Key Revelations in the Nunes Memo that Democrats Keep Ignoring

[idb]

1. The FBI used Steele's dossier as the main basis for their FISA application to spy on Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page, even though the FBI officials involved with the matter knew that the dossier had not been properly vetted or verified. According to the head of the FBI's counterintelligence division, Assistant Director Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its "infancy" at the time of the initial Page FISA application. After Steele was terminated, a source validation report conducted by an independent unit within FBI assessed Steele's reporting as only minimally corroborated. Then-FBI Director James Comey called the dossier "salacious and unverified" when he testified in June 2017 (yet Comey signed one of the FISA warrant extensions).

2. The FBI used news articles sourced by Steele, including a Yahoo News article that had Steele as its source, to corroborate Steele's dossier.

3. The FBI falsely told the court in its FISA application that Steele did not provide information to Yahoo News about Page’s Moscow trip. But British court filings show that Steele admitted he met with Yahoo News in September 2016, two months before the FBI got its initial warrant, to discuss the trip at the direction of Fusion GPS.

4. When the FBI submitted the FISA application, which was based largely on Steele's dossier, the FBI knew that Steele was being paid by the DNC and Hillary Clinton.

5. The FBI did not tell the FISA court that information cited in its FISA application was gathered by someone who was being paid by Trump’s political opponents.

6. The FBI knew that Steele was working for Fusion GPS, a research firm that was hired by a law firm that was receiving large payments from the Clinton campaign and the DNC. The FBI also knew that the DNC and the Clinton campaign had paid Steele $160K directly. The FBI chose not to tell the FISA court about these financial connections.

7. Without the Steele dossier, the FBI would not have tried to get a FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page.

8. Even when the FBI submitted renewal applications, three of them, they never told the FISA court about the Steele dossier or Steele's financial connections with the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

9. Soon after getting the first FISA warrant, the FBI fired Steele for making unauthorized disclosures and lying to the FBI! Yet, even then, the FBI officials involved with the FISA warrant did not tell the FISA court that they had used Steele's dossier as their main source and that they had dismissed Steele as a source for disreputable conduct.

10. While the FBI was working on getting the first FISA warrant, then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr’s wife was working for Fusion GPS, the firm that hired Steele to dig up dirt on Trump. At the firm, she helped conduct opposition research on Trump and his associates. The FBI did not inform the FISA court about any of this information.

'Nunes memo' revelations prove the FBI makes up its own rules

Outcry over the Nunes memo is damning for Democrats and FBI

5 Most Damning Truths From the FISA Memo

1. Show me in the memo where it said MAIN basis you can't invent text because it would fit the narrative better. Even more by saying MAIN you admit that there were other reasons to believe Page was a person of interest for the intelligence community. This immediately makes the whole narrative suspect.
2. This is actually contested. "In reality, the article made was not “derived” from Steele. Isikoff, citing “multiple sources,” reported that U.S. intelligence officials had briefed senior members of Congress on Page's activities in Russia.:"Analysis | The memo’s description of a supposedly key news report is wrong
3. Meeting with the press is not the same as giving them the story in question.
4. So? The fact that the story comes from a source with a bias says nothing of it's accuracy. If someone gets accused of rape and it comes out that victim didn't like the rapist beforehand does that make the accusation by definition inadmissible? Btw the Steele dossier has aspects of it that have since been corroborated.
5. Again something that's contested The central argument in the Nunes memo may have just been debunked. But again why does it matter in the slightest to it's accuracy?
6. See point 5
7. Again being contested. especially because Page first showed up on the FBI's radar in 2013 LOOOOONG before Steele.FBI was 'given second Trump-Russia dossier'
8. Here we get to another thing the memo admitted. In order to get a renewal you have to get additional facts to the original warrant. In other words the Steele dossier couldn't be used in the renewals, the FBI had to be able to establish that they had turned up more evidence. Pretty important if you are trying to establish that the FBI went after Page unjustly.
9. See point 5 and 6
10. So if I have a company that has tens of thousands of employees, if the wife of one of those employees is working for a company that has a connection with a dossier accusing someone of espionage, that is so material to the FACTS of that dossier that it null in voids the accusations? Not the employee but the wife of the employee? I don't think so.
Now I'll make some points of my own.
11. The memo admits contacts with Russia first became suspect not because of the Steele dossier but because of Papadopoulos.
12. Nobody is trying to claim that Page didn't have contacts with the Russians.
13. Page was already gone from the Trump campaign when the warrant was issued. Making the accusation that it was a part of a campaign against Trump dubious at best.
14. The memo makes absolutely no mention of the Mueller investigation, again making it hard to say it is compromised in any way.
15. As a conclusion. It's pretty pathetic that Nunes released this memo which doesn't give any new facts. Clearly can't establish any real wrongdoing. It relies on half truths and destroys his committees credibility with the intelligence community.

What a pack of lies, half-truths, and distortions. Some points in reply:

Why did you avoid the fact that Comey himself said the Steele dossier was “salacious and unverified"? That according to Assistant Director Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its “infancy” at the time of the initial Page FISA application? That after Steele was terminated, a source validation report conducted by an independent unit within FBI assessed Steele’s reporting as only minimally corroborated?

Why did you dance around the fact that Comey, McCabe, Ohr, etc., failed to disclose to the FISA court that the main basis--or even a partial basis--of their application was a dossier prepared by a shady man who was getting paid by the DNC and the Clinton campaign? It is amazing that you will not confront that serious omission.

If the Nunes memo gives "no new information," why did the Dems fight like crazed dogs to keep it sealed? And where is the supposedly damaging disclosure of "sources and methods" that the Dems claimed the Nunes memo contained and that they used as one of their excuses for opposing the memo's release?

What were the supposed other sources for the Yahoo News article? Even if Steele was a minor/secondary source for the article, citing the article as corroboration for Steele's dossier was shabby, disreputable vetting. Since when do news stories constitute corroboration for material used in a FISA warrant application? Since when? Please answer this question.

The Nunes memo states that McCabe testified that without the Steele dossier, there would have been no FISA warrant application. Oh, this is "contested" and "disputed." Well, yeah, Dems are disputing all kinds of clear, obvious facts that they don't have the honesty and patriotism to admit. I trust that the Dems will not object to releasing the transcript of McCable's classified testimony so that we can verify that McCabe said what Nunes says he said. Right? Right?

OF COURSE Page was already being investigated when the FBI asked for the FISA warrant! Duh! This is a Dem talking point that all the liberal networks keep repeating. Do you guys even think before you voice such silly stuff? The FBI normally does not ask for FISA warrants on people out of the blue, on people they know nothing about until the time they prepare the warrant application. So of course Page had already "appeared on their radar"! The point is that when the FBI went to get a FISA warrant on him, they used a lying dossier done by a shady character who was taking big bucks from the Clintons and the DNC to dig up dirt on Trump, and that the FBI did not even inform the FISA court that that dossier formed any part of the basis for the FISA application.

You argue that "the memo admits contacts with Russia first became suspect not because of the Steele dossier but because of Papadopoulos." Uh, you left out something, didn't you? The memo also states that the FISA application contained information on Papadopoulos and that that information triggered the Russian-collusion investigation. Let's the read the relevant part of the memo, shall we? Here you go:

The Page FISA application also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos. The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok. (Section 5)​

Did you somehow miss that part of the memo when you skimmed over it? Have you actually read the memo, or are you relying on Democratic summaries of it? If you read the memo, how did you miss the above information?

If the FBI had not used the Steele dossier, there would have been no FISA application and no information on Papadopoulos to trigger the Russian-collusion witch hunt.

What was the supposed additional information that justified the FISA warrant extensions? And why didn't Comey and McCabe & Company bother to inform the FISA court about Steele's firing, his receipt of $160K from the DNC/Clinton campaign, and his role with Fusion GPS?

If the Steele dossier was not the main basis of the FISA application, then what was? Let's see it. The Nunes memo says that McCabe testified that there would have been no FISA application without the Steele dossier. You "dispute" that? Good, then I trust you'll strongly support releasing McCabe's testimony. Right? Right?

I find your excuses for the hiding of Ohr's wife's connection with Fusion GPS almost comical. Let's get some facts straight: "During this same time period, Ohr’s wife was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all of his wife’s opposition research, paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign via Fusion GPS. The Ohrs’ relationship with Steele and Fusion GPS was inexplicably concealed from the FISC [the FISA court]." Are you seriously claiming that this was not material information that the court deserved and needed to know?!

You are the congenital liar. Comey never testified that all of the dossier was salacious and unverified. He said there were parts of it that were verified, unverified and salacious. That is his testimony. Some of it had been verified. The founder of Fusion GPS stated it was his impression that the FBI already had some of the information. If the information is verified, it doesn't matter how it came about.

Again you seem to have no understanding of how a calendar works. The memo states the FISA warrant was obtained in October. The trouble is that ;Paige left in September. October comes after September. At the time the FISA warrant was obtained, Paige was a former Trump campaign worker. Also the Trump campaign stated that Paige had no major role in the campaign and had not met with Trump.

All your accusations come from the memo. There is no independent source to confirm the memo. Trump's Chief of Staff says it is underwhelming. Former Republican AG Alberto Gonzalez says he has no confidence in it. The underlying material was not released so there is no way to confirm the memo.

"Salacious" isn't a synonym for "wrong" or "lies".
Description of him indulging his fetishes with prostitutes could be 'salacious' while still being true.

 

[Faun]

What about Carter Page? I don't really care about what caused investigations. The arguments against the attack on Page are weak. The progressives obviously don't care about the corruption in this case. I miss the liberals, because they would at least look for the truth. I've never seen the media try so hard 'not' to look for something.

What corruption? Details......

 

[idb]

Why did you dance around the fact that Comey, McCabe, Ohr, etc., failed to disclose to the FISA court that the main basis--or any degree of basis

Why did you dance around the fact that Comey, McCabe, Ohr, etc., failed to disclose to the FISA court that the main basis--or even a partial basis--of their application was a dossier prepared by a shady man who was getting paid by the DNC and the Clinton campaign? It is amazing that you will not confront that serious omission.

Why did you dance around the fact that Comey, McCabe, Ohr, etc., failed to disclose to the FISA court that the main basis--or even a partial basis--of their application was a dossier prepared by a shady man who was getting paid by the DNC and the Clinton campaign?

I didn't dance around it. I answered it a few times in my original post. Supposed bias is no reason to make evidence inadmissable. Judges routinely accept evidence from biased sources.Even if FISA Warrant is Based on Politically Biased Source, It Probably Won’t Amount to Anything Legally

No, I'm just asking you to explain why the Dems so desperately fought the memo's release if it contains no new information? If it truly contains nothing new, then why did the Dems fight like rabid dogs to keep it sealed? Why?

Still irrelevant to your point.

One of the Dems' arguments against releasing the memo was that it revealed sources and methods relating to intelligence collection. But we now see that that was a lie, that it contains no such information.

irrelevant

And you realize that the FBI included that Yahoo News article in the FISA application, right? Right? Right? You knew that, right? This is pointed out in the Nunes memo, which I'm wondering if you've ever actually read.

Yes I did, I also know that other things besides that and the Steele dossier were included. The memo specified the Papadopolous case and who knows what else.

LOL. Uh, ok. And for how many American citizens who are working on political campaigns does the FBI seek a FISA warrant to wiretap them? Hey? 1 in 1,000? 1 every 20 years?

How many American citizens who work on political campaigns bragged to working for the Kremlin before?Carter Page Touted Kremlin Contacts in 2013 Letter. Or admitted to give Russian information on the energy business? Russian Spies Tried to Recruit Carter Page Before He Advised Trump
Or first denied then admitted he met with Russian officials during 2 trips to Moscow in 2016 Former Trump adviser Page met Russian officials in 2016 Moscow trips
Seems to me those things standing alone would warrant further investigation by the FBI.

FBI never asks for FISA warrants in *any* kind of investigation unless they have already been investigating the person

It destroys your claim of bias. Claiming the FBI was investigating him but then claim it's biased because it asked for a warrant is bizarre to say the least.

A sleazy dossier prepared by a disreputable former spy who's on the DNC and Clinton payroll does not constitute valid information from a law enforcement source.

Bias doesn't destroy the validity, neither can you claim the dossier stood by itself

That's because they don't deserve a response but are pointless diversions from the real issues at hand.

You don't think it's that the FISA warrant was issued after Page left the campaign is important when you are trying to claim bias against the campaign? Why not? I think that goes right to the heart of the issue.
The same goes for the fact that in no way does the Mueller campaign gets compromised since Trump is trying to use the memo as vindication.

The dates you jump on are noted and discussed in the Nunes memo! Good grief, let's try this yet again: The information on Papadopoulos was around long before the Page FISA application was drafted and submitted.

Yes and therefore makes the hiring of Page by the Trump campaign even more interesting from a counter espionage standpoint since now you have 2 people in the campaign trying to cultivate or have direct links to the Russian government. Three if you count Manafort.

Furthermore, Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.

Again that's being contested and could easily be resolved if Nunes released the relevant transcript which he hasn't. Convenient don't you think?

I see we're gonna go around in circles because you won't admit anything. But, a few points in reply:

* "Bias" is one thing; actively working for and taking money from the person's enemies is something entirely different.

* No, judges do not routinely routinely accept evidence from a source who is being paid by the subject's enemies to dig up dirt on him and who proves so unreliable that even those enemies fire him for being dishonest and unreliable. You must be kidding.

* The court in this case did not know it was accepting information from such a disreputable source because Comey, McCabe, etc., never told the court about the source's character, motivation, and financial connections.

* It is beyond silly to say that the fact that the FBI was already investigating Page proves there was no bias. The fact that the FBI used the Steele dossier as an "ESSENTIAL" part of the FISA application and then failed to reveal that the information was coming from that dossier shows clear bias, as do the texts from Strzok.

* If the initial information on Page was as compelling as you claim, then why did the FBI have to use the Steele dossier at all, much less as an "ESSENTIAL" part of the FISA application? And, oh, what happened to Carter Page?

* According to the memo, McCabe testified that there would have been no FISA application without the Steele dossier. You can "dispute" this all you want, but that's what the memo says in black and white. And when we get the McCabe transcript released, we will see that Nunes has accurately reflected what McCabe said.

* The fact that even when the FBI submitted renewal FISA applications, they never revealed that the information came from shady sources like the Steele dossier and the Steele-fed Yahoo News article shows that this was a politically motivated effort, not a fact-based one.

* No matter how you want to bend and twist the truth, at a minimum the Nunes memo shows that senior FBI and JD officials lied to a FISA court to spy on an American citizen who was working on a campaign that they did not want to see win. That is the stuff of banana republics, not to mention a serious violation of law.

And....... the warrant was still not used to spy on Trump.

And....... the warrant was still not used to spy on Trump

...and Hillary still didn't get elected.

No wonder the fiscally responsible Republicans are pissed off...with all the federal funds and the resources of the Deep State at their disposal the FBI still couldn't get a sure bet into the Whitehouse.

They must be asking what value the FBI are returning for all the money they get from the State.

 

[longknife]

1. The FBI used Steele's dossier as the main basis for their FISA application to spy on Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page, even though the FBI officials involved with the matter knew that the dossier had not been properly vetted or verified. According to the head of the FBI's counterintelligence division, Assistant Director Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its "infancy" at the time of the initial Page FISA application. After Steele was terminated, a source validation report conducted by an independent unit within FBI assessed Steele's reporting as only minimally corroborated. Then-FBI Director James Comey called the dossier "salacious and unverified" when he testified in June 2017 (yet Comey signed one of the FISA warrant extensions).

2. The FBI used news articles sourced by Steele, including a Yahoo News article that had Steele as its source, to corroborate Steele's dossier.

3. The FBI falsely told the court in its FISA application that Steele did not provide information to Yahoo News about Page’s Moscow trip. But British court filings show that Steele admitted he met with Yahoo News in September 2016, two months before the FBI got its initial warrant, to discuss the trip at the direction of Fusion GPS.

4. When the FBI submitted the FISA application, which was based largely on Steele's dossier, the FBI knew that Steele was being paid by the DNC and Hillary Clinton.

5. The FBI did not tell the FISA court that information cited in its FISA application was gathered by someone who was being paid by Trump’s political opponents.

6. The FBI knew that Steele was working for Fusion GPS, a research firm that was hired by a law firm that was receiving large payments from the Clinton campaign and the DNC. The FBI also knew that the DNC and the Clinton campaign had paid Steele $160K directly. The FBI chose not to tell the FISA court about these financial connections.

7. Without the Steele dossier, the FBI would not have tried to get a FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page.

8. Even when the FBI submitted renewal applications, three of them, they never told the FISA court about the Steele dossier or Steele's financial connections with the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

9. Soon after getting the first FISA warrant, the FBI fired Steele for making unauthorized disclosures and lying to the FBI! Yet, even then, the FBI officials involved with the FISA warrant did not tell the FISA court that they had used Steele's dossier as their main source and that they had dismissed Steele as a source for disreputable conduct.

10. While the FBI was working on getting the first FISA warrant, then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr’s wife was working for Fusion GPS, the firm that hired Steele to dig up dirt on Trump. At the firm, she helped conduct opposition research on Trump and his associates. The FBI did not inform the FISA court about any of this information.

'Nunes memo' revelations prove the FBI makes up its own rules

Outcry over the Nunes memo is damning for Democrats and FBI

5 Most Damning Truths From the FISA Memo

1. Show me in the memo where it said MAIN basis you can't invent text because it would fit the narrative better. Even more by saying MAIN you admit that there were other reasons to believe Page was a person of interest for the intelligence community. This immediately makes the whole narrative suspect.
2. This is actually contested. "In reality, the article made was not “derived” from Steele. Isikoff, citing “multiple sources,” reported that U.S. intelligence officials had briefed senior members of Congress on Page's activities in Russia.:"Analysis | The memo’s description of a supposedly key news report is wrong
3. Meeting with the press is not the same as giving them the story in question.
4. So? The fact that the story comes from a source with a bias says nothing of it's accuracy. If someone gets accused of rape and it comes out that victim didn't like the rapist beforehand does that make the accusation by definition inadmissible? Btw the Steele dossier has aspects of it that have since been corroborated.
5. Again something that's contested The central argument in the Nunes memo may have just been debunked. But again why does it matter in the slightest to it's accuracy?
6. See point 5
7. Again being contested. especially because Page first showed up on the FBI's radar in 2013 LOOOOONG before Steele.FBI was 'given second Trump-Russia dossier'
8. Here we get to another thing the memo admitted. In order to get a renewal you have to get additional facts to the original warrant. In other words the Steele dossier couldn't be used in the renewals, the FBI had to be able to establish that they had turned up more evidence. Pretty important if you are trying to establish that the FBI went after Page unjustly.
9. See point 5 and 6
10. So if I have a company that has tens of thousands of employees, if the wife of one of those employees is working for a company that has a connection with a dossier accusing someone of espionage, that is so material to the FACTS of that dossier that it null in voids the accusations? Not the employee but the wife of the employee? I don't think so.
Now I'll make some points of my own.
11. The memo admits contacts with Russia first became suspect not because of the Steele dossier but because of Papadopoulos.
12. Nobody is trying to claim that Page didn't have contacts with the Russians.
13. Page was already gone from the Trump campaign when the warrant was issued. Making the accusation that it was a part of a campaign against Trump dubious at best.
14. The memo makes absolutely no mention of the Mueller investigation, again making it hard to say it is compromised in any way.
15. As a conclusion. It's pretty pathetic that Nunes released this memo which doesn't give any new facts. Clearly can't establish any real wrongdoing. It relies on half truths and destroys his committees credibility with the intelligence community.

Nice try but

 

[mikegriffith1]

"Salacious" isn't a synonym for "wrong" or "lies". Description of him indulging his fetishes with prostitutes could be 'salacious' while still being true.

How about the other word that Comey used: "unverified"? Does that mean "unverified"?

How about the fact that the FBI's chief of counterintelligence said that verification of the Steele dossier was in its "infancy" when the FISA application was submitted?

How about the fact that an internal review of the dossier found that it had only been "minimally" confirmed? The flip side of that is that its claims had "largely" or "mostly" not been confirmed.

How about the fact that the FBI guys themselves fired Steele because he proved to be dishonest and reliable?

How about the fact that the FBI officials involved with the FISA application never told the FISA court that an "essential" part of the application was coming from a dirt dossier that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary and that was compiled by a shady ex-spy whom the FBI guys themselves soon fired?

How about the fact that the FBI's "verification" of the dossier included the citing of an article cited in the dossier? (And that flaky Yahoo News article was included in the FISA application, by the way.)

How about the fact that the FISA application magically contained the same information on Papadopoulos that had already been used by Strzok as his excuse to start his Russian-collusion witch hunt.

And how about the fact that Mueller's indictment of Papadopoulos did not involve any crime of collusion but about lying about giving the Trump campaign an exaggerated picture of the degree of his Russian connections (i.e., he was padding his resume) and about meetings he held that were not about and did not constitute collusion?

How about the fact that the Grassley-Graham criminal referral on Steele supports key aspects of the Nunes memo?

Why aren't the Democrats screaming and hollering for the McCabe transcript to be released and for the FISA application to be released? Gee, I wonder why they aren't anxious to see those docs come to light. I can't imagine. . . .

 

[idb]

"Salacious" isn't a synonym for "wrong" or "lies". Description of him indulging his fetishes with prostitutes could be 'salacious' while still being true.

How about the other word that Comey used: "unverified"? Does that mean "unverified"?

How about the fact that the FBI's chief of counterintelligence said that verification of the Steele dossier was in its "infancy" when the FISA application was submitted?

How about the fact that an internal review of the dossier found that it had only been "minimally" confirmed? The flip side of that is that its claims had "largely" or "mostly" not been confirmed.

How about the fact that the FBI guys themselves fired Steele because he proved to be dishonest and reliable?

How about the fact that the FBI officials involved with the FISA application never told the FISA court that an "essential" part of the application was coming from a dirt dossier that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary and that was compiled by a shady ex-spy whom the FBI guys themselves soon fired?

How about the fact that the FBI's "verification" of the dossier included the citing of an article cited in the dossier? (And that flaky Yahoo News article was included in the FISA application, by the way.)

How about the fact that the FISA application magically contained the same information on Papadopoulos that had already been used by Strzok as his excuse to start his Russian-collusion witch hunt.

And how about the fact that Mueller's indictment of Papadopoulos did not involve any crime of collusion but about lying about giving the Trump campaign an exaggerated picture of the degree of his Russian connections (i.e., he was padding his resume) and about meetings he held that were not about and did not constitute collusion?

How about the fact that the Grassley-Graham criminal referral on Steele supports key aspects of the Nunes memo?

Why aren't the Democrats screaming and hollering for the McCabe transcript to be released and for the FISA application to be released? Gee, I wonder why they aren't anxious to see those docs come to light. I can't imagine. . . .

"Unverified" doesn't mean "wrong" or "false" either.

As for the rest of your ramblings...are you suggesting that, knowing Page's history as you do, you don't think he would be a legitimate target for investigation?

 

[busybee01]

"Salacious" isn't a synonym for "wrong" or "lies". Description of him indulging his fetishes with prostitutes could be 'salacious' while still being true.

How about the other word that Comey used: "unverified"? Does that mean "unverified"?

How about the fact that the FBI's chief of counterintelligence said that verification of the Steele dossier was in its "infancy" when the FISA application was submitted?

How about the fact that an internal review of the dossier found that it had only been "minimally" confirmed? The flip side of that is that its claims had "largely" or "mostly" not been confirmed.

How about the fact that the FBI guys themselves fired Steele because he proved to be dishonest and reliable?

How about the fact that the FBI officials involved with the FISA application never told the FISA court that an "essential" part of the application was coming from a dirt dossier that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary and that was compiled by a shady ex-spy whom the FBI guys themselves soon fired?

How about the fact that the FBI's "verification" of the dossier included the citing of an article cited in the dossier? (And that flaky Yahoo News article was included in the FISA application, by the way.)

How about the fact that the FISA application magically contained the same information on Papadopoulos that had already been used by Strzok as his excuse to start his Russian-collusion witch hunt.

And how about the fact that Mueller's indictment of Papadopoulos did not involve any crime of collusion but about lying about giving the Trump campaign an exaggerated picture of the degree of his Russian connections (i.e., he was padding his resume) and about meetings he held that were not about and did not constitute collusion?

How about the fact that the Grassley-Graham criminal referral on Steele supports key aspects of the Nunes memo?

Why aren't the Democrats screaming and hollering for the McCabe transcript to be released and for the FISA application to be released? Gee, I wonder why they aren't anxious to see those docs come to light. I can't imagine. . . .

How about the word Comey used "verified." That means proven to be true.

How about the fact that Steele was let go because he talked to the press. Try telling the truth for a change.

How about the fact that you have not seen the FISA application.

How about the fact that Trey Gowdy says the memo does not reflect on Mueller's investigation at all.

How about the fact that when they make a plea deal, normally they plead guilty to a lesser charge.

How about the fact that Nunes' memo is a dud and it shows how dishonest Grassley and Graham are.

How about the fact you are a fool and moron.

 

[Faun]

Why aren't the Democrats screaming and hollering for the McCabe transcript to be released and for the FISA application to be released? Gee, I wonder why they aren't anxious to see those docs come to light. I can't imagine. . . .

When are you gonna stop lying about this,,,?

With a Monday Vote Expected, Democrats Press to Release Their Own Memo

Democrats have publicly called for the Republican-controlled committee to release a transcript of the interview with Mr. McCabe.​

 

[mikegriffith1]

"Unverified" doesn't mean "wrong" or "false" either.

"Unverified" means you don't put it in front of a FISA court as an "essential" part of the warrant application, not to mention the fact that you don't withhold the fact that this "essential" information is coming from a shady ex-spy who took bundles of money from the DNC and Hillary to dig up this "unverified" dirt. And when you submit a renewal application for your FISA warrant, you don't hide the fact that you fired the shady ex-spy because even you found him to be dishonest and unreliable.

As for the rest of your ramblings...are you suggesting that, knowing Page's history as you do, you don't think he would be a legitimate target for investigation?

So that's all you have to say about the other points I raised? In other words, you're okay with Nazi/Soviet-like tactics and corruption as long as these things are done by your party and to attack the other party. You would have made a great Nazi or Soviet; they came to power using these same kinds of methods.

If Page was a legitimate target, why did the FBI have to use the Steele dossier and a Yahoo News article as an "essential" part of the FISA application? And after a year of wire-tapping Page, why was Page not indicted? Answer: Because a year's worth of wire-tapping failed to produce enough evidence to indict him, even by Mueller's flimsy standards. THINK about that.

When Nixon used fascist tactics like these against the Dems, a majority of Congressional Republicans turned on him and called for his ouster. But now that high-ranking Dems have been caught using these same kinds of tactics, you Dems circle the wagons and try to smear the people who are bringing this dangerous corruption to light.

As for Faun's citation of the Washington Post article that claims, at the very end of an article about the Dem memo, that Dems have called for the release of the McCabe transcript, I'd like to know which Dems have done this, since the article does not say. I watched two interviews with two Dems on the House Intel Committee, and when they were asked about this, they hemmed and hawed and equivocated all over the place. But, if some Dems have called for the transcript's release, let's have their names.

 

[Faun]

"Unverified" doesn't mean "wrong" or "false" either.

"Unverified" means you don't put it in front of a FISA court as an "essential" part of the warrant application, not to mention the fact that you don't withhold the fact that this "essential" information is coming from a shady ex-spy who took bundles of money from the DNC and Hillary to dig up this "unverified" dirt. And when you submit a renewal application for your FISA warrant, you don't hide the fact that you fired the shady ex-spy because even you found him to be dishonest and unreliable.

As for the rest of your ramblings...are you suggesting that, knowing Page's history as you do, you don't think he would be a legitimate target for investigation?

So that's all you have to say about the other points I raised? In other words, you're okay with Nazi/Soviet-like tactics and corruption as long as these things are done by your party and to attack the other party. You would have made a great Nazi or Soviet; they came to power using these same kinds of methods.

If Page was a legitimate target, why did the FBI have to use the Steele dossier and a Yahoo News article as an "essential" part of the FISA application? And after a year of wire-tapping Page, why was Page not indicted? Answer: Because a year's worth of wire-tapping failed to produce enough evidence to indict him, even by Mueller's flimsy standards. THINK about that.

When Nixon used fascist tactics like these against the Dems, a majority of Congressional Republicans turned on him and called for his ouster. But now that high-ranking Dems have been caught using these same kinds of tactics, you Dems circle the wagons and try to smear the people who are bringing this dangerous corruption to light.

As for Faun's citation of the Washington Post article that claims, at the very end of an article about the Dem memo, that Dems have called for the release of the McCabe transcript, I'd like to know which Dems have done this, since the article does not say. I watched two interviews with two Dems on the House Intel Committee, and when they were asked about this, they hemmed and hawed and equivocated all over the place. But, if some Dems have called for the transcript's release, let's have their names.

You’re lying again. You have no evidence any of the unverified portions of the dossier were used in obtaining a warrant.

If truth and facts were on your side, you wouldn’t have to keep lying like you do.

 

[idb]

"Unverified" doesn't mean "wrong" or "false" either.

"Unverified" means you don't put it in front of a FISA court as an "essential" part of the warrant application, not to mention the fact that you don't withhold the fact that this "essential" information is coming from a shady ex-spy who took bundles of money from the DNC and Hillary to dig up this "unverified" dirt. And when you submit a renewal application for your FISA warrant, you don't hide the fact that you fired the shady ex-spy because even you found him to be dishonest and unreliable.

As for the rest of your ramblings...are you suggesting that, knowing Page's history as you do, you don't think he would be a legitimate target for investigation?

So that's all you have to say about the other points I raised? In other words, you're okay with Nazi/Soviet-like tactics and corruption as long as these things are done by your party and to attack the other party. You would have made a great Nazi or Soviet; they came to power using these same kinds of methods.

If Page was a legitimate target, why did the FBI have to use the Steele dossier and a Yahoo News article as an "essential" part of the FISA application? And after a year of wire-tapping Page, why was Page not indicted? Answer: Because a year's worth of wire-tapping failed to produce enough evidence to indict him, even by Mueller's flimsy standards. THINK about that.

When Nixon used fascist tactics like these against the Dems, a majority of Congressional Republicans turned on him and called for his ouster. But now that high-ranking Dems have been caught using these same kinds of tactics, you Dems circle the wagons and try to smear the people who are bringing this dangerous corruption to light.

As for Faun's citation of the Washington Post article that claims, at the very end of an article about the Dem memo, that Dems have called for the release of the McCabe transcript, I'd like to know which Dems have done this, since the article does not say. I watched two interviews with two Dems on the House Intel Committee, and when they were asked about this, they hemmed and hawed and equivocated all over the place. But, if some Dems have called for the transcript's release, let's have their names.

So...how would an investigator verify something I wonder...?

 

[mikegriffith1]

You’re lying again. You have no evidence any of the unverified portions of the dossier were used in obtaining a warrant.

No, you're lying again. Very few parts of the Steele dossier had been verified when the FISA application was submitted, as we know from the internal review, from the head of the FBI's counter-intel department, and now from the Grassley-Graham criminal referral memo. That FISA application also included the Yahoo News article, which certainly was not "verified" by any stretch.

If only the precious few verified parts of the dossier were used in the FISA application, why did Dems fight like crazed dogs to keep the Nunes memo from being released? If all was on the up and up, why did the FBI officials involved with the FISA application fail to inform the FISA court that the dossier was funded by the DNC and Hillary and that it was authored by a shady ex-spy whom even the FBI soon found to be dishonest and unreliable?

If truth and facts were on your side, you wouldn’t have to keep lying like you do.

You are the one who keeps lying. If truth and facts were on the Dems' side, they would not have told all kinds of lies about the Nunes memo to try to keep it sealed (such as the lie that it revealed sources and methods). If the FBI officials behind the FISA application had been acting honorably and ethically, they never would have needed to use the Steele dossier in the first place, much less deceive the FISA court about its author and origin.

And I notice you guys are silent about the fact that the Grassley-Graham criminal referral memo supports key aspects of the Nunes memo:

A criminal referral from top Senate investigators confirms explosive charges in last week’s House Intelligence Committee memo regarding abuse of surveillance authorities at the FBI and Department of Justice. It also reveals a host of problems arising from the bureau’s cooperation with foreign investigator Christopher Steele, who was working on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. The eight-page memo from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) includes underlying evidence to support the claims.

“It appears the FBI relied on admittedly uncorroborated information, funded by and obtained for Secretary Clinton’s presidential campaign, in order to conduct surveillance of an associate of the opposing presidential candidate. It did so based on Mr. Steele’s personal credibility and presumably having faith in his process of obtaining the information. But there is substantial evidence suggesting that Mr. Steele materially misled the FBI about a key aspect of his dossier efforts, one which bears on his credibility,” Sens. Graham and Grassley wrote.

The letter describes a verification effort before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) so inadequate it resembles a concerted effort to conceal information from the court. (Criminal Referral Confirms Memo's Explosive Claims Of FISA Abuse)​

This episode shows that American liberals are modern-day Jacobins who are determined to gain power and tear down our constitutional form of government by any and all methods. Rather than join with patriotic Americans who are justifiably alarmed and outraged by what the DNC and the FBI did, you are lying and distorting to excuse and ignore these criminal acts.

By the way, who are the Democrats who are calling for the release of the McCabe transcript? Can you name any names? I asked you this in my previous reply, but you ignored the question. And how about the names of Democrats who are calling for the release of the FISA application? Hey?

 

[Zorro!]

WE NOW KNOW: FULL OF SCHIFF

In a February 2018 memo that earned him noting but opprobrium and abuse, Rep. Devin Nunes laid out the truth of the FISA abuse underlying the Obama administration’s surveillance of the Trump campaign. Rep. Adam Schiff disputed the Nunes memo with a competing memo of his own. Following the Department of Justice Inspector General report issued last week by Michael Horowitz, however, Schiff has been incapacitated from keeping up this particular ruse.

We have come to know Schiff as something of a pathological liar. Nunes now seeks to conduct an intervention. In the letter captured in the tweet below, Nunes invites Schiff to undertake rehab. The first step is admitting he has a problem:

“As part of your rehabilitation, it’s crucial that you admit you have a problem—you are hijacking the Intelligence Committee for political purposes while excusing and covering up intelligence agency abuses.”​

Schiff’s enablers will nevertheless insulate him from the consequences of his exposure. Indeed, they are his accomplices.

Quotable quote:

“I understand taking action on this issue will be difficult for you, as it will be an implicit acknowledgment that you were wrong to deny these abuses and that you were complicit in the violation of an American’s civil liberties. I also understand that such an acknowledgment is made even more difficult by the fact that you’ve already been discredited by your years-long false claim that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to hack the 2016 presidential election.”​

 

[Zorro!]

A DIRTY COP SPEAKS

James Comey appeared for a 15-minute interview by Chris Wallace on FOX News Sunday this morning. When it comes to the FISA warrants whose verification and alleged facts he swore to, Comey asserted, he doesn’t know anything. As Director of the FBI he wasn’t familiar with the details; as the director, he’s “not kept informed.” And he never oversaw investigation of the Trump campaign or of President Trump.

How dirty is this cop? Very dirty. He nevertheless seems quite confident that he faces no consequences for his misconduct, and who can say he is wrong?

Quotable quote: “There were mistakes I consider more consequential than this during my tenure.”

 

[Dragonlady]

You’re lying again. You have no evidence any of the unverified portions of the dossier were used in obtaining a warrant.

No, you're lying again. Very few parts of the Steele dossier had been verified when the FISA application was submitted, as we know from the internal review, from the head of the FBI's counter-intel department, and now from the Grassley-Graham criminal referral memo. That FISA application also included the Yahoo News article, which certainly was not "verified" by any stretch.

If only the precious few verified parts of the dossier were used in the FISA application, why did Dems fight like crazed dogs to keep the Nunes memo from being released? If all was on the up and up, why did the FBI officials involved with the FISA application fail to inform the FISA court that the dossier was funded by the DNC and Hillary and that it was authored by a shady ex-spy whom even the FBI soon found to be dishonest and unreliable?

If truth and facts were on your side, you wouldn’t have to keep lying like you do.

You are the one who keeps lying. If truth and facts were on the Dems' side, they would not have told all kinds of lies about the Nunes memo to try to keep it sealed (such as the lie that it revealed sources and methods). If the FBI officials behind the FISA application had been acting honorably and ethically, they never would have needed to use the Steele dossier in the first place, much less deceive the FISA court about its author and origin.

And I notice you guys are silent about the fact that the Grassley-Graham criminal referral memo supports key aspects of the Nunes memo:

A criminal referral from top Senate investigators confirms explosive charges in last week’s House Intelligence Committee memo regarding abuse of surveillance authorities at the FBI and Department of Justice. It also reveals a host of problems arising from the bureau’s cooperation with foreign investigator Christopher Steele, who was working on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. The eight-page memo from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) includes underlying evidence to support the claims.

“It appears the FBI relied on admittedly uncorroborated information, funded by and obtained for Secretary Clinton’s presidential campaign, in order to conduct surveillance of an associate of the opposing presidential candidate. It did so based on Mr. Steele’s personal credibility and presumably having faith in his process of obtaining the information. But there is substantial evidence suggesting that Mr. Steele materially misled the FBI about a key aspect of his dossier efforts, one which bears on his credibility,” Sens. Graham and Grassley wrote.

The letter describes a verification effort before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) so inadequate it resembles a concerted effort to conceal information from the court. (Criminal Referral Confirms Memo's Explosive Claims Of FISA Abuse)​

This episode shows that American liberals are modern-day Jacobins who are determined to gain power and tear down our constitutional form of government by any and all methods. Rather than join with patriotic Americans who are justifiably alarmed and outraged by what the DNC and the FBI did, you are lying and distorting to excuse and ignore these criminal acts.

By the way, who are the Democrats who are calling for the release of the McCabe transcript? Can you name any names? I asked you this in my previous reply, but you ignored the question. And how about the names of Democrats who are calling for the release of the FISA application? Hey?

As always, you have it backwards. Nearly ALL of the Steele Dossier has been verified, whereas all of the Devon Nunes Memo was thoroughly debunked on the day Nunes issued it. Full of carefully edited and cherry-picked half-truths, it presently an utterly false picture.

Nunes’ claim that the Steele Dossier a source for the Carter Page FISA warrant is true. But everything else that Nunez wrote about the use of the Steele Dossier in the Carter page for FISA warrant is false.

It was not unverified. The section that was used in the FISA warrant application had been verified before it was used. The Steele Dossier was not the primary source for the warrant. The small section of the warrant that was used, was used in support of a primary source. Last but not least the section used was less than half a page of an approximately 80 page document.

Tell me again we see that the facts simply do not support the Trump version of events. Every investigation completed has blown Trump’s lies about , and those of his remaining staffers, right out of the water.

 

[LaDairis]

When the FBI submitted the FISA application, which was based largely on Steele's dossier, the FBI knew that Steele was being paid by the DNC and Hillary Clinton.

Right there. There is a need to put people in prison for that, all of 'em....

 

[The Original Tree]

Nunez was 100% Correct and Vindicated. Remember when Crooked Adam Schiff got Nunez tossed off the Intelligence Committee for simply telling The Truth?

Nancy Pelosi and Schiff have attacked Nunez for 3 years calling him a liar over this.

They are THE LIARS.

 

[The Original Tree]

You’re lying again. You have no evidence any of the unverified portions of the dossier were used in obtaining a warrant.

No, you're lying again. Very few parts of the Steele dossier had been verified when the FISA application was submitted, as we know from the internal review, from the head of the FBI's counter-intel department, and now from the Grassley-Graham criminal referral memo. That FISA application also included the Yahoo News article, which certainly was not "verified" by any stretch.

If only the precious few verified parts of the dossier were used in the FISA application, why did Dems fight like crazed dogs to keep the Nunes memo from being released? If all was on the up and up, why did the FBI officials involved with the FISA application fail to inform the FISA court that the dossier was funded by the DNC and Hillary and that it was authored by a shady ex-spy whom even the FBI soon found to be dishonest and unreliable?

If truth and facts were on your side, you wouldn’t have to keep lying like you do.

You are the one who keeps lying. If truth and facts were on the Dems' side, they would not have told all kinds of lies about the Nunes memo to try to keep it sealed (such as the lie that it revealed sources and methods). If the FBI officials behind the FISA application had been acting honorably and ethically, they never would have needed to use the Steele dossier in the first place, much less deceive the FISA court about its author and origin.

And I notice you guys are silent about the fact that the Grassley-Graham criminal referral memo supports key aspects of the Nunes memo:

A criminal referral from top Senate investigators confirms explosive charges in last week’s House Intelligence Committee memo regarding abuse of surveillance authorities at the FBI and Department of Justice. It also reveals a host of problems arising from the bureau’s cooperation with foreign investigator Christopher Steele, who was working on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. The eight-page memo from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) includes underlying evidence to support the claims.

“It appears the FBI relied on admittedly uncorroborated information, funded by and obtained for Secretary Clinton’s presidential campaign, in order to conduct surveillance of an associate of the opposing presidential candidate. It did so based on Mr. Steele’s personal credibility and presumably having faith in his process of obtaining the information. But there is substantial evidence suggesting that Mr. Steele materially misled the FBI about a key aspect of his dossier efforts, one which bears on his credibility,” Sens. Graham and Grassley wrote.

The letter describes a verification effort before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) so inadequate it resembles a concerted effort to conceal information from the court. (Criminal Referral Confirms Memo's Explosive Claims Of FISA Abuse)​

This episode shows that American liberals are modern-day Jacobins who are determined to gain power and tear down our constitutional form of government by any and all methods. Rather than join with patriotic Americans who are justifiably alarmed and outraged by what the DNC and the FBI did, you are lying and distorting to excuse and ignore these criminal acts.

By the way, who are the Democrats who are calling for the release of the McCabe transcript? Can you name any names? I asked you this in my previous reply, but you ignored the question. And how about the names of Democrats who are calling for the release of the FISA application? Hey?

As always, you have it backwards. Nearly ALL of the Steele Dossier has been verified, whereas all of the Devon Nunes Memo was thoroughly debunked on the day Nunes issued it. Full of carefully edited and cherry-picked half-truths, it presently an utterly false picture.

Nunes’ claim that the Steele Dossier a source for the Carter Page FISA warrant is true. But everything else that Nunez wrote about the use of the Steele Dossier in the Carter page for FISA warrant is false.

It was not unverified. The section that was used in the FISA warrant application had been verified before it was used. The Steele Dossier was not the primary source for the warrant. The small section of the warrant that was used, was used in support of a primary source. Last but not least the section used was less than half a page of an approximately 80 page document.

Tell me again we see that the facts simply do not support the Trump version of events. Every investigation completed has blown Trump’s lies about , and those of his remaining staffers, right out of the water.

God is going to BAN YOU FROM HEAVEN FOR LYING LIKE THIS.

But here, apparently Pathological Liars are welcome.

 

[Osiris-ODS]

1. The FBI used Steele's dossier as the main basis for their FISA application to spy on Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page, even though the FBI officials involved with the matter knew that the dossier had not been properly vetted or verified. According to the head of the FBI's counterintelligence division, Assistant Director Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its "infancy" at the time of the initial Page FISA application. After Steele was terminated, a source validation report conducted by an independent unit within FBI assessed Steele's reporting as only minimally corroborated. Then-FBI Director James Comey called the dossier "salacious and unverified" when he testified in June 2017 (yet Comey signed one of the FISA warrant extensions).

1. Show me in the memo where it said MAIN basis you can't invent text because it would fit the narrative better. ...

I realize this post is old and refers to the Nunes memo rather than the official IG Report that was released on Dec 9, 2019, but since this is the first time I'm seeing these posts (because someone obviously bumped this old thread this morning for reasons I have not yet determined), and since I actually read the IG Report over the weekend, I figured I'd chime in and address this particular point by reference to the official IG Report:

The IG's finding confirming the OP's statement #1 is found on page 126 of the IG Report, in the last paragraph, which states:

"The FISA request form drew almost entirely from Steele's reporting in describing the factual basis to establish probable cause to believe that Page was an agent of a foreign power, including the secret meeting between Carter Page and Divyekin alleged in Steele's Report 94 and the role of Page as an intermediary between Russia and the Trump campaign's then manager, Paul Manafort, in the 'well-developed conspiracy' alleged in Steele's Report 95."​

A copy of the IG Report can be found on the DOJ website at this link: https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf (note: page 126 of the Report is page 164 of the linked PDF)

 

[Zorro!]

You’re lying again. You have no evidence any of the unverified portions of the dossier were used in obtaining a warrant.

No, you're lying again. Very few parts of the Steele dossier had been verified when the FISA application was submitted, as we know from the internal review, from the head of the FBI's counter-intel department, and now from the Grassley-Graham criminal referral memo. That FISA application also included the Yahoo News article, which certainly was not "verified" by any stretch.

If only the precious few verified parts of the dossier were used in the FISA application, why did Dems fight like crazed dogs to keep the Nunes memo from being released? If all was on the up and up, why did the FBI officials involved with the FISA application fail to inform the FISA court that the dossier was funded by the DNC and Hillary and that it was authored by a shady ex-spy whom even the FBI soon found to be dishonest and unreliable?

If truth and facts were on your side, you wouldn’t have to keep lying like you do.

You are the one who keeps lying. If truth and facts were on the Dems' side, they would not have told all kinds of lies about the Nunes memo to try to keep it sealed (such as the lie that it revealed sources and methods). If the FBI officials behind the FISA application had been acting honorably and ethically, they never would have needed to use the Steele dossier in the first place, much less deceive the FISA court about its author and origin.

And I notice you guys are silent about the fact that the Grassley-Graham criminal referral memo supports key aspects of the Nunes memo:

A criminal referral from top Senate investigators confirms explosive charges in last week’s House Intelligence Committee memo regarding abuse of surveillance authorities at the FBI and Department of Justice. It also reveals a host of problems arising from the bureau’s cooperation with foreign investigator Christopher Steele, who was working on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. The eight-page memo from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) includes underlying evidence to support the claims.

“It appears the FBI relied on admittedly uncorroborated information, funded by and obtained for Secretary Clinton’s presidential campaign, in order to conduct surveillance of an associate of the opposing presidential candidate. It did so based on Mr. Steele’s personal credibility and presumably having faith in his process of obtaining the information. But there is substantial evidence suggesting that Mr. Steele materially misled the FBI about a key aspect of his dossier efforts, one which bears on his credibility,” Sens. Graham and Grassley wrote.

The letter describes a verification effort before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) so inadequate it resembles a concerted effort to conceal information from the court. (Criminal Referral Confirms Memo's Explosive Claims Of FISA Abuse)​

This episode shows that American liberals are modern-day Jacobins who are determined to gain power and tear down our constitutional form of government by any and all methods. Rather than join with patriotic Americans who are justifiably alarmed and outraged by what the DNC and the FBI did, you are lying and distorting to excuse and ignore these criminal acts.

By the way, who are the Democrats who are calling for the release of the McCabe transcript? Can you name any names? I asked you this in my previous reply, but you ignored the question. And how about the names of Democrats who are calling for the release of the FISA application? Hey?

As always, you have it backwards. Nearly ALL of the Steele Dossier has been verified, whereas all of the Devon Nunes Memo was thoroughly debunked on the day Nunes issued it...

You are welcome to believe whatever you like, but when it is this at variance with the facts, it simply is not compelling.

17 items of misconduct, each one enough to result in the authorization to spy being denied had they not misled the Court:

Omitted information from another U.S. government agency (CIA) detailing its prior relationship with Page, including that Page had been approved as an operational contact for the other agency from 2008 to 2013, and that Page had provided information to the other agency concerning his prior contacts with certain Russian intelligence officers, one of which overlapped with facts asserted in the FISA application;
​

That is, they used his Russian contacts to support their slander than he was a Russian Spy while concealing from the Court that he was a valued source for the CIA that gathered information for them, ABOUT the Russians. Brennan says, and Horowitz backed up that the CIA REPEATEDLY gave this information to the FBI, yet, the FBI not only concealed this from the Court, but they also inserted "NOT A" next to "SOURCE" to reverse the meaning of the CIA warning that Page worked on behalf of the CIA.

Link for the next 16 instances of horrific wrong doing by a thoroughly corrupt FBI illegally spying on an innocent US Citizen because the FBI leadership wanted Hillary to win the election.

IG Report: Here Are The 17 Specific ‘Inaccuracies And Omissions’ In The FBI’s FISA Warrants Against Carter Page