Here it is guys!   I'll be back to post some videos that are live-streaming right now where all this is broken down and discussed.

House Intelligence Committee Report On FISA Abuses

This might make it easier...
The last page is on the second post and has been cropped for convenience only.

There's a lot of blank space between the upper text and the classification label at the
bottom of the original. I just omitted it.

Thank you @"BIAD".  My haunted computer wouldn't let me copy the document.    

Tracy Beanz did a two part video about the memo. The first video was just her reading over the document, and then it went crazy on her, so she started a second video of where she left off.  If you read over the memo you will not have missed anything... just her reading it.
I like how she breaks it down, so I'm only posting the second video.

Tracy makes some important points for those who don't realize what a big deal this is for ALL the American People.

And don't forget, Steele confided in three-to-four media outlets with information
regarding the dossier he was compiling before taking it to the FBI.

Then after handing over the Clinton-paid-for documents to the FBI, credibility towards
the dossier was supported by the same media outlets!

The FBI then contacted these outlets, took the reinforced information with intent to encourage
a Judge for a Fisa court order and when the same Judge refused the application the FBI felt it
prudent to take-out that media-circle-jerk information with hopes of succeeding with a different
Judge.

They knew the information was crap and they knew any backbone to this 'evidence' was formed
from (probably agency-generated newspapers) major news outlets with 'unknown' sources and
had no credibility.
But... the goal was to get Trump and any left-behind footprints probably wouldn't be looked for.

And remember, this regularly-updated warrant would need further evidence to maintain such a
request and since the bedrock of the original proof is made-up of the dubious dossier and half-assed
confirmations from Journalists who were in cahoots with the Trump-hating Steele, then Lord-knows
what that evidence looks like!

Edit: Sh*t!!! I've just listened to Tracy Beanz's video you provided and what I wrote above is on there!!

When you're dealing with the D.C political swamp, you're also dealing with the medias who're being used in that mire.
Like this:

CNN.

Quote:'What we're covering here
The Nunes memo: The controversial Republican memo memo has been released...'

The next piece in the article holds the heading:

Quote:'...The GOP memo is out. Here's how Democrats could release their own...'

Link:

Notice there's no suggestible word inserted there! It seems the Democrat's memo will not be 'controversial '!
The report goes on to explain how the Democrat's memo will have to pass through the same stringent process
of the one that condemns the FBI, the Justice Dept. and the dossier.

And there's more...! But not what's said or implied in the Republican memo, but what Rep. Adam Schiff says
are his concerns on the memo!

The next segment rolls into the White House being open to having a Democrat memo released and some more
of Schitt Schiff. There's the White House's view on the Republican memo and a weigh-in by Jeff Sessions stating
the Justice Department can make mistakes just like anyone else.

And what's in the memo...? Nope, nothing on the page to make a Blue-Pill-taker think that something maybe awry.

We finally move towards footage of President Trump ignoring Reporters' questions on his way to Marine One
and more negativity towards the recently-released documents.

Since media outlets are indicated in the document like Yahoo and Mother Jones, I have no doubt CNN's name will
appear at some point and they know it. Better to lead the doubts now and hope that nobody talks about a sneaky
three-lettered-logo fake news company with some of their employees on a Government agency's payroll.

With the idea of staying in the magical world that CNN likes to keep it's viewers, may US citizens assume that
this is the first time a security agency has sought to spy on those it serves -with the use of dubious evidence?

A Tweet from David Rothschild to the media talking heads:

Here is another interesting post from Dilley, running for Congress in AZ, dist. 8.

(02-02-2018, 08:46 PM)BIAD Wrote: And don't forget, Steele confided in three-to-four media outlets with information
regarding the dossier he was compiling before taking it to the FBI.

Then after handing over the Clinton-paid-for documents to the FBI, credibility towards
the dossier was supported by the same media outlets!

The FBI then contacted these outlets, took the reinforced information with intent to encourage
a Judge for a Fisa court order and when the same Judge refused the application the FBI felt it
prudent to take-out that media-circle-jerk information with hopes of succeeding with a different
Judge.

They knew the information was crap and they knew any backbone to this 'evidence' was formed
from (probably agency-generated newspapers) major news outlets with 'unknown' sources and
had no credibility.
But... the goal was to get Trump and any left-behind footprints probably wouldn't be looked for.

