PM | Reply

No he doesn't, he has done nothing wrong.

LOL makes me wonder how much shady stuff you've done IRL.

#282 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 12:19 PM | Reply

"No he doesn't, he has done nothing wrong."

Trump should have known better than to use the Office to go after a political opponent.

#283 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-12-10 12:41 PM | Reply

No he doesn't, he has done nothing wrong.

#280 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Youre either lying or stupid.

And I'm sure you'd say the exact same thing if obama had taken help from the russians to get elected, not told the authorities, lied about it, used his presidential powers to obstruct an investigation into it. YOu'd totally be defending him wouldn't you?

#284 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-10 01:15 PM | Reply

Ok. Let's say Carter Page should not have been surveilled.
Now what?

#272 | POSTED BY JOE

Good question. I'm guessing John Durham will provide an answer.

#285 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 01:17 PM | Reply

You don't think anyone is genuinely surprised to see you drop your facade, do you?

#275 | POSTED BY JPW A

What facade?

Are you cool with FISA warrants being improperly obtained?

#286 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 01:18 PM | Reply

Just curious, did the IG find FISA warrants were improperly obtained?

#287 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-10 01:28 PM | Reply

Snowden was right, even if the way he revealed it was wrong. The process for how people are surveilled is a farce. This practice of warrants being improperly obtained isn't unique to the FBI, the Obama administration or even the federal government.

None of this exonerates Trump of anything, just like it wouldn't exonerate Clinton if she had been elected and was the one being impeached now.

#288 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-12-10 01:33 PM | Reply

Just curious, did the IG find FISA warrants were improperly obtained?

#287 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Not in those exact words but, yes.

Horowitz will likely be asked that question tomorrow.

#289 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 01:56 PM | Reply

Good question. I'm guessing John Durham will provide an answer.

#285 | Posted by JeffJ

I'm sure you'll trust the results from the investigation done by men already proven to be partisan corrupt servants of trump than you trust these results. Because you're so nonpartisan and intelligent.

Anything barr pukes out will be a fraud. The fact that you think you could trust anything that comes from him just shows your continued voluntary ignorance about this administration and your party.

#290 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-10 01:57 PM | Reply

"Just curious, did the IG find FISA warrants were improperly obtained?

Not in those exact words but, yes."

I'm a little bit confused by your answer.

Was the IG even tasked with the question of "Were the FISA warrants improperly obtained?"

If so, there should be an affirnative Yes or No.

#291 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-10 02:15 PM | Reply

Your conclusions are completely contrary to the conclusions in the IG report. There was no political motivation in the "oringes" of the investigation; no effort to overturn the election. Saying otherwise 10,000 times won't make it true.

#273 | POSTED BY ANTON AT 2019-12-10 11:47 AM | REPLY

That wasn't what the IG was tasked to decide really and Durham who has a much higher amount of power came out and said their are parts of the IG report that he doesn't agree with. That is telling. When I talk about the differences in power an example is with Comey. Horowitz could not question him because Comey did not re-new his classified status (how convienient) but Durham can question him under oath.

#292 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 02:33 PM | Reply

I'm sure you'll trust the results from the investigation done by men already proven to be partisan corrupt servants of trump than you trust these results. Because you're so nonpartisan and intelligent.
Anything barr pukes out will be a fraud. The fact that you think you could trust anything that comes from him just shows your continued voluntary ignorance about this administration and your party.

#290 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

I remember back in the day lefties loved Durham over his work investigating CIA torture. It's amazing how quickly that changes.

#293 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 02:34 PM | Reply

"I remember back in the day lefties loved Durham"

And how many times did you fawn over the "IG Report"...

...before yesterday?

#294 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-10 02:37 PM | Reply

And how many times did you fawn over the "IG Report"...

For months I've been predicting the IG report would be a dud. It actually turned out to be more damning than I thought it would be.

#295 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 02:42 PM | Reply

"Horowitz could not question him because Comey did not re-new his classified status (how convienient) but Durham can question him under oath."

Did we ever find out if Trump stripped security clearances from all those he was threatening to do so:

ump revokes security clearance of former CIA director John Brennan " a leading critic of the president

"As far as we know, this is the first time that a president of the United States has individually taken action against somebody's security clearance," said Mark Zaid, an attorney who represents government employees in security-clearance disputes.

Last month, the White House said that along with Brennan and Comey, the president was scrutinizing former CIA director Michael V. Hayden, former national security adviser Susan E. Rice, former director of national intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. and former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe.

On Wednesday, Sanders expanded that list to include former acting attorney general Sally Q. Yates, former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, former FBI agent Peter Strzok and Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, who was recently demoted.


www.washingtonpost.com

#296 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 02:42 PM | Reply

using the CIA and FBI to influence and ultimately over turn and election.
Pure garbage.
If it were meant to influence the election there would have been announcements of the investigation during the actual election.
You know, like the ones about the investigation into Hillary's emails.
As for overturning the election, Trump has earned what he's getting. Sorry you're to pathetically stupid and gullible to see it.

#279 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2019-12-10 11:56 AM | FLAG:

You have absolutely no clue about the implications of these investigations. You have zero clue about if these investigations turn over what many think they will turn over what a major problem we have as a country and how badly this part of it needs to be fixed. This is something that is worse than what happens in the country you hate so much, Russia. So unless you want to be called Conrade STFU and pay attention. Your usual name calling about anyone who disagrees with your uninformed views is simply annoying and just makes you look like more of a stooge than you already look.

#297 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 02:43 PM | Reply

Welp, Durham has a lot to prove to vindicate Barr's current talking points:

William Barr Says Obama Administration Posed Greater Threat To U.S. Than Russia

John Harwood @JohnJHarwood

in interview w/@PeteWilliamsNBC, Attorney General Barr suggests the Obama administration and its FBI posed greater threat to American democracy than the Russians

he continues to question the opening of the FBI investigation that the Justice Dept inspector general said was justified

he's talking about Hillary's "secret server"

all-out defense of Trump

12:33 PM - Dec 10, 2019


mavenroundtable.io

#298 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 02:46 PM | Reply

And I'm sure you'd say the exact same thing if obama had taken help from the russians to get elected, not told the authorities, lied about it, used his presidential powers to obstruct an investigation into it. YOu'd totally be defending him wouldn't you?

#284 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-12-10 01:15 PM | FLAG:

Sure, if we had a two year, 40 million dollar investigation run by the opposing party that said he didn't do that I would accept it unlike you.

#299 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 02:49 PM | Reply

"Your usual name calling about anyone who disagrees with your uninformed views is simply annoying and just makes you look like more of a stooge than you already look."

My irony meter just exploded...and the pile of parts is still weeping.

#300 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-10 02:50 PM | Reply

"For months I've been predicting the IG report would be a dud. It actually turned out to be more damning than I thought it would be."

Really? That was never the impression I got.

#301 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 02:51 PM | Reply

"a two year, 40 million dollar investigation"

Typical Republican Math, just using part of the equation, and leaving out the salient parts.

From two weeks ago: Mueller Investigation cost $0.00
nymag.com

#302 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-10 02:52 PM | Reply

I'm sure you'll trust the results from the investigation done by men already proven to be partisan corrupt servants of trump than you trust these results. Because you're so nonpartisan and intelligent.
Anything barr pukes out will be a fraud. The fact that you think you could trust anything that comes from him just shows your continued voluntary ignorance about this administration and your party.

#290 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-12-10 01:57 PM | FLAG:

Ding, ding, ding we have a winner! That's right let's already say the investigation is tainted because of who is running it. Evidence be damned, Barr is a Trump crowny. Well done Speak, what took you so long?

#303 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 02:54 PM | Reply

"Ding, ding, ding we have a winner! That's right let's already say the investigation is tainted because of who is running it. Evidence be damned, Barr is a Trump crowny. Well done Speak, what took you so long?"

Well, it's not like Trump didn't trash the Mueller investigation because of who was running it. Oh, right.

#304 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 02:57 PM | Reply

#303 And Geeksoftly, before you rip Durham remember he worked for Holder and the Obama administration.

#305 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 02:59 PM | Reply

#304 Mueller should have recused himself, and based on his testimony he didn't actually run it anyway, Weissmann did.

#306 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 03:04 PM | Reply

"You have absolutely no clue about the implications of these investigations."

Please, tell me more about the implications of
"Justice Department inspector general concludes Russia probe was justified."

#307 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-10 03:06 PM | Reply

"#304 Mueller should have recused himself, and based on his testimony he didn't actually run it anyway, Weissmann did."

Barr should have recused himself, and based on his comments and his accompanying Durham everywhere he goes, Durham isn't running the investigation, Barr is.

#308 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 03:13 PM | Reply

The reporting did terrible damage to a new president as he took office. And now, the Horowitz report definitively shows that it was all garbage.

The report makes clear the dossier never had even a shred of credibility. Steele had no firsthand knowledge of anything in the document. He got all his information secondhand or thirdhand from sources who themselves heard things secondhand or thirdhand.

Byron York.

#309 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-12-10 03:25 PM | Reply

"The reporting did terrible damage to a new president as he took office"

Such as?
Just give me some bullet points.
Thanks.

#310 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-10 03:27 PM | Reply

"For months I've been predicting the IG report would be a dud."

Actually, what you predicted was the IG report would find the investigation was not improper.

Which is exactly what the IG report found.

#311 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-10 03:29 PM | Reply

Considering he couldn't order anyone to interview, he was investigating from a tight leash. lefties never admit this but it doesn't matter to the law scholars. Durham will in time for a 2020 surprise. Sleep well Ladies.

#312 | Posted by wisgod at 2019-12-10 03:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"based on his comments and his accompanying Durham everywhere he goes, Durham isn't running the investigation, Barr is."

I rest my case:

Natasha Bertrand @NatashaBertrand

Williams: "Would you like to see [Durham] have a report or make some sort of public presentation?"

Barr: "I'm going to largely leave that to him, but I'm also discussing that with him as he gets further along."
9:53 AM - 10 Dec 2019

FYI: The less daylight there is between Barr and Durham, the less Democrats will trust any report Durham comes up with.

#313 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 03:32 PM | Reply

"The reporting did terrible damage to a new president as he took office"
Such as?
Just give me some bullet points.
Thanks.

#310 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2019-12-10 03:27 PM | FLAG:

A two year investigation saying he was illegitimate would be a start. Two years of having to defend himself while running the country is a pretty big one. Being called a traitor and saying he should be punished for treason...........etc.

#314 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 03:35 PM | Reply

As if anything other than "Orange man bad" would be accepted.

#315 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-12-10 03:36 PM | Reply

Are you cool with FISA warrants being improperly obtained?

#286 | Posted by JeffJ

That's not the conclusion of the report.

You're going down the righty road o' lies I see. Sad.

#316 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 03:36 PM | Reply

For months I've been predicting the IG report would be a dud. It actually turned out to be more damning than I thought it would be.

#295 | Posted by JeffJ

Yawn.

It's almost as if you think we've been fooled by the one post saying it would be a dud and missing the 19 others carrying Trump's water and toeing the line of pushing conspiracy theories.

#317 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 03:40 PM | Reply

Barr should have recused himself, and based on his comments and his accompanying Durham everywhere he goes, Durham isn't running the investigation, Barr is.

#308 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY AT 2019-12-10 03:13 PM | FLAG:

Durham works for Barr. We let Mueller run his investigation why don't you want Barr and Durham to run theirs? What are you afraid of? Sound familar?

#318 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 03:42 PM | Reply

You have absolutely no clue about the implications of these investigations.

What I read suggests that the biggest issue is a lack of clear policy regarding how to investigate political campaigns.

Let that sink in, moron.

Your boy, Trump, is so far outside of the norm that the FBI lacked policy guidelines for dealing with his corruption.

You have zero clue about if these investigations turn over what many think they will turn over what a major problem we have as a country and how badly this part of it needs to be fixed.

Yes, it does need to be fixed.

Trump needs to be run out of DC and his supporters never allowed to vote again.

They're clearly too stupid to be trusted with something so important as voting responsibly.

This is something that is worse than what happens in the country you hate so much, Russia.

Awww you're parroting the talking points already.

You want to know what's worse? Barr's inevitably partisan, cherry picked "investigation" that is meant to use the DOJ to exact revenge on those who have embarrassed and properly investigated Trump.

THAT is more akin to what goes on in Russia and highly corrupted former Soviet bloc nations.

And you support it.

So unless you want to be called Conrade STFU and pay attention. Your usual name calling about anyone who disagrees with your uninformed views is simply annoying and just makes you look like more of a stooge than you already look.

#297 | Posted by fishpaw

The ol' "simple disagreement" canard.

It's not a simple disagreement, stupid.

It's you're a lying, stupid pile of dishonest schitt.

Stick that in your stooge pipe and smoke it.

#319 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 03:46 PM | Reply

"Durham works for Barr."

Barr got the job by declaring the Russia investigation was a sham, even though at that point he was not AG and had no idea what evidence the FBI, DOJ or CIA had collected. So, no, Dems don't trust Barr. If Durham sells his soul to Barr the way Barr sold his soul to Trump, there is no reason Democrats should and could trust him.

#320 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-10 03:46 PM | Reply

And now, the Horowitz report definitively shows that it was all garbage.

No, idiot. It doesn't.

No surprise to me, though. I expected you schitheaps to misrepresent it just as you did and do the Mueller report.

#321 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 03:48 PM | Reply

FYI: The less daylight there is between Barr and Durham, the less Democrats will trust any report Durham comes up with.

#313 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY AT 2019-12-10 03:32 PM | REPLY

.... and then there's the touchy subject about Trump suggesting Giuliani is basically Barr's co-counsel during his perfect call with Zelenskiy.

#322 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-10 03:52 PM | Reply

No surprise to me, though. I expected you schitheaps to misrepresent it just as you did and do the Mueller report.

#321 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2019-12-10 03:48 PM | REPLY | FLAG

From "total exoneration" to "attempted coup."

Both are complete lies.

#323 | Posted by anton at 2019-12-10 03:54 PM | Reply

I remember back in the day lefties loved Durham over his work investigating CIA torture. It's amazing how quickly that changes.

#293 | Posted by JeffJ

Are you dumb enough to think barr would hire someone for this mission who was going to be unbiased or possibly reach a conclusion that didn't favor trump?

#324 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-10 03:57 PM | Reply

Durham works for Barr. We let Mueller run his investigation why don't you want Barr and Durham to run theirs? What are you afraid of? Sound familar?

#318 | Posted by fishpaw

Haha your cult leader con man tried everything he could to stop that investigation.

Barr revealed himself to be a lying puppet. Anything he produces has zero credibility.

#325 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-10 03:58 PM | Reply

That's not the conclusion of the report.
You're going down the righty road o' lies I see. Sad.

#316 | POSTED BY JPW

That's what I took away when I read the report coupled with my understanding of the obligations and procedures the FBI must follow in order to obtain a FISA warrant. I'm not at all surprised you dismiss it out of hand.

I'm sure Horowitz will be asked some very pointed questions tomorrow. Curious to see how he'll answer them.

#326 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 04:17 PM | Reply

I don't dismiss anything.

The report says what the report says.

I took much of the commentary regarding policy as comments on the uncharted nature of the territory.

Seriously, a CI investigation of a POTUS campaign? It's ridiculous that we're even having this conversation, let alone that it's, amazingly, a debate.

As for omissions of information, I suspect a reading of the actual chapters is necessary as opposed to the summary. Why? Because the obvious angle for Trumpers is that it was intentional. For me, I suspect it's more nuanced and complicated than that.

#327 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-10 04:23 PM | Reply

As for omissions of information, I suspect a reading of the actual chapters is necessary as opposed to the summary. Why? Because the obvious angle for Trumpers is that it was intentional. For me, I suspect it's more nuanced and complicated than that.

#327 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2019-12-10 04:23 PM | FLAG:

Yes that would be wise, just read it.

#328 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-10 04:33 PM | Reply

"A two year investigation saying he was illegitimate would be a start."

Where's the actual damage in that?

#329 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-10 06:53 PM | Reply

Gal and Tony kicking butt and taking names via facts!

