Image 01 Image 03

The Internet Reacts to Newly Released FISA Memo

The Internet Reacts to Newly Released FISA Memo

Some typical, some more objective than expected

Friday, the now highly anticipated intelligence memo was declassified and made public. Mary covered that in detail here. The memo, “alleges that the FBI did in fact use the disputed dossier to receive FISA warrants to spy on members of then-candidate Donald Trump’s team,” blogs Mary.

For all the hoopla, speculation, an entire week of gossipy leaks and story wars, the memo (or the version of the memo made public Friday) is mostly meh. Without supporting evidence or more information, the memo is just another facet of the ongoing FBI/Russian Collusion/Who Dunnit saga plaguing politics, and as Mary pointed out, creates more questions than it answers.

And so, the internet reacted to the memo:

Chris Hayes

From outgoing Rep. Trey Gowdy:

Former FBI Director Comey

Camp Nothing burger

Surprising reaction

Sohrab Ahmari

Kimberley Strassel


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



Why did the same people who were horrified that this memo might get released, now say that it’s no big deal? We’ve really gone through the looking glass here.

    Tom Servo in reply to moonmoth. | February 2, 2018 at 3:53 pm

    The purpose of this memo is the same reason the dems fought so hard to keep it from being released. It isn’t about what it contains, which is damaging, but not that big in and of itself. (although lying to the FISA court to obtain a warrant is indeed a criminal offense)

    The purpose was to open the gates to what comes next. And there is going to be a flood, and it is going to keep getting deeper and wider.

    Next up is the IG’s report.

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Tom Servo. | February 2, 2018 at 4:07 pm

      So right Tom.

      ““Tip of The Iceberg” – The Pending Intelligence Memo is The Beginning, Not The End…”

      moonmoth in reply to Tom Servo. | February 2, 2018 at 4:13 pm

      I gave your reply to me a thumbs-up, but I have to ask, “Why, if Hillary is walking around free as a bird, and no one seems to be at all concerned about suffering any consequences for the criminal act of lying to the FISA court, should we expect anything to come of the IG’s report?”

        Tom Servo in reply to moonmoth. | February 2, 2018 at 4:59 pm

        This is now a war, and we have to think of this as a series of strategic priorities:

        1st: Neutralize the immediate threat from an “investigation” which has always been based on false pretenses.

        2nd: Remove all of the Obama holdovers from positions of authority in the DOJ and FBI. (the memo and the IG report make that much easier)

        3rd: Publicize the process as much as possible, to get the public on our side, so as to retain the House and Senate in the fall elections.

        After those 3 priorities are achieved, THEN we can start to focus on things like prosecutions and building a case. I think we’re still a special prosecutor or two away from that. But I also think these investigations, charges, and counter charges will now drag on for most of the remaining 7 years of the Trump Presidency.

          Tom, the dems continuing wet dream is to keep their narrative in the news cycle for as long as possible: A scheme for never-ending propaganda.

          inspectorudy in reply to Tom Servo. | February 2, 2018 at 6:08 pm

          The three items you offer to go to war over are the same items that have always been against the anitTrump crowd. There is no way to 1.”Neutralize” the threat of the investigation. That’s called a trial or dismissal by Mueller.
          2.There is no way to get rid of the obama holdovers. Other than a lie detector test there is no reasonable way to do it nor would the msm allow such a witch hunt unless it was for Trump leftovers.
          3. Good luck on publicizing the results of any such investigation in the msm. Today gives you a good idea how rabid they are AFTER reading the memo against Trump and the GOP. They actually are saying that it PROVES Trump’s Russian involvement.

          The only saving grace will be the IG report and I suspect it is not going to be that explosive either. It will point out all kinds of issues with process but not name the actual criminal offenses that were committed and by whom.

          I’m thinking Dems, FBI officials and Comey along with their media shills will now double-down on the Russian narrative forcing Trump to try and prove a negative. Otherwise, their brazen attempt at trying to rig an election will be exposed for all to see. Thoughts?

          randian in reply to Tom Servo. | February 3, 2018 at 12:07 am

          Getting rid of high-level Obama holdovers will do nothing (not that it shouldn’t be done), because they surely hired and promoted like-minded individuals within the general ranks of their agencies. Without sacking everybody you can’t be sure the FBI/DoJ/CIA isn’t filled with traitors.

        Mac45 in reply to moonmoth. | February 2, 2018 at 5:22 pm

        Though it is possible that criminal cases could come out of the FISA warrant affidavit mess, the impact on public opinion is what is most meaningful. And, it is cumulative. Add the FBI and DOJ leadership conspired to exonerate HRC in Servergate, something which virtually no one doubts, with the FBI and DOJ misrepresented [which means they lied, to many people] the facts to get an extension to a FISA warrant which gave them surveillance access to the Trump campaign, to the Obama administration unmasked names of US citizens and disseminated them in violation of the law and the fact that classified material was leaked by federal bureaucrats nd and you have a real problem for the Members of the Obama Administration, President Obama and the federal bureaucracy.

        This could be the beginning of an avalanche which could sweep up HRC and a number of other Obama Administration members. This is what terrifies the Dems, so.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Tom Servo. | February 2, 2018 at 4:14 pm

      Exactly. The ‘rats and the media will downplay it, and get their memo released. I believe that is a trap. They will commit to certain claims, then the evidentiary ‘shoes’ will drop.

      If the memo is a ‘meh’ nothing, why did the ‘rats beg to not have it released.

      I seriously doubt they are breathing sighs of relief, no matter their words. The FISA affidavit has them shaking in their boots.

      Tom, this approach by the House Intelligence Committee seems to mirror that used by James O’Keefe: Release a bombshell, then follow it up with multiple bombshells.

      The dems respond in typical knee-jerk reaction(s) to the first evidence, and then are destroyed by the following revelations.

        murkyv in reply to bear. | February 2, 2018 at 8:55 pm

        Word is, the Senate Judiciary committee is ready to release a memo of their own.

        Don’t know what the Senate rules are for handling it, but usually meek Chuck Grassley has been showing a bit of a bulldog side to him.

        He’s po’d about the feet-dragging from the FBI and the DOJ complying with his requests, so he probably won’t pull any punches to protect anyone

        Interesting times…

    YellowSnake in reply to moonmoth. | February 3, 2018 at 12:58 am

    Please don’t sully Lewis Carroll. He dealt in logic. I sincerely believe that Carroll would have found the illogical arguments and inconsistency of Trump and his acolytes to deserve a place in Wonderland. Perhaps he would have pegged Trump for the Queen of Hearts. Trump does seem the

    embodiment of ungovernable passion – a blind and aimless Fury.

    Now please, is anyone here going to claim that Trump is logical or consistent? For that you have to have drunk an awful lot of kool-aid.

If it’s so inconsequential and they already had a solid investigation going looking into Page and Papadopoulos, why did the FBI/DOJ find it necessary to help the DNC/Hillary pay for an oppo research dossier in order to get more FISA warrants? Nothing of interest found up to that point?

Of course it isn’t proof itself, a summary can’t be. But, to me lying to get a FISA warrant should matter. Those saying this is nothing are full of crap, but the likelihood of it being pursued. Ha, that’s a different thing. There is currently a special counsel based on less.

After a few weeks of fighting to keep it secret, it had become a meh, pretty much most of the insinuations we heard.

But had it been release before all the hoopla, it would have been a big deal.

Sounds like all the Clinton scandals we’ve ever encountered.

Another Voice | February 2, 2018 at 3:44 pm

What really good pieces of legislation and revision of department regulations will Pres. Trump be able to put in place while the opposition goes in to Melt Down 2018 – Part 2 ?

regulus arcturus | February 2, 2018 at 3:53 pm

This was Step 1.

Step 2 is release of the underlying evidence, including FISA affidavits signed by the walking dead.

Step 3 is IG report.

Rosenstein may get fired between steps 2 & 3.

A very unbiased sample selected. 🙂

Funny how NOW the response is “oh it is meh: but before it was opening Pandora’ Box.

The nay-sayers are more upset that anyone might question the hallowed FBI than they are about the idea that the FISA process might have been corrupted. The Left ran amuck with the accusation that this memo was an attack against the entire FBI/DOJ, how dare Nunes imply something negative about the? Those same players had no problem with the entire Trump administration being smeared by innuendo & leaked accusations of unbelievable dirt.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to katiejane. | February 2, 2018 at 4:25 pm

    I disagree. The complaint that the memo is a big smear against the FBI is a distraction – an attempt to change the subject. They’re blowing smoke.

    Not one ‘rat has verbalized a rebuttal to the information.

      They actually have, sort of. (The rebuttal is crap, but it does exist.) The new line is that the dossier was only a small part of the evidence proving the great Trump Russia Conspiracy — there’s tons of super-secret evidence proving that, but it’s all still classified so you just have to take their word for it. (As I said, crap. But it’s plenty to keep the left-wing tinfoil hats firmly in place on their heads.)

Red State throws cold water on the implication that Comey perjured himself. Comey never said the entire dossier was salacious and unverified.

I don’t think it’s a nothingburger that the guy (Rosenstein) who appointed special prosecutor Mueller was a co-conspirator in lying to the FISA court.

Sessions in wake of explosive memo: ‘No department is perfect’

Fire mueller. Fire sessions. ASAP.

I cannot believe that ANYONE could consider federal law enforcement agents lying in a warrant application to be a “nothingburger.” That the court in question is of the “SuperSecretAuthorizedtoSpyonAmericanCitizens” variety should make this even worse. I’m getting to the point where I think we should invite the British back to burn down DC. Again.

    MarkS in reply to Anonamom. | February 2, 2018 at 4:32 pm

    It’s only a “nothing burger” because they don’t like Trump, but if DJT pulled a stunt like this against Hillary it would be the end of the universe

Colonel Travis | February 2, 2018 at 4:46 pm

The (D)s:

1.) Rigged their own primary
2.) Tried to rig the general election
3.) Tried to overthrow a duly-elected president by lying to a federal judge.

For some odd reason, you don’t hear the left condemning any of this – even in theory. Forget reality. They don’t even care if such things were even possible. They’re just blowing off the memo like it’s no big deal. I haven’t heard anyone dissent from the party line and say – if this did happen, it would be a big deal. They aren’t even pretending to be concerned, which tells me they’re cool with any amount of tyranny.

If only the (R) party had half the balls the left does….

I would love to hear Professor Jacobson’s perspective on this.

It is amazing that these people, who thought Trump was so dangerous as President, weren’t a bit afraid of what would happen to them if Trump The Evil actually got elected. They should have been worried that with the power of the Presidency, he would go all Genghis Khan (a man who knew how to treat threats to his authority) on them.

Instead Trump is just sitting back and letting them “twist in the wind”. That’s high level politics played by a master. I would have been all Sword of Vengeance had someone done this to me.

He’s a far better person than I am. I want to see blood, heads on pikes, horses tearing human flesh in quarters, lamentations, and even lost pensions. Sigh.

    G. de La Hoya in reply to Anchovy. | February 2, 2018 at 8:44 pm

    Agree 100%. I wanna see them Sumbitches tarred & feathered, donning sackcloth & ashes and singing & playing their dirges. Then give them a smoke & a blindfold . Lady Justice’s scale has been steadily unbalanced and needs to be leveled out or we are truly done 🙁

The left’s response seems to be paraphrased as “So what if the Hillary-run DNC conspired with the Obama-run FBI to pay Russian intelligence officers for a fictional collection of wild stories that the FBI then used to get warrants to listen in on Hillary’s opposition. They had to! There could have been some sort of criminal behavior in the Trump campaign, and it was their responsibility to lie in order to uncover it. Even though nothing has been found. We just need to lie some more until it shows. Honest!”

I’m a little surprised by Howdy. Maybe just covering for another prosecutor? Can’t see the big picture, the evidence elephant in the room that the entire Mueller investigation is based on a lie…

Trey Gowdy is an Establishment swamp dweller. Anyone who has served four terms [8 years] is. It is also interesting that Gowdy had a reported net worth somewhere between $165,000 and $300,000 in 2011, when he assumed his seat in the HoR. His current net worth is now over $4 million, during a recession. I would love to have his investment councilor. If he is supporting Mueller and his investigation, that says a lot about his allegiance.

Why be surprised by swamp dirty tricks. At least no one died like Waco, Ruby Ridge and Benghazi, to name a few. Whitey Bulgers Boston FBI hit-men are still receiving pensions in prison. I will be shocked if Comey loses his law license.

Hmm…who is that shadowy figure from the past? It’s….it’s coming into focus… why, it’s… Richard Nixon. Is he laughing? Why yes, hes is. He’s laughing hardest.

I’m not a lawyer but isn’t lying to a FISA court Judge perjury?

The revolving door …

Tue January 23, 2018

(CNN) Dana Boente, the acting head of the Justice Department’s national security division and the US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, has been picked to become the new FBI general counsel, according to a source familiar with the move.

Boente was first thrust into the spotlight in January 2017 as the acting attorney general after President Donald Trump fired Sally Yates for her refusal to defend the first travel ban. He later moved to the No. 2 spot at the Justice Department as acting deputy attorney general, tasked with overseeing the Russia probe after Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself and then delivering the news to a slew of US attorneys left over from the Obama administration that they had been fired.

He will take the place of James Baker, who was reassigned within the FBI late last year.

… sometimes you need a program to learn about all the players.

I think many are not really taking note of the names involved with this memo release. Comey, Rosenstein, McCabe (who was promptly fired after Wray read this), Yates… and seeing the witch hunt going on, along with Comey stating he illegally leaked classified information to his liberal buddy to help force a special investigation, while Rosenstein is put in charge of said counsel due to Sessions recusing himself (hastily), it smells worse than the earliest leaks of what Watergate was to become.

Goudy is pissing me off with his dismissal of any questions of Mueller who has strong ties with the Obama regime and Comey and the FBI, and it makes me think he was pressured over something from that cabal, which is why he is retiring.

Yet to come out in the media is how Steele got his information from contacting Russians, not even meeting them in person. The Steele revelation in the memo which showed he was desperate not to see Trump get in office, which Strzok and Page were also pushing and talking about a mean to insure against a Trump Presidency.

Comey is a major piece included in this, as was McCabe and Rosenstein. It stinks to high heaven, and there is a lot more to this than meets the eye.

    Close The Fed in reply to oldgoat36. | February 2, 2018 at 7:27 pm

    Re: OldGoat36

    I dunno…. Yeah it stinks to high heaven, but gee whiz, there is already a LOT to this, that meets the eye.

Somebody help me out here. I’m convinced that the FISA application contained obvious omissions of fact. I just don’t see where the Feds “lied” to the FISA court. Sorry to nitpick, but a lie is not the same as an intentional omission of a material fact, although both may see the same result.

    katiejane in reply to Redneck Law. | February 2, 2018 at 8:32 pm

    Didn’t your mama tell you telling a half truth is still lying?

    The ‘material omission of fact’ goes roughly like this.

    Justice: Here is a folder of allegations against the organization that employs Subject #1, which we would like to enter as evidence that Subject #1 may be communicating with Russian agents.

    Omitted fact #1: The folder was given to us by the ‘organization’s’ political enemies.

    Omitted fact #2: We’ve had the folder for months and haven’t been able to confirm anything at all in it.

    Omitted fact #3: Oh, and the person who collected the information in the folder hates ‘organization’ with a passion, enough that he’s passed the folder onto the MSM and we had to break off official ties with him. But don’t worry, because we’ve got a secret, back-door contact that nobody is supposed to know about.

    Without the omitted facts, the FISA judge will approve a warrant. With them, he might throw the requesting agency into the clink.

Re:George. Yeah, I totally get the omission part. I’m looking for an intentional misrepresentation of a material fact, in other words, a “lie.”

Omission and commission are not the same thing. Apparently, it’s just me, but the more accurate characterization of the circumstances surrounding the FISA application is that the Feds failed to include a material fact. Sin of omission rather than sin of Commission. In pushing the “Feds lied” Point, it opens one up to criticism from the Deep Staters that there was no affirmative misrepresentation or statement made that was untrue.

    Close The Fed in reply to Redneck Law. | February 3, 2018 at 12:19 am

    Re: Redneck Law

    My comments on the earlier post re: the memo.

    It’s very difficult for a lawyer who hasn’t worked with FISA warrants to state if anything criminal has or hasn’t been alleged.

    Since these applications are all ex parte to the judge, I assume the legal requirements of disclosure are more rigorous, but I haven’t read the statutes in play. If you make a statement under oath which statement is a knowing lie, then those statements may amount to perjury with a criminal penalty.

    Ex parte applications are heavily disfavored precisely because the other party is not present to refute the allegations made. The statute probably has high standards for complete disclosure.

    Frankly, anyone that says this memo is underwhelming, has simply been overexposed to the information already. If this was the first time you saw it, you’d be stunned, shocked and appalled.

    As a lawyer, I can say I would fear disbarment. Easily.

    Colonel Travis in reply to Redneck Law. | February 3, 2018 at 1:40 am

    Redneck Law: read this article from an FBI agent who got FISA warrants:

    The story was written in March 2017, I would love to get the reaction of the author now. But from the story, the application approval has to go through several people in the FBI, only after an investigation has rounded up enough, proper evidence. It’s looked over by a supervisor, the chief division counsel and the special agent in charge of the field office. Then it goes to the FBI in DC, where it has to be approved by the unit-level supervisor. Then it goes to the DOJ, “where attorneys from the National Security Division comb through the application to verify all the assertions made in it.”

    “If anything looks unsubstantiated, the application is sent back to the FBI to provide additional evidentiary support – this game of bureaucratic chutes and ladders continues until DOJ is satisfied that the facts in the FISA application can both be corroborated and meet the legal standards for the court.”

    The FBI ultimately knew it was dealing with a “salacious and unverified” document, as Comey described it, and STILL signed off on it. It was renewed three times, so this deception didn’t happen just once. I do not know all the legal standards that need to be met in a FISA application, but how on earth does the FBI/Trump situation square with what the above agent laid out about being extremely meticulous?

    The standards the agent spells out sounds like rules anyone could agree with. The situation that happened with Trump sounds like all standards were thrown out the window.

    It’s like if you’re a seller of a house or building, and you know there is major structural damage but refuse to disclose that when you’re trying to sell it – that is a lie of omission that, depending on state laws, can come with legal ramifications.

      Colonel Travis: It was renewed three times, so this deception didn’t happen just once.

      You have your history muddled. Carter Page has been under federal investigation for several years, and the first FISA warrant was issued before the FBI was given access to the Trump Dossier.

      Consider, Page was known to have been working with Russian spies (wittingly or unwittingly), with recordings of Russian spies from 2013 saying they were working to recruit Page. Page then joined the Trump Campaign as a direct advisor to Trump. This is clearly a valid reason to investigate Page.

        Z: and the first FISA warrant was issued before the FBI was given access to the Trump Dossier.

        regulus arcturus in reply to Zachriel. | February 3, 2018 at 1:37 pm

        Partially factual.

        One of the renewals was rejected, which is why the dossier was used to bolster “evidence” of why it needed to continue.

        Colonel Travis in reply to Zachriel. | February 3, 2018 at 3:27 pm

        Zachriel – nothing is muddled. Either the dossier was BS or it wasn’t. Comey told Congress it was. Either it was used 4 times to get/renew a warrant or it wasn’t. We know for a fact it was used four times.

        The only one who is muddling things is you.

    Ken in Camarillo in reply to Redneck Law. | February 3, 2018 at 6:36 pm

    Actually omission and commission are equivalent when it comes to the basic definition of perjury (from Black’s Law Dictionary):

    Perjury: A false statement knowingly made in a proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction or concerning a matter wherein an affiant is required by law to be sworn as to somr matter material to the issue or point in question.

    False Statement: The federal criminal statute governing false statements applies three distinct offenses: falsifying, concealing, or covering up a material fact by any trick, scheme, or device; making false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations; and making or using any false documents or writing.

    The FISA warrant application must also include any information that would favor the opposing side, therefore concealing that information is an explicit violation of that process and subject to a finding of perjury.

Jay Sekulow brought up that Comey told Trump on Jan 6 the Dossier was unverified and salacious ,but signed off on another FISA warrant on Jan 19 ,with the same dossier material.

“The memo reminds of a million different smoking gun Benghazi scoops that fell apart once the full context became known.”

Benghazi never “fell apart.” It was smothered by Obama’s DoJ.

Some very interesting analysis about all this by Lee Smith at Tablet Magazine. He started writing about Fusion last June, and his December post seems eerily on the mark.

Colonel Travis: Either the dossier was BS or it wasn’t. Comey told Congress it was.

That is incorrect. Comey testified that *parts* of the dossier were “salacious and unverified”, but indicated that some of the dossier had been verified.

The memo story is falling apart. Not only does the memo explicitly make the false claim about what Comey said, but many news organizations are now reporting that the source of the dossier as a political document was disclosed to the FISC, contrary to the memo.