Now that they've release the Republican authored memo, I wonder if they will release the Democrat memo.   Seems only fair to me.   But I doubt they will, because this isn't really about getting at the truth.  It's about protecting Trump.

It's entirely about protecting Trump, but if there's a grain of truth to it, it must be investigated and the supporting documents released publicly. There's no doubt in my mind that there's more than a grain of truth to it. The Democrats trying to keep it from getting out is purely political and predictable. It shields Trump a little tiny bit (but not really). The FBI kicking and screaming about its release speaks volumes about the truth behind what's in that memo.

---

Now that they've release the Republican authored memo, I wonder if they will release the Democrat memo.   Seems only fair to me.   But I doubt they will, because this isn't really about getting at the truth.  It's about protecting Trump.

Once the dems are finished composing their memo, they may look to release it.

What value could a dem memo possible offer?

How about their side of the story?  Wouldn't you like to hear both sides?  Or are you just interested in firming up your pre-existing opinion? 

They've already prepared their own memo.  The problem is, it has the same national security implications that they Republican memo had, so the release has to go through the same approval process.   The Republicans claim they were offering their own memo in the interest of transparency, but now they are fighting the release of the Democratic response.  And that should tell you one thing for sure: releasing the Republican memo had nothing to do with transparency.  Because if it did, they would release the Democratic memo as well.

---

Now that they've release the Republican authored memo, I wonder if they will release the Democrat memo.   Seems only fair to me.   But I doubt they will, because this isn't really about getting at the truth.  It's about protecting Trump.

It's entirely about protecting Trump, but if there's a grain of truth to it, it must be investigated and the supporting documents released publicly. There's no doubt in my mind that there's more than a grain of truth to it. The Democrats trying to keep it from getting out is purely political and predictable. It shields Trump a little tiny bit (but not really). The FBI kicking and screaming about its release speaks volumes about the truth behind what's in that memo.

And now that it's out, what about the Republicans trying to keep the Democratic response from getting out?   Is that not also purely political and predictable?

---

---

It's entirely about protecting Trump, but if there's a grain of truth to it, it must be investigated and the supporting documents released publicly. There's no doubt in my mind that there's more than a grain of truth to it. The Democrats trying to keep it from getting out is purely political and predictable. It shields Trump a little tiny bit (but not really). The FBI kicking and screaming about its release speaks volumes about the truth behind what's in that memo.

And now that it's out, what about the Republicans trying to keep the Democratic response from getting out?   Is that not also purely political and predictable?

It is, entirely, and the Democrats kicking and screaming doesn't surprise me at all. It's the FBI's kicking and screaming that we should all be very worried about. If the FISA courts weren't being abused to illegally spy on Americans, including political opponents, why would the FBI want such an innocuous memo with no supporting material released?

---

Now that they've release the Republican authored memo, I wonder if they will release the Democrat memo.   Seems only fair to me.   But I doubt they will, because this isn't really about getting at the truth.  It's about protecting Trump.

"When The Russian Oligarchs diabolically VIOLATED our sacred Democracy, the great James Comey and Peter Strozk (super Spy) were faced with grave SPLIT SECOND DECISIONS that can only be judged against sands of time, the winds of history, and the survival of our great republic...  Mistakes were made but their heads and their hearts were with the safety of the American people to thwart the evil Putin Blah Blah Blah Blah..."

---

Once the dems are finished composing their memo, they may look to release it.

What value could a dem memo possible offer?

How about their side of the story?  Wouldn't you like to hear both sides?  Or are you just interested in firming up your pre-existing opinion? 

They've already prepared their own memo.  The problem is, it has the same national security implications that they Republican memo had, so the release has to go through the same approval process.   The Republicans claim they were offering their own memo in the interest of transparency, but now they are fighting the release of the Democratic response.  And that should tell you one thing for sure: releasing the Republican memo had nothing to do with transparency.  Because if it did, they would release the Democratic memo as well.

