Trey Gowdy: Do You Want the Memo to Come Out?

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
And the memo...

What does the memo say?

The gist of it: CBS News' Jeff Pegues reports that the memo focuses in part on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants that authorized the surveillance of former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page. Federal law enforcement sources as well as congressional sources briefed on the intelligence during the 2016 campaign have said that well before Page joined the Trump campaign, there were concerns about his contacts with Russian spies. The memo connects information gathered for the Trump "dossier" to the obtaining of those FISA warrants.


What does the memo not say?

The memo does not appear to allege any violation of federal law. The memo also does not claim the Russia investigation was started with the dossier.
The memo also does not immediately appear to disclose information that seriously compromises national security, or law enforcement methods, as Democrats had feared. There could be longer-term concerns about faith in the FBI, or the willingness of the intelligence community to share information with congressional committees.


Read the memo...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nunes-...pite-fbi-warnings-grave-concern-live-updates/

Nunes, at the end of the memo, admits that the Steele dossier was not the only source of information that led to the FISA warrant.

He never did admit that the information therein was compiled at the request of a right-wing political entity.

In October 2015, during the Republican primary campaign, The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website primarily funded by Republican donor Paul Singer, hired the American research firm Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research on Trump and other Republican presidential candidates.[1] For months, Fusion GPS gathered information about Trump, focusing on his business and entertainment activities. When Trump became the presumptive nominee on May 3, 2016, The Free Beacon stopped funding research on him.

In April 2016, Marc Elias, a partner in the large Seattle-based law firm Perkins Coie and head of its Political Law practice, hired Fusion GPS to do opposition research on Trump. Elias was the attorney of record for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Clinton presidential campaign.[14] As part of their investigation, Fusion GPS hired Orbis Business Intelligence, a private British intelligence firm, to look into connections between Trump and Russia. Orbis co-founder Christopher Steele, a retired British MI6 officer with expertise in Russian matters,[2] was hired in May or June to do the job.


Nunes, who worked for the Trump Campaign and transition team, did the best he could for Trump, but it's clearly a major letdown, with nothing really new therein.
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
Oh, wow, 'Americanthinker'. Well, that's just the benchmark for objective journalism.

Excuse me while I consult the 'Daily Star' for an in depth roundup of current events...

:plain:
That's what happens when the supposed "trusted" media and journalists lie to the people. Alternative sources still report the truth, as it turns out, the alternative sources have been right all along.
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
And the memo...

What does the memo say?

The gist of it: CBS News' Jeff Pegues reports that the memo focuses in part on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants that authorized the surveillance of former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page. Federal law enforcement sources as well as congressional sources briefed on the intelligence during the 2016 campaign have said that well before Page joined the Trump campaign, there were concerns about his contacts with Russian spies. The memo connects information gathered for the Trump "dossier" to the obtaining of those FISA warrants.


What does the memo not say?

The memo does not appear to allege any violation of federal law. The memo also does not claim the Russia investigation was started with the dossier.
The memo also does not immediately appear to disclose information that seriously compromises national security, or law enforcement methods, as Democrats had feared. There could be longer-term concerns about faith in the FBI, or the willingness of the intelligence community to share information with congressional committees.


Read the memo...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nunes-...pite-fbi-warnings-grave-concern-live-updates/
Woo Hoo guys, we didn't "break" any Federal Laws. Like sanctuary cities and states do.
 

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Barbarian observes:
"Treason" would be like meeting with Russian agents to swing an election. Far as I can see, Gowdy had nothing whatever to do with that.




Hmmm... I don't have a complete list of the people at that meeting. Let's take a look...

A U.S.-based employee of a Russian real estate company took part in a June 2016 Trump Tower meeting between a Russian lawyer and Donald Trump Jr., bringing to eight the number of known participants at the session that has emerged as a key focus of the investigation of the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russians.

Ike Kaveladze attended the meeting as a representative of Aras and Emin Agalarov, the father-and-son Russian developers who hosted the Trump-owned Miss Universe pageant in Moscow in 2013, according to Scott Balber, an attorney for the Agalarovs who said he also represents Kaveladze.

Balber said Tuesday that he had received a phone call over the weekend from a representative of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III asking whether Kaveladze would agree to be interviewed. Balber said his client would cooperate.

The request is the first public indication that Mueller’s team is investigating the meeting.

The presence of Kaveladze at the Trump Tower meeting introduces a new and intriguing figure into the increasingly complex Trump-Russia drama. A native of the Soviet republic of Georgia who came to the United States in 1991, Kaveladze was the subject nearly two decades ago of a congressional inquiry into Russian money laundering in U.S. banks, although he was never charged with a crime and Balber said there was never any sign of wrongdoing by Kaveladze.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...77740635e83_story.html?utm_term=.7422ed8d03b8

Apparently, she wasn't there. Here's a graphic on who was actually involved:

2300-8thman0719.jpg


We aren't yet sure if Trump was aware of this attempt to give Russians help in return for some dirt on Hillary, or if his people went behind his back to collude with Russian agents. Not yet.

