COLLECTIVE MADNESS


“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Sunday, February 25, 2018

All Crooked Roads Lead to Barack Hussein Obama - Get Kenyatta

7 Deceptions Inside Democrats’ Rebuttal of GOP FISA Memo





The Associated Press

NEW YORK — Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee on Saturday released a purported rebuttal to a four-page House Republican memo from earlier this month that alleges abuse of surveillance authority on the part of Obama-era federal agencies.

The Democratic rebuttal contains misleading claims, omits key details, and, perhaps unintentionally, actually proves the FBI and Department of Justice utilized the infamous, largely discredited 35-page anti-Trump dossier to obtain a FISA court warrant to monitor an individual formerly associated with Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Here are seven key problems with the claims made inside the Democrats’ rebuttal memo.

1 – The House Democratic rebuttal opens with a seemingly deceptive statement that Steele’s dossier “did not inform” the FBI’s decision to start its investigation into Trump’s campaign in late July.

This is the first contention in the rebuttal, which relates it is trying to “correct the record.” However, the Republican memo did not assert that the dossier informed the FBI’s decision to launch its investigation in late July or anytime. Instead, the GOP memo documented that Steele’s dossier formed an “essential part” of the FISA court applications submitted by Obama-era federal agencies to monitor the communications of Carter Page, who briefly served as a volunteer foreign policy adviser to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

Meanwhile, even though House Democrats seem to be rebutting a contention that was not made in the Republican memo, there are possible issues with the rebuttal’s claim that the FBI’s investigative team only received Steele’s “reporting” in mid-September, ostensibly referring to the written dossier.  The Democrats entirely ignore that last July, Steele reportedly traveled to Rome, where he met with an FBI contact to supply the agency with alleged information he found during the course of his anti-Trump work.  The Washington Post reported that Steele met with the FBI on July 5, 2016.  The Democratic memo reveals that the DOJ “accurately informed the court that that the FBI initiated its counterintelligence investigation on July 31, 2016.”  That is 26 days after Steele met with the FBI in Rome.

2 – While perhaps not intending to, the Democratic memo actually confirms that the Obama Justice Department did use Steele’s largely discredited dossier for FISA court applications to monitor Page.

The memo contains a sentence stating that “as DOJ informed the court in subsequent renewals”; but the rest of that sentence is redacted. The next sentence states that “Steele’s reporting about Page’s Moscow meeting,” with the remainder of that sentence also redacted. The next sentence states that “DOJ’s applications did not otherwise rely on Steele’s reporting, including any ‘salacious’ allegations about Trump…” The word “otherwise” indicates that, according to the Democratic memo, DOJ did indeed rely on Steele’s dossier for something.

As a side note, interestingly, the Democrats only use the term “salacious” regarding the dossier, not fully quoting from former FBI Director James Comey’s famous remarks in which he testified that the anti-Trump dossier contained “salacious and unverified” material.

Meanwhile, the Democratic rebuttal goes on to cite specific instances of the FISA applications utilizing Steele’s dossier, with the applications citing Steele’s alleged sources reporting that Page took meetings in Russia.

In a clear attempt to minimize the importance of the dossier, the Democratic memo refers to a 2013 case in which Russian agents allegedly targeted Page for recruitment. In that case, Page was identified in court documents made public as “Male-1” in reference to a case involving three Russian men identified as Russian intelligence agents. The spy ring was accused of seeking information on U.S. sanctions as well as methods of developing alternate sources of energy. The FBI court filings describe “the attempted use of Male-1 as an intelligence source for Russia,” but Page was not accused of having been successfully recruited or spying. The court documents cite no evidence that “Male-1” knew he was talking with alleged Russian agents. That the Obama-era federal agencies needed to still use the dossier in light of that 2013 case may show that the 2013 episode was not enough to obtain a FISA warrant on Page. Steele’s dossier contains claims of updated meetings between Page and Russians that went into the year 2016.
The House Republican memo and a subsequent criminal referral authored by Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) both state that the FISA applications relied heavily on the dossier. Grassley and Graham both reviewed the original FISA applications.

