< http://sachhiem.net/printemail.php?id=2489 >

Bản phản bác của đảng Dân Chủ Hạ viện có những điểm chính sau đây

Subject: *** XEM_XÉT: Bản ghi nhớ phản bác Trump và đồng lõa Nunes_!
From: Mike Wilson
Date: Sun, February 25, 2018 9:07 am

Trump và đồng bọn muốn đánh trống lảng, gây nghi ngờ cho vụ điều tra liên hệ Nga-Trump bằng cách tấn công vào đơn xin điều tra tiếp lần thứ 4 tên Carter Page, người bị tình nghi làm điệp viên cho Nga từ nhiều năm trước khi vào làm cho nhóm tranh cử TT của Trump.

Bản phản bác của đảng Dân Chủ Hạ viện có những điểm chính sau đây :

1. Tất cả 4 đơn xin điều tra theo luật FISA, từ đầu đến cuối, đều không có gì sai phạm về luật pháp, đạo lý hay tính chuyên nghiệp của Công An Liên Bang FBI và Bộ Tư Pháp.

2. Cả hai cơ quan trên đều đệ trình đầy đủ chi tiết dữ liệu để cho 4 vị quan tòa xem xét và chấp thuận cả 4 lần !

3. Bốn vị quan tòa này đều do các Tổng Thống Cộng Hòa bổ nhiệm- như vậy họ không có lí do gì để thiên vị đảng Dân Chủ (!)

4. Việc kế tục điều tra Carter Page do FBI xin phép tòa FISA hồi cuối tháng 7, 2017 đã không khởi đầu bởi thông tin tình báo của Christopher Steele, (cựu điệp viên MI6 của Anh, chuyên ngành phản gián chống Nga), vì thông tin này chỉ đến tay FBI vào tháng 9, sau khi FBI đã vào cuộc điều tra Carter Page cùng các nghi phạm khác trong nhóm của Trump !

5. Để xin tiếp tục theo dõi Carter Page, FBI đã chứng minh với tòa rằng,
những thông tin tình báo cụ thể của Chris Steele về các vụ gặp có hẹn của Page với các tay chân của Putin năm 2016, cùng các hoạt động đáng ngờ khác của Page,
đều được xác nhận bởi nhiều nguồn tin tình báo khác nhau !

5a. Việc bôi bẩn thông tin tình báo của Christ Steele là "fake dossier", cũng như việc bôi bản điều tra của Bob Mueller là "witch hunt", đều là những mẹo vặt gian xảo để lừa bịp công luận Mỹ !!!

6. FBI có cho tòa FISA biết rằng, có người Mỹ (đảng Dân Chủ) tìm những thông tin này để hạ uy tín của Trump, mà không cần khai đích danh người đó là ai - mặc dù các thông tin của Chris Steele ban đầu do phe Cộng Hòa trả tiền, và việc bới móc thông tin (opposition research) là bình thường, không có gì là phi pháp, giữa các đối thủ tranh cử !!!

7. Tòa FISA chỉ cần biết âm mưu (agenda) hạ uy tín chính trị của Trump đàng sau các thông tin đệ trình trước tòa, nhưng trên nguyên tắc, tòa vẫn chấp nhận những thông tin loại này, tỉ dụ như từ những nhân chứng phản bội, muốn khai để giảm tội hay từ những nhân chứng làm "ăng ten", "điềm chỉ", "chỉ điểm" cho FBI. Động lực khai báo không quan trọng đối với tòa, mà quan trọng là các thông tin khai báo có giá trị kiểm chứng !

Nhìn tổng thể, và xem xét mọi chi tiết, thì bản ghi nhớ của Devin Nunes
đã đồng lõa với Donald J. Trump để đánh lạc huớng công luận, tìm cách hạ uy tín của FBI và Bộ Tư Pháp để dễ bễ "nhấn chìm xuồng" toàn bộ điều tra của Bob Mueller vào các hoạt động tình nghi phạm pháp của Trump và đồng bọn trước và sau kỳ tranh cứ TT 2016, và cả những năm trước đó !

Người tự trọng không thể để cho Trump và đồng bọn
VÀO NGỒI CHỒM HỔM TRONG ĐẦU MÌNH
VỚI NHỮNG GIAN XẢO MẤT DẠY, BẤT LƯƠNG, VÔ ĐẠO, GIẢ ĐẠO !!!

Mike Wilson
công dân Mỹ
________________________
2 Weeks After Trump Blocked It, Democrats’ Rebuttal of G.O.P. Memo Is Released
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/24/us/politics/democratic-memo-released-fbi-surveillance-carter-page.html
Nicholas Fandos

House Democrats made public a heavily redacted memo that was drafted to counter Republican claims of surveillanc...


WASHINGTON — The House Intelligence Committee released a redacted Democratic memorandum on Saturday countering Republican claims that top F.B.I. and Justice Department officials had abused their powers in spying on a former Trump campaign aide.

The document was intended by Democrats to offer a point-by-point refutation of what it called the “transparent” attempt by President Trump’s allies on the committee to undermine the congressional and special counsel investigations into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election and possible coordination with the Trump campaign.

But the dueling accounts reflected an extraordinary struggle on the committee to try to shape public perceptions of the credibility of the nation’s top law enforcement agencies. For weeks, instead of focusing its full energy on investigating an attack on the American democratic system, the committee has been pulled into a furious effort by Mr. Trump and his allies to sow doubts about the integrity of the special counsel inquiry and the agencies conducting it.

The Democratic memo amounted to a forceful rebuttal to the president’s portrayal of the Russia inquiry as a “witch hunt” being perpetrated by politically biased leaders of the F.B.I. and the Justice Department.

The Democratic memo underwent days of review by top law enforcement officials after the president blocked its outright release two weeks ago, with the White House counsel warning that the document “contains numerous properly classified and especially sensitive passages.” On Saturday afternoon, after weeks of haggling over redactions, the department returned the document to the committee so it could make it public.

The release was expected to be the final volley, at least for now, in a bitter partisan fight over surveillance that has driven deep fissures through the once-bipartisan Intelligence Committee.

Representative Adam B. Schiff, the top Democrat on the committee, said on Saturday that the Democratic memo should “put to rest” Republican assertions of wrongdoing against the former Trump aide, Carter Page, in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act process.

“Our extensive review of the initial FISA application and three subsequent renewals failed to uncover any evidence of illegal, unethical or unprofessional behavior by law enforcement and instead revealed that both the F.B.I. and D.O.J. made extensive showings to justify all four requests,” he said in a statement.

Republicans, including Mr. Trump, were undeterred. The White House dismissed the Democratic document as an attempt “to undercut the president politically.”

“The Democrat memo response on government surveillance abuses is a total political and legal BUST,” Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter. “Just confirms all of the terrible things that were done. SO ILLEGAL!”

The president said on Saturday night that the memo confirmed the Republican version of events and reflected poorly on Democrats, suggesting that both were grounds for launching an investigation of his political opponents.

“That was nothing but a confirmation, and a lot of bad things happened on the other side — not on this side, but on the other side — and somebody should look at it, because what they did was really fraudulent,” Mr. Trump said in a telephone interview with the Fox News host Jeanine Pirro.

“By somebody,” the president added, “I mean you-know-who.” He appeared to be referring to Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, whom he has savaged in recent days for failing to open an investigation of unspecified “crimes” by Democrats.

The Intelligence Committee dispute centers on an application by the F.B.I. in October 2016 to secure a secret warrant to spy on Mr. Page, suspected by American law enforcement of being a Russian agent, as well as the subsequent renewals.

Republicans, in their own three-and-a-half-page memo, had claimed that top law enforcement officials abused their most sensitive powers in relying on politically motivated research provided by a former British spy, Christopher Steele.

The Republicans complained that the F.B.I. did not tell a secret intelligence court that Mr. Steele’s work had been financed by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign (and previously financed by a Republican source. nth-fl), suggesting that a judge needed to know that information to evaluate the credibility of the information.

But the Democratic document shows that the F.B.I. did tell the surveillance court that Mr. Steele’s research was commissioned by someone who wanted to discredit Mr. Trump’s campaign, and that the information provided by Mr. Steele, a trusted source in the past, was only part of the evidence supporting a wiretap.

According to the memo, officials laid out a “multi-pronged rationale” for spying on Mr. Page, including his past interactions with Russian spies, and informed the court of a counterintelligence investigation then underway into the Kremlin’s covert influence campaign.

Mr. Page, a former investment banker based in Moscow, had been on the F.B.I.’s radar for years, long before his work with Mr. Trump. The Democratic memo reveals that the F.B.I. interviewed Mr. Page as late as March 2016 about his contacts with Russian intelligence agents, the same month Mr. Trump added him to his foreign policy advisory team.

The information from Mr. Steele was about “specific activities in 2016” by Mr. Page, including suspected meetings with close associates of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia during a July trip to Moscow, the Democrats said.

The document says that the bureau did disclose to the court that it had made use of information that was gathered through politically motivated means and quotes from the application itself.

“The F.B.I. speculates that the identified U.S. person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit” Mr. Trump’s campaign, the F.B.I. wrote in the application.

The Democrats said that it would have been inappropriate and inconsistent with standard practice for officials to have disclosed to the court the names of American individuals and organizations that had paid Mr. Steele.

The F.B.I. frequently relies on sources who have agendas, whether it is a gang turncoat or a mafia informer. What is typically seen as important by courts is that the agenda is disclosed to a judge.

In the case of Mr. Page, the surveillance applications were reviewed by four different judges, all appointed by Republican presidents, the document says. Each approved of the request.

The memo also asserts that in applications to renew the wiretap, the F.B.I. provided the court with information from independent sources corroborating Mr. Steele’s findings. Much of the specific corroborating evidence was blacked out.

And, according to the Democrats, the wiretap produced “valuable intelligence” for the F.B.I. that was used to justify its renewal three times. The document once again offers specific examples, which were redacted by the Justice Department.

The warrant application itself remains under seal, and only a handful of lawmakers from either party have seen it. The New York Times has filed a motion asking the surveillance court to take the unusual step of unsealing it.

The Democratic document also rebuts claims by Republicans, including Mr. Trump, that the F.B.I. relied on Mr. Steele’s findings to open its counterintelligence inquiry in late July 2016. Information from Mr. Steele, the memo says, did not reach the F.B.I. counterintelligence team investigating Russian meddling until mid-September, well after the inquiry had been opened and after the F.B.I. had already begun looking at other campaign associates.

The document challenges several other prominent Republican claims. For instance, the Republican memo asserted that the F.B.I. had presented to the court a Yahoo News article from September 2016 as corroboration of Mr. Steele’s claims, despite the fact that it later emerged that Mr. Steele had been a source for it.

The Democrats said that the article, and another it did not identify, was merely used to inform the court that Mr. Page had publicly denied having the meetings in Moscow.

Republicans on the Intelligence Committee released a point-by-point response to the Democratic document, which they said only confirmed that the F.B.I. had relied on politically motivated material. In a separate document, they wrote that the Democrats had provided a “lengthy but wholly unpersuasive attempt to distract from the committee’s key findings” on surveillance abuse.

Mr. Page, in a statement, called the memo “a smear campaign” by Democrats that only made it more important that the underlying applications be released publicly.

Democrats have insisted that Mr. Trump’s deference to national security concerns in delaying the memo’s release was hypocritical and politically motivated. Just a week before blocking their memo’s release, the president had ignored similar objections from the Justice Department and the F.B.I. to declassify the contents of the rival Republican memo, which was based on the same underlying documents.

Adam Goldman, Charlie Savage and Julie Hirschfeld Davis contributed reporting.

Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and the Morning Briefing newsletter.

NGUYÊN VĂN BẢN GHI NHỚ PHẢN BÁC CỦA ĐẢNG DÂN CHỦ :

Democratic Rebuttal of G.O.P. Memo
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/24/us/politics/house-democrats-memo-rebuttal.html