The debate "The memo shouldn't end Mueller probe but does show that Democrats weaponized law enforcement" was started by
February 2, 2018, 5:25 pm.
5 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 13 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
Slymcfly posted 16 arguments to the agreers part.
historybuff posted 13 arguments, Nemiroff posted 7 arguments to the disagreers part.
5 visitors agree.
seavos, Nemiroff, FiddleStorm and 10 visitors disagree.
Also, the job of the security congress is to provide oversight to the law enforcement committees. A little bit off there.
Of course all you saw were weak excuses... When everything I have said is factual and legitimate, aside from my speculation. I never heard Carter Page say that he had met and engaged with Trump before. And even if he had, this is the same buffoon who claimed he was an "aid to the Kremlin", to try to get more attention and a larger audience for the talk he was giving. The dude is pathetic, and to think that he's capable of being a double agent is just plain, flat out stupid to say.
this isn't the general Congress, his is the security council. that is exactly their job.
and what's wrong with defending someone if the defense is valid? you say he is biased against trump? why? does he have some agenda? Or maybe it's because he saw trump as a threat to the people? I certainly believe he is.
Carter page's statement that he never met trump runs counter to his statement that he met his several times he said previously on a radio show.
and "colluding" to gather evidence he clearly said he will be taking to the fbi is not the same as colluding to alter an election.
I'm sorry, but all I heard in those rants were weak excuses trying to defend people who are obviously trying to hide something. between page flipflopping on trump meetings, like 5 inner circle trump people forgetting about their Russia meetings, maniford, the email to don jr. there is plenty of suspicion of not only interference but collusion. stop trying to discredit this vital investigation.
Sorry for all the typos. I hate that you can't edit in this app.
Oh also, ALSO, Schiff tries to make Carter Page to look like some sort of savvy Russian agent, when we have all learned recently, with his appearance on both CNN and Fox, that he is NOT a Russian agent, and that he has NEVER even CONTACTED with Trump before in his life. So one of Schiff's narratives in his memo has already fallen apart before it was even released. This is a joke guys. Like I said, keep the Mueller investigation going, but let's employ a special counsel to look into the Mueller investigation and the Hillary investigation, and let's FINALLY get a grand jury empaneled so that Hillary has to testify under oath in front of the Supreme Court. This is what NEEDS to happen in order for the public's trust to be restored in the FBI and DOJ. This is essentially the only way that they can save themselves from their own demise.
Also, do you even know what's in the Dem's memo? Because I do. It essentially just tries to defend the character of Christopher Steele. Which is impossible to do now because we now know that he had an EXTREME Anti-Trump agenda, and that he made it extremely clear that he wanted Hillary to beat Trump in the election. And we know that Steele wasn't a credible source BEFORE any of that happened, because he's been caught lying so many times in the past. So I wish the Democrats good luck on that one. Because it isn't going to work. It basically just contains partisan jabs at Nunes and Gowdy, which they will fail at with Gowdy, because I even know MANY Democrats who HIGHLY respect Trey Gowdy because they've been following his prosecutorial career since he became a prominent prosecuting attorney in the 90s. And then also defends Steele. If that's what you guys call "debunking" the republican memo, then I feel incredibly sorry for your lack of reasoning and pragmatism.
I'm saying that it isn't Congress's place to disapprove of something because of "sensitive information", it's the President's job and the DOJ's job. And no, I don't believe everything Trump says, because again, I made this prediction now over a week ago... How Democrats don't understand that Schiff is looked at MUCH worse by Republicans than Nunes is looked at by Democrats. To Democrats, Nunes is just an incompetent lap-dog for Trump. To Republicans, Schiff is a snake politician who was even caught trying to "collude" with a Russian oligarch to get information on Trump, which ended up being a comedian, and humiliated him. Then he tried to say he knew it was fake, even though he sent them back a bunch of emails and phone calls to attain the "compromising" photos of Trump. This guy is an absolute joke, and he's always been a snake. I once saw him accuse Tucker Carlson as "working for the Kremlin" because Tucker asked him whether or not there was proof behind Russia hacking John Podesta's emails. That is just off-the-rails INSANE right there. The dude has absolutely no credibility.
that's of you believe what trump says....
didn't you proudly proclaim that the republicans on the council approved it's release? are you saying the entire security council, democrat and Republican, approves the release of a memo full of sensitive information?