The Grassley-Graham memo relates (emphasis added):
On March 17, 2017, the Chairman and Ranking Member were provided copies of the two relevant FISA applications, which requested authority to conduct surveillance on Carter Page. Both relied heavily on Mr. Steele’s dossier claims, and both applications were granted by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). In December of 2017, the Chairman, Ranking Member and Subcommittee Chairman Graham were allowed to review a total of four FISA applications relying on the dossier to seek surveillance of Mr. Carter Page, as well as numerous other documents relating to Mr. Steele.
3 – The rebuttal leaves out key information that may dispute the Democratic document’s claim that the FISA warrant was “not used to spy on Trump or his campaign.”

The rebuttal claims this is the case because Page “ended his affiliation with the campaign months before DOJ applied for a warrant.”  This is misleading. The FISA warrant gives access to phone calls, email, web browsing history and other electronic records, meaning agents can retrieve any emails or recorded communications from the period Page was affiliated with the campaign and would be able to access any recorded communications with the campaign from that period.  Also, according to reports, the FBI monitored Page while he spoke to then-Trump adviser Steve Bannon about Russia in January 2017.

4 – The rebuttal tries to give legitimacy to the possibly illicit surveillance of Page by noting that two of the presiding federal judges were appointed by President George W. Bush and one by President Ronald Reagan.

However, the Republicans’ issue has never been claims of partisanship on behalf of the judges, but rather the charge that key information was withheld from the judges, primarily the origins of the dossier, which was produced by the controversial Fusion GPS and paid for by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee.  Republicans also charge that the FISA court was not told about credibility issues related to Steele.

5 – The Democratic memo raises immediate questions about the possible use of a second dossier authored by Cody Shearer, a shadowy former tabloid journalist who has long been closely associated with various Clinton scandals.

The rebuttal states that the DOJ provided the FISA court with “additional information obtained through multiple independent sources that corroborate Steele’s reporting.” The rebuttal does not mention the names of the other “independent sources.”

Shearer reemerged in the news cycle last month when the Guardian newspaper reported that the FBI has been utilizing a second dossier authored by Shearer as part of its probe into Trump and alleged Russian collusion.

The Guardian reported the so-called Shearer memo was given to the FBI by Steele in October 2016 to back up some of his claims.

According to the Guardian report, the FBI is still assessing portions of the Shearer memo. The newspaper reported that, like Steele’s dossier, Shearer’s memo cites an “unnamed source within Russia’s FSB” alleging that Trump was compromised by Russian intelligence during a 2013 trip to Moscow in which the future president purportedly engaged in “lewd acts in a five-star hotel.”

Shearer’s name was reportedly associated with the Grassley-Graham criminal referral of Steele, which contains redacted information that Steele received information from someone in the State Department, who in turn had been in contact with a “foreign sub-source” who was in touch with a redacted name described as a “friend of the Clintons.”

Numerous media reports have since stated that the second dossier author mentioned in the Grassley-Graham memo was Shearer, an associate of longtime Clinton friend Sidney Blumenthal.

According to sources who spoke to CNN, Shearer’s information was passed from Blumenthal to Jonathan Winer, who at the time was a special State Department envoy for Libya working under then-Secretary of State John Kerry.
Citing the same source, CNN reported that Shearer’s dossier is “actually a set of notes based on conversations with reporters and other sources.” CNN reported that Shearer had “circulated those notes to assorted journalists, as well as to Blumenthal.”

National Review previously dubbed Shearer a “Creepy Clinton Confidante” and “The Strangest Character in Hillary’s Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy.”

6 – While trying to argue otherwise, the Democratic rebuttal actually confirms the key contention in the Republican memo that the FBI and DOJ failed to inform the FISA court that Steele’s dossier was funded by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) via the Perkins Coie law firm.

In an attempt to rebut the Republican argument that the FISA court was not informed about the dossier’s specific origins, the Democratic memo quotes from an explanation to the court that Steele:
was approached by an identified U.S. person who indicated to Source #1 [Steele] that a U.S.-based law firm had hired the identified U.S. person to conduct research regarding Candidate #1’s ties to Russia. (The identified U.S. person and Source #1 have a long-standing business relationship.) The identified U.S. person hired Source #1 to conduct this research. The identified U.S. person never advised Source #1 as to the motivation behind the research into candidate #1’s ties to Russia.  The FBI speculates that the identified U.S. person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate #1’s campaign.
Contrary to the rebuttal’s characterization, this paragraph is a far cry from informing the court that the dossier utilized in the FISA warrant was paid for by Trump’s primary political opponents, namely Clinton and the DNC.  Also, the general mention of  “a U.S.-based law firm” does not identify to the FISA court the actual firm, Perkins Coie, which is known for its representation of Clinton and the DNC. Further, informing the FISA court about “an identified U.S. person” who hired Steele  fails to actually identify that U.S. person as Glenn Simpson, founder of the controversial Fusion GPS.