#330 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-12-10 07:35 PM | Reply

From the report:

The FISA request form drew almost entirely from Steele's reporting in describing the factual basis to establish probable cause to believe that Page was an agent of a foreign power, including the secret meeting between Carter Page and Divyekin alleged in Steele's Report 94 and the role of Page as an intermediary between Russia and the Trump campaign's then manager, Paul Manafort, in the "well-developed conspiracy" alleged in Steele's Report 95. The only additional information cited in the FISA request form to support a probable cause finding as to Page was (1) a statement that Page was a senior foreign policy advisor for the Trump campaign and had extensive ties to various state-owned or affiliated entities of the Russian Federation, (2) Papadopoulos's statement to the FFG in May 2016, and (3) open source articles discussing Trump campaign policy positions sympathetic to Russia, including that the campaign's tone changed after it began to receive advice from, among others, Manafort and Page.

So a salacious and unverified document, paid for by the Clinton campaign as oppo research, makes up almost the entire basis for the FISA request and you think that's proper, JPW?

Seriously?

#331 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-10 09:02 PM | Reply

"So a salacious and unverified document, paid for by the Clinton campaign as oppo research, makes up almost the entire basis for the FISA request"

You must have missed the part where Crossfire Hurricane had already begun when they discovered the Steele Dossier existed. Which led Horowitz to conclude, correctly, CH couldn't have POSSIBLY used the Steele Dossier as the initiator.

And you realize this wasn't an original request, but a renewal, which requires new proof from the prior FISA warrant. In addition, Page had told the FBI he was a Russian target; if the tables were turned, you'd be screaming if they DIDN'T surveil Page at that point.

But go ahead, keep attacking the process while you minimize the actions. My prediction of 20x the keystrokes was waaaaaay under, by several magnitudes.

#332 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-10 09:50 PM | Reply

"So a salacious and unverified document,"

Some aspects of the dossier have been corroborated,[18][19] in particular its main allegations: that Putin and Russia actively favored Trump over Clinton,[20][13] and that many Trump campaign officials and associates had multiple secret contacts with Russians. en.wikipedia.org"Russia_dossier

"paid for by the Clinton campaign as oppo research"

The opposition research conducted by Fusion GPS on Donald Trump was in two distinct operations, each with a different client. The first research operation, from October 2015 to May 2016, was domestic research funded by The Washington Free Beacon. The second operation, from April 2016 to December 2016, was funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

"makes up almost the entire basis for the FISA request"

On March 14, 2016, George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign foreign policy advisor, held a meeting with Joseph Mifsud,[178] a man described by James B. Comey as a "Russian agent".[179][180][181] Mifsud, who claimed "substantial connections to Russian officials",[178] told Papadopoulos that the Russians had "dirt" on Clinton in the form of thousands of stolen emails. This occurred before the hacking of the DNC computers had become public knowledge,[178][182] and Papadopoulos later bragged "that the Trump campaign was aware the Russian government had dirt on Hillary Clinton".[5]

#333 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-10 09:57 PM | Reply

Can't wait to hear JeffJ tell the same lies tomorrow, and the next day, and the next day!
#MAGA

#334 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-10 10:34 PM | Reply

#332 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

As new information came in it undermined the basis for surveilling Page yet they continued to do so anyway. Horowitz just testified to that unequivocally.

But go ahead and keep polishing that turd.

On a side note it's interesting that the DR doesn't have a live thread covering this testimony.

#335 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 11:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"As new information came in it undermined the basis for surveilling Page yet they continued to do so anyway. "

Page, who told the FBI he'd been recruited by the Russians, and expected them to continue?!? That doesn't pass the laugh test.

"But go ahead and keep polishing that turd."

Fat talk from someone who will excoriate 17 lies, but swallow 17,000 lies.

#336 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-11 11:43 AM | Reply

1 minute into her questioning, Feinstein pivots away to the Ukraine WB. That right there is very telling. Graham wasn't even close to being done asking questions when he yielded.

#337 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 11:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Page, who told the FBI he'd been recruited by the Russians, and expected them to continue?!? That doesn't pass the laugh test.

The CIA identified Page as their source and the FBI didn't disclose that on their FISA renewal.

The facts are kicking your ass. Are you even watching the Horowitz testimony?

#338 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 11:45 AM | Reply

Still waiting for Jeff to explain what the import of an unlawful surveillance of Carter Page would be.

Even if the Page surveillance were the sole basis for the Mueller Investigation (it wasn't), I'm told by Trumplets on a daily basis that the Mueller Investigation was a complete exoneration of Trump. And the currently pending Articles of Impeachment are not based on the Mueller Investigation in any way.

Other than perhaps seeking appropriate discipline or charges against anyone who acted improperly with respect to Page (which is handled in the OIG report), what is the relevance of this?

#339 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-11 11:50 AM | Reply

On multiple occasions I've stated the FISA warrants were improperly obtained. JPW, Snoofy and others jumped all over me regarding that classification.

Horowitz just testified, in answering a question by Senator Feinstein (D) that the warrants were not properly obtained.

BOOM!

#340 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 11:52 AM | Reply

what is the relevance of this?

It was central to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. The key component, the primary component of those warrants was the Steele Dossier. And this is all according to Horowitz.

Carter Page, a private citizen and a member of a political campaign, was unlawfully spied on by those under the direct report of the opposition party.

This is 3rd world Banana Republic ----.

You all need to quit defending it.

#341 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 11:54 AM | Reply

That's all I have for now. I'm off to clean the master bedroom bathroom. I'll check back in after more testimony.

#342 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 11:55 AM | Reply

was unlawfully spied on by those under the direct report of the opposition party.
#341 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Link?

#343 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 12:05 PM | Reply

Graham: "Is it fair to say Christopher Steele had a political bias against Trump?"

Horowitz: "He was desperate to prevent Mr. Trump's election."

Hear no evil, see no evil.

#344 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 12:08 PM | Reply

You all need to quit defending it.
#341 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

It's not a matter of defending anything, it's a matter of ensuring what came from the investigation (i.e., of import) is not undermined by a loosely scrapped together narrative.

#345 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 12:08 PM | Reply

I didn't "defend" anything, Strawman Jeff.

I asked you what relevance it has to where we are at today.

Beyond disciplining and punishing those involved, it appears you have nothing further to pursue.

Have fun scrubbing the toilet!

#346 | Posted by JOE at 2019-12-11 12:10 PM | Reply

#344 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Still waiting for anyone to legitimately undercut the Steele dossier as anything other than a conglomeration of reports outlining connections. Is the notion of objectivity dead? It's too much to believe that Strogk or Page or the Trump supporting FBI agents had any political bias, but Steele? That's where one must draw the line?

#347 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 12:14 PM | Reply

I think we can all agree that Chuck Grassley and Pat Leahey should be forced to retire.

Good God was their questioning brutal.

#348 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 12:17 PM | Reply

Link?

#343 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

I can't link my brain. That is my opinion based upon Mr Horowitz's testimony as to how those FISA warrants were obtained.

#349 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 12:19 PM | Reply

Have fun scrubbing the toilet!

#346 | POSTED BY JOE

Ugh. I haven't gotten that far yet. Just finished the sink area and am preparing to do the tub and shower. Then it's on to the toilet and floors.

I just thought I'd pop on real quick since the testimony is in recess.

One observation that is obvious to me at this point is that the GOP is exposing FAR more malfeasance than the Dems can get Horowitz to justify.

Another is Horowitz clearly knows the contents of his report extremely well. The contrast between his testimony so far and Mueller's a few months ago is striking, and perhaps telling.

#350 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 12:22 PM | Reply

#347 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

I don't understand what you are driving at.

Can you please rephrase?

#351 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 12:24 PM | Reply

I didn't "defend" anything...

#346 | POSTED BY JOE

Ok. Then I retract my comment as pertaining to you.

Danforth on the other hand...

#352 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 12:25 PM | Reply

#347

"The FBI did not have specific information corroborating allegations in the dossier authored by ex-British intelligence agent Christopher Steele and was unable to corroborate any of the specific substantive allegations against Carter Page contained in the election reporting and relied on in the FISA applications."

"The investigation found as early as January 2017 that there were potentially serious problems identified in Steele's reporting regarding its accuracy."

"FBI leadership supported relying on Steele's unverified reporting to seek a FISA order targeting Page after being advised of, and giving consideration to, concerns expressed by a Department attorney that Steele may have been hired by someone associated with a rival candidate or campaign."

