Posted by Tina
Devin Nunes, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has written a letter delivered to AG Jeff Sessions asserting the FBI may have criminally used unverified information when seeking a FISA warrant on Carter Page, Trumps former campaign aid. Catherine Herridge of Fox News reports:
House Intelligence Committee (HPSCI) Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., wrote in his letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions that “in this instance, it’s clear that basic operating guidance was violated.”
Nunes cited the Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DIOG), which was created by the bureau and approved by the Justice Department, to say he believed the FBI violated procedures requiring verified and documented evidence in applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
An Oct. 2011 version of the operations guide states that the “accuracy of information contained within FISA applications is of utmost importance… Only documented and verified information may be used to support FBI applications to the court.”
The guidance also states that information in a FISA application must be “thoroughly vetted and confirmed.” …
… “Former and current DOJ and FBI leadership have confirmed to the committee that unverified information from the Steele dossier comprised an essential part of the FISA applications related to Carter Page,” Nunes wrote Thursday.
Nunes listed five criminal statutes that were possibly violated, including conspiracy, obstruction of justice, contempt of court. It also cites statutes that make it a crime to willfully deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution and another preventing unauthorized electronic surveillance.
Nunes asked Sessions to inform him whether the “protocols requiring verified information” had been changed since the 2011 version.
In June 2017 then-FBI Director Jim Comey testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee, saying he still considered the dossier “unverified” and “salacious.” That testimony occurred three months after the October 2016 surveillance warrant was granted.
Slowly we turn….
Nunes is making a feeble attempt to keep his chairmanship … but his Republican colleagues are right pissed at him. Those Intelligence Committee guys like to think of themselves as serious professional sorts, and well above the partisan idiocy embodied in the Nunes memo.
Oh, yes. Quite pissed.
Source please?
The left media does go on. They keep trying to float the idea that Nunes is targeting the entire FBI and that Republicans are anxious about how it will effect them in the election. It’s all spin.
Could be you’re the victim of old news….
See, it doesn’t take a Russian to influence you. All you need is media that has a long history of covering for and favoring the Democrats.
(It worked as long as they had a monopoly)
But our nation is done with the “state media” your party cultivated…that party is over.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/01/senate-concerns-with-house-intelligence-paul-ryan-432146
Tina, it will not work. It is not working. You cannot just call news you don’t like … fake.
Thanks for the link, Libby.
The spin words are obvious: “rare and dramatic gesture” and “casts an even darker pall” and “hobbled by partisan feuding” and “controversial chairman”…yee gods!
And when has a bipartisan committe ever not been “hobbled by partisan bickering?” The writer would like you to believe this is unusual and sinister.
Also we know now the information was actually from “…a New York Times report” that claimed, “two senators, Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.), had concluded that House Intelligence Committee Republicans leaked a batch of Warner’s text messages to Fox News.”
Truth or spin? Factual or fake news?
Your Politico article also states that “Burr told reporters at the Capitol that the Times story’s suggestion that he concluded House Republicans were behind the leak was incorrect, saying only that he and Warner met with Ryan to update him on the Senate’s panel’s investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.”
Most people don’t bother to read more than the headline and a paragraph…they get the spin but not the facts and that’s intentional. Journalist reporting the news are trained in who what where when and why…they’re not supposed to spin. But most “news” has become editorial or tabloid in todays contentious (hate filled) times.
Your claim that his colleagues are “right pissed at him” is an opinion based on not much of anything from the article.
January 2018, NPR, “News Brief: Republicans Rally Behind Nunes Memo, Trump Heads To Davos”
And lastly, Democrats are notorious for leaking even very sensitive information critical in a time of war to the NYT and WaPO.
The Nunes memo contains information that suggest nefarious means were used by one party to spy on the other party during an election and denigrate the candidate and then after the election to spy on and undermine Trump. The criminal acts involved are numerous. The people have a right to know and a right to investigation and due process.
We cannot let this go unaddressed by the judiciary.
Devin Nunes will be on Mark Levin’s show, “Life, Liberty and Levin” Sunday night on Fox News. It should be interesting and informative.
It certainly was!
Nunes made his case and gave hints where he is going next. In addition, his straightforward answers made Adam Schitt and his Demwit talking points look even more foolish than he already is!