The Democrats claim that the above-referenced paragraph proves the Obama-era agencies informed the FISA court about the “political” origins of the dossier. However, the Republican memo specifically and apparently correctly charged that “neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts.”  The Democratic memo fails to dispute that charge.

7 – The Democratic rebuttal omitted key details about the FBI’s internal assessments of Steele and his reporting.

The Democratic memo claims that the Obama-era agencies “repeatedly affirmed to the Committee the reliability and credibility of Steele’s reporting, an assessment also reflected in the FBI’s underlying source documents.”
Actually, the House Republican memo documents that a “source validation report conducted by an independent unit within FBI assessed Steele’s reporting as only minimally corroborated.”

Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.
Written with research by Joshua Klein.

Kenyatta: Going Full Ghetto in desperate attempt to make it "Say it ain't so."

64 comments:

  1. The Moron That Ash Worked To Get Out The Vote For

    February 25, 2018
    The Embarrassing, Hilarious, Can't-Look-Away Trudeau Show
    By Fay Voshell

    See also: Silly costumes were the least problem with Justin Trudeau's 'disaster trip' to India

    Imagine the reaction of the media if President Trump donned lederhosen and tried to do a German folk dance during a trip to meet with Germany's Angela Merkel. Or imagine if India's president, Ram Nath Kovind, arrived for a state visit to Canada dressed as a red-jacketed Canadian Mountie or as a plaid-shirted lumberjack carrying an axe.


    The equivalent of the above is pretty much what Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau attempted during his recent trip to India, where he made himself a laughingstock because of his fervid embrace of the religion of multiculturalism.



    It was quite a show. Nothing was too much for Trudeau to do if it buttressed his devotion to national traditions other than the traditions of his own country, which is supposed to be Canada. Trudeau acted as if he were a representative of India, not Canada. He dressed like an Indian, tried to dance like an Indian, gestured like an Indian.

    Nothing was off limits when it came to his acting, either. As Business Insider reported, "At one point, Trudeau, wearing traditional dress, broke into the Indian dance called the Bhangra, to a mixed reaction on Twitter."

    Oh, it must have been something to see. Or not.

    Some observers, such as Omar Abdullah, former chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir, apparently had had enough of the Trudeau show after three days of the prime minster decking himself out in splendid Indian dress and prancing through the steps of the Bhangra. Abdullah tweeted, "Is this choreographed cuteness all just a bit much now? Also, FYI we Indians don't dress like this every day sir, not even in Bollywood."

    Underlying Trudeau's obvious cultural appropriation of India's tradition of sartorial splendor is the belief that identification with any culture but the Western tradition is virtuous. Pretending to be an Indian from the upper classes or a member of Bollywood is supposedly better than being dressed in a suit or a tuxedo, both of which are ordinary Western dress but both of which may have been deemed by Trudeau as giving off vibes of Western imperialism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He erred even more by hauling his entire family onto the multiculturalist stage, having them all dress in Indian attire while assuming the gestures typical of an Indian greeting. It all looked like a badly staged version of the Von Trapp family done Indian style. Thankfully, the family didn't sing.

      Perhaps some of the messages were unintentional, but at the heart of the Trudeau show is the idea that imitation is the sincerest form of diplomacy.

      It isn't.

      On the contrary, the whole cringe-inducing episode had to have been humiliating for many of the people of Canada, including some of the immigrants from India who are part of Canada's population. What are they to think of their prime minister's ridiculous performances? Surely, they have seen that Trudeau's efforts were not truly diplomatic. Surely, they have noted the insulting fakery. This is to say nothing of the very bad acting and dancing.

      There are some lessons to be learned from Trudeau's bad stagecraft.

      First, ersatz pretenses of multiculturalism coupled with bad acting should never be part of diplomacy. It is diplomatic to understand the history of the nation one is visiting. It is gracious diplomacy to avoid egregious offenses by learning what the host country considers good manners. It is not good diplomacy to present oneself as an imitation citizen of the country that has invited you to visit.