-IG Horowitz

#353 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 12:26 PM | Reply

Notable that even Ken Dilain at NBC, who extensively and breathlessly reported on the Steele Dossier, is now throwing it under the bus:

Ken Dilanian

Verified account

@KenDilanianNBC

The Steele dossier does not emerge well from this IG report. One of Steele's key sources essentially repudiated some of Steele's reporting, including about the alleged Ritz Carlton tape.

8:22 AM - 11 Dec 2019

#354 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 12:38 PM | Reply

Horowitz's testimony, thus far, absolutely legitimizes the need for a much broader investigation, namely, the Durham investigation.

#355 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 12:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Dilain => Dilanian

#356 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 12:38 PM | Reply

Lindsay got twisted because the FBI never gave Trump "defensive" briefings on Russia... I almost bust my gut laughing. I guess it's normal FBI procedure to tell one of the targets of your investigation that they're being investigated especially when this same person - Trump - makes daily comments including:

1. Asking the counterintelligence operative - Russia - to commit a crime and hack his political opponent's email server, something Russia did a mere 5 hours after he asked;

2. Repeatedly and with scorn denying that anyone inside his campaign had any contacts with Russians while the FBI had voluminous evidence of such meetings, ultimately to total over 150;

3. Only became linked to the investigation due to one of his campaign operatives making a drunken boast that a Russian-affiliated contact had approached him, alluding that Russia had stolen information that they might release about Hillary Clinton. The meeting happened BEFORE there was public admission of the DNC hack and the Wikileaks disclosures began. It wasn't until after both became public knowledge that the information was shared with US law enforcement, NOT BEFORE the boast was confirmed as having a basis in fact.

THIS WAS THE TIPPING POINT PREDICATE FOR THE BEGINNING OF CROSSFIRE HURRICANE. Carter Page and FISA warrants had nothing to do with it.

I could go on and on, everyone heard Trump's repeated denials that Russia was interfering while praising Wikileaks some 142 times at the same time his son was trading emails with Julian Assange trading information on when the next tranche of stolen emails would drop and meeting with Russians offering dirt on Clinton from high government sources.

Sure, the FBI should have marched into Trump's office and told him what exactly? They told him to beware of the Russians and to report any contacts. It would have been investigatory malfeasance not to report how that information was received by those it was given to due to all the factors above.

And history notes, there has never been a single incidence where Donald Trump nor anyone associated with his campaign reported any of their contacts with Russian operatives until they were forced to after being arrested under suspicion of a criminal act.

#357 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 12:39 PM | Reply

Lindsay got twisted because the FBI never gave Trump "defensive" briefings on Russia... I almost bust my gut laughing. I guess it's normal FBI procedure to tell one of the targets of your investigation that they're being investigated especially when this same person - Trump

Horowitz eviscerated the FBI for failing to provide Trump with a defensive briefing.

#358 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 12:40 PM | Reply

Horowitz's testimony, thus far, absolutely legitimizes the need for a much broader investigation, namely, the Durham investigation.

#355 | Posted by JeffJ at

Evidence to date is that Durham will be rigged, JEFF.

#359 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 12:41 PM | Reply

Horowitz's testimony, thus far, absolutely legitimizes the need for a much broader investigation

#355 | Posted by JeffJ at

You think there's something that direction that lets Trump of the hook?

#360 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 12:42 PM | Reply

"Horowitz's testimony, thus far, absolutely legitimizes the need for a much broader investigation"

^
Anything to distract from Trump.

#361 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 12:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Evidence to date is that Durham will be rigged, JEFF.

#359 | POSTED BY ZED

Possibly. However I will wait for his findings to be released before passing judgement either way.

What Horowitz has testified to is already damning enough. As it pertains to bias being a motivating factor, he says it wasn't but couches his assessment based upon testimonial evidence. He also says that on all of the abuses laid out he didn't receive any satisfactory answers as to why they happened. He pulled his punch.

#362 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 12:43 PM | Reply

"However I will wait for his findings to be released before passing judgement either way."

That's what you said about the Horowitz report, but you still haven't passed judgment either way.
And you simply never will.

#363 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 12:44 PM | Reply

You think there's something that direction that lets Trump of the hook?

#360 | POSTED BY ZED

I think there's something in that direction that suggests a possible criminal conspiracy by key members of the FBI and DOJ to undermine a duly elected president.

That Trump is a bad person isn't justification for the malfeasance that Horowitz has testified to. This isn't a binary situation. The ends don't justify the means.

#364 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 12:46 PM | Reply

Possibly. However I will wait for his (Durham) findings to be released before passing judgement

#362 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019

This is not Durham's behavior, JEFF. He's passing judgment now.

#365 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 12:46 PM | Reply

"That Trump is a bad person isn't justification for the malfeasance that Horowitz has testified to. This isn't a binary situation."

One might say they are completely separate issues...

#366 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 12:47 PM | Reply

I think there's something in that direction that suggests a possible criminal conspiracy by key members of the FBI and DOJ to undermine a duly elected president.

#364 | Posted by JeffJ at

Not what the IG said, Jeff. But that was such a long time ago. Two days, was it?

#367 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 12:48 PM | Reply

That's what you said about the Horowitz report, but you still haven't passed judgment either way.
And you simply never will.

#363 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

The ---- I haven't. Have you not been paying attention at all? Have you noticed that I flipped the switch from 'wait and see' to unequivocally stating the FISA warrants were improperly obtained, an assertion that Horowitz just echoed about an hour ago?

Hell, I just flat-out said that this IG report and following testimony absolutely justifies the much broader Durham investigation.

#368 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 12:48 PM | Reply

Not what the IG said, Jeff. But that was such a long time ago. Two days, was it?

#367 | POSTED BY ZED

That's my personal take based upon what is in the IG report along with his testimony. When we add in what Horowitz uncovered regarding how the Clinton email criminal investigation was handled coupled with his evisceration of Comey's actions that lead to the Mueller investigation, a clear pattern emerges of partisan politics dictating the direction of these investigations along with how they were conducted.

#369 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 12:50 PM | Reply

this IG report....justifies the much broader Durham investigation.

#368 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-

Into a conspiracy? IG just deep-sixed conspiracy, JEFF.

#370 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 12:50 PM | Reply

a clear pattern emerges of partisan politics dictating the direction of these investigations along with how they were conducted.

#369 | Posted by JeffJ

This is Trump's position, isn't it?

#371 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 12:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

As has been reported ad nauseum, nothing in the Steele dossier has been conclusively proven wholly false while much of it has been confirmed since it's release. The report was always seen and presented as a raw intelligence document not a polished, substantiated certainty. It's allegations were presented as a troubling sequence of things to confirm with deeper investigation, not to believed as gospel truth without further corroboration. Steele was most upset that the FBI would not take resources to follow up on his leads, something he did not have the resources or bandwidth to accomplish by himself. Look up the universally understand definition of 'raw intelligence'. There is a reason the first word is raw: it means undone, not fully cooked.

Page was not the entrance nor fulcrum that the FBI investigation was laid on. Elevating him as an example of errors doesn't eliminate all the other factual crimes and behaviors of Trump-related officials and Russians.

Horowitz eviscerated the FBI for failing to provide Trump with a defensive briefing.

As a matter of procedure. Stevie Wonder see why the FBI treated Clinton differently than Trump.

Is it usual FBI procedure to tell a suspect that you're investigating him especially when he uses the stolen materials as the basis of his own campaign's message?

The cognitive dissonance here is staggering. With Trump denialists every single issue is NEVER related to the whole. Each one that works against him must be a product of personal bias or animus of the person bringing it to light. Trump didn't get a defensive briefing because he was actively using information provided by the Russians being investigated for an illegal criminal counter intelligence operation against the United States. Don't you think Trump knew that? He never saw it on the news? Did it stop him from denying that Russia was doing it?

Trump was a suspect, not an unwitting pawn being played by Russia without his knowledge.

#372 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 12:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Have you noticed that I flipped the switch from 'wait and see' to unequivocally stating the FISA warrants were improperly obtained"

Flipped the switch, more like bait and switch.
You haven't accepted the finding that the Trump investigation was justified, which is raison d'etre for the Horowitz Report.
And you never will.

#373 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 12:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Trump isn't a victim, JEFF. He's a predator.

#374 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 12:53 PM | Reply

Does trump need to be impeached and removed, JEFF?

