Current Events > What is this FISA memo and why are Democrats suddenly losing their shit over it

(+) Yeah! (+)

Suddenly so the talk on Twitter is about how it endangers national security to release wiretapping results. Why was any candidate wiretapped in the first place?
---

Coffeebeanz posted...

Why was any candidate wiretapped in the first place?

They weren't.
---

No one is losing their shit.
---

If they're losing their shit, it probably means they've been told that they won't get their way over something.
---

There's about three things it can be narrowed down to:

1. DNC and Clinton retained Fusion GPS for opposition research. Fusion GPS funded the Steele dossier. DoJ and FBI used Steele dossier to justify spying on Trump campaign.

2. The Strzok texts show that the FBI's McCabe was, at the very least, aware of the "insurance policy" plan against Trump.

3. Comey and McCabe mishandled the Clinton e-mail investigation.

The first one seems to be the focus, but all three points could be included. It's pretty telling that both McCabe and the DNC's CEO stepped down within hours of the vote to release the memo.

Vertania posted...

There's about three things it can be narrowed down to

Don't forget it was the Republican party who originally commissioned the dossier.
---

4. McCabe personally assassinated Seth Rich.
---

Vertania posted...

DNC's CEO stepped down

You guys keep bringing this up but I fail to see how this is at all connected
---

Doom_Art posted...

Vertania posted...

DNC's CEO stepped down

You guys keep bringing this up but I fail to see how this is at all connected

Because they don't realize that she only became the CEO May of last year.
---

Also, fun bit of info, the FBI, DoJ, CIA, and NSA all got ahold of copies of the memo and will be correcting it prior to release.

So like lol, good one Nunes.
---

Coffeebeanz posted...

Suddenly so the talk on Twitter is about how it endangers national security to release wiretapping results. Why was any candidate wiretapped in the first place?

mostly that the memo was compiled by one person and is not necessarilly a full data set. which could mean the data is shaped to be deliberately misleading and push the public--who doesn't have access to the classified underlying information--to false conclusions

but also that it may disclose the identity of security assets who would then be compromised and have to be retired for their safety

it's generally a very bad idea to disclose classified information prior to its declassification date.
---

Coffeebeanz posted...

Suddenly so the talk on Twitter is about how it endangers national security to release wiretapping results. Why was any candidate wiretapped in the first place?

The FBI knowingly used the bullshit fake news dossier to get court approval to wiretap Trump team members, which is illegal. Any names of undercover agents could easily be redacted, so the Democrat's disapproval is more likely because they willingly went along with a conspiracy in a desperate attempt to get at Trump.
---

Vertania posted...

The first one seems to be the focus, but all three points could be included. It's pretty telling that both McCabe and the DNC's CEO stepped down within hours of the vote to release the memo.

McCabe was already on track to retire in March (or May?), so leaving a little early isn't that much of a smoking gun. He was never going to stay in the position long to begin with, and there's less incentive to stay when Trump is breathing down Session's neck to fire him.
---

The Admiral posted...

Any names of undercover agents could easily be redacted

i work with the intelligence community to do my job and this is an extremely naive view of declassifying info

redacting a name doesn't protect much. revealing their findings puts a spotlight on wherever they were working, and means that if there's still an active intel operation there, it's now useless at best. at worst, the operatives in question are easily identified from information extrapolated from the document, and are at risk. their information goes into foreign databases and they cannot be used again, if they are even able to escape.

within a SECRET level document, any information that is marked SECRET would cause severe damage to the interests of the US government if released prior to the declassification data.

my job involves reviewing data specs on foreign threat missiles. to me, the information is just information, but if it were made public it would be blatantly obvious to their government who was leaking that information. those with access to it would be questioned; if the source was not found it would at least be identified and thus compromised.
---

Nunes, a known trumpanzee made his aides make a bullshit memo with a bunch of misleading information.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-31/trump-says-100-percent-after-he-s-asked-to-release-gop-memo
---

Doom_Art posted...

Also, fun bit of info, the FBI, DoJ, CIA, and NSA all got ahold of copies of the memo and will be correcting it prior to release.

So like lol, good one Nunes.

deep state
---

It's a bunch of hogwash that Devin Nunes cooked up to give Trump a justification to purge the FBI and the investigation against him
---

The FBI Director has formally come out against the memo after reviewing it, citing inaccuracies.

Looooollll
---

008Zulu posted...

Vertania posted...

There's about three things it can be narrowed down to

Don't forget it was the Republican party who originally commissioned the dossier.

Literally false.
---

https://twitter.com/mattzap/status/958755042810630144

JUST IN: FBI issues first public statement on the memo release, saying in part we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memos accuracy.

---

Darkman124 posted...

The Admiral posted...

Any names of undercover agents could easily be redacted

i work with the intelligence community to do my job and this is an extremely naive view of declassifying info

redacting a name doesn't protect much. revealing their findings puts a spotlight on wherever they were working, and means that if there's still an active intel operation there, it's now useless at best. at worst, the operatives in question are easily identified from information extrapolated from the document, and are at risk. their information goes into foreign databases and they cannot be used again, if they are even able to escape.

within a SECRET level document, any information that is marked SECRET would cause severe damage to the interests of the US government if released prior to the declassification data.

my job involves reviewing data specs on foreign threat missiles. to me, the information is just information, but if it were made public it would be blatantly obvious to their government who was leaking that information. those with access to it would be questioned; if the source was not found it would at least be identified and thus compromised.

This. During the Cold War, some of the USSR's best information gathering assets against us were compromised partially based on what the information was. When you know that leaked information X only exists on a certain computer or that they happen to know all information going across a certain channel, then that basically burns the source.
---

Phantom_Nook posted...

https://twitter.com/mattzap/status/958755042810630144

JUST IN: FBI issues first public statement on the memo release, saying in part we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memos accuracy.

Ok yeah that sounds like someone caught red handed
---

Coffeebeanz posted...

Suddenly so the talk on Twitter is about how it endangers national security to release wiretapping results.

It does. Imagine the nationwide riots if people found out how many trillions of their tax money went to funding attacks on their freedom like Room 631a.
---

Spooking posted...

Coffeebeanz posted...

Ok yeah that sounds like someone caught red handed

FBI is trying to discredit the memo before its release. Shady.

It's almost like releasing classified information intended specifically to mislead is a bad idea.
---

UnholyMudcrab posted...

Spooking posted...

Coffeebeanz posted...

Ok yeah that sounds like someone caught red handed

FBI is trying to discredit the memo before its release. Shady.

It's almost like releasing classified information intended specifically to mislead is a bad idea.

Thanks for the clarification, Nancy Pelosi
---

It shows the FBI was doing shit they shouldn't have been doing because Obama\Clinton swamp.
---

UnholyMudcrab posted...

Spooking posted...

Coffeebeanz posted...

Ok yeah that sounds like someone caught red handed

FBI is trying to discredit the memo before its release. Shady.

It's almost like releasing classified information intended specifically to mislead is a bad idea.

Maybe they think the "C" is just there to alphabetize the memo.
---

s0nicfan posted...

UnholyMudcrab posted...

Spooking posted...

Coffeebeanz posted...

Ok yeah that sounds like someone caught red handed

FBI is trying to discredit the memo before its release. Shady.

It's almost like releasing classified information intended specifically to mislead is a bad idea.

Maybe they think the "C" is just there to alphabetize the memo.

The old Hillary Clinton "how dumb do you think we are" defense
---

The country is so divided I dont think this will have any impact no matter what.

The right will blow it out of proportion. Sean Hannity is already claiming this makes Watergate look like someone stealing a snickers from a grocery store by comparison.

The left will just cry that its all lies and anything that is negative in the memo isnt true.
---

UnholyMudcrab posted...

Spooking posted...

Coffeebeanz posted...

Ok yeah that sounds like someone caught red handed

FBI is trying to discredit the memo before its release. Shady.

It's almost like releasing classified information intended specifically to mislead is a bad idea.

We aren't talking about the Trump dossier that the FBI is alleged to have used to secure FISA warrants to wiretap Trump's campaign, giving Hillary Clinton insider info on Trump's campaign.

We're talking about the memo that is alleged to have proof of this.
---

I see the new strategy on news sites is to heavily emphasize that the memo was "republican authored"
---

It was.

By a member of Trumps transition.

In addition to the fact that the author isn't exactly trustworthy to begin with

And the fact that anyone who's read the memo has said it's sketchy af

You can see why folks are skeptical of it lol
---

Doom_Art posted...

It was.

By a member of Trumps transition.

In addition to the fact that the author isn't exactly trustworthy to begin with

And the fact that anyone who's read the memo has said it's sketchy af

Thanks for the pro tip, Pelosi
---

You can see why folks are skeptical of it lol

Anyone should be skeptical of something like this.

It's a damn shame Democrats weren't afforded the same level of scrutiny the previous eight years.

We wouldn't have had election-ruining email scandals if they had simply been investigated by an unbiased media prior to the election and all the damage control could've been delivered.
---

Coffeebeanz posted...

Suddenly so the talk on Twitter is about how it endangers national security to release wiretapping results. Why was any candidate wiretapped in the first place?

It's not a FISA memo. It's a Nunes memo.
---

Coffeebeanz posted...

Thanks for the pro tip, Pelosi

...wat?

Coffeebeanz posted...

Anyone should be skeptical of something like this.

I'm glad we agree
---

Also Trumps campaign was wiretapped because members of his campaign were meeting with people on a fucking watchlist regularly lol

"Hey this political campaign keeps talking to foreign nationals we're keeping tabs on. What's up with that"
---

Darkman124 posted...

The Admiral posted...

Any names of undercover agents could easily be redacted

i work with the intelligence community to do my job and this is an extremely naive view of declassifying info

redacting a name doesn't protect much. revealing their findings puts a spotlight on wherever they were working, and means that if there's still an active intel operation there, it's now useless at best. at worst, the operatives in question are easily identified from information extrapolated from the document, and are at risk. their information goes into foreign databases and they cannot be used again, if they are even able to escape.

within a SECRET level document, any information that is marked SECRET would cause severe damage to the interests of the US government if released prior to the declassification data.

my job involves reviewing data specs on foreign threat missiles. to me, the information is just information, but if it were made public it would be blatantly obvious to their government who was leaking that information. those with access to it would be questioned; if the source was not found it would at least be identified and thus compromised.

Basically because you deal with classified information personally that has compelling reason to be classified, you assume all classified info has compelling reason to be classified. Good way to analyze a situation that you have no idea about in any way and have no real credibility to analyze while posing as an expert because most people here will just listen to you because you articulate yourself well.
---

Pretty funny the FBI and DOJ don't want the American people knowing their treasonous and bias behavior.
---

Howl posted...

you assume all classified info has compelling reason to be classified.

It does. You are speaking confidently with zero knowledge of a subject that is my job. I retrain annually in order to maintain my capability to properly handle classified information.

Classified info is not classified because someone decided to mark it that way to cover his ass. It's done according to program guidelines that were written by someone very far separated from the individuals actually doing the work, whose job was simply to identify what has potential to cause damage to the US government if released prior to the declassification date.

When I create a classified document--as I do on a daily basis--I do it with a binder next to me that identifies all the subjects and numbers that are individually classified and require the whole thing be marked as a classified document. Then I submit that document to a PM who reviews it, checks all my markings a second time, and confirms it is accurately marked before disseminating it.

If this document is marked classified, it contains classified information. That information is not classified to cover the FBI's ass for recent activities. It's classified because someone who was involved in creating the program generated a document specification that identified specific names, locations, numbers, and other terminology as classified.

In generating his memo, Nunes had to refer to that document, and portion-mark each paragraph that contained such information as classified. Some such portions may be inadvertently both documenting supposed misdeeds and including specified classified information; it may be impossible to document the alleged actions without including that information.

But it's not classified because the FBI doesn't want people to know that Agent Bob Jones fucked Melania in the process of learning that Donald was getting pegged during the making of the peepee tape.

It's classified because the FBI doesn't want people to know Agent Bob Jones' name, operating location, etc. Classified information is classified because its release harms active programs.
---

Howl posted...

Basically because you deal with classified information personally that has compelling reason to be classified, you assume all classified info has compelling reason to be classified.

Well yes:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States#Levels_of_classification_used_by_the_U.S._government
The United States government classifies information according to the degree which the unauthorized disclosure would damage national security.
---

Darkman124 posted...

Howl posted...

you assume all classified info has compelling reason to be classified.

[lots of great info]

Dark, since you know all this, you must also know that if the classified memo is considered a piece of derivative work, that it may be very easily redacted. It may be as simple as the use of "wifi" in the same memo as a program name which resulted in the classification level. Removal of program name in this instance would completely declassify the memo without fear of leaking state secrets. Not every classified document is so deeply classified that it can't be scrubbed. This is even more likely if it's a memo someone is making in relation to a classified effort.

But more importantly, it's interesting that nobody is even considering that there might be something valid about the memo. Yes, Nunes isn't an entirely neutral source, but 2 weeks ago Dems were basically taunting Trump to release it, telling him if it was that damning that he had the power to declassify it. He called their bluff, and now everyone is in damage control mode. Everyone is telling Trump what he claimed never happened, but they're also telling him that any evidence he may have that it did isn't allowed to be shared. It's an impossible situation where he's not allowed to be believed and also not allowed to make his case.

Also, I'd remind people that Democrat Senator Feinstein unilaterally leaked a full transcript without congressional approval... and openly admit to it in the name of "transparency"... and nobody seemed to take issue with that at all. In fact, they called her a hero for it:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/01/dianne-feinstein-release-fusion-gps-steele-russia-dossier-testimony.html

So I think we should also drop the double standard when it comes to this stuff. Dems have been leaking like a broken faucet for a year now, and suddenly Trump wanting to legally declassify a document that defends his case is an issue of national security? Cut the shit.
---

Doom_Art posted...

Also Trumps campaign was wiretapped because members of his campaign were meeting with people on a fucking watchlist regularly lol

"Hey this political campaign keeps talking to foreign nationals we're keeping tabs on. What's up with that"

So did Clinton. No FISA warrants.
---

s0nicfan posted...

Dark, since you know all this, you must also know that if the classified memo is considered a piece of derivative work, that it may be very easily redacted. It may be as simple as the use of "wifi" in the same memo as a program name which resulted in the classification level. Removal of program name in this instance would completely declassify the memo without fear of leaking state secrets. Not every classified document is so deeply classified that it can't be scrubbed. This is even more likely if it's a memo someone is making in relation to a classified effort.

Derivative work is not 'very easily' scrubbed. Removing program names frequently is insufficient to declassify the document, although yes, sometimes that is possible. A document that is unclassified/FOUO except for a single entry can be scrubbed by clearing that entry, yes.

But...it's pretty rare for people to generate a document with so few classified markings. Generally when you're dealing with a single cause for higher classification, you scrub that marking (for example, producing plots without axes if the curve is unclassified, but the magnitude values are) and release it as unclassified.

As to Feinstein's leak, I don't think we're comparing apples to oranges, since what she released was not subject to a classification marking system designed to protect the interests of programs and assets of the US government. Trump's reputation, like it or not, is not an asset of the US government.

That said, if this can be released without harming government assets, and can be made to be informative and not misleading, I'd support the release.

I just question whether it can or not, and when the split on whether it can is broken down to party lines, I tend to lean towards 'no'. Clearly it is not being evaluated objectively.
---

s0nicfan posted...

Darkman124 posted...

Howl posted...

you assume all classified info has compelling reason to be classified.

[lots of great info]

Dark, since you know all this, you must also know that if the classified memo is considered a piece of derivative work, that it may be very easily redacted. It may be as simple as the use of "wifi" in the same memo as a program name which resulted in the classification level. Removal of program name in this instance would completely declassify the memo without fear of leaking state secrets. Not every classified document is so deeply classified that it can't be scrubbed. This is even more likely if it's a memo someone is making in relation to a classified effort.