HistoryBuff, if you actually read my comments in their entirety, you would see that I had already predicted this a week ago. I predicted that Schiff the snake, would put so many sources and methods in their memo, that it would HAVE to be HEAVILY redacted, and Schiff the snake would use that as a ploy to say that Republicans are hiding something when they aren't. Trey Gowdy, as well as several other congressman, say that the memo doesn't debunk anything in the republican memo, and is more focused on keeping the investigation alive, which I don't care about. I've said over and over that I think the investigation should continue, however, I want a special counsel employed to provide oversight to the Mueller investigation now, just to make sure it has all been done by the books after all these red flags have come up, and then I want a grand jury empaneled and have Hillary testiy in front of the supreme Court. That's what I want. You guys can do whatever you want to Trump.
and much to everyone's shock trump blocked the release of the Democrat's Memo.
Sorry it was a CBS*** source, not CNN. Either way, they were quotes straight from Democratic leadership themselves.
I am really starting to lose patience here with the lack of ability to follow a discussion and engage in a meaningful way, instead of acting like some sort of Democratic talking piece. I am making legitimate points, and all you do is slam my source, which was straight from the congressman himself, or try to argue with me about something I'm NOT trying to make a case for.
Because if you think I said that, that never came out of my mouth. Especially with regards to the memo. I actually said the opposite, and acknowledged that the Mueller investigation SHOULD continue.
When did I say it vindicated Trump???
Uhhh, this came from ADAM SCHIFF, WHO IS A HUGE PART OF THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP. They reported it. HE SAID IT. You have got a huge issue with arguing actual substance man. Respond to the SUBSTANCE of what I said instead of making fun of a very generous CNN source that I'm giving you.
I don't care about pundits. I'm looking at the leadership. You rely too much on pundits. maybe that's why you jump to the conclusions you are told to reach and don't bother consider all the factors yourselves.
Paul Ryan was asked if this really vindicates trump and he just walked off the stage.
I can't seem to find a single article referring to a lawmaker outraged by the memo. and please, save me the punditry. If it was bad, the Congressmen would have been hyping it up endlessly. they know it's irrelevant. especially since many of them read both memos and the underlying documents.
Then there was this pathetic desperation attempt by Schiff to thwart the release. How do you explain this one off??
Dude, Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi AND James Comey were talking about how classified the memo was, and how it would reveal all this classified information. LOOK AT THEIR TWITTER PAGES. Unless they deleted those tweets, all you have to do is see that. Or go back to last Thursday and look up any Adam Schiff or Nancy Pelosi video. You will hear them saying it over and over. The fact that you're asking me to prove something that an informed person wouldn't bother refuting, instead of getting to the substance of my point, is incredibly obnoxious and slippery.
I have to only assume that you either didn't read it, or when you did read it, you completely removed yourself from all logic and reason, and already had the liberal talking points in your head. Why did Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi act as if the sky would fall if the memo were released? Why did they LIE about the republican memo revealing sources and methods, when it CLEARLY didn't. Think for yourself. Think INDEPENDENTLY. Who looks guilty in that scenario??? And take into account the fact that democrats BLOCKED the republican memo, and Republicans did NOT do the same to Democrats with theirs. All it takes is taking a step back and using some common sense, to see who it is trying to hide something here.
You keep saying "democrats said that the memo has classified" info. I'm not sure how that's an important point. your just trying to catch a technicality lie that has little to do with substance. but if you insist, show the quote.
the issue with classification was the underlying documents and the only thing I can think that was classified about the memo was the memo itself.
And please show me one Republican who said the memo was just a bunch of fluff. And aspiring MSNBC pundit James Comey does NOT count. He has proven himself to be an incoherent buffoon time and time again. NO Republicans think it's nothing. NO Americans except for Democrats in their little bubble think it's nothing. This looks as if it's a violation of an Americans 4th amendment, and if that is, in fact true, and Democrats can't dispute that fact or excuse that fact IN THEIR memo, then that is a VERY big deal.