      Second, to state the obvious: Mr. Trudeau supposedly was visiting India to represent Canada, not India itself. Canada has its own integrity and national traditions, which traditions are the ones Mr. Trudeau is supposed to represent. Some of those traditions include parliamentary government vested in the national interests of Canada, which still technically is part of the British Commonwealth. In other words, Canada is Western in its history, not Indian. Mr. Trudeau is a Westerner, though he appears either not to know it or not to like it.

      Third, Trudeau's attachment to the ideals of globalism is obvious. Even if it is at the expense of his own country, he apparently is committed to following the old adage, "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." If he were in Tibet, he would probably attempt to take up a prayer wheel and learn throat-singing. If he were in Japan, he might be inclined to wear a samurai costume and thrum away on the shamisen. Were he in Australia, he might try the "Kangaroo Hop" on the didgeridoo. Nor would he neglect trying out the melodious flugelhorn while in the Swiss alps.

      In any case, he has revealed himself as a chameleon who will try to assume the cultural identity of any nation he visits – any nation other than Canada.

      In view of his bending over backward to be all things to all people, we can hazard a guess that as Trudeau returns to Canada, he will doubtless continue to try to be all things to all peoplekind.



      https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/02/the_embarrassing_hilarious_cantlookaway_trudeau_show.html#ixzz589d5B9xZ

      Delete
    2. .

      Imagine the reaction of the media if President Trump donned lederhosen and tried to do a German folk dance during a trip to meet with Germany's Angela Merkel


      Yea, that would have been almost as bad as his sword dancing episode in Saudi Arabia.

      .

      .

      Delete
  2. 3 – The rebuttal leaves out key information that may dispute the Democratic document’s claim that the FISA warrant was “not used to spy on Trump or his campaign.”

    The rebuttal claims this is the case because Page “ended his affiliation with the campaign months before DOJ applied for a warrant.”

    This is misleading.

    The FISA warrant gives access to phone calls, email, web browsing history and other electronic records, meaning agents can retrieve any emails or recorded communications from the period Page was affiliated with the campaign and would be able to access any recorded communications with the campaign from that period.


    Also, according to reports, the FBI monitored Page while he spoke to then-Trump adviser Steve Bannon about Russia in January 2017.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quirk Sun Feb 04, 10:08:00 PM EST.

      No, Doug, it's just a matter of knowing that just because you want something to be doesn't mean it is. Just because some dork says something is true doesn't actually mean it is true. And, just because someone bolds a comment or even yells it doesn't mean it is true.

      Example...your first sentence from above...

      FISA Warrant Allowed FBI to Spy on Carter Page And ALL OF TRUMP CAMPAIGN

      The FISA request for a warrant to spy on Page came a month after Page had already left the Trump campaign.

      The only way the Feds could spy on ALL OF TRUMP CAMPAIGN is if ALL OF TRUMP CAMPAIGN got on a conference call with Page while the Feds were listening in.

      But we know that wouldn't happen.


      Trump says he never met Page and doesn't know anything about him. His staff says Page was a low level advisor who was never actually officially on the Trump team. Who to believe?

      https://2164th.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-us-media-mindless-fealty-to-rancid.html

      Delete


    2. :-)

      The only way the Feds could spy on ALL OF TRUMP CAMPAIGN is if ALL OF TRUMP CAMPAIGN got on a conference call with Page while the Feds were listening in.
      But we know that wouldn't happen.

      :-)


      Delete
    3. .

      Trump says he never met Page and doesn't know anything about him. His staff says Page was a low level advisor who was never actually officially on the Trump team. Who to believe?

      The White House says Page was an insignificant figure, a volunteer, small potatoes. What could anyone associated with the Team have said to the guy that would be incriminating? what could he have said to them?

      .

      Delete
    4. The FISA warrant gives access to phone calls, email, web browsing history and other electronic records, meaning agents can retrieve any emails or recorded communications from the period Page was affiliated with the campaign and would be able to access any recorded communications with the campaign from that period.

      Delete
    5. You STILL don't see it doesn't take a frigging "Conference Call" ???????

      Delete
  3. Quirk Sun Feb 04, 11:55:00 AM EST


    .

    The Nunes Memo


    Both sides are talking about the Nunes memo, one side praising it and one side berating it. It's is easy to become confused in the cacophony surrounding it.

    There is a solution. Read it.

