I think people were saying that because it was a no-knock warrant, which was reported as being pretty unusual for a situation like this. And presumably that warrant was issued after additional evidence was gathered (evidence that may have already been gathered prior to this FISA warrant for all we know, unless we take the Nunes memo at face value, which we probably shouldn’t).
Maybe we need a lawyer in here but I haven’t read any commentary surrounding this supports your position that the FBI was under any obligation, legal or otherwise, to disclose hypothetical political motivations behind the dossier.
Steele was so concerned about what he saw when he did his paid opposition research that he thought it was criminal activity and notified the FBI. The FBI had already taken notice of the nefarious Russian connections with the campaign. This does in no way confirm that the FBI misled the FISC- the Steele stuff was just a minor part of what the warrant was issued for which is why the FBI decries the Republican cherry picking.
Since there is no transcript or substantial summary of McCabe’s testimony from December and apparently it was “confidential” but not classified, Nunes has left no way for us to verify his claims. Unless, of course, he and the Republicans on the Intelligence Committee were to also vote to release any transcripts. It is reasonable to infer that their failure to make such a move, while asserting that their release of their conclusively memo with no supporting evidence is to ensure transparency for the American people, is not credible.
I wonder if republicans would be ok with democrats doing this.
For example Clinton could have said she and some fellow democrats got together and totally investigated the email server thing and decided that Comey and the FBI were just out to get her and there is nothing to the whole thing. Honest Amos…there was tons of testimony that proves it (but it was confidentially given so take her word for it)!
If someone were unfamiliar with the history of WWII, and that was the information given, do you think that those people would think of Japan as a belligerent or an ally?
There’s a pretty big difference between saying “we don’t know how much the Steele stuff contributed to the warrant” vs saying it “was just a minor part”. The first would be an admission of a lack of information, which I wouldn’t have quibbled with. The latter is a claim of knowledge, which I’d like a cite for.
That’s fair. That, of course, is going to be a problem with this memo altogether, though. The FBI has publicly released a statement saying the memo contains material omissions of fact, a statement backed by the (Trump-appointed) director. Given that statement and the lack of corroborating evidence, what does Nunes et al expect Democrats to do with this other than just shrug?
Thanks, I think I get it now. I guess my mind was just filling in the holes in that statement with knowledge about Pearl Harbor that someone who was unfamiliar with history wouldn’t have been able to do.
He doesn’t expect the Dems to do anything about it. The purpose of releasing it is to poison the well so the water that the base is drinking will taste the way they want it to taste. It’s vague, it’s unspecific and it’s just twisted enough to make the whole enterprise by the FBI look crooked and biased. Perfect Republican “evidence”.
This whole thing is being blow waaaay out of proportion.
Page was on the FBI’s radar since 2013. Any warrant sent to the FISA court will include all information they felt the judge needed which almost certainly included more than the Steele dossier.
Also, even if the Steele dossier was paid for by democrats that does not in and of itself make it wrong.
Another thing, FISA warrants are trivial to get. By which I mean if the FBI wants one they almost always get one. Want to know how many FISA warrant requests have been rejected? 12 from 1979 to 2013.
To suggest that this all hinges on ONLY the Steele dossier is ridiculous not to mention even if it did no one has proven why the FBI shouldn’t have used it. Because it was paid for by democrats?
All of the thought-to-be-blockbuster claims of the memo are indeed worthy of a good “Cite?” response. Particularly since if McCabe’s testimony was so clear cut on that point that one would imagine there would have been an immediate release of his testimony or a press conference afterwards proclaiming that the Steele dossier was the sole basis for the FISA warrant against Carter Page.
The previously known information, however, indicates it wasn’t. Particularly the fact that the Australian tip was already known to the FBI at that point and apparently Carter Page had previously been a FISA warrant target in 2013 due to his Russian-related activities.
I don’t know what Nunes expects. What I think would be great is if Dopers like BobLibDem didn’t add their own unsubstantiated claims to the already-muddy waters.
For the record, I obviously have no way of independently verifying what McCabe testified about the significance of the Steele dossier in the warrant application(s). Here is one data point where Nunes said that McCabe testified that “no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.” If the Dems release their own memo that casts further light on that statement, or if McCabe or the FBI issue some clarification, I’ll take those into consideration as well in forming my opinion on the matter. If BobLibDem wants to present some evidence that it “was just a minor part”, I’d take that into consideration as well.