Posted by Tina
House chairmen Trey Gowdy and Bob Goodlatte have called for the Justice Department to appoint a special council to investigate how the FBI handled applications to wiretap Trump associates in 2016 and 2017:
The request comes on the heels of an announcement by the attorney general last week that the Justice Department’s inspector general had opened an investigation into allegations of abuse of the wiretap process under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA.
“We think this is a very serious matter regarding conduct by the FBI and by some in the Department of Justice that that calls for the appointment of a special counsel who will have subpoena and prosecutorial powers. We also believe that this matter extends beyond the Department of Justice and therefore calls for someone who can have greater jurisdictional authority than the inspector general,” Goodlatte, R-Va., told reporters Tuesday afternoon.
Gowdy, R-S.C., said he has been “resistant” for calls for special counsel appointments in the past, but he counted “at least 24 witnesses” that would be outside the reach of the Justice Department’s inspector general.
“If the IG cannot do it himself or herself, and the Department of Justice should not do it because of conflicts of interest whether real or perceived, then that leaves no alternative except special counsel,” Gowdy explained.
Both Gowdy and Goodlatte noted the inspector general cannot bring in former Justice Department and FBI officials, nor can he bring in officials from other departments or people from outside the federal government who could be involved.
“It’s particularly important that the DOJ itself and FBI itself not lead this investigation because it involves decisions made at the highest levels of the FBI and high levels of the Department of Justice that need to be examined from the outside,” Goodlatte said. “The inspector general can and should look into the matter form the standpoint of what he can do, but his abilities in this area are limited.”
I’m certain that many of you will agree it’s about time this happened!
If it happens, I do hope those appointed will be objective. Members of the Meuller special council destroyed public confidence when they were found to have conflicts of interest and extreme personal and political biases. See here, here, and here.
Were I a FISA judge, I would be mad as hell that the FBI lied to me in order to get a surveillance warrant based on unverified info.
Gonna be interesting . . . . . .
I would be too and I imagine there are plenty of judges and others in the legal and law enforcement business that are mad as hell.
Look at all the agencies that have been besmirched due to criminal and unethical activities…I’ve never seen anything like it!
J, the FBI didn’t lie to the court. The FBI said in the warrant that they “speculated” that the dossier came from a biased source trying to damage Trump’s credibility. Unless it can be proven that the FBI knew that the dossier was funded by the Clinton campaign–which is unlikely, as even Steele himself didn’t know who was funding his work–it stands to reason that they told the court all they knew.
There would have been no point in lying about the source of the funding while still saying they thought it was funded by a biased anti-Trump source. Why would they do it? And why would any court be fooled by it? The theory articulated in the Nunes memo simply doesn’t make any sense. Either the four Republican-appointed judges who approved the warrant are idiots, or it simply didn’t matter who funded the dossier because the information about Page was verified.
“The FBI said in the warrant that they “speculated” that the dossier came from a biased source trying to damage Trump’s credibility. Unless it can be proven that the FBI knew that the dossier was funded by the Clinton campaign…”
1. Such speculation would require the revealing the source. According to those that have applied for FISA warrants such information is always expected in the application.
2. FBI officials involved DID KNOW according to evidence discovered in the House probe/s:
See also The Federalist, “Here Are The 7 Biggest Bombshells In The House Intel Memo On FISA Abuses.” I’ve excerpted the seven bulletpoints. read the article for details:
Every American should be deeply concerned about these abuses of power, as they should have been in the revealed IRS abuses, as they should have when Hillary was described as a criminal by Comey and then let off the hook, as they should have by the gross errors in judgement before, during, and after Benghazi.
In my opinion, and I know hearing it gets old, more Americans would be deeply concerned except for the old medias failure to neutrally report about these events. Instead, CNN ABC, NBC, CBS, the NYT and WaPo, among others, chose long ago to take the side of the Democrat Party and act both as promoter and defender of the leadership. It’s an exclusive club of elitists. There are Rino Republicans that have managed to join this club on the periphery (McCain), but they would not receive the same level of protection for the simple reason that denigrating Republicans would take precedence.
The day is coming when honorable people in the Democrat electorate are going to have to question and make a choice about their affiliation with this corrupt band of unscrupulous (often criminal) elitists.
1. Such speculation would require the revealing the source. According to those that have applied for FISA warrants such information is always expected in the application.
They did reveal the source: Steele. They did not reveal the funding, and indicated they did not know who was funding it. The court didn’t care, because the funding didn’t matter.
2. FBI officials involved DID KNOW according to evidence discovered in the House probe/s:
You relied on the Nunes memo to support that, but the Nunes memo provided no evidence for this, only assertions. Remember, the Nunes memo contained no excerpts from the application itself; the Schiff memo did.
The Federalist article you cited also does not provide any evidence to back up its claim that the FBI was aware of the funding at the time.
You also cited two parts of the Nunes memo that have since been proven false:
“The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of — and paid by — the DNC and the Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separtely authorized payment to Steele for the same information.” [Emphasis added.]
The FBI had considered paying Steele, but reconsidered, and they never paid him.
The FISA application “ignored or concealed his [Steele’s] anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations,” reads the memo. [Emphasis added.]
No, it didn’t. It flat-out said the FBI speculated that he was working to discredit the Trump campaign. The court did not find this reason to throw out the application, nor should they have; evidence against suspects is very often given to authorities by people who are biased against those suspects. That does not invalidate the information.
This is all a deflection from the fairly obvious facts that Page was shady as hell and that there was plenty of reason to be monitoring him.
There are two types of lies: Deliberate and those of Omission.
The FBI did both, as they knew who funded the dingy dossier.
The “information about Page was verified” by the dingy dossier and no other source. And the idea that the Yahoo article verified the dingy dossier becomes circular reasoning.
Circular reasoning doesn’t cut it when presenting evidence or lack thereof.
Great information j, thanks
A former agent called in to a talk show one day and explained how an unethical agent can use language to force a “lie.” He used an example (car?)…old brain defies me now…any thoughts on the tactic of forcing a lie?
The Intel Community Lie About Russian Meddling.
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/03/the-intel-community-lie-about-russian-meddling-by-publius-tacitus.html
Incredible, in depth, information RHT447.
The entire reason for the Russian probe is based on uncorroborated specious accusations made by a select few…terrific.
Arghhhhh…
Conservative Treehouse:
Democrats, including Schiff, did not go to the special room to read the “unmasking requests.” Nunes cannot talk about the classified information he saw. He also could not reveal what he saw in the memo he wrote. Schiff could make any claims he wanted since he didn’t bother to look.
We need a special council to investigate the investigators..
“…They did not reveal the funding, and indicated they did not know who was funding it. The court didn’t care…”
Pure hogwash! FISA court warrants (on Americans) are only granted when there is evidence of a crime. The court expects full disclosure regarding that evidence.
Members of the Senate investigating this came to the same conclusion, FOX:
Andrew McCarthy of National Review, “The Schiff Memo Harms Democrats More Than It Helps Them”
Read the article Chris and open your mind to the possibility.
The people deserve the truth. The Schiff memo offered nothing of substance. It was written to distract and shift the conversation away from the Nunes memo and revelations slowly coming forth.
Good News!, “Why No Investigation Into FBI, Justice Dept. Collusion With Democrats To Spy On Trump? Turns Out, There Is One”:
This tells me Sessions has ensured that a serious thorough investigation is taking place. This investigation lacks the political theater of the Meuller probe.
Patience.