But more importantly, it's interesting that nobody is even considering that there might be something valid about the memo. Yes, Nunes isn't an entirely neutral source, but 2 weeks ago Dems were basically taunting Trump to release it, telling him if it was that damning that he had the power to declassify it. He called their bluff, and now everyone is in damage control mode. Everyone is telling Trump what he claimed never happened, but they're also telling him that any evidence he may have that it did isn't allowed to be shared. It's an impossible situation where he's not allowed to be believed and also not allowed to make his case.

Also, I'd remind people that Democrat Senator Feinstein unilaterally leaked a full transcript without congressional approval... and openly admit to it in the name of "transparency"... and nobody seemed to take issue with that at all. In fact, they called her a hero for it:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/01/dianne-feinstein-release-fusion-gps-steele-russia-dossier-testimony.html

So I think we should also drop the double standard when it comes to this stuff. Dems have been leaking like a broken faucet for a year now, and suddenly Trump wanting to legally declassify a document that defends his case is an issue of national security? Cut the shit.

This.
---

Darkman124 posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Dark, since you know all this, you must also know that if the classified memo is considered a piece of derivative work, that it may be very easily redacted. It may be as simple as the use of "wifi" in the same memo as a program name which resulted in the classification level. Removal of program name in this instance would completely declassify the memo without fear of leaking state secrets. Not every classified document is so deeply classified that it can't be scrubbed. This is even more likely if it's a memo someone is making in relation to a classified effort.

Derivative work is not 'very easily' scrubbed. Removing program names frequently is insufficient to declassify the document, although yes, sometimes that is possible. A document that is unclassified/FOUO except for a single entry can be scrubbed by clearing that entry, yes.

But...it's pretty rare for people to generate a document with so few classified markings. Generally when you're dealing with a single cause for higher classification, you scrub that marking (for example, producing plots without axes if the curve is unclassified, but the magnitude values are) and release it as unclassified.

As to Feinstein's leak, I don't think we're comparing apples to oranges, since what she released was not subject to a classification marking system designed to protect the interests of programs and assets of the US government. Trump's reputation, like it or not, is not an asset of the US government.

That said, if this can be released without harming government assets, and can be made to be informative and not misleading, I'd support the release.

I just question whether it can or not, and when the split on whether it can is broken down to party lines, I tend to lean towards 'no'. Clearly it is not being evaluated objectively.

Given that it's a memo of documents and not the documents themselves, I'd argue it's more likely than not that it's probably easily scrubbed. From what it seems, the whole point of the memo was to summarize the results in a way that is more easily disseminated compared to the actual, likely extremely classified reports. Given how many senators have seen it, that seems the most likely intent.

As for the objectivity, I'd argue it doesn't really matter whether the reaction is split on party lines, especially if we assume the contents are true. True or false, the claim is that dems willingly abused the system to spy on their opposition, a literal watergate situation. Of COURSE they're going to be against it. What matters in terms of believability is the intent of the memo in the first place, and whether Nunes was explicitly trying to create a false narrative or whether he knows something he thinks is important for others to know. I think it's a much higher bar to claim he was trying to sabotage democracy over that he simply believes what he wrote.

As for the Feinstein leaks, that's a fair point about content. That being said, CNN reported late last year that Sessons has 27 open investigations into classified leaks. So again: Dems seem perfectly cool with leaking like a faucet until the moment it might reveal that they did something bad. Then suddenly it's "how DARE he even suggest it".
http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/14/media/leak-investigations-jeff-sessions/index.html
---

s0nicfan posted...

As for the objectivity, I'd argue it doesn't really matter whether the reaction is split on party lines, especially if we assume the contents are true.

what about the fact that the Republican FBI director is saying he is against releasing the memo because it is misleading ?
---

TC seemed to imply that they weren't aware of what this memo was and that they didn't have fixed opinion on it. But now they're attacking everyone who implies this isn't Watergate x1000. Hmmm.
---

008Zulu posted...

No one is losing their shit.

Adam Schiff is on twitter losing his Schiff. Calling it a "constitutional crisis" and that it will lead to another "Saturday Night massacre". The memo must be worse than what the leaks are suggesting.