Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Russia ACTIVELY WORKING TO DISCREDIT MUELLER [View all]L. Coyote
(51,134 posts)15. The bot storms are obvious. They were trying to drown out specific news reports.
My OP from:
THREAD regarding: FBI used the Steele dossier to get FISAs
3. (It's worth noting in that previous article that Steele apparently believed that there was a cabal in the FBI *preventing* the dossier from reaching the top, and it also suggests that he contacted @DavidCornDC about its contents. But I'll let reporters sort out those details.)
6. The DOJ lawyers who help prepare the FISA applications take this VERY seriously. Like, even if you had a common-knowledge assertion, like "Country X is a state-sponsor of terrorism," they make you include a cite (preferably two) supporting it. They want every fact airtight.
7. The Steele dossier is "raw intelligence." It contains reporting from third party sources -- meaning it is basically hearsay. So the FBI can't just staple the dossier to a cover sheet that says "GIVE ME A FISA" and be done with it.
8. To use any or all of the dossier, the FBI would have to provide independent verification and corroboration of each fact that would be included in the application. This could mean first-hand witness statements, actual recordings from electronic surveillance, etc.
9. In other words, if the FBI *did* use the contents of the dossier to obtain a FISA, then by definition those contents are true, corroborated, and independently verifiable. Remember that the application is presented to an Article III judge -- a judicial check -- before granted.
10. This does not seem like the road Trump supporters want to be going down...and yet they are. It's so bizarre. And to underscore: To claim that this was a huge conspiracy is ALSO directly implicating members of the judiciary (who could be Republican appointees) without basis.
P.S. In tweet #2 *he* refers to Steele -- I was cutting down this sentence to fit and omitted him as the original referent
THREAD regarding: FBI used the Steele dossier to get FISAs
Link to tweet
3. (It's worth noting in that previous article that Steele apparently believed that there was a cabal in the FBI *preventing* the dossier from reaching the top, and it also suggests that he contacted @DavidCornDC about its contents. But I'll let reporters sort out those details.)
Link to tweet
6. The DOJ lawyers who help prepare the FISA applications take this VERY seriously. Like, even if you had a common-knowledge assertion, like "Country X is a state-sponsor of terrorism," they make you include a cite (preferably two) supporting it. They want every fact airtight.
7. The Steele dossier is "raw intelligence." It contains reporting from third party sources -- meaning it is basically hearsay. So the FBI can't just staple the dossier to a cover sheet that says "GIVE ME A FISA" and be done with it.
8. To use any or all of the dossier, the FBI would have to provide independent verification and corroboration of each fact that would be included in the application. This could mean first-hand witness statements, actual recordings from electronic surveillance, etc.
9. In other words, if the FBI *did* use the contents of the dossier to obtain a FISA, then by definition those contents are true, corroborated, and independently verifiable. Remember that the application is presented to an Article III judge -- a judicial check -- before granted.
10. This does not seem like the road Trump supporters want to be going down...and yet they are. It's so bizarre. And to underscore: To claim that this was a huge conspiracy is ALSO directly implicating members of the judiciary (who could be Republican appointees) without basis.
P.S. In tweet #2 *he* refers to Steele -- I was cutting down this sentence to fit and omitted him as the original referent
Link to tweet
Here's my screen capture of the bots attacking McCabe and suppressing the story that he confirms Comey's statements.


Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
52 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
republicans are led by limbaugh and putin may have been using talk radio for a decade
certainot
Dec 2017
#45
The bot storms are obvious. They were trying to drown out specific news reports.
L. Coyote
Dec 2017
#15
I don't view targeted PSYOP programs by foreign entities as "free speech". n/t
LuckyCharms
Dec 2017
#33
Then say that instead your Hitleresque idea of purging democracy of my right to speak.
L. Coyote
Dec 2017
#38
Even though I'm an active Twitter user..I would support shutting it down until controlled procedures
iluvtennis
Dec 2017
#29
I think a lot of what I thought was RepubliCON troll activity was really Putin troll activity
Farmer-Rick
Dec 2017
#47