Why no protest By FBI over Democrats releasing their "Dossier" Memo?

[healthmyths]

I've looked all over briefly so maybe there is a story where the FBI has protested as vehemently as they did with the Nunes memo the release of the Schiff Memo.


But the FBI says the four-page document is inaccurate and stripped of critical context. And Democrats say the memo, which makes public material that is ordinarily considered among the most tightly held national security information, cherry-picks Republican talking points in an effort to smear law enforcement.
Hotly disputed Russia-probe memo released over FBI protest | KSL.com

Does this mean the FBI is "politicized" because they protested GOP but where is the similar angst over the Democrats' release?
To me that shows how the Obama holdover lawyers are still politicizing the FBI.

 

[OldLady]

The FBI/DOJ spokesmen I have heard are concerned that this sets a dangerous precedent of the I.C. sharing information it was supposed to keep secret. There are ways to handle their concerns without broadcasting details to the general public. The Inspector General's office or the Court could have been asked to review it, and the I.C. at the minimum should have done investigating on its own, asking for testimony from the FBI et al. about their questions. This memo was clearly politicized. Not a good precedent to set, since in the future sources may be reluctant to share info with us because it could become part of a media circus.
At least that is their position.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The FBI/DOJ spokesmen I have heard are concerned that this sets a dangerous precedent of the I.C. sharing information it was supposed to keep secret. There are ways to handle their concerns without broadcasting details to the general public. The Inspector General's office or the Court could have been asked to review it, and the I.C. at the minimum should have done investigating on its own, asking for testimony from the FBI et al. about their questions. This memo was clearly politicized. Not a good precedent to set, since in the future sources may be reluctant to share info with us because it could become part of a media circus.
At least that is their position.

Well, the Republicans' one has already been released, so, it's all out in the open now, isn't it? What difference does another Memo make?

 

[TNHarley]

Will this one taint national security as well?

 

[OldLady]

The FBI/DOJ spokesmen I have heard are concerned that this sets a dangerous precedent of the I.C. sharing information it was supposed to keep secret. There are ways to handle their concerns without broadcasting details to the general public. The Inspector General's office or the Court could have been asked to review it, and the I.C. at the minimum should have done investigating on its own, asking for testimony from the FBI et al. about their questions. This memo was clearly politicized. Not a good precedent to set, since in the future sources may be reluctant to share info with us because it could become part of a media circus.
At least that is their position.

Well, the Republicans' one has already been released, so, it's all out in the open now, isn't it? What difference does another Memo make?

Apparently, no, it's not "ALL" out in the open. Since the memo released so far is being described as misleading and leaving out relevant information, a second memo presenting additional information could be helpful.
Although at this point, I don't trust any of them and we'll never know since we can't see the underlying FACTS.

 

[healthmyths]

The FBI/DOJ spokesmen I have heard are concerned that this sets a dangerous precedent of the I.C. sharing information it was supposed to keep secret. There are ways to handle their concerns without broadcasting details to the general public. The Inspector General's office or the Court could have been asked to review it, and the I.C. at the minimum should have done investigating on its own, asking for testimony from the FBI et al. about their questions. This memo was clearly politicized. Not a good precedent to set, since in the future sources may be reluctant to share info with us because it could become part of a media circus.
At least that is their position.

Well, the Republicans' one has already been released, so, it's all out in the open now, isn't it? What difference does another Memo make?

Well that means that the Democrat memo means nothing. So why protest you say?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I've looked all over briefly so maybe there is a story where the FBI has protested as vehemently as they did with the Nunes memo the release of the Schiff Memo.


But the FBI says the four-page document is inaccurate and stripped of critical context. And Democrats say the memo, which makes public material that is ordinarily considered among the most tightly held national security information, cherry-picks Republican talking points in an effort to smear law enforcement.
Hotly disputed Russia-probe memo released over FBI protest | KSL.com

Does this mean the FBI is "politicized" because they protested GOP but where is the similar angst over the Democrats' release?
To me that shows how the Obama holdover lawyers are still politicizing the FBI.

View attachment 174991

IRS - Lois Lerner - politicized the IRS , pled the 5th, then said she was not guilty of any charges...
DOJ -Eric(the racist) Holder - Politicized the DOJ by running guns into Mexico, which killed 10,000s of Mexicans and a Border Agent, lied under Oath.
State Dept - Politicized the State Dept, when 4 US citizens were left for dead in Benghazi, and was blamed on a Movie, when Sec Hiltery knew it was Al Qaeda. Lied to Congress.
DOJ - Loretta Lynch once again Politicized the FBI by having James Comey, lie about Hitlery scrubbing emails as a accident.

Martha Stewart was indicted for insider trading, yet nothing was found about the trading, so got her for perjury because she forgo what she said before, 5 years in jail.
Wesley Snipes failed to report his earnings one year, and was convicted of tax evasion, 5 years in jail.

Bradly Manning - Sold out the United States and US servicemen died. Bradly Manning was sentenced to 37 years in jail but Obama pardoned him/her/it.

And the left wonders why more people are not voting for the stupid Democrats(redundant statement).

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Release all the motherfucking information and let us decide.

This bullshit involves all of us.

