FISA Memo "bomb" went off in Washington
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
Hi everybody,
just learned about a few very recent things in Washington, concerning the 4 page FISA memo which was delivered to the House of representatives. Several representatives have already mentioned to the press, that it contains rather schocking and explosive information that would show that the FISA was misused and there were practices in place against the presidential candidate Trump, instigated by Obama government, the FBI and the Hillary Clinton campaign.
Just an example from a tweet by one representative
The classified report compiled by House Intelligence is deeply troubling and raises serious questions about the upper echelon of the Obama DOJ and Comey FBI as it relates to the so-called collusion investigation.
— Ron DeSantis (@RepDeSantis) 18. Januar 2018
and also
While the report is classified as Top Secret, I believe the select committee should, pursuant to House rules, vote to make the report publicly available as soon as possible. This is a matter of national significance and the American people deserve the truth.
— Ron DeSantis (@RepDeSantis) 18. Januar 2018
We'll see whether or not those covering up will succeed in keepting the information from the American people.
Another representative mentioned that illegal activities had been conducted which might cause a lot of people in the FBI and ministry of justice to lose their jobs, some even going to jail ...
What has happened here is actually much worse then the Watergate scandal, when president Nixon gave orders to break in at Democratic party center at the Watergate building to find material to use against them
Watch some coverage of the matter here on YouTube
Rep. Gaetz Discusses FISA Memo on the Sean Hannity Show
I wonder what will come of it in the next few weeks ... seems like the "backfire" has been ignited 
Comments
-
@Wolfgang said:
Hi everybody,
just learned about a few very recent things in Washington, concerning the 4 page FISA memo which was delivered to the House of representatives.One of the interesting facts about this "bombshell" memo, Wolfgang, is that it was NOT "delivered to the House of Representatives." It was WRITTEN/COMPILED by the House of Representatives, Rep. Devin Nunes, to be specific.
Nunes, you may well remember, is the House Intelligence Committee chairperson who traveled, under cover and without notice to anyone, to the White House late at night one day last year to receive information on what turned out to be legal unmasking activities, then, in one of the more awkward occasions of the political year, returned the next day to hold a press conference and to brief the president ON INFORMATION THAT HE HAD RECEIVED FROM THE WHITE HOUSE 12 HOURS EARLIER!
As for the contents of the memo, those excited about its alleged atrocities would do well to listen to the contrary view of Intelligence Committee ranking member, Adam Schiff, of California. Schiff, who speaks with measured, carefully monitored word choice, says the memo includes "a profoundly misleading set of talking points drafted by Republican staff attacking the FBI and its handling of the investigation." He also claims it is "rife with factual inaccuracies and referencing highly classified materials that most Republican Intelligence Committee members were forced to acknowledge they had never read," a reality, Schiff believes, which "is meant only to give Republican House members a distorted view of the FBI." Such a practice "may help carry White House water, but it is a deep disservice to our law enforcement professionals," Schiff contends.
And one other thing about the content of this "bombshell" memo: We don't know what it says. Yes, we have a bunch of partisan politicians voicing their characterizations and conclusions about it, but none of them has told us what's in it. So all that we know about the memo comes from headlines screamed into the public discourse: "Shocking!" "Worse than Watergate!"
Until we see the memo - if we see the memo - and until we are able to assess its reliability, I suggest we reserve judgment. [A note on political strategy: I don't know that this is their plan, but it could be smart politics for Trump defenders to rant and rave about a memo that won't be released. They get to cry "Wolf!" without ever having to explain why they cried "Wolf!" when it was really more of a rat terrier.]
One other thing: Check out THIS REPORT FROM BUSINESS INSIDER, which details the curious and concerning roles of Russian Twitter bots and Wikileaks in the memo controversy.
-
Bill, this is one time I really hope you are right. Really, really hope.