Ooooh! Looky what else the FBI is up to:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/01/politics/ivanka-trump-fbi-investigation/index.html
This is why sensible office holders divest. This is also why nepotism is generally a bad idea. And, for the coup de grace, Maggie over at the NYT is reporting that source of the impetus to push the kiddies out of the nest is Trump, not Kelly.
Oh, fun, fun, fun.
I’m not particularly fond of nepotism either Libby, but it isn’t like this is a first.
Bobby under JFK, Hillary as the “two for one” extra president who tried to do healthcare (and performed badly)
If something is found then appropriate actions should and will take place.
In June 2017 then-FBI Director Jim Comey testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee, saying he still considered the dossier “unverified” and “salacious.”
That is not correct. Comey said parts of the dossier were unverified and salacious. The Schiff memo claims that the parts related to Page were verified, and those are the only parts that would be relevant to the FISA application.
The government blacked out what exactly was verified. I hope they release soon how much of the dossier was verified. I don’t think you’ll be happy with the results.
A June 2017 article at CNS News includes a direct quote:
Ugh. Read the original source instead of far-right cherry-picking. “This material” referred to the pee tape parts of the dossier, not the whole enchilada.
Ugh, yourself!
“A June 2017 article at CNS News includes a direct quote…Comey did not say “parts” of the dossier were salacious and unverified, he said the dossier was salacious and unverified. The incoming president was “alerted” to the entire dossier.
“The Schiff memo claims that the parts related to Page were verified, and those are the only parts that would be relevant to the FISA application.”
That’s what it says, but is it accurate or is it simply a case of attempted deception.
And is it relevant? If the dossier was the sole justification used to obtain the FISA warrants that led to Pages indictment it is quite likely that the warrants were obtained deceitfully and therefore the evidence obtained is “fruit of the poisonous tree.” if that’s the case Page’s rights were stomped on and federal crimes were committed by people who should know better.
Related:
Daily Wire:
Something rotten has gone on. Every American should be behind getting to the truth.
Evidence. It’s important in these matters. So far you have innuendo and accusations but no hard evidence. The
(And you criticize what you call far-right cherry-picking”)
Two things that should be cleared up:
1. The so-called “far right” is about where the center once was in this nation…Bobby Kennedy and his brother JFK could find a home with the folks at these sites. In fact some of them were, like Reagan, once Democrats!
2. It is your party that has shifted dramatically and continues the shift toward socialism and away from the principals upon which our nation was founded. The party you think of as “extreme” is more in tune with American principles and the value of individual freedom and rights. Your party is fast becoming a extreme socialist party that champions full government control, group rights and divisions.
We call the parties in America left and right (because of where the representatives sit) but the truth is whether communism or any other brand of socialism, those isms are the only thing that exists on a scale left to right. The arguments about what is better belong in European circles, not in America, where we adopted an entirely different form of government.
I challenge you to look deeply into the principles that underpin our federal government, which was supposed to remain limited. I challenge you to look deeply into the responsibilities, as well as the rights, of individual citizens.
Socialism, and the attending arguments, don’t belong here. They divide our nation, as intended.
“A June 2017 article at CNS News includes a direct quote…Comey did not say “parts” of the dossier were salacious and unverified, he said the dossier was salacious and unverified. The incoming president was “alerted” to the entire dossier.
As I just told you, the quote from the CNS article cherry-picked that quote and left out important context. If you had read the original source, as I asked you to do, you would see that “this material” did not refer to the whole dossier, only part of it.
If the dossier was the sole justification used to obtain the FISA warrants
We already know it wasn’t! The Schiff memo published pictures of the FISA application itself (which the Nunes memo did not do) which clearly showed that the dossier was NOT the sole justification for the warrant.
As for your socialism digression, it is completely irrelevant to what we are discussing. All it shows is your monomaniacal obsession with tribalism.
Excellent synopsis of a speech given by Joseph E. diGenova titled,”The Politicization of the FBI.” diGenova is a former US attorney with broad credentials, “served as United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, Independent Counsel of the United States, Special Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives, Chief Counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, and Counsel to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (the Church Committee),” that make him uniquely qualified to comment on the behavior of certain FBI and DOJ officials and the investigations they’ve conducted from Benghazi to collusion.
Please read it in full. Our nation’s survival depends on trust in the notion that no citizen is above the law.
an excerpt that relates to this article: