Posted on 07/22/2018 7:33:24 PM PDT by dirtboy
Earlier this year, the political world was gripped by a stunning accusation from Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) that the government’s application for a warrant to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page was born of bias and almost entirely reliant on a dossier of information compiled on the dime of Democratic operatives. He had a memo that made that argument; eventually, and probably without much goading, President Trump was persuaded to release it publicly.
Even based on what was known then, the hype surrounding Nunes’s memo seemed to oversell the point. In short order, other revelations about the warrant application made it clear that the contents of the memo were iffy. It was the second time in two years that Nunes had gone to bat in defense of one of Trump’s pet theories, and neither time worked out that well.
As it turns out though, Nunes’s efforts to raise questions about the surveillance warrant, granted by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, were even less robust than they seemed at the time. With the release Friday of a redacted copy of both the initial warrant application targeting Page in October 2016 and the three 90-day extensions of the warrant, we can get a better sense of just how far from the mark the Nunes memo actually was.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Carter Page WAS a Russian spy... FOR THE FBI.
Funny they didn’t mention that in the FISA application.
I see Wapo, I usually stop reading.
Oh so that’s their spin
What universe are these people living in?
Somebody forgot to tell Jake...
Just the Wapo I making up more fake news.
Bump draws a lot of conclusions from heavily redacted documents, and gets after Nunes on nit-picks while dismissing what Nunes got right.
22 Jul: Powerline: The Associated Press Lies About the FISA Application
by John Hinderaker
The Associated Press carries on a daily vendetta against the Trump administration, systematically misleading the American people in articles that appear in hundreds or thousands of newspapers. Thus, it is no surprise that the AP’s story on DOJ’s FISA application dump is nothing but Democratic Party spin. The AP’s headline: “Without evidence, Trump claims documents confirm misconduct.”...
Actually, the president had a lot more to say about the FISA application than the AP acknowledges. These tweets all were issued this morning...
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/07/the-associated-press-lies-about-the-fisa-application.php
from the comments:
Ambrose Rankin: Did AP take the “without evidence” wording from NYT or did NYT take it from the AP?
Thomas L. Heller: The AP headline could have easily read “Without Evidence Democrats and Their Media Hacks Charge Trump with Collusion.”
Byron York wrote a good column on July 22 that came to a totally different conclusion. He docuuments that Nune’s 12 paragraphs are correct.
I'm tempted to stop reading right there, because it's all I need to say that
1.) This is exactly what Nunes said,
2.) Steele is not American, therefore this is foreign influence,
3.) Hillary paid for it, so there's your collusion, and
4.) Any intelligence officer who denied this to Congress under oath then lied under oath.
I don't know what else there is to say about any of it.
bttt!
They may have. Half the document's redacted.
Reuters joins NYT & AP re “without evidence”, but Reuters - with a whole pile of their writers/editors - uses the phrases:
“offers no evidence” and “offered no evidence”
22 Jul: Reuters: Trump says his campaign was spied upon illegally, offers no evidence
Reporting by David Stamp in London; Additional reporting by Pete Schroeder and Amanda Becker in Washington, and Roberta Rampton in Bedminster, N.J.; Editing by David Goodman, Jason Neely and Daniel Wallis
U.S. President Donald Trump said on Sunday that documents released by the FBI relating to a former adviser’s ties to Russia showed that his campaign for the 2016 presidential election had been illegally spied upon by U.S. law enforcement, but offered no evidence to support his assertion...
A White House spokeswoman referred questions on why Trump believed the documents proved the FBI and DOJ demonstrated illegal conduct or were misleading courts to Trump’s personal counsel. His lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, did not respond to a request for comment.
The DOJ did not immediately respond to requests to comment on Trump’s allegation. The FBI declined to comment. ..
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-page-doc/trump-says-carter-page-documents-show-doj-and-fbi-misled-courts-idUSKBN1KC0EP
the original:
Without Evidence, Trump Claims Vindication From Release of Carter Page Documents
New York Times · 12 hours ago
It’s bizarre. They just print whatever they want to be true. But according to even WaPo: one whole section, out of 6, is devoted to the Steele dossier. And two sections are completely redacted so it could be more.
They wouldn’t have redacted something that exonerates them. It’s the things that indict them that they redact.
The one in which the TRUTH of what Obunga, Hitlery and all the other LIBERAL LOONS must be hidden by ANY and ALL means.
who got the documents that initially were to be a Judicial Watch scoop?
Yesterday 6:29pm: Splinter News: Here Are the Secret Documents About the Surveillance of Ex-Trump Adviser Carter Page
by Dell Cameron and Jack Mirkinson; Additional reporting by Susie Banikarim, Aleksander Chan, and Bryan Menegus.
The records were obtained by Gizmodo Media Group (GMG), Splinter’s parent company, via a Freedom of Information Act request filed in April 2017. Other media and political organizations, including the New York Times, USA Today, and Judicial Watch, also filed FOIA requests.
https://splinternews.com/here-are-the-secret-documents-about-the-surveillance-of-1827768635
USA Today writes of FBI harbouring “broader evidence”...yet provides no evidence of the evidence!
USA Today: FBI releases FISA records on Carter Page surveillance
by Brad Heath, USA TODAYPublished 7:49 p.m. ET July 21, 2018 | Updated 9:13 a.m. ET July 22, 2018
The FBI released more than 400 pages of documents in response to lawsuits by USA TODAY and other media organizations...
Two of the four surveillance requests had been approved by top Trump appointees in the Justice Department, including Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
But the records also show the FBI harbored broader suspicions – and broader evidence – about Page’s possible ties to the Russian government...
The documents offer few clues about the scope of that surveillance. But in its application, the FBI noted that the surveillance “may incidentally acquire other foreign intelligence information.”...
They also offer little information about what, if anything, the government learned in nearly a year of monitoring Page’s communications. The surveillance court granted the Justice Department permission to extend its surveillance of Page three times in 2017. In each of those applications, the department said it was providing the court updated information about its investigation, but those details were largely omitted from the materials released Saturday...
The FBI’s surveillance applications argued the government had probable cause to believe Page had committed a crime in acting as an agent of the Russian government, though the Justice Department did not reveal Saturday which laws it thought he had broken. U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer endorsed that conclusion when she approved the surveillance request...
USA TODAY and the James Madison Project, a non-partisan organization that promotes government accountability, filed a lawsuit last year under the Freedom of Information Act seeking records about surveillance of Trump’s campaign...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/07/21/fbi-releases-carter-page-fisa-records/813984002/
.
Remember the big push, coincidentally at the same time, of the WAPO and NYTs to say the FISA applications had little to nothing to do with the Dossier?
The Dossier was the fuel and the engine.
.
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.