Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Mon Feb 19 23:51:56 PST 2018

Utopia Talk / Politics / The Full Text of the Nunes Memo
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Sat Feb 03 22:49:03


The Full Text of the Nunes Memo

On Friday, the House Intelligence Committee released the controversial document, which alleges surveillance abuses by the FBI.

House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes briefs reporters at the U.S. Capitol in

Washington. Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

Lena Felton Feb 2, 2018


On Friday, the House Intelligence Committee, which is chaired by Republican Representative Devin Nunes, released a four-page memo alleging surveillance abuses by the FBI. Earlier this week, Republicans on the committee voted to make the document public. The classified document has drawn criticism from Democratic lawmakers, who argue it is misleading, as well as from law enforcement officials. In a rare statement, the FBI warned against the document’s release, saying it had “grave concerns” about its accuracy. Despite pushback from officials, the White House approved the release of the memo Friday.

Below, read the memo in full.

January 18, 2018

To: HPSCI Majority Members

From: HPSCI Majority Staff

Subject: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses at the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation

Purpose

This memorandum provides Members an update on significant facts relating to the Committee’s ongoing investigation into the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and their use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) during the 2016 presidential election cycle. Our findings, which are detailed below, 1) raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), and 2) represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from abuses related to the FISA process.

Investigation Update

On October 21, 2016, DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA probable cause order (not under Title VII) authorizing electronic surveillance on Carter Page from the FISC. Page is a U.S. citizen who served as a volunteer advisor to the Trump presidential campaign. Consistent with requirements under FISA, the application had to be first certified by the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI. It then required the approval of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General (DAG), or the Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division.

The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC. As required by statute (50 U.S.C. §,1805(d)(l)), a FISA order on an American citizen must be renewed by the FISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a separate finding of probable cause. Then-Director James Comey signed three FISA applications in question on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one. Then-DAG Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ.

Due to the sensitive nature of foreign intelligence activity, FISA submissions (including renewals) before the FISC are classified. As such, the public’s confidence in the integrity of the FISA process depends on the court’s ability to hold the government to the highest standard—particularly as it relates to surveillance of American citizens. However, the FISC’s rigor in protecting the rights of Americans, which is reinforced by 90-day renewals of surveillance orders, is necessarily dependent on the government’s production to the court of all material and relevant facts. This should include information potentially favorable to the target of the FISA application that is known by the government. In the case of Carter Page, the government had at least four independent opportunities before the FISC to accurately provide an accounting of the relevant facts. However, our findings indicate that, as described below, material and relevant information was omitted.

1) The “dossier” compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application. Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign, via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS, to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.

a) Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.

b) The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a U.S. law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOJ at the time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier). The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of—and paid by—the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.

2) The Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016, Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff, which focuses on Page’s July 2016 trip to Moscow. This article does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News. The Page FISA application incorrectly assesses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News. Steele has admitted in British court filings that he met with Yahoo News—and several other outlets—in September 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS. Perkins Coie was aware of Steele’s initial media contacts because they hosted at least one meeting in Washington D.C. in 2016 with Steele and Fusion GPS where this matter was discussed.

a) Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations—an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jones article by David Corn. Steele should have been terminated for his previous undisclosed contacts with Yahoo and other outlets in September—before the Page application was submitted to the FISC in October—but Steele improperly concealed from and lied to the FBI about those contacts.

b) Steele’s numerous encounters with the media violated the cardinal rule of source handling—maintaining confidentiality—and demonstrated that Steele had become a less than reliable source for the FBI.

3) Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General Yates and later Rosenstein. Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Ohr, documenting his communications with Steele. For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files—but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications.

a) 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.

4) 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. Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was—according to his June 2017 testimony—“salacious and unverified.” While the FISA application relied on Steele’s past record of credible reporting on other unrelated matters, it ignored or concealed his anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations. 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.