And remember, this regularly-updated warrant would need further evidence to maintain such a
request and since the bedrock of the original proof is made-up of the dubious dossier and half-assed
confirmations from Journalists who were in cahoots with the Trump-hating Steele, then Lord-knows
what that evidence looks like!

Edit: Sh*t!!! I've just listened to Tracy Beanz's video you provided and what I wrote above is on there!!

Yes, it is, but thanks for posting it for those who won't bother to listen to her video.  

There will be more coming out in March.  Independent journalists' insiders are telling them this is just the tip of the iceberg. 
Maybe they needed to start small to give the snowflakes time to realize their world was/is only an illusion.  You have to keep it simple for them starting out, you know, then build up from there. 

I hope they have their safe places ready with coloring books, crayons, and teddy bears. 

Wow...

I'm going to hold back further laughs until I see what Mueller has to say. And before anybody screams "witch hunt!" or "Fake News!".


Birth Certificates and Transvestite FLOTUS. For like 8 fucking years. 

(02-03-2018, 02:25 AM)DuckforcoveR Wrote: I'm going to hold back further laughs until I see what Mueller has to say. And before anybody screams "witch hunt!" or "Fake News!".


Birth Certificates and Transvestite FLOTUS. For like 8 fucking years. 

You might want to wait on that laughter.  We're not done yet.  

Quote:It turns out the Senate Judiciary Committee also has a memo on Christopher Steele, the FBI and Russia dossier they are working to declassify. Their memo is set to be released including FBI redactions shortly.

Here comes the tsunami.

 

BREAKING: Senate Judiciary Committee to Release Memo on FBI, Christopher Steele and Russia Dossier


And there is even more to come in March.   :smallwink:

The report itself states that FISA became a thing well before the dossier was even released. Nunes once again made an ass of himself to get his name in the news. McCarthy part deux, gotta love it 

The entire thing was about Carter page who was being investigated for YEARS before Trumpo even announced his candidacy.

There was a time (ahem...) when it was applauded that the government investigated shady operations. For 8 years that's all most of you CLAMORED for. We'll, now What? Oh, now it's the "deep state" taking down "my guy"

I agree DFC, this Carter Page-fellow seems a real dick-head and I can see how his interactions with Russia, the Trump
campaign and surveillance of Trump Tower would -to an onlooker, seem a very important situation regarding national
security.

But the Nunes memo indicates more than just perceived individual biasedness in the FBI and dubious Federal protocols,
it offers an insight to the 'Tail-Wagging-The-Dog' syndrome.

The FISA warrant to keep an eye on him does have merit, but the up-keep of that warrant needs to be probed further
as well and once more, leads us to the poor diligence of acquiring the evidence for that up-keep.

My favourite 'pinata' is Journalism and the duplicitous manner of it's ratings-grabbing investigations. In standard society,
a report would come from something that occurred and was testable. The evidence would be the grist of the story and
not the narrative to sway a reader or viewer.
Sadly these days, the need to convince through vague implication and slanted optics seems to be the norm.

And that -I believe, is where this particular investigation came from, the manipulation of mediums that to some extent,
support a preferred dossier from Christopher Steele.

Carter Page.

Quote:In Wikipedia, it states '...Page's name repeatedly shows up in a 'leaked a contract intelligence dossier containing
unsubstantiated allegations of close interactions between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin...'
SOURCE:

If these allegations needed mores substance to believed by the FBI, what would be more confirmable than asking
Journalists who traffic in the nuances of 'could-be's'? They have sources -it's presumed and when approached, it
seems that the FBI obtained favourable information that hints towards something going on with persons connected
with the Trump campaign.

Fusion GPS is a Journalistic creation, the U.S. Department of Justice looked into any connection between this
company and Russia. It's been accused of assisting the Democratic party to derail Mitt Romney's campaign and...

Quote:'...In 2013, the US Department of Justice, represented by the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York,
Preet Bharara, sued Prevezon Holding, a Republic of Cyprus corporation registered in New York State as a
foreign business corporation, under the Magnitsky Act for money-laundering.

The lawsuit sought forfeiture of various assets and real estate holdings in the US.  In May 2017, two months after
President Trump had dismissed Bharara, the lawsuit was settled for $6 million, without Prevezon admitting to any
wrongdoing and with both sides claiming victory.