---

It's entirely about protecting Trump, but if there's a grain of truth to it, it must be investigated and the supporting documents released publicly. There's no doubt in my mind that there's more than a grain of truth to it. The Democrats trying to keep it from getting out is purely political and predictable. It shields Trump a little tiny bit (but not really). The FBI kicking and screaming about its release speaks volumes about the truth behind what's in that memo.

And now that it's out, what about the Republicans trying to keep the Democratic response from getting out?   Is that not also purely political and predictable?

Just out of Curiosity, is their memo going to explain why Bruce Ohrr has been demoted twice.  Is there memo going to say that his wife didn't work for Fusion GPS to do oppo research on the president.  Is their memo going to say that Peter Strozk didn't send those text messages?  IS it going to say that he and Comey weren't planning Hillary's exhoneration before she was interviewed?  Is it going to explain why her team was given blanket criminal immunity for nothing in return?  Is it going to explain why they allowed the DNC to choose the third party firm to do the pharensic analysis on their servers?  Is their memo going to coroberate the Steele Dossier?  Is their memo going to say that it was never signed off on by a director of the FBI that testified under oath that it was salacious and unverified?  Is their memo going to explain why Andy McCabe is on the Reserve/vacation/retired list?  

I'm just curious.  

Michael Flynns life has been destroyed because he misremembered a phone conversation of no consequence that didn't break any laws that he was authorized to give by the president elect of the united states.  

These people systematically lied to federal judges and violated the 4th amendment rights of American citizens and tarnished the reputation of federal law enforcement for their own gain.  they should all be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

---

How about their side of the story?  Wouldn't you like to hear both sides?  Or are you just interested in firming up your pre-existing opinion? 

They've already prepared their own memo.  The problem is, it has the same national security implications that they Republican memo had, so the release has to go through the same approval process.   The Republicans claim they were offering their own memo in the interest of transparency, but now they are fighting the release of the Democratic response.  And that should tell you one thing for sure: releasing the Republican memo had nothing to do with transparency.  Because if it did, they would release the Democratic memo as well.

---

And now that it's out, what about the Republicans trying to keep the Democratic response from getting out?   Is that not also purely political and predictable?

Just out of Curiosity, is their memo going to explain why Bruce Ohrr has been demoted twice.  Is there memo going to say that his wife didn't work for Fusion GPS to do oppo research on the president.  Is their memo going to say that Peter Strozk didn't send those text messages?  IS it going to say that he and Comey weren't planning Hillary's exhoneration before she was interviewed?  Is it going to explain why her team was given blanket criminal immunity for nothing in return?  Is it going to explain why they allowed the DNC to choose the third party firm to do the pharensic analysis on their servers?  Is their memo going to coroberate the Steele Dossier?  Is their memo going to say that it was never signed off on by a director of the FBI that testified under oath that it was salacious and unverified?  Is their memo going to explain why Andy McCabe is on the Reserve/vacation/retired list?  

I'm just curious.  

Michael Flynns life has been destroyed because he misremembered a phone conversation of no consequence that didn't break any laws that he was authorized to give by the president elect of the united states.  

These people systematically lied to federal judges and violated the 4th amendment rights of American citizens and tarnished the reputation of federal law enforcement for their own gain.  they should all be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

As should anyone who actually collaborated with a foreign power to rig the election.

Both sides are guilty here. There's plenty of evidence out there showing that these suspicions existed before the abuse of the FISA court took place, which would mean that fruit of the poisoned tree does not apply. Anyone who participated in or had knowledge of the FISA court manipulation belongs in prison. Anyone who collaborated, arranged the collaboration of or was aware of the collaboration with a foreign power to influence the outcome of an election should join them. If that leaves us with Governor Bob running against Mayor Jill in the 2020 election, that is what it is. This is our great chance as the American public to remind that government that we're in charge, not them.