 

[healthmyths]

I want to remind all that the FISA judges make judgements based on all relevant information. The FISA judges didn't know that Steele who created the "dossier" and the reason for the FISA warrant had been fired by FBI.

 

[healthmyths]

Release all the motherfucking information and let us decide.

This bullshit involves all of us.

Hey not one GOP is saying NOT to release it but to release using the methodical procedures used for Nunes memo.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I can't believe that Obama vaporized every law abiding agent out of the FBI in 8 years, but what other conclusion can one make?

 

[BlackSand]

I've looked all over briefly so maybe there is a story where the FBI has protested as vehemently as they did with the Nunes memo the release of the Schiff Memo.

Representative Schiff would actually have to have a memo before the FBI could offer an opinion on it ...

To make the case that a memo no one has seen, much less read warrants comment ...
Just means you have been duped into believing a unicorn exists for no other reason than the fact Representative Schiff said he has a memo.

It's an age old courtroom trick called "the bluff" ...
And was even poorly executed when Representative Schiff was not prepared to let anyone read the memo he was pretending exists.

.

 

[Desperado]

The FISA judges didn't know that Steele who created the "dossier" and the reason for the FISA warrant had been fired by FBI.

Are you sure the judge did not know? How can you be sure since the democrats are known for judge shopping.

 

[healthmyths]

I can't believe that Obama vaporized every law abiding agent out of the FBI in 8 years, but what other conclusion can one make?

Well I don't believe that. But it does cause questions when this phrase was changed by a Obama appointee...
Electronic records show Peter Strzok, who led the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server as the No. 2 official in the counterintelligence division, changed Comey’s earlier draft language describing Clinton’s actions as “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless,” the sources said.
The shift from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless,” which may appear pedestrian at first glance, reflected a decision by the FBI that could have had potentially significant legal implications, as the federal law governing the mishandling of classified material establishes criminal penalties for “gross negligence.”
FBI agent changed key phrase in Clinton email report

So doesn't it look kind of political when Strozok who told his girlfriend ...

Strzok – Would he be a worse president than Cruz?
Page –Trump?, yes I think so
Strzok – I’m not sure.
Strzok – Omg he’s an idiot.
Page – He’s awful
Strzok – America will get what the voting public deserves.
Page – That’s what I’m afraid of.
Strzok – God Hillary should win. 100,000,000-0.
Page – I know
Page – Also did you hear him make a comment about the size of his d**k earlier? This man cannot be president.
Strzok – Yes I did. In relation to this size of his hand. All the “Lil Marco” blah blah blah
Strzok – Ok I may vote for Trump.
Page – What? Poor Kasich. He’s the only sensible man up there.
Strzok – He was pretty much calling for death for Snowden. I’m a single-issue voter. Espionage Machine Party
Read FBI's Strzok, Page texts about Trump

Remember Strzok CHANGED the wording of Hillary's actions to a lesser phrase...!

 

[healthmyths]

The FISA judges didn't know that Steele who created the "dossier" and the reason for the FISA warrant had been fired by FBI.

Are you sure the judge did not know? How can you be sure since the democrats are known for judge shopping.

Good point! Which again validates the politicizing of the Dossier by the people that wanted Hillary elected.

 

[OldLady]

Will this one taint national security as well?

Not directly. They blew it using that excuse. It sets a bad precedent, though, I agree. If our oversight committees can't be partisan neutral, they can't do their job fairly.

 

[TNHarley]

Will this one taint national security as well?

Not directly. They blew it using that excuse. It sets a bad precedent, though, I agree. If our oversight committees can't be partisan neutral, they can't do their job fairly.

We are one of the most corrupt countries on the planet. None of this is surprising.

 

[BlackSand]

Will this one taint national security as well?

Not directly. They blew it using that excuse. It sets a bad precedent, though, I agree. If our oversight committees can't be partisan neutral, they can't do their job fairly.

Have no fear Old Lady ... The FBI cannot comment on a memo they haven't seen (no one has seen the imaginary Schiff memo for that matter).
Just like the House Intelligence Committee cannot agree to release a memo no one has read.

.

 

[deanrd]

I've looked all over briefly so maybe there is a story where the FBI has protested as vehemently as they did with the Nunes memo the release of the Schiff Memo.


But the FBI says the four-page document is inaccurate and stripped of critical context. And Democrats say the memo, which makes public material that is ordinarily considered among the most tightly held national security information, cherry-picks Republican talking points in an effort to smear law enforcement.
Hotly disputed Russia-probe memo released over FBI protest | KSL.com

Does this mean the FBI is "politicized" because they protested GOP but where is the similar angst over the Democrats' release?
To me that shows how the Obama holdover lawyers are still politicizing the FBI.

View attachment 174991

Because they were attacked for no reason dum dum.

Someone needs to defend America's law enforcement agencies.

 

[dannyboys]

Will this one taint national security as well?

Not directly. They blew it using that excuse. It sets a bad precedent, though, I agree. If our oversight committees can't be partisan neutral, they can't do their job fairly.

Have no fear Old Lady ... The FBI cannot comment on a memo they haven't seen (no one has seen the imaginary Schiff memo for that matter).
Just like the House Intelligence Committee cannot agree to release a memo no one has read.

.

There is no Schiff memo. There never will be one. Schiff will end up claiming the rebuttal evidence is "too classified" for the American people to see.