Met die passage wordt wederom bewezen dat er geen sprake was van politieke partijdigheid binnen de FBI.quote:Op dinsdag 10 december 2019 13:27 schreef dellipder het volgende:
Een van de meest persistente leugens uit de Russia collusion delusion hoax -en uit het leugenachtige Steele dossier- dat periodiek werd gerecycled was dat Micheal Cohen in Praag zou zijn geweest om de Russische hackers voor bewezen diensten financieel te belonen.
[ afbeelding ]
bron
Dit is een make believe fairytale verhaaltje geweest dat met verve voor zoete koek werd aangenomen door de Muh Russia mafklappers.
Dit betekent overigens gelijktijdig dat de memo van de minority (the Democrats) volledige BS is.quote:Op dinsdag 10 december 2019 13:21 schreef dellipder het volgende:
Het rapport is een overwinning voor Devin Nunes die als eerste aan de bel trok over FISA--misbruik.
Het rapport bevestigt de Nunes-memo waarin stond dat het dossier een "essentieel" onderdeel was in het aanvragen van de FISA-dagvaarding en dat de FBI informatie onthield aan de FISC.
[ afbeelding ]
bron
[ afbeelding ]
bron
Hieruit blijkt dus dat de FBI het Steele-dossier grondig heeft gecheckt en dat er van politieke partijdigheid geen sprake was. Geen Deep State. Geen anti-Trump bias. Helemaal niks.quote:Op dinsdag 10 december 2019 13:56 schreef dellipder het volgende:
Het rapport van Micheal Horowitz is ook een aanklacht tegen het Christopher Steele, Fusion GPS en het dossier.
Op 31 juli 2016 werd het contra-inlichtingenonderzoek tegen George Papadopoulos opgestart en in september 2017 had FBI nog slechts beperkt informatie uit het rapport bevestigd en het grootste deel daarvan was openbaar toegankelijke informatie.
"Serious problems", "exaggerated", "not consistent with and, in fact, contradicted the allegations", "inconsistencies", "inaccurate", et cetera.
[ afbeelding ]
bron
twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 10-12-2019 om 13:16:43I don’t know what report current Director of the FBI Christopher Wray was reading, but it sure wasn’t the one given to me. With that kind of attitude, he will never be able to fix the FBI, which is badly broken despite having some of the greatest men & women working there! reageer retweet
Waar denk je dat "I don’t know what report current Director of the FBI Christopher Wray was reading" naar verwijst?quote:Op dinsdag 10 december 2019 16:08 schreef dellipder het volgende:
Hij heeft het over Christopher Wray, niet over het OIG-rapport en maakt zoals ik het begrijp een verwijzing naar zijn verklaring.
Hell yeah!twitter:MSNBC twitterde op dinsdag 10-12-2019 om 19:18:03AG Barr has essentially dismissed the findings of the IG that there was no evidence of political bias in the launching of the Russia investigation, saying that his hand-picked prosecutor, John Durham, will have the last word on the matter. https://t.co/sAvuRmFlVZ reageer retweet
quote:‘Corroboration Zero’: An Inspector General’s Report Reveals the Steele Dossier Was Always a Joke
The reports throws water on one “deep state” conspiracy theory of the Russia investigation, but validates complaints about “fake news”
[...]
Not only did obtaining a FISA warrant allow authorities a window into other Trump figures with whom Page communicated, they led to a slew of leaked “bombshell” news stories that advanced many public misconceptions, including that a court had ruled there was “probable cause” that a Trump figure was an “agent of a foreign power.”
There are too many to list in one column, but the Horowitz report show years of breathless headlines were wrong. Some key points:
The so-called “Steele dossier” was, actually, crucial to the FBI’s decision to seek secret surveillance of Page.
Press figures have derided the idea that Steele was crucial to the FISA application, with some insisting it was only a “small part” of the application. Horowitz is clear:
We determined that the Crossfire Hurricane team’s receipt of Steele’s election reporting on September 19, 2016 played a central and essential role in the FBI’s and Department’s decision to seek the FISA order.
The report describes how, prior to receiving Steele’s reports, the FBI General Counsel (OGC) and/or the National Security Division’s Office of Intelligence (OI) wouldn’t budge on seeking FISA authority. But after getting the reports, the OGC unit chief said, “receipt of the Steele reporting changed her mind on whether they could establish probable cause.”
Meanwhile, the OI unit chief said Steele’s reports were “what kind of pushed it over the line.” There’s no FISA warrant without Steele.
Horowitz ratifies the oft-denounced “Nunes memo.”
Democrats are not going to want to hear this, since conventional wisdom says former House Intelligence chief Devin Nunes is a conspiratorial evildoer, but the Horowitz report ratifies the major claims of the infamous “Nunes memo.”
As noted, Horowitz establishes that the Steele report was crucial to the FISA process, even using the same language Nunes used (“essential”). He also confirms the Nunes assertion that the FBI double-dipped in citing both Steele and a September 23, 2016 Yahoo! news story using Steele as an unnamed source. Horowitz listed the idea that Steele did not directly provide information to the press as one of seven significant “inaccuracies or omissions” in the first FISA application.
Horowitz also verifies the claim that Steele was “closed for cause” for talking to the media, i.e. officially cut off as a confidential human source to the FBI. He shows that Steele continued to talk to Justice Official Bruce Ohr before and after Steele’s formal relationship with the FBI ended. His report confirms that the Steele information had not been corroborated when the FISA application was submitted, another key Nunes point.
There was gnashing of teeth when Nunes first released his memo in January, 2018. The press universally crapped on his letter, with a Washington Post piece calling it a “joke” and a “sham.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi slammed Nunes for the release of a “bogus” document, while New York Senator Chuck Schumer said the memo was intended to “sow conspiracy theories and attack the integrity of federal law enforcement.” Many called for his removal as Committee chair.
The Horowitz report says all of that caterwauling was off-base. It also undercuts many of the assertions made in a ballyhooed response letter by Nunes counterpart Adam Schiff, who described the FBI’s “reasonable basis” for deeming Steele credible. The report is especially hostile to Schiff’s claim that the FBI “provided additional information obtained through multiple independent sources that corroborated Steele’s reporting.”
In fact, far from confirming the Steele material, the FBI over time seems mainly to have uncovered more and more reasons to run screaming from Steele, to wit:
The “Steele dossier” was “Internet rumor,” and corroboration for the pee tape story was “zero.”
The Steele report reads like a pile of rumors surrounded by public information pulled off the Internet, and the Horowitz report does nothing to dispel this notion.
At the time the FBI submitted its first FISA application, Horowitz writes, it had “corroborated limited information in Steele’s election reporting, and most of that was publicly available information.” Horowitz says of Steele’s reports: “The CIA viewed it as ‘internet rumor.’”
Worse (and this part of the story should be tattooed on the heads of Russia truthers), the FBI’s interviews of Steele’s sources revealed Steele embellished the most explosive parts of his report.
The “pee tape” story, which inspired countless grave headlines (see this chin-scratching New York Times history of Russian “sexual blackmail”) and plunged the Trump presidency into crisis before it began, was, this source said, based a “conversation that [he/she] had over beers,” with the sexual allegations made… in “jest”!
Steele in his report said the story had been “confirmed” by senior, Western hotel staff, but the actual source said it was all “rumor and speculation,” never confirmed. In fact, charged by Steele to find corroboration, the source could not: corroboration was “zero,” writes Horowitz.
Meanwhile the Steele assertions that Russians had a kompromat file on Hillary Clinton, and that there was a “well-developed conspiracy of coordination” between the Trump campaign and Russians, relied on a source Steele himself disparaged as an “egoist” and “boaster” who “may engage in some embellishment.” This was known to the FBI at the start, yet they naturally failed to include this info in the warrant application, one of what Horowitz described as “17 significant errors or omissions” in the FISA application.
Finally, when the FBI conducted an investigation into Steele’s “work-related performance,” they heard from some that he was “smart,” and a “person of integrity,” and “if he reported it, he believed it.”
So far, so good. But Horowitz also wrote:
Their notes stated: “[d]emonstrates lack of self-awareness, poor judgment;” “[k]een to help” but “underpinned by poor judgment;” “Judgment: pursuing people with political risk but no intel value;” “[d]idn’t always exercise great judgment- sometimes [he] believes he knows best;” and “[r]eporting in good faith, but not clear what he would have done to validate.”
The Crossfire Hurricane team got all of this, but, again, didn’t pass it upstairs or include any of it in its warrant application.
I’ve written about how reporters used sleight of hand to get the Steele dossier into print without putting it through a vetting process. What Horowitz describes is worse: a story about bad journalism piled on bad journalism, balanced on a third layer of wrong reporting.
Steele in his “reports” embellished his sources’ quotes, played up nonexistent angles, invented attributions, and ignored inconsistencies. The FBI then transplanted this bad reporting in the form of a warrant application and an addendum to the Intelligence Assessment that included the Steele material, ignoring a new layer of inconsistencies and red flags its analysts uncovered in the review process.
Then, following a series of leaks, the news media essentially reported on the FBI’s wrong reporting of Steele’s wrong reporting.
The impact was greater than just securing a warrant to monitor Page. More significant were the years of headlines that grew out of this process, beginning with the leaking of the meeting with Trump about Steele’s blackmail allegations, the insertion of Steele’s conclusions in the Intelligence Assessment about Russian interference, and the leak of news about the approval of the Page FISA warrant.
As a result, a “well-developed conspiracy” theory based on a report that Comey described as “salacious and unverified material that a responsible journalist wouldn’t report without corroborating,” became the driving news story in a superpower nation for two years. Even the New York Times, which published a lot of these stories, is in the wake of the Horowitz report noting Steele’s role in “unleashing a flood of speculation in the news media about the new president’s relationship with Russia.”
No matter what people think the political meaning of the Horowitz report might be, reporters who read it will know: Anybody who touched this nonsense in print should be embarrassed.
More of this!!twitter:PatriotNotPol twitterde op dinsdag 10-12-2019 om 20:03:56The reason the FBI went for the FISA on Carter Page was to get access to the campaign communications. https://t.co/kG9n8M5ufj reageer retweet
Dat is de enige manier om het verzinsel vast te kunnen houden.quote:Op dinsdag 10 december 2019 12:43 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:
Het blijft zorgwekkend om te zien hoe mensen gewoon een eigen draai geven aan WEER een duidelijk rapport. Echt een vreemd fenomeen in dit topic.
quote:In August 2019, the DOJ told the court that it would begin producing records by November 5, 2019. After producing no records, on November 13, 2019 the agency told Judicial Watch that it was having “technical difficulties,” and in a recent email claimed that “difficulties with the production remain.”
In a joint status report filed on December 5, 2019, Judicial Watch reported to the court that the DOJ claimed in a phone call that it was now unable to produce any records to either of the FOIA requests “because the agency was waiting for some unspecified action by Judge [Tanya S.] Chutkan in some other matter so as to avoid having to produce records in this case.” In that same report the DOJ told the court that Judge Chutkan is “presiding over a related sealed criminal matter” that prohibits the government from releasing the requested FOIA information. [Emphasis added]
quote:Op dinsdag 17 december 2019 04:31 schreef dellipder het volgende:
In de onderstaande clip een samenvatting van het rapport van de inspecteur-generaal Micheal Horowitz over de FISA-dagvaardingen die zijn gebruikt in de Russia collusion delusion hoax-onderzoek van de FBI door procureur-generaal William Barr van iets meer dan tweeënhalve minuut:
Hoe komt het toch dat het jou elke keer lukt om alleen domme emoties in te brengen? Waarom lukt het jou niet om naast een temper tantrum argumenten in te voeren waarom precies jij het een ontzettend dom filmpje vindt en welke redenen jij hebt te menen dat de procureur-generaal bias heeft?quote:Op dinsdag 17 december 2019 12:43 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:
[..]![]()
Wat een ontzettend dom filmpje. Wat een kanaal ook, en deze man heeft zeker geen bias?
Dat geldt niet voor diverse users hier.quote:Op dinsdag 17 december 2019 15:32 schreef dellipder het volgende:
[..]
Hoe komt het toch dat het jou elke keer lukt om alleen domme emoties in te brengen? Waarom lukt het jou niet om naast een temper tantrum argumenten in te voeren waarom precies jij het een ontzettend dom filmpje vindt en welke redenen jij hebt te menen dat de procureur-generaal bias heeft?
Probeer eens voor de verandering het nutteloze en oninteressante bijdrage te ontstijgen, a.u.b.!
B.v.d.
bronquote:Fox’s Bret Baier asked Pence if he would have “had to fire Flynn anyway”- even if Flynn had not misled him about his conversations with Russia’s ambassador to the US in December – because he was was paid over $500,000 “to lobby, essentially, for Turkey” from August-November 2016.
“Hearing that story today was the first I’d heard of it,” Pence said, adding that he “fully support[s] the decision that President Trump made to ask for General Flynn’s resignation.”
But Rep. Elijah Cummings, Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, sent Pence a letter on November 18 requesting more information about the potential conflicts of interest posed by Flynn’s lobbying work.
Hieronder een passage uit het OIG-rapport van Horowitz dat de methodologie van de audit beschrijft.quote:Op maandag 9 december 2019 21:23 schreef dellipder het volgende:
[..]
De scoop waarin Micheal Horowitz onderzoek doen is gelimiteerd, terwijl John Durham in zijn onderzoek naar de oorsprong van de Russia collusion delusion hoax zich niet hoeft te beperken tot enkel het ministerie van Justitie, maar ook voor deze volledige context informatie van bijvoorbeeld State Department en buitenlandse inlichtingendiensten kan onderzoeken.
Dit is geen politiek bedrijven. Dit is een verschil in reikwijdte van het onderzoeksgebied tussen een waakhond en een openbaar aanklager over een volledig gerechtvaardigde onderzoek.
[...]
Here’s Your Guide To The Latest Wild Developments With Michael Flynntwitter:SidneyPowell1 twitterde op woensdag 15-01-2020 om 02:44:20We just filed a Motion to Withdraw the plea of @GenFlynn because the government acted in bad faith, with vindictiveness, and breached the plea agreement pursuant to which he has cooperated fully at great personal expense and "held back nothing" according to #prosecuters until https://t.co/5FRWvvol09 reageer retweet
Het verhaal komt van een private cybersecurity firm genaamd Area1, waarvan de eigenaar voormalig werknemer van de NSA en jawel.... Crowdstrike blijkt te zijn. Je verwacht het nietquote:Russians hack energy company that played major role in Trump Ukraine scandal
(CNN)Russian military hackers have successfully infiltrated the Ukrainian gas company at the heart of the impeachment drama surrounding President Donald Trump, former Vice President Joe Biden and his family, according to cybersecurity researchers.
Employees of the gas company, Burisma Holdings, were tricked into giving up their computer credentials by a sophisticated network of fake websites set up by Russian military intelligence, the GRU, said Area 1, an online security firm.
The websites were designed to look and feel like the same ordinary work products that Burisma employees would access on a daily basis, said Area 1 in its report.
The New York Times was the first to report the hack, and noted the attempts began in early November, as the Bidens, Ukraine and impeachment were dominating the news in the United States while the House impeachment hearings were underway.
CNN has reached out to the Russian Embassy in Washington for comment but has not yet received a response.
It is unclear what information the hackers sought or how deeply Burisma may have been compromised. A cybersecurity expert speaking to CNN about the situation said this was likely not the first time Russian operators have hacked Burisma, adding that Russian hackers are very aggressive in their cyberefforts inside Ukraine.
But in light of Burisma's role in the unfolding political saga -- in which Trump pushed Ukrainian officials to investigate Biden and his son, Hunter, who had served on Burisma's board -- the probing of the company's systems closely resembles Russian efforts in 2016 to destabilize the US election.
"The timing of the GRU's campaign in relation to the 2020 U.S. elections raises the spectre that this is an early warning of what we have anticipated since the successful cyberattacks undertaken during the 2016 U.S. elections," said the report.
In a statement, Biden's presidential campaign said the incident "proves that both Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin understand the true stakes of this election."
"Now we know that Vladimir Putin also sees Joe Biden as a threat. Any American president who had not repeatedly encouraged foreign interventions of this kind would immediately condemn this attack on the sovereignty of our elections," Biden spokesman Andrew Bates said.
Area 1 monitors the internet for so-called "phishing" attacks. It was founded in 2013 by two former National Security Agency officials and a computer scientist.
Oren Falkowitz, the company's co-founder and CEO, told CNN in an interview that Area 1 has been tracking the GRU for some time.
"We've been able to definitively link it based on patterns consistent from this campaign with many others," he said.
Asked whether he had notified Burisma of the Russian campaign, Falkowitz acknowledged that the company had made a "series of disclosures." He declined to comment on "who we spoke with prior to releasing, but it was consistent with responsible standards."
En de usual suspects vreten het als zoete koek. Het lijkt wel alsof ze verslaafd zijn aan verliezen en voor lul staan.quote:Op donderdag 16 januari 2020 09:58 schreef EdvandeBerg het volgende:
Men probeert de BS over de Russische hackers weer op te warmen;
[..]
Het verhaal komt van een private cybersecurity firm genaamd Area1, waarvan de eigenaar voormalig werknemer van de NSA en jawel.... Crowdstrike blijkt te zijn. Je verwacht het niet
En de beweringen van deze meneer Darche worden door NYT, CNN ea. als feit zonder enig aantoonbaar bewijs.
quote:Op vrijdag 17 januari 2020 10:47 schreef EdvandeBerg het volgende:
Bijkomend voordeel van het impeachmentcircus voor de DNC; van senatoren wordt verwacht dat ze veel aanwezig zullen zijn bij de verhoren van getuigen etc. De zittende senatoren die een gooi doen naar het kandidaatschap, worden hierdoor ernstig benadeeld in hun mogelijkheden om campagne te voeren, terwijl andere kandidaten dat nadeel niet hebben. Bernie zit in de senaat, Joe Biden niet.SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.Scratch a liberal and you will find a fascist
Wat toevallig toch. Twee bevriende CIA-stafleden van het Witte Huis zouden door toenmalige collega's zijn gehoord toen ze spraken over hoe de nieuwe president Trump ten val zou kunnen worden gebracht. De een werd een jaar later de whistleblower, de ander zit samen in een committee met Adam Schiff. Wat is de wereld toch klein!quote:Whistleblower Was Overheard in '17 Discussing With Ally How to Remove Trump
Barely two weeks after Donald Trump took office, Eric Ciaramella – the CIA analyst whose name was recently linked in a tweet by the president and mentioned by lawmakers as the anonymous “whistleblower" who touched off Trump's impeachment – was overheard in the White House discussing with another staffer how to remove the newly elected president from office, according to former colleagues.
Sources told RealClearInvestigations the staffer with whom Ciaramella was speaking was Sean Misko. Both were Obama administration holdovers working in the Trump White House on foreign policy and national security issues. And both expressed anger over Trump’s new “America First” foreign policy, a sea change from President Obama’s approach to international affairs.
“Just days after he was sworn in they were already talking about trying to get rid of him,” said a White House colleague who overheard their conversation.
“They weren’t just bent on subverting his agenda,” the former official added. “They were plotting to actually have him removed from office.”
Misko left the White House last summer to join House impeachment manager Adam Schiff’s committee, where sources say he offered “guidance” to the whistleblower, who has been officially identified only as an intelligence officer in a complaint against Trump filed under whistleblower laws. Misko then helped run the impeachment inquiry based on that complaint as a top investigator for congressional Democrats.
| Forum Opties | |
|---|---|
| Forumhop: | |
| Hop naar: | |