Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

retrofade

Carter Page FISA Documents Are Released by Justice Department

Recommended Posts

Quote

The Trump administration disclosed on Saturday a previously top-secret set of documents related to the wiretapping of Carter Page, the onetime Trump campaign adviser who was at the center of highly contentious accusations by Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee that the F.B.I. had abused its surveillance powers.

Democrats in February rejected the Republican claims that law enforcement officials had improperly obtained the warrant, accusing them of putting out misinformation to defend President Trump and sow doubts about the origin of the Russia investigation. But even as Republicans and Democrats issued dueling memos characterizing the materials underlying the surveillance of Mr. Page, the public had no access to the records.

On Saturday evening, those materials — an October 2016 application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to wiretap Mr. Page, along with several renewal applications — were released to The New York Times and other news organizations that had filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits to obtain them. Mr. Trump had declassified their existence earlier this year.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/21/us/politics/carter-page-fisa.html

Here's the link to the heavily redacted documents.

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/95-carter-page-fisa-documents-foia-release/full/optimized.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vobkfi5.png

sVKXhPz.png

So wait... the Nunes memo was full of shit? I never would have guessed. That sure as +++++ looks like a VERY clear disclose of Steel's connection to Fusion/Perkins Coie. 

Something tells me that Trump is really going to regret declassifying this thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, retrofade said:

Vobkfi5.png

sVKXhPz.png

So wait... the Nunes memo was full of shit? I never would have guessed. That sure as +++++ looks like a VERY clear disclose of Steel's connection to Fusion/Perkins Coie. 

Something tells me that Trump is really going to regret declassifying this thing. 

This is all crapola, until we see the unredacted version. 

Documents with more redactions than text aren't a good sign for Schiff & the tin-foil hat crew.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Thomas said:

This is all crapola, until we see the unredacted version. 

Documents with more redactions than text aren't a good sign for Schiff & the tin-foil hat crew.

 

q6gX8he.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, retrofade said:

Vobkfi5.png

sVKXhPz.png

So wait... the Nunes memo was full of shit? I never would have guessed. That sure as +++++ looks like a VERY clear disclose of Steel's connection to Fusion/Perkins Coie. 

Something tells me that Trump is really going to regret declassifying this thing. 

That literally says what Nunes claimed. Like, exactly what he claimed.

5_FC74_DA5_8_FEB_4_BEA_85_E6_AE8_A091900

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wake me up when Carter Page is capable of anything legit, not just being an unemployed patsy who got used by GCHQ, and then the FBI.

Dude couldn't' find his way out of a paper bag.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

I thought the Steel thing was discredited when it was found several things were inaccurate like Cohen going to Prague.

Hence, why I'm ignoring it entirely.

They don't even kniw which of their phony narratives have or have not been trashed already.

Clueless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, soupslam1 said:

Lots of redactions in the above. What do they say? Is Source #1 Steele? If so, hasn’t his dossier found to be unreliable? 

Steele is source #1. And it should be mentioned that Steele is not the source for any of the allegations in the dossier he compiled. He was never present for any of the conversations between the people he paid and those they talked to. This needs to be stressed. The FBI heard it from a friend (Steele) who heard it from a friend (Steele’s people) who heard it from a friend (various Russians) that Trump and Putin were messing around. But the DOJ is telling the FISA court that their guy had it straight from the Russian horse’s mouth.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

Steele is source #1. And it should be mentioned that Steele is not the source for any of the allegations in the dossier he compiled. He was never present for any of the conversations between the people he paid and those they talked to. This needs to be stressed. The FBI heard it from a friend (Steele) who heard it from a friend (Steele’s people) who heard it from a friend (various Russians) that Trump and Putin were messing around. But the DOJ is telling the FISA court that their guy had it straight from the Russian horse’s mouth.

And the entire dossier was paid for by the political party of the opposition candidate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rebelbacker said:

And the entire dossier was paid for by the political party of the opposition candidate. 

... and the "reports" used to corroborate the dossier to the FISA Court came from the same source as the dossier itself, not an indeoendent source...

 

The entire thing is epic bullshit.

 

Wonder when the shit's gonna hit the fan over Strzok's Iranian ties, and his wife's convenient Obama-appointment to the SEC?

...but he has no bias.

Right.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rebelbacker said:

And the entire dossier was paid for by the political party of the opposition candidate. 

I think that’s well understood. My emphasis on the Steele as a source stuff is because Steele’s reputation as a reliable source in the past should have no bearing at the time of the warrant, because he is not the source of the information. He is the aggregator. You wouldn’t give the Drudge Report the Pulitzer for aggregating an important piece of journalism, because Drudge is not the source of that information. Likewise, the information itself doesn’t come from Steele, but by someone who told Steele what he talked with someone else about. 