#375 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 12:54 PM | Reply

Does trump need to be impeached and removed, JEFF?

#376 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 12:59 PM | Reply

Pissing into the wind, aren't I?

#377 | Posted by Zed at 2019-12-11 12:59 PM | Reply

Trump and the Congressional Republicans are going to tear the DOJ and FBI unsunder to protect Donald Trump from facing due responsibility for his own actions and crimes. This is going to force people to take a side and I don't think the results will be pretty.

It is plain as day. Anyone and everyone who dares call him into account is an enemy of the state and those defending him are soldiers in a holy war. Everyone has personal bias, all of us. But that doesn't mean it seeps into our professional conduct unless one presents evidence of it in the work product, not one's personal, 1st Amendment protected feelings. This is assuming guilt by inference not guilt beyond a reasonable doubt or even a preponderance of actual evidence outside of gleaned innuendo of private conversations.

My God, this country is going to be torn apart.

#378 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 01:01 PM | Reply

#369 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

So it was the political bias that led the inquiries, not actual evidence.

That's a stark accusation to make against the DOJ and FBI with MINIMAL evidence to back. In fact, there's more evidence justifying the investigations (as stated in IG report) than there is evidence of political bias directing the investigations, IMO.

But I guess this is where the basis of perception steps in. IMO, your basis of perception is severely skewed coupled with the intent of making yourself out to be more objective than anyone else here on the DR.

#379 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 01:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

My God, this country is going to be torn apart.
#378 | POSTED BY TONYROMA

I know how hard you're working on it, Tony.

#380 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-12-11 01:11 PM | Reply

#349 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

The question being what evidence is your brain considering when you come to the conclusion it was unlawful.

Not a difficult ask, but your unwillingness to take the meager steps speaks volumes.

#381 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 01:12 PM | Reply

The report was always seen and presented as a raw intelligence document not a polished, substantiated certainty. It's allegations were presented as a troubling sequence of things to confirm with deeper investigation, not to believed as gospel truth without further corroboration. Steele was most upset that the FBI would not take resources to follow up on his leads, something he did not have the resources or bandwidth to accomplish by himself. Look up the universally understand definition of 'raw intelligence'. There is a reason the first word is raw: it means undone, not fully cooked.

Is this the latest guidance from Talking Points Memo? You dolts accepted the Steele Dossier as gospel on a daily basis for over a year and now that it is being destroyed by Horowitz and his report your backpedaling is comical.

This is assuming guilt by inference not guilt beyond a reasonable doubt or even a preponderance of actual evidence outside of gleaned innuendo of private conversations.

You now decry this yet you and the rest of the Useful Idiots of the DR Left do this on a daily basis with any innuendo that fits your personal bias.

TFF

#382 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 01:19 PM | Reply

#382

Stop painting with a broad brush. I'm me. I'm not TPM, MaddowBlog, or any of the sources I might bring to threads. I speak only for myself. I'm not responsible for what anyone else says.

There is a difference in declaring how I might feel about something versus the advocation of denying anyone their own right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. I'm very clear about that. Opinion is fine but there are lines.

It's sad you've digressed into just another curmudgeon too lazy to look beyond the mainstream bile produced for the lemmings. You used to bring fresh links and insights into the discourse. Now you recycle dated tropes and don't acknowledge that kinetic fact patterns have moved from where they were before due to more information coming to light.

But you've stepped up your personal attacks and attributions of intent meant to demean those of us seeking information, not confirmation bias. Yeah, you wanted the Dems to impeach Trump before yet now that they have the strongest evidence yet you cheer as the GOP tries to turn night into day and left into right to avoid the obvious implications if all the witnesses and evidence were allowed to go on the record.

You're nothing more than a Janus, looking for cheap thrills. Hope this gives you one.

#383 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 02:02 PM | Reply

Mike Lee: The lack of evidence is not evidence that there was no bias?

Horowitz: Correct.

#384 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 02:03 PM | Reply

Late to the thread. I wonder if the FISA judge might have been less persuaded had the FBI lawyer not changed the CIA email saying Page was their asset to he was not. Also, the contention that the reason Trump was not briefed was because they thought he might be the one with direct links to Russian intelligence is a joke.

But maybe not so fast! Trump met with Lavrov on the day impeachment was announced. Maybe they cooked up a scheme for 2020. I demand Trump release the transcript of that conversation and EVERY conversation that he's had going back 5 years. There's going to be something! Lots of somethings!!

Rep. Green is right - there is no limit to the number of times the House can impeach. Do it again and again! A couple of times a month, anyway.

#385 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2019-12-11 02:07 PM | Reply

Yeah, you wanted the Dems to impeach Trump before yet now that they have the strongest evidence yet you cheer as the GOP tries to turn night into day and left into right to avoid the obvious implications if all the witnesses and evidence were allowed to go on the record.

Still do, but only if they did it correctly and put the GOP in a bind, which they haven't done. The Ukraine call and claiming that assertions Executive Privilege are Obstruction of Congress are far weaker legally and from an evidentiary standpoint than the Obstruction of Mueller's investigation, and it is a mistake to not follow the trail that Mueller clearly laid out for the Dems.

IMO, by following the weaker claims the Dems are letting the GOP Senators off the hook.

#386 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 02:09 PM | Reply

#384 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Goes the other way just as easily.

#387 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 02:11 PM | Reply

I personally loathe Ted Cruz, but this was a pretty good line:

"This wasn't Jason Bourne, this was Beavis and --------."

#388 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 02:11 PM | Reply

IMO, by following the weaker claims the Dems are letting the GOP Senators off the hook.
#386 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Is that an indication that you'd prefer nothing to come of this?

#389 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 02:12 PM | Reply

#387

That is why I posted it, that exact claim has been a Dem mantra since the Mueller Report was released.

#390 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 02:12 PM | Reply

IMO, by following the weaker claims the Dems are letting the GOP Senators off the hook.

I can respect that view. But I think the hope is that during the trial the key witnesses will testify under oath and documents will have to be produced. It's hard to tell Roberts that EP or AI privileges are inviolate when an impeachment trial and verdict are at stake.

#391 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 02:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Chris Wallace: Terrible Misconduct' From FBI on FISA Doesn't Mean the Entire Russia Investigation Was Fraudulent'
www.mediaite.com

#392 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 02:24 PM | Reply

The report that will truly be most important regarding FISA warrants will be the comprehensive review of the entire warrant application process.

I have a strong feeling that they'll find the usual errors associated with LEO putting their hands on the scale of making sure warrants are issued. I don't think for a second bureaucrats are making decisions based on their own political biases while working in information silos.

This is why I think the GOP attacks are so unwarranted without any concrete corroborating evidence. But time will tell.

#393 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 02:25 PM | Reply

Horowitz report produced seemingly contradictory conclusions that can both be true
video.foxnews.com

#394 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 02:26 PM | Reply

The Dems would have been better served to give all their allotted time to everyone but Feinstein and Leahy.

Time has obviously passed them by.

#395 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 02:31 PM | Reply

Chris Wallace: Terrible Misconduct' From FBI on FISA Doesn't Mean the Entire Russia Investigation Was Fraudulent'

I agree with that. I also understand that the IG has serious limitations that Durham does not. It doesn't make the entire investigation fraudulent on its own. Durham will shed far more light on that issue (his budget should be increased ten-fold effective immediately).

What he testified to today is deeply disturbing.

The amazing thing is none of this is new. Everything Horowitz laid out has been written about extensively by the likes of Andrew McCarthy, John Solomon, Margot Cleveland, Kim Strassel, Paul Sperry and others.

And any mention of it would be condescendingly hissed at as "Fox News right wing conspiracy theories." Well, this IG report and subsequent testimony have made these conspiracy theories become real.

Certain people on this site, namely Zed and Beach, are getting really angry with me personally for pointing all of this out.

#396 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 02:34 PM | Reply

Tony,

I thought Feinstein handled herself adequately. I agree regarding Leahey and to have him piggy-back Grassley was just brutal.

#397 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 02:35 PM | Reply

Mike Lee: (Paraphrased from memory) There are only 2 possible explanations for this - either motivated by political bias or gross incompetence and I'm not sure which explanation is worse.

#398 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 02:36 PM | Reply

Beach [is] getting really angry with me personally for pointing all of this out.
#396 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

You have no clue what you're talking about.