Uhh, it isn't jumping to conclusions when you put together the very long paragraph full of evidence that supports my conclusion, which was full of undisputable facts... I think you may want to look up the term "jumping to conclusions"
but you are the one drawing conclusions.
You declared the memo to be damning when even most republicans find it to be nothing but fluff. even nunes himself admitted he left out information.
you declared the democrats guilty before either memo was released and claimed their memo was irrelevant corrupt lies.
that's what is called jumping to conclusions. what do you call it?
Dude, I asked you what you're asking me. Stalling for what? It IS everywhere. Once you finally specify what the hell you say you don't believe. I'm not a mind reader. It seems to me as if YOU are stalling...
if it's everywhere, you shouldn't have a problem pulling up a quote, but you seem to be stalling.
HistoryBuff are you really that slow??? Republicans literally voted UNANIMOUSLY to release the DEMOCRAT'S MEMO. It is so difficult talking to you guys when you are obviously not keeping up with any of it, and then accuse me of drawing conclusions. You guys both need to do some serious reading on this. If you'd like me to provide the literature or the videos to catch you up, I would be more than happy to put that together for you, but good Lord. I thought you guys were both more informed than you have proven NOT to be in this particular subject.
Like what conclusion am I even drawing? All I'm stating are.the facts that have led up to this point. None of them would even be refuted by a hardcore leftist. Which part are you having problems believing? Because I am genuinely confused...
What conclusions are you saying that I'm drawing? Because nothing I stated has even been argued by Democrats, from what I've heard, and is common knowledge if you watch any news outlet. Also, I am unsure as to what point you are saying Historybuff made?
1. You didn't address any of the issues history buffs brought up, pretending they were never even said.
2. once again, can you actually show a quote because every democratic statement I have found says otherwise. the sensitive information is in the underlying documents. maybe what they said is that the memo itself is classified... which is why it needed to be declassified before release.
how are you drawing these conclusions?
there is nothing damning in the Nunes memo. how did you draw those conclusions?
If you put all of those pieces together, all signs lead to Hillary being protected, with Obama's acknowledgement. The very LEAST you'd be able to gather from that, even if you were a partisan Democrat hack, is that it's very obvious that the Democrats are trying to hide something (hence the fact that they voted to keep the republican memo classified, while the republicans voted unanimously to release the Democrat's memo)
For the record, Nemiroff is (mostly)correct. Nunes DID, in fact, write the memo. However, it was also written by Trey Gowdy, who is the architect of the memo. He was the one who went to the DOJ to look at the underlying documents. One thing that even Democrats have to admit, is that aside from the way they think he treated Hillary during the Benghazi investigation (I obviously thought he let her off easy), Trey Gowdy is maybe the most respected Republican in all of the House and Senate. I can almost guarantee with absolute certainty, that the Democrat's memo won't refute the things that are actually damning in the Republican's memo, but we'll see.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again....
Democrats claimed the sky would fall if the republican memo were released, and that it had HIGHLY CLASSIFIED information inside it, and every Democrat voted AGAINST it's release...
The memo comes out. It has absolutely nothing classified in it, and hardly anything that needed a redaction. And the sky did not fall the way Democrats intended. Not only that, but they went from saying "The sky will fall if this memo is released", to, "That's it? What a nothingburger". I don't know how it's possible to have those two same reactions in consecutive days, but you'd have to be a very slippery, disingenuous snake.
NOW, there was a vote to release the Democrat's memo, and Republicans vote unanimously to let the public see it. Because they have nothing to hide.
How is this so difficult for people to figure out? Do I really need to connect the dots for everyone who blindly hates Trump?
here is an interesting article I was reading this morning. even if the memo was everything the Republicans say it is, at most it affects 1 of the 5 branches of the investigation.
one of the main objections to the memo is that it just leaves things out strategically. the FBI had a bunch of information they used to get the FISA warrant. the memo only mentions one to try to make it look like they were misusing the system. and the Republicans will not declassify the rest of the information. they will only declassify the Nunes memo because they think it undermines the credibility of the investigation.
the democrats didn't write the memo, Republican Devon Nunez did.