This is either a problem of the FBI misleading FISC of what they knew by fudging facts, or it may be a normal course of how the court works. Either way, this is a serious problem, and should be viewed as such regardless of how one views the Trump/Russia stuff. The FISA court is an extremely useful tool to protect the country from foreign adversaries. The question has always been whether or not the government could handle the responsibility to make use all due intelligent discretion with regard to 4th amendment rights.

This is a clear example of an irresponsible trampling of that right. And no amount of the redacted material that might later not redacted will excuse it. It’s an unacceptable lowering of the bar, regardless of whatever other evidence that might point to it being reasonable for the warrant to be approved. The government should do it right, or the FISA needs to burn to the ground.

I usually rest in the burn it camp, but am trying really hard to see things from the opposite position. I can’t see how this is defensible on the part of the DOJ. It’s too powerful a weapon to be mishandled like this.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Thomas said:

Wake me up when Carter Page is capable of anything legit, not just being an unemployed patsy who got used by GCHQ, and then the FBI.

Dude couldn't' find his way out of a paper bag.

 

One more coffee boy?   Trump midst love coffee!

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

I think that’s well understood. My emphasis on the Steele as a source stuff is because Steele’s reputation as a reliable source in the past should have no bearing at the time of the warrant, because he is not the source of the information. He is the aggregator. You wouldn’t give the Drudge Report the Pulitzer for aggregating an important piece of journalism, because Drudge is not the source of that information. Likewise, the information itself doesn’t come from Steele, but by someone who told Steele what he talked with someone else about. 

This is either a problem of the FBI misleading FISC of what they knew by fudging facts, or it may be a normal course of how the court works. Either way, this is a serious problem, and should be viewed as such regardless of how one views the Trump/Russia stuff. The FISA court is an extremely useful tool to protect the country from foreign adversaries. The question has always been whether or not the government could handle the responsibility to make use all due intelligent discretion with regard to 4th amendment rights.

This is a clear example of an irresponsible trampling of that right. And no amount of the redacted material that might later not redacted will excuse it. It’s an unacceptable lowering of the bar, regardless of whatever other evidence that might point to it being reasonable for the warrant to be approved. The government should do it right, or the FISA needs to burn to the ground.

I usually rest in the burn it camp, but am trying really hard to see things from the opposite position. I can’t see how this is defensible on the part of the DOJ. It’s too powerful a weapon to be mishandled like this.

I agree with you. The problem with trusting Steele is that there is no such thing as "vicarious credibility". As you said the info didn't come from Steele. It came from people twice removed from Steele that weren't vetted and completely anonymous. 

The hilarious item is that the original FISA warrant was turned down. It was only granted AFTER the Steele dossier. Without the dossier there is no warrant. 

I agree that this process needs to be looked it in totality. Imagine what abuses have taken place to everyday people? Remember that Page was of such a pressing nature for surveillance that he's never been charged with any crime. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Rebelbacker said:

I agree with you. The problem with trusting Steele is that there is no such thing as "vicarious credibility". As you said the info didn't come from Steele. It came from people twice removed from Steele that weren't vetted and completely anonymous. 

The hilarious item is that the original FISA warrant was turned down. It was only granted AFTER the Steele dossier. Without the dossier there is no warrant. 

I agree that this process needs to be looked it in totality. Imagine what abuses have taken place to everyday people? Remember that Page was of such a pressing nature for surveillance that he's never been charged with any crime. 

I get why Page has not been charged with anything. The FISA warrant is a tool in a counterintelligence investigation where the purpose is to stop the foreign threat, so it doesn’t require the same degree of evidence of a crime that a criminal one does. Because of that, the evidence gained through FISA is not supposed to be used in criminal proceedings. It causes a whole bunch of legal questions in a trial and it undermines the DOJ’s scout’s honor oath that they won’t abuse this tool to trample on the rights of Americans. They might have Page dead to rights, but if their evidence was gathered through the FISA warrant it leaves them open to a compelling fruit of the poisoned tree argument.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

I get why Page has not been charged with anything. The FISA warrant is a tool in a counterintelligence investigation where the purpose is to stop the foreign threat, so it doesn’t require the same degree of evidence of a crime that a criminal one does. Because of that, the evidence gained through FISA is not supposed to be used in criminal proceedings. It causes a whole bunch of legal questions in a trial and it undermines the DOJ’s scout’s honor oath that they won’t abuse this tool to trample on the rights of Americans. They might have Page dead to rights, but if their evidence was gathered through the FISA warrant it leaves them open to a compelling fruit of the poisoned tree argument.

 

I get that. My point is that Page was used as a pretext to get the warrant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...