5) 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. Strzok was reassigned by the Special Counsel’s Office to FBI Human Resources for improper text messages with his mistress, FBI Attorney Lisa Page (no known relation to Carter Page), where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of Clinton, whom Strzok had also investigated. The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an “insurance” policy against President Trump’s election.


http://www...1/?utm_source=yahoo&yptr=yahoo
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sat Feb 03 23:13:31
"While the FISA application relied on Steele’s past record of credible reporting on other unrelated matters, it ignored or concealed his anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations."


again... "the FISA application relied on Steele’s past record of credible reporting on other unrelated matters"... CASE CLOSED

as to supposed financial motivations... he means being paid by Dems to do the research... so fucking what!?! how does that bear on the validity of the info... he's going to flush his reputation & give false info just because it was Democrats hiring him this time?

as to anti-Trump ideology... he means Steele was passionate about Trump not winning... which was AFTER he learned all this concerning info... so concerning to him, HE wanted to bring it to the FBI... again so fucking what!?!


no bias demonstrated, no rationale that dossier couldn't be part of FISA request

fuck James Woods! :p
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Sat Feb 03 23:32:16

This is just the beginning of the beginning sonny. In a year from now I would wager the next special prosecutor will have more than two persons under indictment over this.

I would not be surprised if it goes all of the way to the top.

Let us wait and see.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sat Feb 03 23:43:30
prepare to be disappointed
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sat Feb 03 23:55:03
why don't you ponder why none of the congressmen gave a shit about this 'shocking abuse', that many surely would've known, when they just reauthorized FISA a couple weeks ago
Wrath of Orion
Member
Sun Feb 04 00:56:18
Hack Rod is never disappointed, because his delusions prevent him from ever thinking he was wrong. He always just spins it some other way and keeps spewing his hack bullshit.
patom
Member
Sun Feb 04 05:53:09
Is this the full unedited version or the Nunes version?
American Democrat
Member
Sun Feb 04 06:17:56
The full version is 60 pages long.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Feb 04 10:36:27
the OP is the full Nunes memo w/ his insinuations about the FISA warrant (which Nunes admits he hasn't read)

the actual FISA warrant is (i heard) 50 pages... and almost certainly way more than the dossier and yahoo article
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Feb 04 11:15:26
here's Gowdy AGAIN saying the memo doesn't discredit the investigation (as liar boy pushing)

and Gowdy was the person tasked by Nunes to read the FISA warrant

http://www...ics/trey-gowdy-memo/index.html

to my knowledge only Gowdy (R) & Schiff (D) have actually read the FISA warrant... and neither share opinions anywhere close to the Trumps, Hannitys, & James Woods's of the world
Renzo Marquez
Member
Sun Feb 04 14:21:49
Pretty clear the FBI and Democrats lied about the memo at this point. They kvetched nonstop about how releasing the classified info would damage national security. Pretty much all the info in the memo was already publicly known.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Feb 04 14:33:53
i don't know that we knew Steele was already a trusted FBI informant on other matters... plus you are giving the right-wing spin, which ignores all the concern that it was inaccurate & misleading (it wasn't purely national security concerns... although falsely smearing the FBI could be considered harming our security)

"As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo's accuracy."
~ Wray (FBI)... appointed by Trump
Renzo Marquez
Member
Sun Feb 04 14:39:57
tumbleweed
the wanderer Sun Feb 04 14:33:53
"i don't know that we knew Steele was already a trusted FBI informant on other matters..."

That was in tons of news reports before the memo. It does not contain any classified info that harmed national security. None. The FBI and Democrats lied about it.
Renzo Marquez
Member
Sun Feb 04 14:41:35
tumbleweed
the wanderer Sun Feb 04 14:33:53
"... plus you are giving the right-wing spin..."

Uh no.

http://the...-damning-for-democrats-and-fbi
Senor Marquez
Member
Sun Feb 04 14:42:05
Look I'm I am a (((lawyer))) with a credible background, trust me! Or believe me!
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Feb 04 14:50:29
that's an opinion piece, and he's accepting the memo's assertions (recent reporting says judge WAS told of the political nature of dossier for example)

as to his dem concerns he cites

“dangerous irresponsibility and disregard for our national security”
that's one Pelosi comment, ok maybe she exaggerated

“disregarded the warnings of the Justice Department and the FBI”
this is True... see the Wray note... was about accuracy, not national security

yet i'm seeing all these right-wing pieces (sadly bleeding into once more respectable pieces) claiming national security was the ONLY concern by Dems & FBI, so again pretending they are both in league & corrupt
American Democrat
Member
Sun Feb 04 14:54:06
Oh, it is the resident pseudo-lawyer deciding to come out from it's lurking only to still provide nothing.

"Pretty clear the FBI and Democrats lied about the memo at this point. They kvetched nonstop about how releasing the classified info would damage national security. Pretty much all the info in the memo was already publicly known. "

How did they lie? Expressing concerns is not 'lying.' And it having a legitimate concern about national security is forthright;

"Ultimately, the memo doesn't amount to anything near the bombshell Nunes and other House Republicans hyped it as. It does, though, make public information that law enforcement officials consider extremely confidential, in a way that seems engineered to intentionally mislead. Releasing the memo will likely sow distrust between intelligence agencies and potential sources, and serves to widen the gulf between the White House and the law enforcement community."

http://www...memo-carter-page-surveillance/
American Democrat
Member
Sun Feb 04 14:55:26
Maybe you should go back lurking "lawyer."
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Feb 04 14:57:47
with brief looking, i can't find any FBI statement that says national security was their concern (let alone only concern)
Renzo Marquez
Member
Sun Feb 04 15:02:14
tumbleweed
the wanderer Sun Feb 04 14:50:29
"yet i'm seeing all these right-wing pieces (sadly bleeding into once more respectable pieces) claiming national security was the ONLY concern by Dems & FBI"

I haven't seen any of those pieces and that certainly is not my position.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Feb 04 15:02:15
and i'll go back to Gowdy... the hard-liner Republican who knows way more than Nunes, as he's the only one who looked at the FISA request... he doesn't back any of the hysteria being pushed about this memo

he does have concern if anything improper done in the request but has no conclusive opinion that it did, and says the memo has absolutely nothing to do w/ the overall investigation (which suggests he doesn't see any improper bias or corruption)
American Democrat
Member
Sun Feb 04 15:06:59
"I haven't seen any of those pieces and that certainly is not my position. "

And in other words, nothing substantially provided.
Renzo Marquez
Member
Sun Feb 04 15:07:31
tumbleweed
the wanderer Sun Feb 04 15:02:15
"and i'll go back to Gowdy..."

Whatever he said is not relevant to my point. We heard nonstop cunting about how the memo should stay classified and that making the classified info public would harm our national security. That was clearly BS.
American Democrat
Member
Sun Feb 04 15:08:28
"Whatever he said is not relevant to my point. We heard nonstop cunting about how the memo should stay classified and that making the classified info public would harm our national security. That was clearly BS. "

False, AH. You haven't made the case how it was clearly BS.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Feb 04 15:11:43
"I haven't seen any of those pieces"

the conclusion of your Hill article is the Dems lied about their concerns, citing only lack of sources & methods in memo
------

why not ask whether this memo release has been helpful to the public?... look how our child president is using it, and we know he has hordes who unquestioningly believe him & his Hannity capos

minimally they should've waited til both memos could be released... but even more appropriate would've been to allow the FBI to address the concerns to the committee & write a more accurate memo to begin with (which was denied for no good reason i can think of)
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Feb 04 15:17:52
"We heard nonstop cunting about... harm our national security."

i recall a lot more concern over accuracy than national security, but we probably aren't using same sources
American Democrat
Member
Sun Feb 04 15:34:17
"i recall a lot more concern over accuracy than national security, but we probably aren't using same sources "

TW, it definitely was a combination. As for the scale of balance of what was focused more is in the eye of the beholder. The pseudo-lawyer Alexander Hamiliton/Renzo Marquez claims he has no position, but clearly he is inferring a position. Unless he wants to own up and clarify it.

But his claims are as follows; Dems and FBI claim national security concern -- only. And lied about it. It is not lying if expressing a concern that it may have some residuals.

vs.

His non-interest or impression with any expression that Trump and crew utilized it to show exploitation and claim vindication. Which is clearly BS.

But the pseudo-lawyer won't touch that one.
Renzo Marquez
Member
Sun Feb 04 15:44:06
tumbleweed
the wanderer Sun Feb 04 15:17:52
"i recall a lot more concern over accuracy than national security, but we probably aren't using same sources"

The reason last week's circus was necessary was because the memo contained material that was classified. If it didn't, declassification would not have been necessary. Take a look at what this disgraced assclown had to say:

http://twitter.com/Comey/status/959498570532577285

"That’s it? Dishonest and misleading memo wrecked the House intel committee, destroyed trust with Intelligence Community, damaged relationship with FISA court, and *****inexcusably exposed classified investigation of an American citizen*****. For what? DOJ & FBI must keep doing their jobs." (*emphasis added*)

Of course, this information had been very widely known for many months. See, e.g.,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-obtained-fisa-warrant-to-monitor-former-trump-adviser-carter-page/2017/04/11/620192ea-1e0e-11e7-ad74-3a742a6e93a7_story.html?utm_term=.edee0bdb0a4b

"FBI obtained FISA warrant to monitor Trump adviser Carter Page"

"The officials spoke about the court order on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss details of a counterintelligence probe."

There wasn't much outrage or concern about national security when someone leaked that to the press. But somehow it's inexcusable when the information is released in a Congressional memo almost 10 months after everyone already knew.

It's also comical because we know Comey leaked some information on Trump via a third party because he was too cowardly to come out on the record.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Feb 04 15:48:05
let's look at the abuse of the president of declassifying info purely for his own benefit

"This memo totally vindicates “Trump” in probe."
~ “Trump”

he would've said that regardless of what was in the memo... and given the memo is more than one page, and doesn't have bullet points, very doubtful he even read it
(plus it has essentially no bearing on the probe as acknowledged by all non-shills... Ryan, Gowdy, 2 other R's on the intel committee... whose names i'd have to look up)
American Democrat
Member
Sun Feb 04 15:49:14
"There wasn't much outrage or concern about national security when someone leaked that to the press. But somehow it's inexcusable when the information is released in a Congressional memo almost 10 months after everyone already knew. "

This is irrelevant.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Feb 04 15:54:18
it WAS classified as Trump signed off to de-classify

it DID note the FISA on Carter Page was reauthorized 3 times (meaning likely they were finding something) and that suggests 360 days of surveillance (90x4), deep into 2017... i don't know that that was prior knowledge... i haven't cared about Carter Page too much at any point
(i can't speak for what part(s) Comey may have been referring)

so Comey's comment not too extreme imo... plus undoubtedly he's pissed at being falsely smeared so much, plus all the people he probably considers family

the info Comey leaked was not classified, plus he did it secretly with a reasonable explanation: not wanting to be hounded by reporters who were already parking in his driveway
Cold Rod
Member
Sun Feb 04 16:24:41
LOL hot rod is so stupid
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Feb 05 10:41:41
"Representative Devin Nunes, a man of tremendous courage and grit, may someday be recognized as a Great American Hero for what he has exposed and what he has had to endure!"
~ TRUMP
http://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/960530665702912000

^one hand washes the other

he also had a childish attack on "Little Adam Schiff"...gotta smear him good before the minority report gets out
... & claimed Fox & Friends exposed the truth on something... i'm going to safely guess that didn't happen

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Feb 05 12:17:20
perhaps this is the exposed 'truth'... Nunes on Fox&Friends provably blatantly lying to the American public (2nd video in chain)

http://twitter.com/i/web/status/960515245516222465

he claims Papadopoulos never met Trump (even though there's a photo of them in a meeting together)

and that all drunken Papadopoulos said to the Australian diplomat is that he didn't like Hillary (yeah, i'm sure the diplomat was so concerned about -that- that he went to the FBI)

Nunes -> LIAR... PROVEN... AGAIN...
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Feb 07 18:34:49
the lying smear machine is at it again
(including Fox News, Trump)

they seized on a Strzok/Page text of
"potus wants to know everything we’re doing."

and decided it was about the Hillary email investigation & that he was therefore involving himself

"NEW FBI TEXTS ARE BOMBSHELLS!"
~ignorant dictator child prez


however...
it was about being briefed on Russian interference in the election which is completely appropriate (& something our current President shows no interest in)

oops... i'm sure they will all apologize for yet again misleading the public...
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Feb 08 13:00:49

"patom
Member Sun Feb 04 05:53:09
Is this the full unedited version or the Nunes version?


American Democrat
Member Sun Feb 04 06:17:56
The full version is 60 pages long."



This is just the short form that shows what happened. Just a summary in other words.

The long form has the data on *how* they uncovered the Intel that proves the short form. That could expose undercover assets to the other side.

I've heard it is 50 pages, but it could be 60 now.


show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share