I also realized someone might want to say something about Russian collusion regarding the Memo, and that there is another level that can be discussed. This video uses paragraphs from the memo itself (primary source) and connects pretty well. I wouldn't ask anyone to like a YouTuber or their political position, but maybe consider the argument as something worth looking at and developing arguments or wondering why someone should be worried about four pages. https://youtu.be/FGYZGrVZKHM
I'm here after a bit of time to see how everyone is doing. Hi!
Alright, to the point, I'm going to save us all a bit of time. The document is out, online, unclassified. As far as it seems, the "cherry picked" information was still in the democrat's ball court, they wrote it. If it sounds bad, it really should have been drafted better haha. But really, if the clarifying notes need to be in another document, you could question how far you can still get with the memo alone, as it is a legal document. That is, a memo sending information or recording information, official or not, gives freeway to act when done incorrectly. If the wording gave them the ability, it doesn't matter if the clarifying document has backing!
That also being said, if the classified bits are in another document, this one shouldn't have had controversy when it came out if that were not a case. As such, a spade is a spade, and admitting this gives credit to the idea that the FBI is circumventing accountability. It would be amiss to say that I am asserting without proof because it 'could' be and that is not certainty, but this is not how internal documents should be in any case. due to the formal and informal powers in an agency.
Much like giving a blank check, there is no balance for the metaphorical dollar amount, so it might be best for democrat's to release the classified but contextual document, rather than their own memo. Internal documents are for quick but important reads, and for action. So! A memo asserts and redirects work, and includes the basis for within itself, usually self evident but sure, let's put some doubt and say that the backing stuff wasn't in it. Still strange to pick Steele out of everything.
If it is possible to say this memo doesn't work like a blank check, that clarification would be nice, but an after the fact clarification by cherry picking facts and reframing the perspective won't do. That's just damage control, and as far as it seems the counter memo is not this information.
That's all for checking up on people, it doesn't seem like anything else is fresh here. Maybe I'm wrong, and someone will hop onto a response, must seem kinda selfish for me to drop an opinion and leave. But I feel when I start debating, it goes in circles and is no good for me, like junk food, so I come back sometimes. But when I get into it, I really start losing out.... I just had to come back to see the responses to the memo though!
the risk was in the underlying documents that give context to the memo. not in the memo itself. your getting things confused. maybe don't be so mad when you want to debate?
What is untrue about the memo? Also, where is this huge national security risk that Democrats were talking about? All the people like Adam Schiff who claimed the sky would fall if it were released? And since we both know that isn't the case, why was he trying so hard to keep it from coming out? It is really sad that you are so biased, and hate Trump SO MUCH that you don't have a problem with the FISA courts being abused by the FBI and DOJ. If that's where this country is headed, I don't know if I will be here much longer.
you don't know they lead with it. all you know is there cherry picked part the extremely biased memo included. the FBI and Democrats both say they had other evidence, but the Republicans won't declassify that part.
Why did they LEAD with the Steele dossier? Not to mention the fact that the dossier was BARELY corroborated? Is that okay?
I've looked up FISA warrants. you need to have reason to believe they will engage in clandestine intelligence activities. that's it. the Steele dossier with all the information they had in addition to it gave them that. the Republicans just didn't mention all the other info they had in addition to the Steele document.
Like between correcting you and having to get you caught up, that's way too much effort for a stupid debate app. You need to do that reading on your own time instead of having me spell it out for you. You can say it's full of lies and that you don't believe it, but to say that you didn't see anything that was illegal in the memo, then I can't help you anymore.
Again, if you need an explanation as to why it's wrong to use oppo-research to gain a FISA warrant, and you don't see that as weaponizing the FBI, then you aren't even qualified to have this discussion. It would take so long for me to explain to you how FISA courts work, and how we came to the conclusion, as a country, that abusing FISA courts is dangerous and against the law. It would take an INCREDIBLE amount of effort that I'm not willing to put forth in order to get you caught up. If you don't want to believe me that it's against the law and corrupt to do that, then don't. I couldn't possibly care less anymore.
you are the one making the argument. you believe that the Nunes memo proves the Democrats did something wrong. I don't see any evidence of that. I'm simply asking you to explain your point of view and you are refusing.
