Senate Criminal Referral of Steele Backs Congressional Memo

Started by Blindside121 pages

Senate Criminal Referral of Steele Backs Congressional Memo

The Senate Judiciary committee's criminal referral backs up the House Intel Memo.

Chuck Grassley/Graham Criminal Referal

Criminal Referral can be read Here

YouTube video

Note that this is the guy Nunes himself said knows the facts better than him. Gowdy is the only Republican on the House Intelligence Committee to have actually seen the warrant applications, so he's the guy who actually knows what hes talking about.

I bet you dont even care, or know why Nunes had Gowdy write the memo, instead of himself?

"BAIER: Did you read the actual FISA applications?

NUNES: No, I didn’t. This has been one of the bogus news stories that had been put out. So, the agreement we made with the Department of Justice was to create a reading room and allow one member and two investigators to go over and review the documents. I thought the best person on our committee will be the chairman of the Oversight Committee, Trey Gowdy, who has a long career as a federal prosecutor, to go and do this. And then they over a series of meetings would come back with their notes and brief the rest of the committee members -- "

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/02/full_replay_devin_nunes_explosive_interview_with_bret_baier.html

I don't care, no. I don't see why that's particularly relevant to the video of Gowdy saying that memo is horsecrap that accomplishes nothing.

Originally posted by Nephthys
YouTube video

Note that this is the guy Nunes himself said knows the facts better than him. Gowdy is the only Republican on the House Intelligence Committee to have actually seen the warrant applications, so he's the guy who actually knows what hes talking about.

Gowdy knew the memo was a clear distraction hitpiece full of misinformation by the time the final version was had, it's why he's doing his best to back away and is shame-quitting politics. What a sad political legacy he's leaving for himself, being one of the two "memo boys".

Turns out Obama was involved inthe FBI investigation what a sad political legacy to leave.

"But Obama!"

#obamadontcare

"But Trump"

I get it, you can't help yourself.

Um, you're the only person who's said "Trump" in here...

"I guarantee that there is no political influence in any investigation conducted by the Justice Department or the FBI, not just in this case but in any case. Period. Nobody gets treated differently when it comes to the Justice Dept because nobody is above the law.” -Obama 4/10/16

Originally posted by Robtard
Um, you're the only person who's said "Trump" in here...

and now you just did. see? you just lost at 4d chess.

Incontrovertible proof that Trump suffers from Parkinson's. He's not fit to lead the nation!

oh you can do politics with parkinsons, it's not like being a politician requires any physical autonomy in the first place https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/06/10/sen-johnny-isakson-discloses-he-has-parkinsons-disease/?utm_term=.1e576dcf7bda

however the gif does prove that trump invites the wrath of god, so that should disqualify him imho.

Lol Gowdy said he didn't think the memo would have any impact on Mueller. He did not say it was a distraction. He did not say there was nothing in it to be concerned about.

Trey Gowdy attacked a Democrat talking point on the FISA memo – here’s what he said

“You have argued that it was essential, that without it, they would never have received the authorization for the warrant from the FISA court,” she continued. “You said that there’s other information about Carter Page — you said they basically have three things. They have the Yahoo News article, the dossier, and other information about Carter Page.”

“Can they argue that that other information was substantial enough for the warrant?” she asked.

“I would find that interesting because they didn’t make that argument to the judge,” Gowdy responded. “If you have enough without the dossier, then why did you include the dossier? If you have enough without the dossier, why did you, in your court filing, lead with the dossier? Lawyers don’t start with their weakest argument.”

“And you certainly don’t start with an argument that you don’t need to make and should not have made,” he added. “So the fact that you used the dossier tells me that you felt that you needed it, or else you would not have included it in your court filing.”