The FISA Release Truth by Andrew McCarthy

Before you even start, he’s no fan of Trump.

Read it and learn.

Bona Fides

Andrew C. McCarthy III is a former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. He led the 1995 terrorism prosecution against Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven others. The defendants were convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and of planning a series of attacks against New York City landmarks. He also contributed to the prosecutions of terrorists who bombed U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. He resigned from the Justice Department in 2003. He is a contributing editor of National Review and a senior fellow at the National Review Institute.

1 Like

I can’t figure out how to make the below a quote

Now we have some additional information in the form of the redacted FISA applications themselves, and the Nunes memo looks even worse. In my earlier post, I observed that the FBI’s disclosures about Steele were contained in a footnote, but argued that this did not detract from their sufficiency: “As someone who has read and approved many FISA applications and dealt extensively with the FISA Court, I will anticipate and reject a claim that the disclosure was somehow insufficient because it appeared in a footnote; in my experience, the court reads the footnotes.” Now we can see that the footnote disclosing Steele’s possible bias takes up more than a full page in the applications, so there is literally no way the FISA Court could have missed it. The FBI gave the court enough information to evaluate Steele’s credibility.

I

Bonafides:

David Kris is a founder of Culper Partners LLC. He previously served as assistant attorney general for national security, associate deputy attorney general, trial attorney at the Department of Justice, general counsel at Intellectual Ventures, and deputy general counsel and chief ethics and compliance officer at Time Warner. He is the author or co-author of several works on national security, including the treatise National Security Investigations and Prosecutions, and has taught at Georgetown University and the University of Washington.

Read it and argue?

Mine is much better.

Steele was not the source of anything.

But well done. Respect.

The FISA court was not told that the Clinton campaign was behind Steele’s work. Nor did the FBI and Justice Department inform the court that Steele’s allegations had never been verified. To the contrary, each FISA application — the original one in October 2016, and the three renewals at 90-day intervals — is labeled “VERIFIED APPLICATION” (bold caps in original).

From mine. True or no?

Appeal to authority? Weak.

Adios gnomo.

Funny how you criticize others for doing exactly that. Isn’t it?

True. The problem and strength of yours for those who are so inclined to believe is the opening line. That it was the driving force. I disagree about it’s importance. I agree with that it’s usé is a problem.

That driving force versus a foot note is the crux of the argument.

True or no?

Can you post the footnote?

From the article by David Kris. Definitely true.

Your guy is feeding you red meat.

Sorry for asking again, I see now you already answered. Did the application footnote tell the court the Clinton campaign paid for the dossier?

None of that is true, it’s all opinion on politics.

Were the allegations VERIFIED as it states in the application?

Why hasn’t Trump declassified all of the FISA document? There is nothing stopping him from doing that.

This isn’t true. FISA court was told it was political oppo research.

Isn’t this sort of hand waving from the fact that the FISA release shows the Steele dossier wasn’t solely used for the warrant application?

Andrew McCarthy is Birther and a bit of a crank, I wouldn’t get too in love with him being a US Attorney.

It wouldn’t say that because it’s not true.

No he isn’t.

:rofl: of course it’s true.