Posted on 05/16/2019 9:28:53 AM PDT by workerbee
Former FBI General Counsel James Baker is defending the FBI’s handling of the Trump dossier, saying “we took it seriously” but “we didn’t necessarily take it literally” and did not treat it as “literally true in every respect.”
The dossier, packed with salacious and unverified claims about President Trump's ties to Russia, was written by British ex-spy Christopher Steele and formed a key part of the FISA applications used to justify surveillance warrants against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.
Sitting down with Yahoo News’ Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman for a "Skullduggery" podcast released on Wednesday, Baker said the FBI treated the dossier as “something that we were obligated to deal with and obligated to assess. He did not provide any details on what, if anything, the FBI verified in the dossier.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
The SS Coup D'Etat just sprung another leak.
He’s a DITTOHEAD..?
That’s exactly what Rush Limbaugh said.
Wow.
Fake but accurate... I’ve heard that someplace before.
The excuses are starting .....
Then comes the adjusted narrative and the blame game.
Smells like fear to me.
“we took it seriously”
Even though we knew it was bullshit opposition research commissioned by Hillary using Russians to produce it.
Sure sounds like an ADMISSION OF GUILT to me.
“and did not treat it as “literally true in every respect.”
And yet someone stamped the FISA application as “verified”.
Hmmmmmm.
L
Yeah; who would take a legal document literally? Picky, picky, picky.
Priming us for the "we were wrong but our intentions were good" excuse. FILTHY BASTARDS!
Backpedaling furiously...
Rep. Jim Jordan
Verified account
@Jim_Jordan
Follow Follow @Jim_Jordan
More Rep. Jim Jordan Retweeted Washington Examiner
If the FBI didn’t take the Dossier literally, then they shouldn’t have used it to get a warrant to spy on an American citizen!
8:42 AM - 16 May 2019
https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1129049599375826944
Sorta like screaming, ‘The world will end in 12 years!’ then saying, ‘Hey, can’t you take a joke?’
If someone had dragged out this dossier to me....the first question I would have asked....who bought it and what did they pay? At that point, my interest or trust in it would have been at 5-percent.
With these jokers, they probably all still believe in the tooth-fairy, Santa Claus, and Milli Vanilli.
It’s not the nature of the evidence, it’s the seriousness of the charge. - Rush Limbaugh
BAKER: "Well, the pee-pee tapes weren't validated,
and the Cohen-Prague meeting wasn't validated,
and the other stuff in there wasn't validated,
the bank wire stuff from Trump Towers wasn't validated,
the secret meetings in Russia with Paige weren't validated
but you DID validate the "Orange Man Bad" sentiment, and is that, Mr. FISA Judge, good enough to go on?"
What does this actually mean in English? That they didn't believe it but would still be happy to use it?
So Baker's signature is on Page's FISA warrant. That explains the mounting desperation, because there are a lot more signatures yet to explain. Using justifications you know are false on a FISA warrant is a felony, isn't it?
It’s literally the best excuse our domestic enemies’ handlers could come up with.
All they have left now is their braying worshipful Big Media Hussein Heads, and the ineligible POTUS supporters here.
I subscribe to the Skullduggery podcast and listened to Baker’s tripe. What a Clymer...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.