So, how is that different than Hillary paying For a dossier on Trump?
If Trump had offered to pay Veselinitskaya for the info he'd be all good?
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
So, how is that different than Hillary paying For a dossier on Trump?

Russians didn't offer to do it for her. She employed the same firm that republicans used to get dirt on Trump. In fact, the firm offered her the dirt republicans had paid him to find.

If Trump had offered to pay Veselinitskaya for the info he'd be all good?

Nope. As even Steve Bannon admitted, what Trump's people did was disloyal. It's arguable whether or not it amounts to treason, as Bannon asserts.
 

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
It's the difference between going to a business in the capital and trying to buy information, and contacting a hostile foreign government and asking them for a favor.
But the Russians Trumps people met weren't from the Government. And. They contacted the Trump campaign not the other way around.
So the complete opposite of what you wrote.


If Trump paid full market value (because special discounts are viewed as donations), then he would be cool in the specific case of that bit of election law. But, for it to be really legit, he would have to avoid other crimes.
We'll he didn't receive anything so he couldn't pay and if they had something he might have been willing to pay for it but they didn't have anything so the negotiations never got off the ground.
Looks like he's cool.
 

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Nope. As even Steve Bannon admitted, what Trump's people did was disloyal. It's arguable whether or not it amounts to treason, as Bannon asserts.
So, if he had paid Fusion GPS to meet with the Russians he would have been cool?
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
taptoon02.jpg


That's what happens when the supposed "trusted" media and journalists lie to the people. Alternative sources still report the truth, as it turns out, the alternative sources have been right all along.

Alternative sources still report the truth, as it turns out, the alternative sources have been right all along.
********************************************
1. Barrack Obama does not have an American birth certificate and therefore is disqualified by the Constitution to hold the office of the Presidency ("alternative sources" were stramgely silent about the fact that Ted Cruz was born in Calgary Alberta Canada and until recently held duel American/Canadian citizenship)

2. President Obama "wiretapped" the phones at Trump Towers, and if not by the FBI it was done by the British (the nation is still waiting for proof)

3. Ted Cruz's father was part of the conspiracy to assassination JFK (does anyone take this seriously?)
 

rexlunae

New member

That's how I know you're smarter than Jerry, fool. Rather than getting your info directly from "Tyler Durden" at ZeroHedge, you wait for them to launder it through Hannity's empty noggin.

Ok. So they filed a complaint that Clinton's campaign paid Perkin's for what it called "Legal Services" and "Legal and Compliance Consulting" and that that should have been called something else because it ended up paying for the dossier. The DNC used the phrases "Legal and Compliance Consulting", "Data services subscription" and "research consulting". I don't see anything wrong with those descriptions.

Maybe someone will think they aren't specific enough and ask them to amend their filings. I doubt it. This is pretty thin. And the most likely outcome, unless deliberate deception can be shown, is that the organizations might be asked to amend their disclosures.
 

rexlunae

New member
But the Russians Trumps people met weren't from the Government.

Doesn't matter as far as the prohibition on foreign campaign contributions goes. And that is itself a disputed point. Most spies don't admit to working for their governments either.

And. They contacted the Trump campaign not the other way around.

And the Trump campaign took the meeting. Doesn't matter who approached whom.


So the complete opposite of what you wrote.

When Veselnetskaya emailed, DJTJ to set up the meeting, she said that it was part of the Russian government's support for Trump's campaign. She now says that she doesn't work for the government, but she has in the past and she said that she was when the meeting was set up.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/us/politics/trump-russia-email-clinton.html



We'll he didn't receive anything so he couldn't pay and if they had something he might have been willing to pay for it but they didn't have anything so the negotiations never got off the ground.
Looks like he's cool.

Maybe as far as the illegal campaign contributions related to that interaction.
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
The dems fans are feeling better now that they've been soaking up mainstream scripted media all afternoon. Things are really looking up for the mid-terms. :thumb:
 

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
That's how I know you're smarter than Jerry, fool. Rather than getting your info directly from "Tyler Durden" at ZeroHedge, you wait for them to launder it through Hannity's empty noggin.
I Googled it and found an article that laid out the basics.

Ok. So they filed a complaint that Clinton's campaign paid Perkin's for what it called "Legal Services" and "Legal and Compliance Consulting" and that that should have been called something else because it ended up paying for the dossier. The DNC used the phrases "Legal and Compliance Consulting", "Data services subscription" and "research consulting". I don't see anything wrong with those descriptions.
Right, someone filed a complaint that they went afoul of some esoteric law.
Maybe someone will think they aren't specific enough and ask them to amend their filings. I doubt it. This is pretty thin. And the most likely outcome, unless deliberate deception can be shown, is that the organizations might be asked to amend their disclosures.
So as long as the Trump tower meeting with the Russians was described as "Research Consulting" they're all cool?
 
Top