    It is only 3 1/2 pages long. Read it slowly and carefully. Determine what is mere 'assertion' and what is stated fact, what is implied and what is proven. Ignore what people tell you it says and means and determine those things for yourself. Ignore the assumptions and concentrate on the facts. In other words, think.

    I realize this is asking a lot of some here but try.

    It should be pretty clear what substance the memo holds.

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Deuce ☂ Sun Feb 04, 01:09:00 PM EST

      I never thought of actually reading it.
      Once again, thanks for your scholarly interpretation for those of us trapped in the vulgate.

      Delete
  4. President Donald Trump and the White House struck back at Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee after they released their rebuttal memo to the so-called Nunes memo.

    Trump said the rebuttal was "a total political and legal BUST" and described actions by the Department of Justice that were "SO ILLEGAL."

    ...

    That the FISA court and multiple senior officials — including those who had been appointed by Trump — approved multiple renewals of the Page application indicates the FBI had substantial evidence to justify extending its surveillance of the former campaign adviser.

    ...

    According to both the Schiff memo and previous news reports, the DOJ gave the FISA court enough information which made clear that the dossier was produced as opposition-research against a candidate in the 2016 campaign. Moreover, the Democratic memo contains specific portions of the DOJ's explanation to the court regarding the dossier's funding which make clear that it was commissioned as opposition-research.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nunes on Dem Memo:

      "What you basically will read in the Democratic memo is they are advocating that it is okay for the FBI and [Justice Department] to use political dirt paid for by one campaign and use it against the other campaign," he said.

      http://thehill.com/homenews/house/375459-nunes-dem-memo-doesnt-change-anything-proves-intel-abuse-occurred

      Delete


    2. .

      Makes perfect sense to me!

      .


      Delete
    3. At least they're consistent:

      "No reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case..."

      ...it was just a private insecure server, and she only destroyed tens of thousands of emails.

      Delete
    4. .

      "What you basically will read in the Democratic memo is they are advocating that it is okay for the FBI and [Justice Department] to use political dirt paid for by one campaign and use it against the other campaign," he said.

      And we know this because...

      Nunes tells us so?

      You mean David 'Deep Throat' Nunes, the guy who lied about those secret talking point he got during his midnight run to the White House, the ones provided to him by a 'secret source', the secret source being a White Hose official, the info he had to rush to deliver to Trump to keep him in the loop about some very serious new information, that Nunes.

      You would think if White House aides wanted to get some info to Trump they could find a less circuitous method.

      .

      Delete
    5. And we know this because...

      I was replying to Sam's post.

      It says:

      "According to both the Schiff memo and previous news reports, the DOJ gave the FISA court enough information which made clear that the dossier was produced as opposition-research against a candidate in the 2016 campaign. Moreover, the Democratic memo contains specific portions of the DOJ's explanation to the court regarding the dossier's funding which make clear that it was commissioned as opposition-research."

      Comprendo?

      Of course not if it requires you to ever admit you're wrong.

      Delete
    6. .

      Dougie, Dougie, Dougie, don't get you panties in a twist.

      You put up a quote from Nunes. It is his interpretation of what the Dems were saying in their memo. I responded to that quote and reflected on the integrity, honesty and judgement of that source.

      Get over it, son.

      .

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. It's called logic, but in your World, namecalling trumps logic.

      Delete
  5. THE DEMOCRATS’ MEMO: CHARGE AND RESPONSE

    https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/democrat_memo_charge_and_response.pdf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1.
      CHARGE:
      “Christopher Steele’s raw intelligence reporting did not inform the FBI’s
      decision to initiate its counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016.”

      RESPONSE:
      As stated in the declassified GOP memo on FISA abuse, information about Trump
      campaign advisor George Papadopoulos “triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence
      investigation in the late July 2016 by FBI agent Peter Strzok.” Once underway, the investigation
      was fueled by Christopher Steele’s dossier, which the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal
      Bureau of Investigation (FBI) used to get a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant
      on Carter Page.

      DOJ and FBI’s reliance on the DNC- and Clinton-campaign funded dossier in
      court filings, not the overall investigation, is the focus of the GOP memo.