The sole shareholder of Prevezon was Russian citizen Denis Katsyv, whose father is Petr Katsyv, vice president
of Russia's state-run rail monopoly and "reportedly a business associate of Vladimir Yakunin, a confidant of Vladimir
Putin".
Katsyv’s Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya was not licensed to practice in the US, and Katsyv hired the law firm
of BakerHostetler to represent Prevezon; BakerHostetler hired Fusion GPS in early 2014 to provide research help
for the litigation...'

SOURCE:

In regards of the 'Trump situation'...
(From the same source as above)

Quote:'...In September 2015, Fusion GPS was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative political website,
to do opposition research on Trump and other Republican presidential candidates.

In spring 2016 when Trump had emerged as the probable Republican candidate, the Free Beacon stopped funding
investigation into Trump. From April 2016 through October 2016, the law firm Perkins Coie, on behalf of the Clinton
campaign and the Democratic National Committee retained Fusion GPS to continue opposition research on Trump.

 In June 2016, Fusion GPS retained Christopher Steele, a private British corporate intelligence investigator and former
MI-6 agent, to research any Russian connections to Trump. Steele produced a 35-page series of memos from June to
December 2016, which became the document known as the Donald Trump–Russia dossier.

Fusion GPS provided Marc Elias, the lead election lawyer for Perkins Coie, with the resulting dossier and other research
documents...'

Do you see the preferred narrative...?! I know there's alternative new outlets that may have favoured the Republican
party, but the 'bubble'... the group that had more access to listeners/viewers/readers out-voiced any opposing groups
due to their larger mainstream, socially-preferred approach.

I'll not labour the obvious that if such verve was shown towards Hillary Clinton's email debacle, then we could possibly
use the word 'equality'!! But news is supposed to equal in it's reporting, a across-the-board relating of unbiased information.

One can like Trump or hate him, but surely if the country benefits by the elected administration, wouldn't that be the area
he and his party would be held accountable for? If the voters picked the wrong guy and the economy, problems with other
countries and real, world-wide dilemmas, then the media should be all over his presidency like a cheap-suit!
........................................

But what seems to have happened in regard of the FBI seeking assurance of the contents of Steele's dossier, is that
Steele -himself, was relating information to certain news outlets in order to prop-up his collection of documents.

The act of him/Fusion GPS being paid by originally the Republican party, an opposing political party, the FBI and possibly
others, doesn't go a long way to offering Christopher Steele's integrity in his quest to seek the truth.
But it does offer a ready-made arena to drop in convenient evidence, all created by a fevered biasedness of -what seems
to be by the constant negative reporting of Trump and Steele's mysterious dislike for the fellow.

Even after Steele was dropped from the FBI's investigations, he was still interacting with someone within that agency.
Why...?Why after doing one's paid-for job, would an ex-spy/investigator continue to interact with the agency and presumably
propagate negative information? It's certainly not professionalism.

But it's to get Trump and that seems to be the paramount mission here.
In my humble opinion, I think that's where it all went wrong. The FBI was certainly politicised and if one needs to validate
their preferred ethical views, some may use the tools at-hand to find evidence they're correct.

Steele hated Trump, Hillary Clinton and the Democrats wanted the Presidency, sections of the FBI didn't like Trump and
the majority of the media had been accused of canard by Trump... their goal was the same.
If all these factions were correct, that meant:
A. Trump wouldn't win the election.
B. Trump would be seen as a corrupt head-piece of the Republican party and create an effect that could benefit the
mid-term elections and possibly hinder the next presidential election for the Republicans.
C. The FBI and other agencies would be seen to be doing their job.

It became a circle-jerk, where all the information pointing in the one direction everyone involved approved of.
Carter Page may have been the starting point, but considering the Russians' view of him, I'd suggest he may have been
a means-to-an-end.

Quote:'...Page is frequently quoted by Russian state television, where he is presented as a "famous American economist".
In 2013, Russian intelligence operatives attempted to recruit Page, and one described him as enthusiastic about business
opportunities in Russia but an "idiot".

News accounts in 2017 indicated that because of these ties to Russia, Page had been the subject of a FISA warrant in 2014,
at least two years earlier than was indicated in the stories concerning his role in the 2016 Presidential campaign of Donald
Trump...'