Either you're trolling or you are a hypocrite that can't handle being trolled.

Buck up, buttercup.

#399 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 02:38 PM | Reply

#389

That is an indication that the Dems did not do enough on these articles to get Trump convicted in the Senate...which is the point of the whole exercise, at least as far as the Framers were concerned.

If the House had followed precedent, done these hearings in the Judiciary Committee, allowed Trump to be represented by counsel throughout those hearings, sought court orders for witnesses that the Administration claimed executive privilege on (like McGahn, who then never testified), had hearings on the potential articles, etc. then they might have moved the needle with the NeverTrumpers in the Senate.

They did none of that, rushed to get this done before Christmas and now it is going to blow apart in the Senate.

#400 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 02:41 PM | Reply

"Well, this IG report and subsequent testimony have made these conspiracy theories become real."

Describe the real conspiracy, in your own words.

#401 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 02:43 PM | Reply

#391

Newsworthy and I agree 100%, but that will require the Minority to ask for those witnesses without knowing what they are going to say, which is dangerous for a prosecutor.

I don't know who Pelosi is going to name as her Managers for the trial, but they better have relevant experience to navigate testimony from hostile witnesses that they haven't previously deposed.

#402 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 02:47 PM | Reply

The FBI has a long and storied history of biasing investigations and evidence toward the desires of LEO. This is not a political problem, it's an endemic LEO problem and stands as the basis for Horowitz' recommendations for needed changes.

The GOP- without any direct evidence of prior political bias on the part of the agents they are mentioning - are trying to turn what most likely was an institutional bias to help LEO especially on cases with national security implications into a political scandal.

Career bureaucrats know the rules and don't normally work on one-offs. The GOP will make sure half if not all of them are fired or reassigned and we'll likely find out that their mostly Republicans just like Comey, McCabe, and other now pariahed officials who weren't registered Democrats.

I'll be more than happy to believe there was political bias if and when it can be produced in cases other than this one. Until then, it's likely what it appears to be and what Horowitz' exhaustive investigation says that it was.

#403 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 02:48 PM | Reply

#395 and 397

That was brutal, I muted them on my office TV after a few questions.

Blumenthal is showing his chops as a former USA and I think his questioning has been particularly effective so far. Too bad he has to sit as a "juror" for the trial since he knows what he is doing.

#404 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 02:51 PM | Reply

If the House had followed precedent, done these hearings in the Judiciary Committee, allowed Trump to be represented by counsel throughout those hearings, sought court orders for witnesses that the Administration claimed executive privilege on (like McGahn, who then never testified), had hearings on the potential articles, etc. then they might have moved the needle with the NeverTrumpers in the Senate.

C'mon ROC, Trump wasn't cooperating in his own execution even if you lined up "10s" in the cloakroom for him to bang. He would have fought every issue in the courts until appeals were exhausted.

Why do you believe someone who lies more than he tells the truth? Trump's game is to delay, obfuscate and say the whole thing is illegal and unconstitutional against him. Once you drop that chit, there's no going back.

#405 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 02:52 PM | Reply

#396

Everything these people intimate is based on the intentions of the actors that they have no way of knowing outside of reading personal tea leaves. We all have bias, but that doesn't mean we let them dictate how we do our work even when the two may clash.

These people are career folks, not politically appointed stooges. Produce actual documented evidence that they executed their work product with obvious political bias as stated by outside parties or give them the benefit of the doubt until such information can be produced.

The right talks about first hand knowledge of evidence as it regards Trump but hearsay and innuendo not connected to any work output is firm ground for definitively assessing bias for FBI bureaucrats working in silos pushing information to their superiors?

#406 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 02:58 PM | Reply

They did none of that, rushed to get this done before Christmas and now it is going to blow apart in the Senate.

Would you like to make a small wager to our favorite charities that it doesn't "blow up" in the Senate in the way you think?

I'm not saying that Trump will be convicted, only that the trial will be more detrimental to Trump than his defense will be exculpatory as it regards facts and evidence.

I think it's universally understood that the real facts and circumstances are damning for Trump if the first and second hand witnesses are allowed to come forth and share their testimony. All this stuff about the investigation is moot for the impeachment trial, since it's based directly on Ukraine, with the 2016 election only tangentially involved due to Trump himself.

It actually just dawned on me: Nancy Pelosi is a freaking political savant. She saw this coming and insulated the articles from all the slop the dueling reports are digging up.

Got to give her props.

#407 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 03:04 PM | Reply

C'mon ROC, Trump wasn't cooperating in his own execution even if you lined up "10s" in the cloakroom for him to bang. He would have fought every issue in the courts until appeals were exhausted.

So did Clinton, Nixon, etc. That is what the Courts are for, and if the Dems had done the same thing with Pompeo, Mulvaney, Bolton etc. that they did with McGahn they probably would have their testimony by the end of January.

Why do you believe someone who lies more than he tells the truth?

LOL, I have said from the start that Trump shht the bed on the Ukraine call and that it was improper. I also think that with the evidence that the Dems have produced they have properly met their burden of proof but then the burden shifts to the defense. But that is the key point in our system of jurisprudence: the defense, even with a defendant whose character flaws and dubious veracity is deeply concerning, gets to call witnesses on his behalf. That will happen in the Senate trial and it will be interesting to see who they call. One thing is practically certain - Trump will not testify on his own behalf because he would be a terrible witness.

Trump's game is to delay, obfuscate and say the whole thing is illegal and unconstitutional against him. Once you drop that chit, there's no going back.

Once again, so did the last two Presidents who faced impeachment hearings and is unfortunately part of the system.

#408 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 03:08 PM | Reply

#406 | POSTED BY TONYROMA

Please see #398.

your basis of perception is severely skewed coupled with the intent of making yourself out to be more objective than anyone else here on the DR.
#379 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

Nice straw man. This is what I was referencing when I said you were getting angry.

Based upon what I've seen in this report and following testimony it is my belief that this entire investigation was predicated on political bias and I take into account how Comey instigated the Mueller investigation and how these same actors handled the Clinton email criminal investigation. I freely admit that I don't have official proof of that although given Durham's brief statement on Monday I'm pretty sure he has proof and will be producing it once he concludes his investigation.

#409 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 03:15 PM | Reply

Horowitz has been very impressive in his testimony.

I can see why he's so well-respected on both sides.

#410 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 03:23 PM | Reply

The GOP- without any direct evidence of prior political bias on the part of the agents they are mentioning - are trying to turn what most likely was an institutional bias to help LEO especially on cases with national security implications into a political scandal.

It's amazing that all of this occurred under the Obama administration (after he left office it was his holdovers) and Tony finds a way to make this about the GOP.

The GOP will make sure half if not all of them are fired or reassigned and we'll likely find out that their mostly Republicans just like Comey, McCabe, and other now pariahed officials who weren't registered Democrats.

Comey? You mean this guy?:

Ex-FBI head James Comey urges public to vote Democratic

www.cnn.com

#411 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 03:27 PM | Reply

"I can see why he's so well-respected on both sides."

Strange, then, how you don't respect his conclusion that the investigation was justified.

#412 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 03:28 PM | Reply

Strange, then, how you don't respect his conclusion that the investigation was justified.

#412 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

I've explained why I disagree with his conclusion.

He's basing his conclusion based only upon what he saw in his investigation and the OIG has serious restrictions as to what they can dig in to.

As to your premise, I greatly respect my dad, but I don't always agree with him.

#413 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 03:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Am I the only one who has noticed that Dems spend a lot of time talking about anything other than this IG report.

#414 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 03:33 PM | Reply

"I've explained why I disagree with his conclusion."

You're just cherry picking, then.

#415 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 03:35 PM | Reply

Kammie is trying desperately to deflect to the Ukraine call, with limited success.

#416 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 03:35 PM | Reply

WTF is she doing talking about online gambling?

#417 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-12-11 03:37 PM | Reply

Kammie demonstrated she's very smart but also why her campaign failed so spectacularly - she's very unlikeable.

#418 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 03:42 PM | Reply

It's amazing that all of this occurred under the Obama administration (after he left office it was his holdovers) and Tony finds a way to make this about the GOP.

Why are you such a hard-headed idiot these days? You know what I'm talking about in that sentence. I'm talking about what the GOP is claiming TODAY about what was done THEN.