      Delete
  6. I can see Bug-eyed Schiff writing this one:

    CHARGE: The GOP memo does not cite evidence that Steele disclosed to Yahoo News
    details included in the FISA warrant. (p. 6)

    RESPONSE: As noted in the Democrat memo, both the initial FISA application and the Steele
    dossier include the allegation from Steele that Carter Page met with two specific Russians, Igor
    Sechin and Igor Diveykin, in July 2016.
    A September 2016 article by Michael Isikoff of Yahoo
    News contains the exact same allegation, attributed to a “well-placed Western intelligence
    source.”
    Steele has admitted to meeting with Yahoo News in September 2016, and Isikoff has
    publicly confirmed that Steele was a source for the article.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The life of Christopher Steele reads like the script of an international spy thriller.

    From the shores of Yemen to MI6 offices in Moscow and London, the British spy amassed an impressive career before he compiled the infamous yet seminal dossier about then-US presidential candidate Donald Trump’s ties to Russia in 2016.

    ...

    Here’s a look at how Steele became a vital intelligence source on both sides of the Atlantic – and a defining figure in the Russia investigation in the process:

    * Steele’s story begins in an unlikely location — on a colonial army base in the port of Aden, Yemen, on the Arabian Sea, where he was born in 1964.

    * Steele’s father was a weather forecaster for the British military, which meant that he spent much of his childhood in far-flung locations around the world.

    * In addition to Yemen, he spent time in Cyprus and in the Shetland Islands of Scotland, where he developed a passion for bird-watching.


    Engraging Republicans

    ReplyDelete
  8. .

    He Said. She Said.

    In response the initial post Deuce put up and in addition to laughing boy's numerous posts, I can put up a half dozen that say the opposite. The only way it will be settled is if transcripts of both the FBI application for the warrant and the warrant itself are made public so we can see what the FBI used as justification and what the warrant actually authorizes. Trump can release both of them. He's already released enough info that there should be no more pretense of concern of 'sources and methods'. I'm sure he is pondering this right now and will soon be releasing the info in the name of full disclosure and to clear all of this up.

    The House Intelligence Committee under Nunes has become a running joke. It has been since he made his midnight run to the White House to get those talking points he made public without telling anyone else on his committee. It has become thoroughly politicized unlike the one in the Senate.

    The only way to get to the bottom of this distraction is to release everything.

    Is Nunes really looking for clarity and transparency? that's questionable. Before writing his memo and sending it to the floor of the House and then on to the White House, the Dems asked to have the FBI come in in a closed door session and under oath explain what they did in the application process. Nunes refused. Why ruin a good story with a few facts?

    .

    ReplyDelete
  9. .

    Trump said the rebuttal was "a total political and legal BUST" and described actions by the Department of Justice that were "SO ILLEGAL."

    Illegal?

    Where are the grand juries, the indictments, the arrests?

    .

    ReplyDelete
  10. Maybe Adam Schiff has more of a sense of humor than I’d have given him credit for. The House Intelligence Committee’s ranking Democrat begins his long-awaited memo — the minority response to the Nunes memo that was penned by staffers of the committee’s Republican majority — by slamming Chairman Devin Nunes’s unconscionable “risk of public exposure of sensitive sources and methods for no legitimate purpose.”

    ...

    The FBI and the Justice Department heavily relied on the Steele dossier’s uncorroborated allegations. You know this is true because, notwithstanding the claim that “only narrow use” was made “of information from Steele’s sources,” the Democrats end up acknowledging that “only narrow use” actually means significant use — as in, the dossier was the sine qua non of the warrant application.

    The memo concedes that the FISA-warrant application relied on allegations by Steele’s anonymous Russian hearsay sources that:

    Page met separately while in Russia with Igor Sechin, a close associate of Vladimir Putin and executive chairman of Roseneft, Russia’s state-owned oil company, and Igor Divyekin, a senior Kremlin official. Sechin allegedly discussed the prospect of future U.S.-Russia energy cooperation and “an associated move to lift Ukraine-related western sanctions against Russia.”


    Harms More than Helps

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      Hmmm.

      The Dem's response memo says the FBI investigation was initially launched because of information on Popadopolous.

      The Nunes memo says the same thing.

      But Andrew McCarthy says no it wasn't.

      .

      Delete
    2. Please provide the quote where Andrew McCarthy says it wasn't.

      Delete
  11. The ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee Rep. Adam Schiff explained why the GOP memo’s central claim – that law enforcement agencies improperly obtained a surveillance warrant for one of Trump’sR campaign associates – doesn’t add up.