-
By the way, after 1 year presidency Trump, here's a list of what has happened:
Year One List: 81 major Trump achievements, 11 Obama legacy items repealed -
Some logical observations in the wake of the FISA Memo (from P.C. Roberts, whom some may not like ... I would encourage you to read what he had to say anyways and consider the message instead of ignoring due to the messenger)
The main function of the National Security Administration is to collect the dirt on members of the house and senate, the staffs, principal contributors, and federal judges. The dirt is used to enforce silence about the crimes of the security agencies.
The blackmail mechanism was put into gear the minute the news reported that the House Intelligence Committee had assembled proof that the FBI, DOJ, and DNC created Russiagate as a conspiracy to unseat President Trump. Members of Congress with nothing to hide demanded the evidence be released to the public. Of course, it was to be expected that release of the facts would be denounced by Democrats, but Republicans, such as Rep. Mike Conaway (R, Texas), himself a member of the committee, joined in the effort to protect the Democrats and the corrupt FBI and DOJ from exposure. Hiding behind national security concerns, Conaway opposes revealing the classified information. “That’d be real dangerous,” he said. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/48637.htm
As informed people know, 95% of the information that is classified is for purposes that have nothing to do with national security. The House Intelligence Committee memo has no information in it related to any security except that of Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Hillary, Obama, Mueller, Rosenstein, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, the DNC, and the presstitute media. The logical assumption is that every member of Congress opposed to informing the American public of the Russiagate conspiracy to unseat the President of the United States is being blackmailed by the security agencies who planned, organized, and implemented the conspiracy against the President of the United States and American democracy.
-
@Wolfgang said:
The main function of the National Security Administration is to collect the dirt on members of the house and senate, the staffs, principal contributors, and federal judges. The dirt is used to enforce silence about the crimes of the security agencies.
The blackmail mechanism was put into gear the minute the news reported that the House Intelligence Committee had assembled proof that the FBI, DOJ, and DNC created Russiagate as a conspiracy to unseat President Trump. Members of Congress with nothing to hide demanded the evidence be released to the public. Of course, it was to be expected that release of the facts would be denounced by Democrats, but Republicans, such as Rep. Mike Conaway (R, Texas), himself a member of the committee, joined in the effort to protect the Democrats and the corrupt FBI and DOJ from exposure. Hiding behind national security concerns, Conaway opposes revealing the classified information. “That’d be real dangerous,” he said. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/48637.htm
As informed people know, 95% of the information that is classified is for purposes that have nothing to do with national security. The House Intelligence Committee memo has no information in it related to any security except that of Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Hillary, Obama, Mueller, Rosenstein, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, the DNC, and the presstitute media. The logical assumption is that every member of Congress opposed to informing the American public of the Russiagate conspiracy to unseat the President of the United States is being blackmailed by the security agencies who planned, organized, and implemented the conspiracy against the President of the United States and American democracy.
As is usual for him, Mr. Roberts draws conclusions based on inferences of unknown validity:
- He says "the main function" of the NSA is "to collect dirt" on government officials, but offers no proof.
- He writes of a "Russiagate conspiracy" to unseat President Trump, but offers no proof.
- He claims "95%" of classified information has that status for reasons unrelated to national security, but offers no proof.
- He claims to know what's not in the infamous memo, but hasn't seen it, so he can't possibly know what not in it.
- He claims that every opponent of "informing the public," I guess via the memo's release, is being blackmailed by security agencies... you guessed it, but offers no proof.
Any of us can create a collection of unfounded conjectures that can't be disproven because insufficient information exists to judge their truthfulness. Mr Roberts has created a web-based career out of such conjectures.
-
Here's some more very interesting information with some background
"Brazen Plot To Exonerate Hillary Clinton" And Frame Trump Unraveling, Says Former Fed Prosecutor
-
An interesting development in the evolving farce that is this alleged memo: Congressional Republicans - the authors of the memo - won't allow the Justice Department or the FBI to see it!
Now why do you suppose those GOPers don't want the FBI to see all the "proof" they have collected about FBI misdeeds? Wouldn't they want Trump's appointed FBI director to know about it and be able to clean up and clean house? My guess is they know they don't have anything resembling proof of misdeeds. What they have instead is a collection of uninformed, misleading, and manufactured innuendo. To air the report - to distribute it to people who could fact-check it and identify its errors - would not help the cause of distraction from the developing storm that is the Mueller probe. So they keep the memo mysteriously under wraps - let the rumors fly - and at the same time, take advantage of the Russian bots which are spreading the "release the memo" hashtag all over the world.
During the 2016 campaign, right around the time of the infamous Trump Tower meeting between Don Jr and several Russian operatives, candidate Donald Trump promised a major speech on all the bad things Hillary Clinton had done. That speech never happened, likely because Don Jr's meeting with the Russians didn't produce the dirt Don and Don Jr expected it to. BUT, simply telling the public that he was going to give a speech supported his cause, if only for a short time. In the same way, House GOPers SAYING there's a memo (that they wrote) that says terrible things about the FBI helps distract from the Mueller probe... at least until the public figures out that there's nothing more to the memo than there was to Don Sr's big speech on Clinton.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
An interesting development in the evolving farce that is this alleged memo: Congressional Republicans - the authors of the memo - won't allow the Justice Department or the FBI to see it!Now why do you suppose those GOPers don't want the FBI to see all the "proof" they have collected about FBI misdeeds? Wouldn't they want Trump's appointed FBI director to know about it and be able to clean up and clean house?
I don't think so .... sounds more like the FBI director and echelon are involved on the wrong side
-
Now why do you suppose those GOPers don't want the FBI to see all the "proof" they have collected about FBI misdeeds? Wouldn't they want Trump's appointed FBI director to know about it and be able to clean up and clean house? My guess is....
Bad guess.
GOPers don't want the FBI to see the proof for the same reason any lawyer doesn't tell, blow by blow, what he knows about the other side.
Like Wolfgang already said.
A lot of speculation follows terms like
" My guess is"
" likely because"I can relate:
Sometimes in a foreign country, when food is served, I look it over and do the same thing. -
@Wolfgang said:
@Bill_Coley said:
An interesting development in the evolving farce that is this alleged memo: Congressional Republicans - the authors of the memo - won't allow the Justice Department or the FBI to see it!Now why do you suppose those GOPers don't want the FBI to see all the "proof" they have collected about FBI misdeeds? Wouldn't they want Trump's appointed FBI director to know about it and be able to clean up and clean house?
I don't think so .... sounds more like the FBI director and echelon are involved on the wrong side
I think it's hard to imagine the scenario under which the FBI director is "on the wrong side" where the infamous memo is concerned. The memo has to do with FBI activities > @GaoLu said:
Now why do you suppose those GOPers don't want the FBI to see all the "proof" they have collected about FBI misdeeds? Wouldn't they want Trump's appointed FBI director to know about it and be able to clean up and clean house? My guess is....
Bad guess.
GOPers don't want the FBI to see the proof for the same reason any lawyer doesn't tell, blow by blow, what he knows about the other side.
Like Wolfgang already said.
A lot of speculation follows terms like
" My guess is"
" likely because"I can relate:
Sometimes in a foreign country, when food is served, I look it over and do the same thing.I'm curious about your analysis of word choice.
You claim that "a lot of speculation follows terms" such as "my guess is" and "likely because." How much speculation follows phrases such as "Bad guess. GOPers don't want the FBI to see the proof...." (your post) and "I don't think so .... sounds more like...." (Wolfgang's post)
Or put differently, how are your or Wolfgang's proposals post any less "speculation" than mine?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
Or put differently, how are your or Wolfgang's proposals post any less "speculation" than mine?Oh, I am sure our speculations are all much the same! The point is to discern wild speculation from fact with an illustration as to why.