Compound thoughts are lost on you now? And many were not "his holdovers". Most weren't hired under his administration, they were CAREER agents hired during MANY administrations.

Why be such a partisan-driven hack? That's your problem. Horowitz had complete access to all pertinent documentation or all their work product. More than a million pages of documents were looked at by Horowitz and DOCUMENTS are the only way to discern tangible evidence of bias and you know that. Horowitz found none.

Durham is not looking at any documents that Horowitz didn't so any hints of "bias" are going to have to based on other's feelings, anecdotes or statements about the individuals involved unrelated to their work product. If you can name any other physical evidence of actual bias in their work product I'd love to hear the speculation.

Barr and Durham are on a mission to attack these individuals personally by digging into the thoughts, statements, or feelings likely outside their work responsibilities, full stop. We'll hear that they said this about that while talking to a coworker, or they were reading this book while on break at work, or watched videos of that person on their computer. It's all too predictable.

And you'll be one of the first ones trumpeting unproven smear allegations as soon as they hit the right wing media bloodstream.

#419 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 03:45 PM | Reply

"He's basing his conclusion based only upon what he saw in his investigation"

It's hilarious that you think that's the wrong basis!

"and the OIG has serious restrictions as to what they can dig in to."

Why does this discredit his conclusion, exactly?

What did Horowitz miss in his dig, that JeffJ didn't miss?

#420 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 03:56 PM | Reply

Barr and Durham are on a mission to attack these individuals personally by digging into the thoughts, statements, or feelings likely outside their work responsibilities, full stop. We'll hear that they said this about that while talking to a coworker, or they were reading this book while on break at work, or watched videos of that person on their computer. It's all too predictable.

So, you call me a partisan hack but are pre-judging the Durham investigation before its findings are released. As Danforth likes to say, "My irony meter just pegged."

I'm talking about what the GOP is claiming TODAY about what was done THEN.

Have you watched the testimony?

Horowitz has brutally taken apart the very people you are trying to paint as victims of the evil GOP. This has been an unmitigated disaster politically for the Democratic Party that has habitually defended these people and these actions.

#421 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 03:59 PM | Reply

What did Horowitz miss in his dig, that JeffJ didn't miss?

#420 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

I think his conclusions are reasonable based upon the information available to him in his report.

Durham has certainly seen things that Horowitz hasn't.

#422 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 04:00 PM | Reply

And you'll be one of the first ones trumpeting unproven smear allegations as soon as they hit the right wing media bloodstream.

#419 | POSTED BY TONYROMA

Do you regard Horowitz's report to be unproven smear allegations?

#423 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 04:01 PM | Reply

There are some very conspicuous absences of DR lefties who called all of this to be RW conspiracy theories and Horowitz's testimony completely blew that up.

#424 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 04:06 PM | Reply

"Do you regard Horowitz's report to be unproven smear allegations?"

You regard the main conclusion of the Horowitz Report to be an unproven smear allegation, JeffJ.

#425 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 04:07 PM | Reply

It's amazing how many narratives were absolutely eviscerated today.

The MSM is probably going to completely ignore today's testimony.

#426 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 04:19 PM | Reply

#425 I'm not responding to troll posts.

#427 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 04:19 PM | Reply

There are some very conspicuous absences of DR lefties who called all of this to be RW conspiracy theories and Horowitz's testimony completely blew that up.

Alternate reality version. Nothing substantive about Horowitz' confirmations was blown up. It. Did. Not. Happen.

The GOP invented a personal attack based bias conspiracy that Horowitz refused to sign on to, while admitting with vigor that systemic mistakes were made as it regarded Page's FISA warrant business, full stop.

That's what I saw along with the other posters wondering why you got drunk on the partisan rantings of Trump apologists. The FBI isn't biased. The investigators have not been proven biased. Their work product was indeed flawed perhaps to the point of criminality.

That does not mean it was flawed due to political bias and it certainly isn't proven so by GOP outrageous allegations without a shred of documentary evidence, which is the only thing that counts. So us a history of biased documentation outside of this single case.

Don't bother, Horowitz couldn't find any.

#428 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 04:39 PM | Reply

Interesting...

From NBC NEWS

youtu.be

...the report states that Horowitz is extremely concerned about the FBI's FISA abuses because, if they did not follow legal protocol in obtaining a surveillance warrant against a presidential campaign's aide, then to what lengths is the FBI going to obtain surveillance warrants against average Americans?

In fact, Horowitz is "so concerned about these problems" that he is opening a new investigation.

"We learned today the inspector general is now opening a new investigation into how the FBI gets these FISA warrants on American citizens," Williams reported.

#429 | Posted by Idependant97 at 2019-12-11 04:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Show us a history of politically biased document content.....

As I said before, the investigation will almost certainly uncover other things that allowed various FISA warrant applications to be issued as Sasse alluded to while throwing another partisan bias log on the fire.

Helping LEO get FISA warrants is their priority so we're surprised it happened when it involved someone associated with Trump? Guarantee it happens far more than it should, and normally the same Senators turn a blind eye if they think the surveillance might help with national security. Same way they defend torture.

You're too rich claiming that a system built on 9/11 was used just this once because low level career attorneys decided they wanted Trump to go down and jeopardize their entire careers.

You're a joke. People don't risk their jobs for one-off political hits unless they've done it before and did it again. Show me the evidence.

#430 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 04:44 PM | Reply

#429

Thank you. That's my point. I guarantee that any other abuses weren't made because the subjects were Trumpers.

#431 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 04:46 PM | Reply

"...the report states that Horowitz is extremely concerned about the FBI's FISA abuses because, if they did not follow legal protocol in obtaining a surveillance warrant against a presidential campaign's aide, then to what lengths is the FBI going to obtain surveillance warrants against average Americans?"

Yeah.
We've known that since the whole Snowden thing, when it was revealed that of 11,000+ FISA warrant requests, judges had said "NO" to only 2.
That's not really what's at stake here.

#432 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 04:49 PM | Reply

That's not really what's at stake here.

POSTED BY SNOOFY

Yeah, I think it is. It's what the report recommends: internal systemic changes to halt abuses of the warrant process.

The GOP is trying to turn this particular abuse into a partisan attack against the attorneys who committed them. Reality is that it's probably what they do to get such a high issuance rate that had nothing to do with any direct personal political feelings about their actions.

I think they're trained to get them through because LEO needs them and they'll cut corners to help them get them.

#433 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 04:55 PM | Reply

I meant, what's at stake with respect to the report finding that the investigation was not improper.

I don't think anyone's surprised that secret courts with precious little oversight are not tools of the prosecution, and not the prosecuted.
When we built the FISA system in 1978, I don't think anyone was expecting them to not rubber stamp FISA requests. Nobody's that stupid.

#434 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 05:01 PM | Reply

make that
"are tools of the prosecution, not the prosecuted."

#435 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 05:01 PM | Reply

Tony,

Please see #409.

#436 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 05:47 PM | Reply

Alternate reality version. Nothing substantive about Horowitz' confirmations was blown up. It. Did. Not. Happen.

It absolutely happened.

The Nunes memo alleged that the Steele dossier was central to the FISA warrants.

The Schiff memo contradicted that. Almost the entirety of the MSM blasted Nunes and lauded Schiff.

Anybody who called into question the voracity of the FISA warrants were excoriated as peddling Fox conspiracies.

Horowitz validated every one of those claims.

Almost everything that Horowitz testified to has already been doggedly reported by the likes of Andrew McCarthy, Kim Strassel, John Solomon, Paul Sperry, Margot Cleveland and others. They were either ignored by the MSM or scoffed at. Now, they are vindicated.

Throw in Durham's brief statement Monday that he disagrees with Horowitz's conclusion that the investigation was adequately predicated and things go from bad to worse.

I was totally blown away by today's testimony. I thought Horowitz would be evasive, coy (the language he used in his report was coy) and overly bureaucratic. It turns out he was congenial, and while careful in his language he was anything but evasive. He had impressive command of the facts and made it very clear that what he uncovered was beyond alarming.

Another potential bombshell is the Michael Flynn case.

#437 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 05:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

So, now that Tony and Snoofy can't defend how these FISA warrants were obtained, the narrative becomes -without any evidence, of course - that this is business as usual; that it happens all of the time.