I do. I fact check everything everyone says. I do it automatically. However I don't expect people to catch me up on things so that we can have the conversation that you are already feebly attempting to have. That is just an insane expectation.
So Historybuff, it looks as if we're at a stalemate.
And I refuse to do research for you so that you can keep up and say things that actually relevantly pertain to the discussion at hand.
you should defend your own points... unless your going to do research for our facts as well (instead of dismissing them as false by default)
I reject any argument that is based on me doing research for you.if you can't explain what your point is then it isnt worth putting effort into disproving it.
I'm not asking you to take my word for it. When did I do that? If you actually read what I said, you would see that I actually suggested that you educate yourself on this, because you're making it obvious that you don't know what you're talking about here. I prefer not having to catch people up to all the nuances that are involved in a discussion, before having the discussion. That's just a waste of time and I'm not going to do it. Read about it yourself. Read the 4th amendment, and read about FISA warrants, and what constitutes as FISA court abuse. You will find the answer to all of the questions you've asked me. I just don't have the time or energy to do it, because it would require a post that is ten times the length of this one.
either explain your point or start a blog. repeating yourself over and over while insulting people for not just taking your word for it is stupid.
Maybe they could have gotten the warrant WITHOUT the dossier? But it doesn't matter. They used the oppo-research, and they broke the law.
If you need me to answer that question, and you don't already know the fact that this is against the law, then you really need to brush up on this before you start acting as if Democrats did nothing wrong. Because that is just an insane claim to make.
so your only point is that it's wrong. you are completely incapable of providing any reason at all why it is wrong.
Do you know what the FISA court is? How do you not understand how this is a big deal??? If you know what the 4th amendment is, and you know what the FISA courts are, then that should tell you everything you need to know. You can NOT use oppo-research to gain a FISA warrant. That is just so elementary and has always been understood. The fact that most Americans didn't want this to exist in the first place, because it opens up the precedent of the government lawfully spying on it's citizens. You have GOT to understand these things before having a coherent, productive conversation on this. Everyone should unanimously agree that what they did was wrong. The fact that it isn't unanimous scares the absolute shit out of me.
Where is the law that says that you can't? what exactly is the problem with that when they already had other independent reports of the same thing?
That also does not make a difference. The fact is that they used oppo-research to gain access to a FISA warrant. If you can't see the problem with that, then I don't know if we can even have this discussion, because we are not speaking on the same terms at all.
I didn't say they vetted it before using it to get a warrant, I don't know if they did. but I know many of the allegations included in the Steele document had already been reported by other sources. that means the Steele document was reinforcing things they already knew.
This is the fact of the matter... You can NOT, I repeat CANNOT, use oppo-research in order in an application of a FISA warrant. That is abhorrent.
Also that is false. The Steele dossier was unchecked entirely. Nobody looked into how true it was before it was used to obtain the FISA warrant. I encourage you to actually read the memo.
What does the fact that they had been investigating for 3 months have to do with the fact that they used the Steele dossier to get the FISA warrant?
one of the main things they argue is that they relied on the Steele document to get warrants. but they had been investigating for 3 months already. the Steele document was corroborating information they already had, but the memo doesn't mention that.
It doesn't matter if that information was cherry picked. It is real information, and it doesn't matter what the excuse is, even though we will be hearing it within the next 10 days or so, if Democrats don't leak it sooner. Why is it that you think Democrats were so desperate to keep it from being released? They knew how damning it was, and how bad it made them look. You can agree or disagree all you want. The FACT is this. Democrats used a dossier that they bought and paid for from a British agent with very strong ties to Russia, in order to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on not only American citizens, but on the opposition campaign. This is a gross weaponization of the FBI and the DOJ and Democrats whether you like it or not. Again, I don't think it should end the Mueller investigation. The Mueller investigation should keep going. Every republican now agrees with me on that, because after seeing this, it has never been more obvious that Trump didn't collude with Russia.
I don't think it shows that at all. since they cherry picked the information they liked to draw the conclusion they wanted.