SOURCE:

Quote:'...Page, a native of Poughkeepsie, New York, who made trips to Moscow during the campaign and the presidential transition,
has been described as an energy consultant and businessman with an interest in foreign policy.
Page was also described by a Russian intelligence agent who was trying to recruit him as an asset for Moscow in 2013 in
another way: “idiot”.

“He wants to meet when he gets back,” the agent, Victor Podobnyy, said in a conversation recorded by US intelligence.
“I think he is an idiot and forgot who I am. Plus he writes to me in Russian [to] practice the language.”

In eight hours of testimony before Nunes’s committee late last year, Page flatly denied the accusation that he had colluded
with Russia in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, though he admitted communicating with senior Trump campaign
officials about a July 2016 trip to Moscow in which he met with at least one top Russian government official...'

'...Page told congressional investigators that the meeting was short and inconsequential.
He also downplayed his role in the Trump campaign, saying he did not know Trump personally but learned from studying
him on video.
“I’ve never met Donald J Trump in my life, I’ve learned a lot from him, and I got great insights from that, from listening and
studying the information that he – that he’s provided in public forums,” Page said...'

The Guardian:

A possible whisperer to a foreign 'enemy'...? Maybe, but it's a tenuous link to assume he's part of a gang doing the
bidding of Putin and Trump is Robert Duvall's character in the Godfather!

To be candid, I think this was low-grade horse manure used to stink up the Republican's bid for the White House.
After swimming in this crap of 'maybes' and 'tittle-tattle ratings-trickery' the Trump-hating groups were forced to produce
evidence because of the poor progress from ongoing investigation Hearings.
That evidence to-date, is not good enough.

Notice the Pizzagate child-molesting stories held very little sway in the mainstream media and yet, when it came
to Trump allegedly accepting an offer of prostitutes willing to urinate on a hotel bed -instead of acquiring a business
in Russia, it was proclaimed as a sign of his amateur political prowess.

Hookers pissing on beds belongs in the tabloids and I'd suggest isn't evidence that Putin holds the political reins in the US.

Ethical reporting and the presumed failure of all the US agencies to protect it's country from this alleged invasion, are the
only victims in all of this. If Trump is a Soviet mule, he's been very good at hiding it.
And... if true, he can't have done it alone.

It would serve people well to go back to the beginning of the Q posts on 8Chan (sometime in late Oct. 2017) and follow the messages he/they have posted.  These "crumbs" lead the person to do their own investigations and find the real truth in what has been going on, connections to other players in the Deep State, etc.  They have opened the eyes of MANY who live in a fantasy land.  This research doesn't show favoritism to either side... just facts.
And the facts show that Hillary and Obama were up to no good.  Some already knew it, others had to be awakened to the truth.

I could sit here typing posts about it all day, but when you do your own research and every crumb leads to the dirty dealings of what was going on since as early as Bush Sr. became President, well...  facts are facts that can't be ignored. There was a plan to bring America to it's knees and make it a third world country so the Elite could take over and control us.  Obama had everything set up ready for Hillary to move in with the finishing touches, but...  we know the rest of the story.  I really think there was divine intervention in there somewhere that saved us.

Anyway...   I came here to post this news article from Yahoo this morning.  Q said there would be lots of this coming out to spin the narrative, trying harder than ever to make Trump and his followers look stupid to the masses.  If that's how anyone feels about the direction Trump is leading the country, they are still being brainwashed by CNN, ABC, CNBC, and all those other MSM jerk-offs. 
I suggest people find an independent news source on the internet that doesn't sway left or right, but report only the FACTS. There are plenty out there.

Notice the first paragraph in this article starts out RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA!  SERIOUSLY?!    

Quote:In the real world, evidence mounts that President Donald Trump has striven to obstruct the Russia investigation ― not least by attempting to fire Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Yet his party plunges ever deeper into a fever swamp of fantasy.

President Trump has said himself (in his tweets) that he had no plans to fire Mueller.  More fake news to stir the pot.

Quote:There hallucinations breed. The hitherto impeccable Mueller is conducting a partisan witch-hunt. Spearheaded by a “secret society” within its ranks, the FBI conspires against Trump. To cover their tracks, the conspirators destroyed damning text messages ― until the messages were found. Yet another conspirator, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein ― a Republican Trump appointee and Mueller’s superior ― “improperly” extended surveillance of a Trump campaign operative who, beyond dispute, had extensive contacts with Russian officials.

UGH!  

Quote:Unsatisfied with free-floating hysteria, congressional Republicans have now voted to release a memo, written by GOP congressional staffers and cherry-picked from classified information, that supposedly documents the FBI’s bias. Never mind that a senior official in Trump’s own Justice Department has said that releasing the memo would be “extraordinarily reckless.” Or that the FBI, headed by another Trump appointee, Christopher Wray, publicly stated that “we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy.” Or that the memo is a transparent effort to derail the investigation ― including by providing a pretext for firing Rosenstein as a prelude to filing Mueller.

After reading the memo, tell me what was so "extraordinarily reckless" other than exposing their criminal asses to the American people?  They were only trying to protect themselves.

Quote:For Trump’s Republican acolytes, only one thing matters ― their leader wants to advance the specious storyline weaponized by this memo to protect himself from investigation, the rule of law be damned. Disdaining the anguished protests from the DOJ and FBI, Trump has authorized its release. And so the GOP propels us toward a constitutional crisis by enabling an American president to attack our system of justice.

If President Trump is in cahoots with Putin, why is he wanting to make our nuclear weapon policy on Russia stronger?   Trump's new nuclear weapon policy on Russia tougher than Obama's

  (Thanks @"Wallfire" )

HPSCI MAJORITY
HVC 304, The Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225
-
4121
U.S.HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE

CHARGE:
The Majority failed to comply with House and Committee Rules.

RESPONSE:
All House and Committee rules were complied with and followed, as prescribed, from the requirement to notice a business meeting, to make available classified executive session material to the House, and to publically disclose the material.

CHARGE:
The memo is intended to undermine the Special Counsel’s ongoing Russia investigation.

RESPONSE:
The memo has nothing to do with the Special Counsel’s investigation, and is
intended to expose past abuses of the FISA process, namely Senior DOJ and FBI officials’ use
of unverified opposition research. That research was financed by a presidential candidate,
Hillary Clinton, and resulted in a surveillance warrant on an American citizen. Further,
consistent with its bipartisan commitment not to impede any ongoing investigation, the
Committee has not sought documents or information post-dating the appointment of the
Special Counsel in May 2017.

CHARGE:
The memo is intended to undermine DOJ and FBI.

RESPONSE:
The memo is intended to hold some senior DOJ and FBI officials accountable
for abuses of the FISA process, consistent with the Committee’s constitutional
responsibilities.The Committee has not only the right, but the responsibility, to conduct rigorous
oversight of potential abuses—including by making information publicly available—on behalf of the American people.

CHARGE:
The memo is intended to undermine the men and women of DOJ and FBI.

RESPONSE:
The memo is focused on abuses by a small number of
senior leaders. The Committee’s fulfillment of its constitutional duty supports the hard working men and women of law enforcement and the intelligence community by enabling effective, efficient and
constitutional oversight of their agencies.


CHARGE:
The memo unfairly targets government officials like Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

RESPONSE:
This is patently false. The memo simply states that Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and former FBI Deputy Director McCabe were among the senior DOJ and FBI officials who signed off on a FISA application that included, as a substantial and essential part, the DNC and Clinton campaign-funded Steele dossier.

CHARGE:
The memo undermines recently-reauthorized FISA Section 702.


RESPONSE:
The memo has nothing to do with Section 702, which targets foreigners located overseas.
As specified in the memo, the FISA order authorizing surveillance on Carter Page was not
obtained under Title VII.

CHARGE:
DOJ and FBI did nothing wrong by using the Steele dossier in a FISA application.


RESPONSE:
DOJ and FBI senior leaders had four separate opportunities, but failed each time, to adequately investigate or disclose to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) the role of the DNC and Clinton campaign as the funders and beneficiaries of the Steele dossier—even though its political origins were known to numerous senior DOJ and FBI officials. Additionally, FBI’s reliance on Steele’s past credi
bility was misplaced, since he concealed from the FBI unauthorized media contacts with numerous outlets and his anti-Trump bias, which was known by a senior DOJ official.


CHARGE:
The memo, and DOJ and FBI’s use of the Steele dossier in a FISA application, are no big deal.