    ...

    Schiff’s memo clarifying the allegations made in the Nunes memo was initially sent back to the House Intelligence Committee for redactions before Trump cleared its release on Saturday.

    Trump tweeted his displeasure at the memo shortly after unsealing it.

    ...

    “Wait a minute, Mr. President. Am I a phony, or sleazy, a monster or little? Surely you know the key to a good playground nickname is consistency,” Schiff tweeted.

    “I thought you were supposed to be good at this.”


    ReplyDelete
  12. Meanwhile....

    RECORD CROWD FLOCKS TO FL GUN SHOW....DRUDGE

    ReplyDelete
  13. The paywall trend may have some other consequences by limiting national "conversations" based on shared news.

    ...

    Strict paywalls may also lead to a greater "digital divide" with a segment of the population having access to high-quality news, analysts note.

    "From a journalist's perspective, the big game is to be important to the community," said Rick Edmonds, a media business analyst at the Poynter Institute.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Replies
    1. Excellent advertising technique to put a hook in the wallet of many a sucker.

      Delete
    2. The best ad line I've seen lately is:

      "Eat and lose weight"

      Pure genius....

      Delete
    3. It really works if you're like Quirk and spend all day spouting shit.

      Delete
    4. A diamond is forever

      -DeBeers, 1948

      Delete
    5. But your marriage won't survive your first affair

      -DeBobo, 2018

      Delete
    6. A little dab'll do ya

      - BrylCreem, 1955

      Delete
    7. If anyone here knows the secret of making shit smell sweet, it's our Quirkstar.

      A unique and precious talent to possess if one's intentions are noble, and if ignoble an easy path to a good paycheck.

      Delete
    8. Breakfast of Champions

      Wheaties, 1930

      Delete
    9. DOES SHE…OR DOESN’T SHE?

      Clairol, 1964

      Delete
    10. A Mars a day helps you work, rest, and play

      - Mars 1980

      Delete
    11. I THINK, THEREFORE IBM

      IBM, 1988

      https://www.thebalance.com/best-advertising-taglines-ever-39208

      Delete
    12. MELTS IN YOUR MOUTH, NOT IN YOUR HANDS

      M&Ms, 1950s

      Delete
    13. Probably fake

      - Louis Vuitton, 1854

      Delete
    14. Don't read the comments

      - Steve Chen (YouTube founder), 2005

      Delete


    15. samMon Feb 26, 12:15:00 AM EST
      A little dab'll do ya

      - BrylCreem, 1955


      BEST BRYLCREAM QUOTE, EVER:

      "I got the Feds so far up my ass I can taste the Brylcreem." - Junior Soprano

      Delete
  15. Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf is warning residents of a possible ICE raid that could happen within the next 24 hours.

    According to Schaaf, she learned of the raids from credible sources who say the Immigration and Customs Enforcement is preparing to conduct a sweep in the Bay Area.

    ...

    Full statement here:

    News from: Office of Mayor Libby Schaaf

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
    February 24, 2018

    Mayor Schaaf Encourages Residents to Consult Immigration Resources Due to Potential ICE Activity

    Oakland, CA – Earlier today, I learned from multiple credible sources that the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is preparing to conduct an operation in the Bay Area, including Oakland, starting as soon as within the next 24 hours.

    As Mayor of Oakland, I am sharing this information publicly not to panic our residents but to protect them.

    ...

    ReplyDelete
  16. MUSLIM TERRORISTS TOPPED MASS SHOOTINGS IN 2 OUT OF 3 YEARS
    Muslims are less than 1% of the United States population, but 33% of major mass shootings.


    February 26, 2018 Daniel Greenfield

    https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/269382/muslim-terrorists-topped-mass-shootings-2-out-3-daniel-greenfield

    STOP MOSLEM IMMIGRATION TO USA NOW !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      Lordy, Bob, don't you have to take shower each time you read that racist bullshit?

      .

      Delete
    2. Nope.

      Reading the truth is in itself cleansing.

      And, again, Islam is not a race.

      You've often had trouble getting that in your noggin.

      Delete
  17. .

    DougSun Feb 25, 10:57:00 PM EST

    You STILL don't see it doesn't take a frigging "Conference Call" ???????


    :o)

    Jesus, Doug, I was joking about the 'conference call'.

    I thought you would get it since I put it in CAPITAL LETTERS (something I rarely do). It was in response to your comment...

    FISA Warrant Allowed FBI to Spy on Carter Page And ALL OF TRUMP CAMPAIGN

    Around the first of the month you were doing a lot of yelling (sometimes even bolding the capital letters). I figured you were just on the rag. Bob was doing the same thing but I just assumed you guys had finally synched.

    Sorry, old timer, I was trying to figure out what you were talking about.

    Say, did you actually go all the way back to the beginning of the month to find that comment? Or, are you now archiving past comments? I thought the only ones who did that around here were Bob and rat.

    Man, I must have really gotten into your head.

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sir, I very very rarely archive comments.

      Delete

    2. Man, I must have really gotten into your head.

      That would result in one hell of a splitting headache, and Doug doesn't show the signs of that.

      Delete
    3. Please provide the quote where Andrew McCarthy says it wasn't.

      (see Quirk Sun Feb 25, 09:38:00 PM EST above)

      Delete
    4. Quirk's never been wrong.

      ...by his account, at least.

      Delete
  18. More confirmation that:

    Canada has a reckless buffoon in charge.

    February 25, 2018
    Silly costumes were the least problem with Justin Trudeau's 'disaster trip' to India
    By Thomas Lifson

    See also: Hilarious: Justin Trudeau dresses like Indian stereotype in India and gets slammed

    The ridiculous costumes worn by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on his trip to India got all the attention in the American media, but the Indian political and media establishment is far more upset over his implied support for secessionist forces seeking an independent secessionist state for Sikhs, known as Khalistan. They are suggesting that the motivation for his trip was to gain political support from Canada’s large immigrant population of Sikhs.



    The Times of India is using unusually blunt language to describe the depth of the disaster in an article titled, “Why Trudeau’s disaster trip may trigger a reset in India-Canada ties.”




    Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau’s visit was a disaster that has little parallel in India’s recent diplomatic history. (snip)

    A prime ministerial visit to a foreign country for a week with a thin official component is always fraught with danger. In addition, moving the official meetings to the very end of the trip indicated that the government meetings were an after-thought. Most foreign leaders who throw in other events almost always front-load the official meetings, and then go on to business or tourism events.

    Here, it was clear from the start that Trudeau came to India to score with his Sikh constituency back home — four out of the six cabinet ministers who travelled with him were Sikh, as were an overwhelming number of MPs who also travelled with him. Until the media barrage in India forced the Canadian side to change tack, Trudeau was not even ready to meet Amarinder Singh, chief minister of Punjab. Even the Canadian high commissioner’s official reception was a celebration of Punjab with the prime minister himself waltzing in on bhangra beats.

    The most glaring misstep was not that Trudeau and his family dressed up in gaudy clothes — that could pass off as a celebration of Indian ethnic chic even if it was slightly over the top. It was Canada’s misunderstanding of the depth of feeling in India on the Khalistan issue. Canadian officials compared the Khalistan issue to the Quebec separatist movement — which counted a single death (of a minister, Pierre Laporte) as opposed to the tens of thousands who were killed at the hands of Khalistanis. Over the years, successive Indian governments have tried to get Canadian governments to change their minds.

    “Canada is the only country where the head of government is comfortable to be seen with Sikh separatists,” said senior government sources. There are Khalistani activists in the UK and Australia, but in no country is the government seen to be pandering to these forces. In the event, the joint statement issued at the end of the week-long visit, which named the Babbar Khalsa and International Sikh Youth Federation along with al-Qaida and ISIS, passed everyone by. There is no political cost either — both these groups have been banned in Canada. Officials said they had flagged the Khalistan problem to the Canadian side before the visit began, including at the NSA level during the last round of security talks.

    As a native of Quebec, whose separatist movemnet roiled Canadian politics for decades, Trudeau ought be sensitive to the political implications in India of his palling aournd with Sikh separatists. But domestic political gains apparently dominated any consideration of the effects of his actions on his host country.

    Isn't this the sort of fear that many expressed about the presidency of Donald Trump? Trudeau, as the son of a leftist Prime Minister of Canada, was assumed to be a master diplomat. Instead, Canada has a reckless buffoon in charge.



    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/02/silly_costumes_were_the_least_problem_with_justin_trudeaus_disaster_trip_to_india.html#ixzz58C1aXBUl

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete