Why the surveillance memo matters

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dvdjs (regarding Gowdy and the FISA warrant request):
He is entitled to his opinon, of course, but this is not really somethign he can “know”. It is conjecture on his part.
Click to expand...
Do you apply this reasoning to Gowdy’s conjecture on his trust of Mueller too (Mueller being trustworthy is not something Gowdy really can know), or do you give yourself a pass on being consistent with Gowdy’s “conjecture” only in rejecting the area of the FISA warrant statement?
 
Cathoholic said:
Do you apply this reasoning to Gowdy’s conjecture on his trust of Mueller t
Click to expand...
Yes and by the same standard.

I think that it is very difficulty for Gowdy to predict what a particular judge would have done, although I surmise that Gowdy, if he were the judge himself, would have found the application lacking without whatever material came from the dossier.

Gowdy is fully and uniquely competent to judge whether he thinks Mueller is trustworthy, moreover his assessment is made on the basis of considerable knowledge of Mueller professionally. That personal knowledge was not part of Gowdy’s assessment of the how the unknown judge would have ruled, and lends greater weight to his opinion of Mueller, than his opinion of how the judge would have acted in a hypothetical case…

In the same way, Gowdy’s assessment of the relevance of the memo to the Mueller investigation has credibility because of his knowledge about many aspects of what is being investigated and the connection, or lack thereof, to the dossier and the FISA warrant. He even named lines of investigation that haven’t gotten much play in the media and seem completely unconnected to Carter Page, e.g., Cambridge Analytica.

I use a common standard: there are things that Gowdy is in a position to know, and things that he isn’t. I attach greater significance to the assessments that he makes in areas that he is in a position to know, and lesser significance to assessments that he makes in areas that he is not, or has not establish himself as being in a position to know.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs:
Gowdy is fully and uniquely competent to judge whether he thinks Comey is trustworthy,
Click to expand...
But I didn’t ask about Gowdy with respect to Comey.
I asked about Gowdy with respect to Mueller.
 
Gowdy is fully and uniquely competent to judge whether he thinks Mueller is trustworthy . . .
Click to expand...
There is an element of judgment here. I agree with you.

But there is an element of conjecture too.

Just like there is conjecture with Gowdy’s thoughts on the FISA prerequisites.

But there is more than an educated guess too (based on information Gowdy has about other dimensions of the allegations, support or lack there of, and perhaps other reasons (i.e. Gowdy MAY know the judge’s tendencies from past dealings or if the secret FISA court has a panel of judges Gowdy may have had dealings with one or some of them).

In my opinion, there is MORE than mere conjecture here.
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
Gowdy MAY know the judge’s tendencies from past dealings or if the secret FISA court has a panel of judges Gowdy may have had dealings with one or some of them.
Click to expand...
He may, but that was not brought up in any discussion.
We will have a better idea when trump releases the minority memo that the committee unanimously voted to release.
 
that was not brought up in any discussion
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t expect it would. It is a secret court (and many of the documents are classified).
 
Last edited:
I think I misread it. Very sorry! I’ll quit commenting when I don’t have evidence to back my claim.
 
All trails lead back to Hillary; the whole charade is backfiring badly.
 
But you know, I was thinking about this (with my low IQ of course…) and HRC was an employee of the State Dept. If you or I had worked at a place we would have friends there. Close friends who trusted us… It makes a little sense to me why people in high places would put their trust in her… I don’t think they could be objective. I know I probably wouldn’t, you know team player and all… It all goes wrong though when laws are broken. Even if you do it for a friend, it is breaking the law…
 
Sen. Graham details ‘odd’ Susan Rice email on Russia probe


The surveillance abuse controversy and Obama’s legacy


🤔
 
How do they get away with all this stuff?

It’s amazing.

Been going on for many decades.
 
As the dossier today takes on even more importance, The Washington Times identified Mr. Steele’s 10 core collusion accusations. The analysis includes the charges’ status, 20 months after Mr. Steele first contacted the FBI and urged the prosecution of President Trump.

• The Trump campaign launched an “extensive conspiracy” with the Kremlin to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. To date, no public verification.

• Mr. Trump, for decades a developer of tall buildings, maintained an eight-year relationship of give-and-take with Russian intelligence. To date, no public verification.

• Mr. Trump and senior campaign aides actively supported the Russia hacking of Democratic Party computers to steal and release stolen emails. To date, no public verification.

• Volunteer Carter Page and campaign manager Paul Manafort personally conspired with Moscow to hack the Democrats’ computers. When the hacking began in 2015, neither man was associated with the Trump campaign. Both deny the charge. Mr. Page testified under oath that he had never met or spoken with Mr. Manafort. To date, no public verification of this dossier part.

• Mr. Page, an Annapolis graduate, an energy investor and a former resident of Moscow, traveled to that city in early July 2016 to deliver a public speech at a university. The dossier says he met with two top Kremlin operatives and discussed bribes for working to lift economic sanctions. Mr. Page testified under oath that he had never met nor spoke with them. He has filed libel lawsuits.

• Mr. Trump engaged with Russian prostitutes during a trip to Moscow in 2013. Mr. Trump has denied this numerous times. To date, no public verification.

• Mr. Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen, secretly traveled to Prague in August 2016. His supposed mission: to orchestrate payments with agents of Vladimir Putin to cover up the hacking. At that point, the hacking was known worldwide. Mr. Cohen repeatedly has denied under oath that he took such a trip and showed his passport. He has filed libel lawsuits, including against Fusion GPS. Fusion co-founder Glenn Simpson, who ordered the dossier, has suggested that Mr. Cohen took a private Russian plane and might have been on a yacht in the Adriatic Sea. To date, there has been no public verification of any of this.
 
Last edited:
• Russian tech entrepreneur Aleksej Gubarev, owner of XBT Holding, hacked the Democrat Party computers with spyware and pornography. He has denied this repeatedly. He sued Mr. Steele for libel in a London court, where the former spy said the information was raw call-in information and not verified.

• Three Russian oligarchs and shareholders in Alfa Bank were involved in Russian election interference and paid bribes to Mr. Putin. They deny the charges and have filed libel lawsuits.

• Mikhail Kalugin was chief of the economic section at the Russian Embassy in Washington. Mr. Steele accuses him of being a spy and of funding the hacking with skimmed-off pension funds. He was supposedly whisked out of Washington when the hacking scandal broke in August. Washington associates of Mr. Kalugin told The Washington Times that the diplomat announced his planned departure 10 months beforehand. He and his family returned to Moscow. He now works in the Foreign Ministry. A former senior U.S. government official told The Times that Mr. Kalugin was never internally identified as a spy.

Republicans and dossier targets uniformly deride the 35 pages as falsehoods and fabrications. Some Democrats have acknowledged that the collection of memos is flawed.

 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top