Do you think that this memo justifies any action on anyone’s part? Like, should Trump purge the DOJ/FBI and shut down the Mueller investigation because of this memo?
I’m curious what your impression is of the underlying content contained in the Steele dossier. Do you think the Steele dossier was:
A) completely true
B) mostly true
C) half true
D) mostly false
E) completely false
?
I think most people have concluded it was at least mostly bullshit, but you don’t seem to share that view. Am I misunderstanding your position here?
From The Twist in the Nunes Memo - The Atlantic
“In addition to the vague point about the dossier’s “essential” role in the warrant application, it’s unclear what other information was in the application, beyond what the memo has specified. There’s also no legal prohibition on using partisan information in such an application, as Orin Kerr explains. And as Jim Sciutto notes, FISA warrants have to be renewed every 90 days, and the FBI couldn’t have simply relied on the dossier for those. It would have to prove it was obtaining valuable intelligence from the wiretap.”
Of course. But there’s a higher likelihood that it might be.
This seems circular.
If this was directed at me, I think it would be foolish for Trump to shut down the Mueller investigation / fire Mueller. The political optics of it would be absolutely terrible, and the longer the Mueller investigation goes on, the more likely it appears to me that it’s going to end with a whimper, not a bang. I suspect that it will conclude that Trump did not collude with Russia. It would be like blowing up the courtroom when the jury was about to announce one’s verdict as “not guilty”.
I don’t know how extensively these claims have been investigated, but as far as actions justified by it, I would think it would justify some additional investigation and fact-finding. “If true” (sounds like a cop-out even as I write it), I’d be uncomfortable with the idea that the FBI used unverified oppo research to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on an American citizen. If they investigate (or already have) and find that BobLibDem was right, and the Steele dossier “was just a minor part”, then good, I’d feel a little bit better about our secret surveillance court and the people that make warrant requests to them.
Right, the worst thing anyone can do right now is to question the Nunes dossier with unsubstantiated accusations that the FBI isn’t an arm of the Clinton campaign.
Kinda makes ya wonder what Trump’s so afraid of, don’t it?
Who would investigate such a thing? Maybe the house and senate intelligence committees?
If Trump shouldn’t be compelled to act on this memo, and everyone who needs to investigate it already has all the access they need in order to launch an investigation, then why did anyone see a need to write this thing and release it to the public?
I don’t really think he’s “afraid”, but I’d be open to reading something on that perspective if you’d like to share it.
And that’s the point with the memo. There is not enough context to “fill in the holes” to come to an accurate conclusion.
Here’s the quote re McCabe from the memo:
Indeed, it does not quote or link to the testimony in question. It could be false. If so, and that fact emerges, it would pretty much destroy the credibility of all who pushed for release of this.
You have to believe that if this is false, that fact will quickly emerge. There are (I believe) 9 Dem members of the Committee, who have a strong interest in disclosing such an error. There’s McCabe himself, who would have no reason not to immediately set the record straight.
And precisely how do you know this? The Court’s proceedings are secret. Its rulings, and the judges’ reasoning behind the rulings, are not publically released.
Informal poll here: how many people here got suckered by Nunes’ last bombshell report in April 2017?
Not I.
This statement means nothing without clarification: Higher as in from 20% to 70%, or higher as in from 3% to 5%?
I’m open to the possibility that the primary (or perhaps only) motivation in releasing the memo was to achieve some political goal(s).
It should be obvious. You think there’s nothing to any of this Russia stuff, but the person in the best position to know is acting as if there were and that he’s going to be caught.
Why? Shouldn’t you reconsider your position?
Build public support for further investigation.
As it stands now, any accusations of bias in the FBI investigation is being greeted with cries about how it’s just an attempt to shut down the whole Russia investigation. If you can provide some more detail and documentation, it might build some support for looking further into the matter. (Not that it will convince many partisans, but some of the more neutral people might be won over.)
On another note, anyone want to take a guess at my earlier question? What harmful classified info was revealed in this memo?
It would be more accurate to add the word *Republican *to that.
There’s an ongoing criminal investigation, and all the interested parties now know the exact time periods that one of suspects was being monitored.
I just thought of another thing, if Nunes has seen the FISA warrant application (he has), and the Steele dossier was the only relevant piece of evidence presented, why wouldn’t he just come out and make that accusation? Instead of giving some vague, unverifiable and possibly out-of-context quote from Andrew McCabe? I mean, he winks a little, but if he wanted to make that accusation, he could have. But he didn’t. Why is that?