RESPONSE:
It is important for the American people to judge the facts presented in the memo, which Members of the Committee and House assessed to be of substantial public interest. But it is simply astonishing that Democrats would argue the memo is insignificant given the extreme lengths they went to prevent its release.


CHARGE:
The memo is nothing more than a collection of partisan talking points.


RESPONSE:
The memo is the result of a nearly year long investigative effort by the Committee, including document review and witness interviews. As the public can see, it sets forth a series of facts uncovered by Committee investigators in the face of attempts efforts by Page Senior DOJ and FBI officials to stonewall the Committee’s, and contains no partisan rhetoric or personal attacks.

CHARGE:
The memo represents an irresponsible release of highly-sensitive classified information.

RESPONSE:
The complaints from the left about Congress doing its job, and Democrats’ sudden opposition to transparency, represent a hypocritical and partisan attempt to prevent the public from learning about the memo’s contents. Contrary to unauthorized leaks of classified information so prevalent in Washington today, the memo’s release occurred pursuant to the Committee’s oversight function and a process laid
out in House Rules that balances the public and national interests. Some have falsely claimed that the memo contains “an immense amount of classified information.” However, it was specifically crafted to exclude information that might damage national security and has now been declassified following an executive branch review. This authorized, limited release of formerly classified information serves the public interest, and the only “source or method” specifically mentioned is Christopher Steele—who
was terminated as an FBI source for unauthorized disclosures to the press.

CHARGE:
It is irresponsible to release the memo over DOJ and FBI’s objections.


RESPONSE:
It is disappointing that senior officials at DOJ and FBI would continue to attempt to obstruct the Committee’s efforts to share with the American people information related to surveillance abuses at these agencies. The Committee notes that both DOJ and FBI—along with other stakeholders—had an opportunity to provide input into the executive branch review process, which resulted in the President’s decision to declassify the document in full.

CHARGE:
DOJ and FBI had good reason to suspect Carter Page of being a Russian agent.

RESPONSE:
While many unverified claims have been made by both Christopher Steele and
Committee Democrats, the focus of the memo is not Carter Page. The focus of the memo is
the Steele dossier—funded by the DNC and Clinton campaign, and described as “salacious
and unverified” by former FBI Director Comey—that formed a substantial and essential part
of a secret court application for a warrant on an American citizen.

CHARGE:
According to FBI, there are “material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy.”

RESPONSE:
No one, including the FBI officials who reviewed the memo, has identified any factual errors, and the Committee encourages DOJ and FBI to make publicly available, to the greatest extent possible, documents in those agencies’ possession that would shed additional light on the abuses uncovered by the Committee. Also, the memo does not purport to be exhaustive: it is focused on DOJ and FBI’s use of the DNC-and Clinton campaign-funded Steele dossier to obtain a warrant on an American citizen.

CHARGE:
Most members have not reviewed the documents underlying the memo.


RESPONSE:
 As part of stonewalling the Committee’s investigation, senior officials at DOJ
and FBI initially placed burdensome and unreasonable restrictions on the Committee’s access
to documents responsive to its subpoenas. Chairman Nunes designated Chairman Gowdy, an
experienced prosecutor and investigator, to lead the Committee’s review. All Republican
members participated in weekly briefings on the results of the Committee’s investigative
efforts, and the Committee does not believe there are—or should be—current restrictions on
the Committee’s access to this important information.


CHARGE:
The memo’s release violated an agreement with DOJ.


RESPONSE:
DOJ and FBI placed no limits on disseminating the information made available
to the Committee which—contrary to false claims—is not highly classified or limited to the so-called “Gang of 8.”

CHARGE:
The Committee drafted the memo in coordination with the White House.

RESPONSE:

This is patently false. No one outside the Committee played any role in drafting
or compiling the memo. The Committee had no communications with the White House about
the contents of the memo until after the Committee voted to make it publicly available, and it
was transmitted to the President’s representatives in accordance with House rules.

CHARGE:
The memo was materially altered after the Committee’s vote to make it public.

RESPONSE:
The Committee’s vote to release the memo was procedurally sound, and in
accordance with House and Committee Rules. The version transmitted to the White House
included minor edits, made before the Committee voted to make the memo public, to the
version previously made available to all members of the House.
The minor edits included technical and grammatical changes, along with the deletion of one
piece of information in response to FBI’s last-minute suggestion—which was in accordance
with national security protocols, but had no bearing on the memo’s substance. The memo also
includes a more precise characterization of the FISA application’s use of aYahoo News article,
in response to feedback from Committee Democrats.  Complaints about these edits from Committee Democrats—none of whom voted to release any version of the memo—represent the latest example of the minority’s consistent efforts to obstruct the Committee’s efforts to collect and share information about FISA abuses. The minority opposed all efforts to obtain the underlying documents, including issuing subpoenas for them in August 2017.


CHARGE:
The Committee blocked release of the Democrats’ memo.


RESPONSE:
The Committee elected to follow the same process and timing for the Majority
and Minority memos by first making each available for all members of the House to review.
The Majority voted unanimously to make the Minority’s memo available to all House members, even though all Democrats voted against making the Majority’s memo similarly available.
The Committee is planning a business meeting next week to address the Minority’s memo, and
is soliciting feedback from Members of both parties who have reviewed it.
i
Procedural History
On January 16, 2018, the Committee noticed a business meeting, pursuant to House Rule XI, clause
(g)(3)(A)(ii), to consider the public release of executive session transcripts. Upon completion of the
scheduled business, Representative Peter King sought tim
e and moved that the Committee waive the
notice requirement of House Rule XI, clause (g)(3)(A)(ii) in order to conduct additional business,
pursuant to the authority granted in House Rule XI, clause (g)(3)(B)(ii). By a unanimous vote of the
quorum present,
the Committee waived the notice requirement to conduct additional business.
Representative King moved that, pursuant to Committee Rule 14(i), the Committee call to the attention of
the House [classified executive session] matters requiring the attention
of the House. The Committee,
pursuant to House Rule XI, clause 2(g)(1), moved to closed session in order to debate the underlying
motion because disclosure of matters to be considered would endanger national security. Upon
completion of debate, the Committ
ee voted on an amendment offered by Ranking Member Schiff. By a
majority vote, the amendment offered by Ranking Member Schiff was rejected. The Committee then
voted on the motion by Representative King to call to the attention of the House [classified exec
utive
session] matters requiring the attention of the House. By a majority vote, the motion was adopted and the
classified executive session material was made available to the House.
On January 27, 2018, the Committee noticed a business meeting, pursuant
to House Rule XI, clause
(g)(3)(A)(ii), to consider pending committee business and other matters at the request of Ranking
Member Schiff. Up to this point, over 200 Members of the House had reviewed the classified executive
session material and there was a
movement for the Committee to publicly release the material. Taking
into consideration the feedback received from both the FBI and the Committee’s Minority, technical,
grammatical, and typographical corrections were made to the executive session material.

Prior to the commencement of the business meeting, Chairman Nunes received a letter, which was made
available to all Members of the Committee, from Representative King requesting that the Committee,
pursuant to House Rule X, clause 11(g), vote to make pu
blicly available the classified executive session
material, which had been previously disclosed to the House. In accordance with the meeting requirement
of House Rule X, clause 11(g)(1)(A), Chairman Nunes entertained Representative King’s request as an
oth
er matter, consistent with the Committee’s notice. Prior to the vote on Representative King’s motion,
Chairman Nunes entertained two amendments offered by Ranking Member Schiff; both amendments
were rejected by a majority vote of the Committee. Upon favor
ably voting, pursuant to House Rule X,
clause 11(g), to make publicly available the classified executive session material, which had been
previously disclosed to the House on January 18, 2018, the Committee, in accordance with House Rule X,
clauses 11(g)(2
)(A) and 11(g)(2)(B), transmitted notification to the President of the Committee’s vote.

Not directly related to the Memo, but I need to stick this somewhere current, so...   Hillary!  

Here is a link Where one may download the document in PDF format or text for free and without having to register for it. Scribd is on my shit list, and has been, ever since I uploaded my book there for free distribution, and they started charging to download it.

I do not trust sites that require me to register there before I can download freely available information. As General Akbar said - "It's a trap!".


.

(02-02-2018, 10:08 PM)BIAD Wrote: When you're dealing with the D.C political swamp, you're also dealing with the medias who're being used in that mire.

I believe that line may contain a typo - instead of reading "medias who're" shouldn't it read "media whores"?


.