---

Once the dems are finished composing their memo, they may look to release it.

What value could a dem memo possible offer?

How about their side of the story?  Wouldn't you like to hear both sides?  Or are you just interested in firming up your pre-existing opinion? 

They've already prepared their own memo.  The problem is, it has the same national security implications that they Republican memo had, so the release has to go through the same approval process.   The Republicans claim they were offering their own memo in the interest of transparency, but now they are fighting the release of the Democratic response.  And that should tell you one thing for sure: releasing the Republican memo had nothing to do with transparency.  Because if it did, they would release the Democratic memo as well.

The problem is, it isn't a "story". It is factual. Let's see the democratic memo. Looking forward to it. Looking forward to hearing why McCabe "retired" early.

You do know that the crap is about to hit the fan, right?

---

Just out of Curiosity, is their memo going to explain why Bruce Ohrr has been demoted twice.  Is there memo going to say that his wife didn't work for Fusion GPS to do oppo research on the president.  Is their memo going to say that Peter Strozk didn't send those text messages?  IS it going to say that he and Comey weren't planning Hillary's exhoneration before she was interviewed?  Is it going to explain why her team was given blanket criminal immunity for nothing in return?  Is it going to explain why they allowed the DNC to choose the third party firm to do the pharensic analysis on their servers?  Is their memo going to coroberate the Steele Dossier?  Is their memo going to say that it was never signed off on by a director of the FBI that testified under oath that it was salacious and unverified?  Is their memo going to explain why Andy McCabe is on the Reserve/vacation/retired list?  

I'm just curious.  

Michael Flynns life has been destroyed because he misremembered a phone conversation of no consequence that didn't break any laws that he was authorized to give by the president elect of the united states.  

These people systematically lied to federal judges and violated the 4th amendment rights of American citizens and tarnished the reputation of federal law enforcement for their own gain.  they should all be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

As should anyone who actually collaborated with a foreign power to rig the election.

Both sides are guilty here. There's plenty of evidence out there showing that these suspicions existed before the abuse of the FISA court took place, which would mean that fruit of the poisoned tree does not apply. Anyone who participated in or had knowledge of the FISA court manipulation belongs in prison. Anyone who collaborated, arranged the collaboration of or was aware of the collaboration with a foreign power to influence the outcome of an election should join them. If that leaves us with Governor Bob running against Mayor Jill in the 2020 election, that is what it is. This is our great chance as the American public to remind that government that we're in charge, not them.

As the memo states, the origins of the probe were with peter stroxk, an agent mueller has had to admit wasn't credible and was removed from the Russia probe.  This is after his text messages showed not only a hatred of trump but a belief "nothing would come" of the Russia probe.  That's a ringing endorsement after, at the time, 8 months of investigation.  

This whole thing stinks.  There is no evidence of the Trump campaign coordinating with the Russians and the evidence that the Russians hacked the dnc is third party from a company hired by a dnc chairwoman that had to be removed.  Her replacement incidentally dedicated her book to a guy named SETH RICH...

---

As should anyone who actually collaborated with a foreign power to rig the election.

Both sides are guilty here. There's plenty of evidence out there showing that these suspicions existed before the abuse of the FISA court took place, which would mean that fruit of the poisoned tree does not apply. Anyone who participated in or had knowledge of the FISA court manipulation belongs in prison. Anyone who collaborated, arranged the collaboration of or was aware of the collaboration with a foreign power to influence the outcome of an election should join them. If that leaves us with Governor Bob running against Mayor Jill in the 2020 election, that is what it is. This is our great chance as the American public to remind that government that we're in charge, not them.

As the memo states, the origins of the probe were with peter stroxk, an agent mueller has had to admit wasn't credible and was removed from the Russia probe.  This is after his text messages showed not only a hatred of trump but a belief "nothing would come" of the Russia probe.  That's a ringing endorsement after, at the time, 8 months of investigation.  

This whole thing stinks.  There is no evidence of the Trump campaign coordinating with the Russians and the evidence that the Russians hacked the dnc is third party from a company hired by a dnc chairwoman that had to be removed.  Her replacement incidentally dedicated her book to a guy named SETH RICH...

If there's no evidence, then Trump should stop fighting and let the investigation finish.   If the investigation wants to issue some finding of guilt, then they will have to produce actual evidence of it.   The way he struggles against the investigation, demonizing law enforcement, firing or forcing out people from the FBI and the Justice Department, all the crazy tweets, it bears all the hallmarks of a guilty person.  

IF it is true that he is totally innocent of any of this stuff, then it is absolutely, unarguably also true that he is unfit for the Presidency, because apparently, he can't handle the pressure.

Honestly, so far I haven't seen anything that connects the Trump campaign to the Russians, except for Donald Trump acting guilty as hell.   That just stokes my interest.   Why is he acting that way?   The irony is, he could wind up getting in a lot of trouble for obstructing an investigation that would have declared him innocent if he had just ignored it and gone about his business.

---

As the memo states, the origins of the probe were with peter stroxk, an agent mueller has had to admit wasn't credible and was removed from the Russia probe.  This is after his text messages showed not only a hatred of trump but a belief "nothing would come" of the Russia probe.  That's a ringing endorsement after, at the time, 8 months of investigation.  

This whole thing stinks.  There is no evidence of the Trump campaign coordinating with the Russians and the evidence that the Russians hacked the dnc is third party from a company hired by a dnc chairwoman that had to be removed.  Her replacement incidentally dedicated her book to a guy named SETH RICH...

If there's no evidence, then Trump should stop fighting and let the investigation finish.   If the investigation wants to issue some finding of guilt, then they will have to produce actual evidence of it.   The way he struggles against the investigation, demonizing law enforcement, firing or forcing out people from the FBI and the Justice Department, all the crazy tweets, it bears all the hallmarks of a guilty person.  

IF it is true that he is totally innocent of any of this stuff, then it is absolutely, unarguably also true that he is unfit for the Presidency, because apparently, he can't handle the pressure.

Honestly, so far I haven't seen anything that connects the Trump campaign to the Russians, except for Donald Trump acting guilty as hell.   That just stokes my interest.   Why is he acting that way?   The irony is, he could wind up getting in a lot of trouble for obstructing an investigation that would have declared him innocent if he had just ignored it and gone about his business.

They've been investigating him for how long now? Mueller's investigation is a sham. How long should it go on?

They've only made a couple arrests in areas not related to collusion. If you're Trump, you have to believe they're going to try the same thing on you. Stop fighting? The release of this memo shows how flawed the investigation has been, and even if they actually found credible evidence of collusion, there's already enough reasonable doubt that he'll never be convicted.

Demonizing law enforcement? He's been a big supporter of law enforcement throughout his Presidency. He's lashing out at a select few. They've been very clear who is the problem. They don't have a problem with the rank and file. You're being misleading here.

Trump isn't acting guilty. He's acting like Trump. He's angry at a [BLEEP] investigation from people who should be in prison instead of him. He should be angry. This level of corruption may be easier for you to dismiss, but this is historic levels of corruption. I'm not sure that's "acting guilty" in this situation.

---

TJ and Marty, outside of arguing even the most trivial of facts like "water is wet", just for the sake of argument, do you guys truly feel the content in this memo is false? I am curious.

---

TJ and Marty, outside of arguing even the most trivial of facts like "water is wet", just for the sake of argument,  do you guys truly feel the content in this memo is false? I am curious.

No, not in the slightest. The FBI's nervous breakdown suggests that there's a great degree of truth to it.

I want the FISA documents to be released because I want the memo to be true. I want there to be tremendous outrage followed by criminal inquiries and teardown of the FISA courts, with ripple effects all the way through the intelligence state. Until those real FISA documents come out, the Democrats will hide behind the veil of plausible deniability provided to them by CNN, MSNBC and CBS (among other media outlets), who are all successfully burying this memo as the politically motivated work of a man desperate to save his presidency. While that may well be true--hell, it probably is given the timing of the thing--releasing the actual, classified FISA documents in unedited form showing exactly who said and authorized what would absolutely destroy the police state and those who use it against American citizens.

So to answer the question, no, I don't believe it's false. I think it's largely true based solely upon the FBI's reaction to it, but I also recognize that it was a political tool used by a man who's under intense fire right now from someone he's seeking to discredit by releasing this memo. Is there exaggeration or creative manipulation of facts in there? Hell yes, but that does not invalidate or excuse the very true elements of it surrounding what could be described as treason if one were so inclined.

---

As the memo states, the origins of the probe were with peter stroxk, an agent mueller has had to admit wasn't credible and was removed from the Russia probe.  This is after his text messages showed not only a hatred of trump but a belief "nothing would come" of the Russia probe.  That's a ringing endorsement after, at the time, 8 months of investigation.  

This whole thing stinks.  There is no evidence of the Trump campaign coordinating with the Russians and the evidence that the Russians hacked the dnc is third party from a company hired by a dnc chairwoman that had to be removed.  Her replacement incidentally dedicated her book to a guy named SETH RICH...

If there's no evidence, then Trump should stop fighting and let the investigation finish.   If the investigation wants to issue some finding of guilt, then they will have to produce actual evidence of it.   The way he struggles against the investigation, demonizing law enforcement, firing or forcing out people from the FBI and the Justice Department, all the crazy tweets, it bears all the hallmarks of a guilty person.

Michael Flynn was arrested for "lying" about something he did that was perfectly legal and should not have even been questioned. Manafort's home was attacked by armed officials in the wee hours of the morning, with his wife and children there, when Mueller authorized a search warrant. And you think Trump should just let several other people get shafted like those two?  Would you just ignore such things if you were the POTUS? If so, I've lost some respect for you.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

As the memo states, the origins of the probe were with peter stroxk, an agent mueller has had to admit wasn't credible and was removed from the Russia probe.  This is after his text messages showed not only a hatred of trump but a belief "nothing would come" of the Russia probe.  That's a ringing endorsement after, at the time, 8 months of investigation.  

This whole thing stinks.  There is no evidence of the Trump campaign coordinating with the Russians and the evidence that the Russians hacked the dnc is third party from a company hired by a dnc chairwoman that had to be removed.  Her replacement incidentally dedicated her book to a guy named SETH RICH...

If there's no evidence, then Trump should stop fighting and let the investigation finish.   If the investigation wants to issue some finding of guilt, then they will have to produce actual evidence of it.   The way he struggles against the investigation, demonizing law enforcement, firing or forcing out people from the FBI and the Justice Department, all the crazy tweets, it bears all the hallmarks of a guilty person.  

IF it is true that he is totally innocent of any of this stuff, then it is absolutely, unarguably also true that he is unfit for the Presidency, because apparently, he can't handle the pressure.

Honestly, so far I haven't seen anything that connects the Trump campaign to the Russians, except for Donald Trump acting guilty as hell.   That just stokes my interest.   Why is he acting that way?   The irony is, he could wind up getting in a lot of trouble for obstructing an investigation that would have declared him innocent if he had just ignored it and gone about his business.

Your opinion is just that.  From my perspective I would go even harder.  U don't leave your people on the beach.  In the real world being the target of a federal investigation costs hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees.  Flynn and mamafort have been loyal.  Their lives are being destroyed based on personal hatred while Clinton's team was cleared of demonstrable wrong doing before their investigation was finished.  That's cheap.  Mueller was appointed the day after he was interviewed and turned down for the position vacated by his friend that trump fired.  There was no declaration of probable cause or an underlying time laid out for the special counsel to investigate.  That's a violation of the statute that allows for the appointment of a special counsel.  

The general reason given "collusion for election tampering" isn't really a crime.  Accepting opo research from. Foreign entity isn't a crime unless you pay them to produce it.  The fbi and the justice department used illegal foreign opo research/propaganda paid for by the Clinton campaign in their application to surveil carter page.  

There is nothing legitimate or redeeming about this farce.

---

If there's no evidence, then Trump should stop fighting and let the investigation finish.   If the investigation wants to issue some finding of guilt, then they will have to produce actual evidence of it.   The way he struggles against the investigation, demonizing law enforcement, firing or forcing out people from the FBI and the Justice Department, all the crazy tweets, it bears all the hallmarks of a guilty person.

Michael Flynn was arrested for "lying" about something he did that was perfectljy legal and should not have even been questioned. Manafort's home was attacked by armed officials in the wee hours of the morning, with his wife and children there, when Mueller authorized a search warrant. And you think Trump should just let several other people get shafted like those two?  Would you just ignore such things if you were the POTUS? If so, I've lost some respect for you.

AND the fbi neglected to inform Flynns attorneys that the investigator who questioned flynn, peter stroxk, was removed from the investigation because of rampant biased.  Withholding exculpatory evidence is a violation of basic disvovery.  Bob Mueller should be ashamed of himself.  His second in command andrew Wiseman has been proven to be unethical and has had major cases overturned at the highest level because of this very behavior.  

These aren't independent truth seekers.  These are establishment attack dogs.

---

TJ and Marty, outside of arguing even the most trivial of facts like "water is wet", just for the sake of argument,  do you guys truly feel the content in this memo is false? I am curious.

I've read the memo and I've read enough about the memo to conclude that there should be a lot of doubt about the conclusions as well as the importance of what it is alleging.  

I doubt that any of you Trump supporters are even willing to read anything that might cast doubt on your opinion, but please read this: 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018...pe=article

The problem is, we haven't seen the actual FISA warrant, and probably never will.  But it should be pointed out that Page was under investigation by the FBI since 2013.  This didn't start in October 2016 as the Republican memo alleges.  Also, the FISA warrant was obtained just a couple of weeks prior to the election, so it would have been impossible to gather any evidence that would have influenced the election at that time. 

The funny thing is, Nunes has stated that he hasn't ever read the FISA warrants he wrote about in his memo.  

It's also worth noting that several important Republicans, including Trey Gowdy, have said the Nunes memo has nothing to do with Mueller's investigation.  Trey Gowdy was one of the authors of the Nunes memo.

I would also like to read the Democratic response, so I think in fairness, their memo should also be released.

---

TJ and Marty, outside of arguing even the most trivial of facts like "water is wet", just for the sake of argument,  do you guys truly feel the content in this memo is false? I am curious.

I've read the memo and I've read enough about the memo to conclude that there should be a lot of doubt about the conclusions as well as the importance of what it is alleging.  

I doubt that any of you Trump supporters are even willing to read anything that might cast doubt on your opinion, but please read this: 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018...pe=article

The problem is, we haven't seen the actual FISA warrant, and probably never will.  But it should be pointed out that Page was under investigation by the FBI since 2013.  This didn't start in October 2016 as the Republican memo alleges.  Also, the FISA warrant was obtained just a couple of weeks prior to the election, so it would have been impossible to gather any evidence that would have influenced the election at that time. 

The funny thing is, Nunes has stated that he hasn't ever read the FISA warrants he wrote about in his memo.  

It's also worth noting that several important Republicans, including Trey Gowdy, have said the Nunes memo has nothing to do with Mueller's investigation.  Trey Gowdy was one of the authors of the Nunes memo.

I would also like to read the Democratic response, so I think in fairness, their memo should also be released.

I read the NYT article. There's a lot of spin. Much of it is speculation, and it does not refute any of the fact presented in the Nunes memo. In particular, the fact that the origin of the 'dossier' was never reported to the court, in four separate filings, was not refuted. The claim in the NYT article (speculation) that there were other facts presented to the FISA court ignores the statement of McCabe that there would have been no request for a FISA warrant without the 'dossier.'

Your use of the word "since" is a mischaracterization. Page was investigated in 2013 and cleared in 2015. There was not a continuous investigation.

And here is an article which I hope you will read that points out that all of the claims that the release of the memo would endanger national security were lies.

Security Lies

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

TJ and Marty, outside of arguing even the most trivial of facts like "water is wet", just for the sake of argument,  do you guys truly feel the content in this memo is false? I am curious.

I've read the memo and I've read enough about the memo to conclude that there should be a lot of doubt about the conclusions as well as the importance of what it is alleging.  

I doubt that any of you Trump supporters are even willing to read anything that might cast doubt on your opinion, but please read this: 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018...pe=article

The problem is, we haven't seen the actual FISA warrant, and probably never will.  But it should be pointed out that Page was under investigation by the FBI since 2013.  This didn't start in October 2016 as the Republican memo alleges.  Also, the FISA warrant was obtained just a couple of weeks prior to the election, so it would have been impossible to gather any evidence that would have influenced the election at that time. 

The funny thing is, Nunes has stated that he hasn't ever read the FISA warrants he wrote about in his memo.  

It's also worth noting that several important Republicans, including Trey Gowdy, have said the Nunes memo has nothing to do with Mueller's investigation.  Trey Gowdy was one of the authors of the Nunes memo.

I would also like to read the Democratic response, so I think in fairness, their memo should also be released.

Doubting the conclusions? I'm genuinely curious which conclusions you doubt. These are facts, not opinions.

The FISA warrant was initially rejected. It wasn't until they reapplied with the fake dossier that they actually got the warrant. Gowdy said that the dossier was the only thing different during each application. If I'm not mistaken, Page stepped down from the Trump campaign before they even got the FISA warrant. If that's true, they got a surveillance warrant on Trump and his campaign when it was supposedly intended for Carter Page. 

Do you believe the FBI was dishonest here? We have Comey, under oath, say that Trump wasn't being watched when he had already signed off on the FISA warrant saying differently. Page was the focus of the warrant so that they could get to Trump. They didn't do anything with it until Trump took him in. I'm not sure we'll get a chance to see the FISA warrant, but I'm inclined to believe the FISA judge was a willing participant. I've spoken to many judges and magistrate judges, and the burden for probable cause is so much more than a Yahoo article. You can't even use a Yahoo article as a source or a school paper. For the judge to accept it, and to not speak out since the information has been known, tells me that he did it knowingly. 


While you think two weeks isn't enough to influence an election, I'd argue otherwise... especially if there's something really scandalous. Let's assume they found collusion and proved Trump was an agent for Russia. Do you think that would've been enough to help Hillary win? Absolutely.

---

So huge surprise here, uuuuuuuuge surprise, the Democratic response has "national security concerns" and won't be released.

I smell the remnants of a bull. We saw what the Republicans had to say and the [BLEEP] fit it sent the FBI into, now let's see what the Democrats have to say.

Unless you have something to hide, Mr. President.

---

So huge surprise here, uuuuuuuuge surprise, the Democratic response has "national security concerns" and won't be released.

I smell the remnants of a bull. We saw what the Republicans had to say and the [BLEEP] fit it sent the FBI into, now let's see what the Democrats have to say.

Unless you have something to hide, Mr. President.

The dems put so many statements in their memo they knew would be redacted on purpose so they could accuse The Don of hiding something. Aren't you getting tired of their games already?

Most people can see through their garbage. Especially the voters.

Speaking of, do the dems have an actual message to run on yet? Hate Trump isn't a message.

---