Haha, was just about to add link. Don't expect to actually click it let alone read it.

I don't know how this contradicts anything I posted, particularly the refutations of your conclusions.

Those aren't his conclusions. Stop skimming if you are even doing that... Those are conclusions in the report... He's right you are straight up omitting key points.. not only in the sources but in other people's post...

This is me acknowledging there were errors with the FISAs, and providing some context which shows it probably wasn't some conspiracy to get Trump.

Facts and then the odd need to add your own bit of conjecture. Hahaha

Yea, election fraud in a large scale is impossible to... Why do these exist?

https://gnews.org/589245/

Man... This IS sad

The FBI team purposefully omitted facts that would have weakened their case for FISA's and then they purposely failed to due diligence on some of their most central and crucial sources.

An objective investigation would have taken all facts into account and would have done due diligence on Steele instead of gleefully accepting his 'facts' which served as the basis for further intrusion. Even after there were concerns they basically just looked the other way to fit their biased investigation. You don't care that this investigation was based on lies? Lies that the FBI team eventually knew about but failed to pull back their FISA's? To you that's ethical?

For example:

The quote there says that after the original FISA, the FBI received information that casted doubt on the reliability of some of Steele's information.

How can an investigation that began months earlier because of different information become illegitimate because some of Steele's information was ruled unreliable? You're not making a coherent argument. You haven't rebutted any of my points.

The right thing to do here is to advise the NSD and pull the FISA's instead of hiding or pretending nothings wrong to keep going ahead based on BS evidence. That's troublesome. Not sure how any objective person can know some of these details and deduce that this investigation was objective.

My point is pretty simple to follow. There are threads of bias throughout this investigation and just a few points I'm highlighting show that. These people aren't joe shmoes who didn't know any better, they're high-level bureaucrats.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Nov 26 2020 11:32am

The right thing would've been to notify all interested parties about the new information relating to the Page FISA, which was just one portion of the Russia investigation. Maybe the FISA would've been pulled, maybe not. The investigation didn't hinge on the Page FISA.

This post was edited by IceMage on Nov 26 2020 11:38am

You haven't shown that to be the case, and I've already stated the fact that the FISA review process found similar errors in other FISAs unrelated to Crossfire Hurricane.