Do you realize how much of an indictment that is of the FBI as an institution - that they routinely cut corners and flat-out mislead and lie to FISC judges and that these judges in turn just go along with all of it because they don't take their responsibilities seriously.

#438 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 05:57 PM | Reply

The Nunes memo alleged that the Steele dossier was central to the FISA warrants.

The Schiff memo contradicted that. Almost the entirety of the MSM blasted Nunes and lauded Schiff.

For the final time, I have no quarrel with those facts. I agree. For the umpteenth time.

The sole Trump person under FISA investigation was Page and nothing came from that warrant. Page was never publicly outed as a target until Nunes did.

The FISA issue has no influence over the findings that the predication of the Russia investigation which included Trump officials connected to their activities and all the resultant evidence, indictments and convictions coming from said investigation.

That what Horowitz confirmed over and over again.

#439 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 06:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Do you realize how much of an indictment that is of the FBI as an institution"

Get Woke, Son!

#440 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-11 06:10 PM | Reply

So, now that Tony and Snoofy can't defend how these FISA warrants were obtained, the narrative becomes -without any evidence, of course - that this is business as usual; that it happens all of the time.

Seriously your making me effing mad. Keep my name out of your lying mouth. The Horowitz report lays out a long list of systemic changes that must be undertaken to make sure that what happened to Page won't happen to others. No evidence? That's the evidence blind man!

II. Recommendations

For the reasons fully described in previous chapters, we recommend the
following:

1. The Department and the FBI should ensure that adequate procedures
are in place for the Office of Intelligence (01) to obtain all relevant and
accurate information, including access to Confidential Human Source

414

(CHS) information, needed to prepare FISA applications and renewal
applications. This effort should include revising: (cont. 415)

And not a single word about anything regarding any employees' political bias. Because Horowitz did not find it to be a problem after inspecting over 1 million pages of work product and conducting interviews with over 100 witnesses.

#441 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 06:14 PM | Reply

Another potential bombshell is the Michael Flynn case.

Still haven't read the actual report, have you?

"Our review included the examination of highly classified information. We were given broad access to relevant materials by the Department and the FBI, including emails, text messages, and instant messages from both the FBI's Top Secret SCINet and Secret FBINet systems, as well as access to the FBI's classified Delta database, which FBI agents use to record their interactions with, and information received from, [confidential human sources]."

"FBI and NSD officials told us that the Crossfire Hurricane team ultimately did not seek FISA surveillance of [George] Papadopoulos, and we are aware of no information indicating that the team requested or seriously considered FISA surveillance of [Paul] Manafort or [Michael] Flynn."

www.washingtonpost.com

Read it and weep. Your bomb is a dud.

#442 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 06:19 PM | Reply

"what he uncovered was beyond alarming."
~Jeff "17 lies are inexcusable, but 17,000 are okay" Jaglowski.

#443 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-11 06:31 PM | Reply

Read it and weep. Your bomb is a dud.

I'm not saying this because I don't think any alternative isn't possible. I'm saying this because Republicans have dominated the US federal government since the time of Reagan and federal law enforcement has never been proven nor known as a radical hotbed for liberals nor liberal politics. By it's very institutional design, the DOJ is an extremely conservative organization who emphasizes ENFORCEMENT, especially post 9/11. Trumpers got the same treatment that anyone caught in their position would have received regardless of how those doing the work personally feel about the subject's politics.

Without tangible evidence otherwise, the wild conspiracy notion of an FBI that was backhandedly trying to hurt Trump while at the same time publicly killing Hillary makes ZERO sense. If they'd wanted to help Hillary they wouldn't have killed her and if they wanted to hurt Trump they had every means necessary of doing so before he was elected.

The rest is lunacy if you believe in the knowable history of the institutions. Sore thumbs get plucked out, not put into places where their skewed judgments could bring Americans harm. The people aren't naked partisans, their bureaucrats doing what they do, thinking that they're helping catch possible bad guys.

#444 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-12-11 06:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#439 | POSTED BY TONYROMA

Fair enough, Tony.

#445 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 06:40 PM | Reply

"what he uncovered was beyond alarming."
~Jeff "17 lies are inexcusable, but 17,000 are okay" Jaglowski.

#443 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Lame

#446 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 06:41 PM | Reply

#446
But true, nonetheless.

#447 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-11 07:00 PM | Reply

#447

No, it really isn't. At best it's a straw man. At worst, it's lame trolling. It's also illustrative that you don't appear interested in discussing the meat of the IG testimony, most likely due to the suit you are donning.

#448 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-11 07:09 PM | Reply

to investigate fine, to make ---- up and hide ---- not fine

#449 | Posted by Maverick at 2019-12-11 07:14 PM | Reply

Based upon what I've seen in this report and following testimony it is my belief that this entire investigation was predicated on political bias and I take into account how Comey instigated the Mueller investigation and how these same actors handled the Clinton email criminal investigation. I freely admit that I don't have official proof of that although given Durham's brief statement on Monday I'm pretty sure he has proof and will be producing it once he concludes his investigation.
#409 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

The entire investigation? Your absolutism is what I question and why I added in the notion that you prop yourself up as being more objective than anyone here.

And no, I don't get angry at anonymous posters on the internet, ESPECIALLY here on the DR. You didn't even offer an accusation of trolling against me; instead went straight to "he's aaaaaaaaaaaaaaangry!" Maybe your trolling against others actually is a front, a measly attempt at masking your sincerity. Maybe not.

BOAZ's willful ignorance is frustrating, but that hardly rises to the level of anger.

#450 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 08:21 PM | Reply

#425 I'm not responding to troll posts.
#427 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Aaaaawwww fcck!

Now my irony meter is spiking!

Down boy, down!

#451 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 08:32 PM | Reply

[Nov 3. 2016]

"The FBI is Trumpland," said one current agent.

This atmosphere raises major questions about how Comey and the bureau he is slated to run for the next seven years can work with Clinton should she win the White House.

The currently serving FBI agent said Clinton is "the antichrist personified to a large swath of FBI personnel," and that "the reason why they're leaking is they're pro-Trump."

www.theguardian.com

#452 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-11 09:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The entire investigation?

We don't know yet.

Comparing and contrasting how the Clinton email criminal investigation was handled, then throw in Comey's machinations to get the Mueller thing going....the Loretta Lynch - Bill Clinton tarmac meeting... all of those events along with certain other caveats and we have a backdrop for what Horowitz testified to yesterday. The Horowitz testimony was shocking to me. It 100% affirmed everything I've read over the past couple of years but never fully believed because it was coming from right-leaning sources and the MSM was SO harsh toward any of it (Fox right wing conspiracies). Then, on Monday, Durham says he disagrees with Horowitz's conclusion that the investigation itself was adequately predicated....

To your point, no, we don't have definitive proof. Yet. I believe it's coming though. Time will tell...

#453 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-12 08:43 AM | Reply

"Then, on Monday, Durham says he disagrees with Horowitz's conclusion that the investigation itself was adequately predicated...."

Not adequately predicated for a full investigation, only a preliminary one:

"Well, I was surprised by the statement. I didn't necessarily know it was going to be released on Monday," Horowitz said, adding that he met in November with Durham"who is working with Attorney General William Barr on an investigation into the origins of the Russia probe. "He said he did not necessarily agree with our conclusion about the opening of a full counterintelligence investigation, which is what this was. But there are also investigative means by which the FBI can move forward with an investigation called a preliminary investigation."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) also asked Horowitz whether Barr or Durham presented anything that would alter his report, which found there was no political bias and there was sufficient evidence to begin the probe. "No," he replied.

www.thedailybeast.com

#454 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-12 08:49 AM | Reply

According to Horowitz' account of the discussion, Durham disagreed with the Horowitz finding that there was an adequate basis to open a full investigation into the Trump campaign and Russia's election interference. However, according to Horowitz, Durham conceded that there was an adequate predicate to open a preliminary investigation into the matter.

The early actions the FBI took to probe the Trump-Russia links could have been taken under just a preliminary investigation. However, according to Horowitz' report, the October 2016 move to seek a surveillance warrant against ex-Trump campaign advisor Carter Page was a step the FBI could only take under a full investigation.

talkingpointsmemo.com

#455 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-12-12 08:52 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort