Skip to content

#ReleaseTheMemo

Discuss.

37 thoughts on “#ReleaseTheMemo Leave a comment

  1. For those who might be unaware: The
    “classified memo allegedly detailing abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by senior Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigations officials in relation to the investigation of the Trump campaign and called for it to be declassified and available to the public immediately.” (Summary from Breitbart.com).

    There have been rumblings going back to Trump’s “wiretapping” allegation in March 2016 against the Obama administration. Trump’s claim was met with some merriment and chortling among members of the press, as his remarks provided further evidence of Trump’s buffoonish nature. CNN went as far to call these claims “baseless.” Fake news, anyone? http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/04/politics/trump-obama-wiretap-tweet/index.html

    Now, if members of the press had simply done their job and thought to themselves, “This is an interesting thing for a president to say that could implicate the administration of a rival party in a crime of gigantic proportions. Maybe we should do some investigation and find out the truth.” Nah, so much easier to sit back and spill some more anti-Trump vitriol. After all, the negative reporting worked so while during the campaign that they are all reporting to, my mistake, reporting on President Clinton, now. Might as well use the same tactic now.

    There is not only the suggestion of FISA-warrant spying, but also troubling questions about how the warrant was obtained, and putting the pieces together, it is not a stretch to imagine that the so-called dossier (French for “spun fantasy”) that Fusion GPS was involved in. Fusion GPS is a firm that occasionally does opposition research, which is when one party or another digs up dirt on a rival. This is usually done through trolling through public records to looks for things that are unusual or merit more attention. Sometimes opposition research has to do with getting on the street and talking to people–a little like reporting. Fusion GPS noticed that some of Trump’s friends were Russian bad actors, and thought that perhaps Trump might be a bad actor, too.

    Fusion engaged Christopher Steele, one-time British spy with connections in Russia, to dig a little more. Steele calls himself a Russia expert. And while he may have the bona fides, having lived in Moscow, knowing the language, etc., we have no way of testing his expertise. He put out his antenna and started asking around these activities of these oligarchs and others and heard some stories. There is a lot we don’t know. We don’t know who the contacts are. We don’t know if the contacts had other agendas. We don’t know if the contacts were connected to the Putin administration. We don’t know (for sure) if the contacts were paid. (The understanding is that they weren’t.) We don’t know if the contacts were lying. We don’t know if the contacts with the contacts occurred during periods of complete sobriety on the part of either party. We don’t know if the contacts were aware of Steele’s agenda, and telling him what they thought he wanted to hear. All we have, and Fusion GPS had, was Steele’s word as a Russian expert. And if the new standard, according to Michael Wolff, is that if it “rings true” then, by golly, it has to be true.

    Steele was so alarmed by his writing he told Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS that they have to go to the FBI. (Glenn Simpson’s testimony before Congress was also released yesterday, and interested readers can find it on the internet.) The dossier was taken to the FBI by Steele, and it eventually found itself in the hands of others in the Obama administration. (It is unclear if the dossier only made its way to the FBI, or if the client who solicited the information in the first place also had possession of the dossier. The client engaged Fusion GPS under the cover of a Seattle law firm. If the client also had the dossier, there is more than one entry point for the dossier to penetrate the Washington establishment.)

    And from the alarm the memo caused in the news yesterday, the meta-story seems to be that the unsubstantiated dossier was used to obtain the FISA warrant. If #Releasethememo, then we will find out for sure.

  2. What is the truth?

    THE MEMO IS “SHOCKING” REVELATION OF FISA, and, FBI/Dept of Justice Collusion/ABUSE to Undermine the Trump Admin.:

    Republican members of Congress, mostly conservative, are calling for the release of a brief memo written by the House Intelligence Committee about alleged FISA surveillance abuses. The committee had voted along party lines Thursday to allow House members to read the memo.
    “I viewed the classified report from House Intel relating to the FBI, FISA abuses, the infamous Russian dossier, and so-called ‘Russian collusion.’ What I saw is absolutely shocking,” Rep. Mark Meadows, R-North Carolina, tweeted.
    (From multiple press reports)

    OR,

    THE MEMO IS A GROSS DISTORTION BASED ON INCOMPLETE INFORMATION:

    But the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-California, characterized the memo as misleading and inaccurate. The committee, Schiff explained, had voted Thursday along party lines “to grant House Members access to a profoundly misleading set of talking points drafted by Republican staff attacking the FBI and its handling of the investigation.”
    “Rife with factual inaccuracies and referencing highly classified materials that most of Republican Intelligence Committee members were forced to acknowledge they had never read, this is meant only to give Republican House members a distorted view of the FBI,” Schiff’s statement said. “This may help carry White House water, but it is a deep disservice to our law enforcement professionals.”
    (From multiple press reports)

    Again, what is the truth?

    Probably elements of both of the above (though, routinely officials read and trust reports based on intel info without ever reading the intel reports – so that basis of objection presented by A. Schiff [which might seem credible on the surface — without thinking about it] seems somewhat discredited with just a little thought: Why is it necessary to read the intel reports behind that document when reading similar background on other documents is routinely not done? That’s a significant detail not addressed, though Schiff asserts, in effect, a smear job. But that’s the sort of tactic used to create hubris/ad-hominem and similar attacks that seem merited but are not. Classified makes this harder to assess as details are necessarily withheld).

    After perusing a few news articles & discussions one detail I’ve noticed absent is the author(s) of the inflammatory memo (or “talking points” [per Adam Schiff] or “classified report” [per other articles]) – that little detail might provide some insight into how credible/objective that memo/report/talking-points [or whatever it is] really is. Is that classified document really credible and objective, or, just another biased smear from one side in the US’ two-party system?

    We really don’t know how credible that document [whatever it is] is.

    But what we observe is the near-rabid appeal to disclose from one side … because that particular document is appealing to that side’s interests. Perhaps disclosure would include providing insight into the author’s credibility/objectivity of the info presented, maybe not. We don’t know that that thing says or how credible its assertions/conclusions might be.

    Not knowing what that thing states, or how credible it is, or isn’t, I for one am not going to get excited and jump on the bandwagon for disclosure — coupled with mindless acceptance — simply because that document might present views that further my views/interests/outlook…

    Another thing to observe is that document is a product of politics…and every key official involved is a politician … and you know how they are…

  3. Many of you have no doubt noticed, and many others likely have not consciously thought about it but sense something’s missing, how superficial so much of the press is … and how its superficial:

    Superficial like this story from America’s Greatest News Source, The Onion:

    Headline: “An Idea So Crazy It Just Might Work”

    Story: “ROCHESTER, NY—According to sources, an idea thought of Monday has been reported to be so crazy and ill-conceived that it may actually wind up working. “Without getting too specific,” said Myron Halversham, 53, the idea’s creator, “let’s just say that this is the kind of off-the-wall idea that ordinarily you’d immediately reject as ridiculous and insane, and obviously doomed to fail. But upon second thought, it occurred to me that despite—or perhaps even because of—its utter absurdity, this idea may well be successful.” Despite Halversham’s tremendous optimism, area nay-sayers are scoffing at the hare-brained scheme.”

    The Onion presents that as satirical farce. On such things they could go on & on & sometimes do…without ever even hinting at what the controversial “idea” is. Again, they do it for frivolous entertainment.

    Much of the media has been wallowing in that low — talking endlessly ABOUT something [the topics vary] without ever really, or at all, defining what that something is. Wallowing in unfounded hubris with the audacity of faith that such actually constitutes journalism… Take away the opinion and often what’s left is, if not nothing, pretty close to it.

    Now the republicans have pounced on a classified document and the press is reporting their emotion … but so far, we’ve no substance on which we, mere citizens, can reach any reliable conclusions. More of the same, only the side benefitting is changed. No doubt it’s inflammatory, but that doesn’t mean it’s credible… Frankly, I hope there’s something bona fide to it … but until that something is disclosed and available for analysis, we wait…

    Hopefully, we can keep from getting caught up in the snowballing emotional hullabaloo having more in common with a stirred up mob out to get the monster than process rigor and stay somewhat objective and rational … and then — after considering the merits of all the info over the mere sentiment of the conclusions — vote, write/phone our elected hired help accordingly…

  4. The biggest “tell” is that several members of the previous administration, when asked in Congressional hearings if the dossier could have been used as part of a FISA court warrant, all replied using some version of “I have no knowledge of that.” Were it not, the better answer for each and every one, would have been a variation on “No, it was not.” The implied answer is that the dossier was a/the document used to persuade the court to approve the surveillance warrant else the better answer, the one to deflect all doubt would be the latter.

    And after all, the latest standard is “if it feels like the truth, then it must be true” according to the Wolff tabloid.

  5. It’s likely that this is a first step in a strategem to provide cover for actions necessary to de-classify the memo.

    Classification is the last refuge of the modern-day American political scoundrel.

    Many government misdeeds and crimes are never known, or at least not till 30 years later, due to secrecy laws.

    The Obama administration sank to the depths of politicization of law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Never in American history had the Intelligence Community been used so blatantly for political purposes–see John Brennan, Michael Morrel, for a start. Law enforcement is more commonly used for political purposes, but the post-9/11-counter-terror FBI is more of an intelligence agency than a cop shop. The FBI’s actions are subject to the same secrecy laws as intelligence agencies.

    When what you do, by law, is not subject to public review, then political operators are empowered to operate.

    And John Brennan, et al, were political operators par excellence.

    The memo likely describes the political actions taken by the IC and the FBI. These are likely electronic and physical surveillance of Trump and/or his staff. It likely also provides details on the who/how/where of the fake justifications for the intelligence operations against Trump. The memo could also detail the collusion between the Obama minions and the media to destroy Trump.

    If this memo shows that the US government’s intelligence and law enforcement agencies were used by the Obama administration for political purposes, then this is Watergate on steroids.

    Watergate saw the president’s political operation touch the administration of the government. It appears that the Obama/Hillary political operation was totally integrated into the administration of the government–including using intelligence and law enforcement agencies, personnel, and tactics to destroy the man who is now the president.

    It is pretty clear, from current evidence, that is exactly what happened. This memo might finally provide clearer details.

  6. Gary,

    ”Congressional hearings if the dossier could have been used as part of a FISA court warrant, all replied using some version of “I have no knowledge of that.” ”

    If they had said it wasn’t, they would have lied. The number of people that know about any specific FISA warrants are incredibly low (the prosecutor and 2 agents, maybe 3, and maybe the AG(tough he wouldn’t know the specific. The reality is that they don’t know and couldn’t know.

    FISA warrant cannot be issued to surveille a US citizen or even national communication (US to US). It can only be issued against a foreigner and applied to international communication. Flynn calling the Russian ambassy in Washington was an international communication since any ambassy is foreign territory.

    No FISA warrant could have been issued against anyone in Trump campaign except maybe Sebastian Gorka.

    The Dossier, which most of the information as been corroborated to date, could not have been used to issue a FISA warrant, at least by itself. The FBI learned of the Russian connection because Papadoupoulos spoke to an Australian diplomat about the stolen email. The Australian didn’t about the email hack until the email were released during the Dems convention.

    Other meeting between Trump associates and Russians were reported by European spy agency. These meetings were also included in the dossier by Christopher Steele which was given to the FBI at a later in the summer.

    After the dossier was published January 2017, several high ranking Russian like the of the cyber division of the FSB, is now considered dead after he was taken during a FSB meeting and never seen again.

  7. Kent Clizbe,

    “If this memo shows that the US government’s intelligence and law enforcement agencies were used by the Obama administration for political purposes, then this is Watergate on steroids.”

    And IF I had a working spaceship I could send Drumpf (is real family name) and is gang to mars.

    How exactly did Obama politicize law enforcement agencies? By asking Clinton to concede on election night.

    By that, you mean like Putin who put in jail the people that can threaten his hold on Russia.

    Why is Putin the only person on earth that Trump did not insult? and Russia the only country he did not antagonize.

    I hope Trump will exit NAFTA since it will give Canada the chance to cut the flow of gas south of our border. How much do you think the price of gas would surge with 20% less import availability coming in the USA.

  8. The democrats have been trying to spin this as “Nothing to see here”. As of yesterday, only one has taken the opportunity to view it. Makes one wonder how they know there’s “Nothing to see”. But why spin it when you can instead call for its release and show us? Must be something really uncomfortable for them. Looking forward to its release.

    Don’t know why but the Canada Goose comes to mind.

    Strange bird. Presumably hails from Canada but has taken up residence in the U.S. Perhaps the U.S. is better than Canada and has more to offer.

    It will prod and pester for attention and food. Once fed it will attach itself to you for life. Feed it at your own risk.

    http://oi62.tinypic.com/2s1rrxd.jpg

    On the plus side, they fertilize everything around them. Apparently, they have more than enough to spare.

  9. M. Allard:

    You might want to check in with SpaceX to reserve a seat on their next trip. Because the Obama/Hillary clique politicized both the IC and the FBI–as never before has happened in modern American history.

    Luckily for you, since you asked, and since you seem to be unaware of the real story, I chronicled the issue for several years.

    A little background reading for you, in your gassy northern redoubt:

    “Sadly, the FBI’s political whitewash of Hillary Clinton’s apparent crimes illustrates the bureau’s descent into the same politicization of the CIA under John Brennan and Obama.

    From its first days, the Obama administration has poisoned the well of American interests in favor of its own political interests. Since Obama unveiled John Brennan as his preferred intelligence expert during the 2008 presidential campaign, non-partisan American interests have been sacrificed for the interests of Politically Correct Progressivism.

    Brennan, the first director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) from 2004-2005, was rewarded with the counterterrorism czar throne, Homeland Security Advisor, after being rejected as the Director of the CIA in early 2009. After his appointment, Brennan came to effectively rule the intelligence community from his office in the White House.

    The 2009 underwear bomber case provided clear evidence of Brennan’s absolute power over the wider intelligence community, as well as how he politicized it. A Nigerian terrorist, already in Brennan’s databases, boarded a plane bound for Chicago. His underwear was full of bomb material. In U.S. airspace the terrorist attempted to light the bomb. The plot was only foiled because the Nigerian had worn the shorts for two weeks.

    Even though Brennan had sold the “connect-the-dots” analytical software to the center after he left government employment in 2005, Obama appointed Brennan-the-czar to lead the investigation into the reasons that NCTC failed to connect the dots in the underwear case. In short, after Brennan conducted an investigation into Brennan’s agency’s use of Brennan’s company’s counterterrorism software, Brennan announced that he would take care of the issues. Pretty sweet work, if you can get it!

    As Obama and Brennan’s vision for iron-fisted rule of the intelligence community was further developed, the czar cooperated with a political witch-hunt, led by the attorney general, to punish CIA officers for their roles in harsh interrogation carried out during the Bush administration. Even though Brennan was the Deputy Director of the CIA during the Bush administration’s use of harsh interrogation, he sat next to Obama as the administration pushed for prosecutions of CIA officers.

    Later, when Congress conducted an investigation into the internal machinations at the CIA, the CIA dipped into the congressional investigators’ computers.

    Brennan, quietly, and behind the scenes, appeared to be the evil genius behind Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s unprecedented meddling, including the destruction of America’s stable partner in counterterrorism in North Africa, Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi.

    Comey’s brazen and public refusal to do his Constitutional duty and Brennan’s quiet politicization of the intelligence community are unprecedented in modern history.

    The result has been an eight-year purge of the intelligence community — with any political dissenters either banished or silenced. A reign of quiet terror now blankets the IC. Dissent means losing jobs, retirements, and perks. Go-along-to-get-along is now standard operating practice.”

    Read Full Article Here FBI and CIA Politicized by Comey, Brennan

    You’re welcome!

  10. Dav,

    You should thank me because after talking 5 minutes with pretty much anyone see your kind of American (the gop kind, Trump kind, Fox kind) as the crass of the world.

    The only thing we envy you is your warmer climate, but we don’t envy your lack of liberty that your kind impose on other.

    Almost all French Canadian doctors who went to work in the USA are now back working for a much better healthcare system.

  11. Mr Clitzbe,

    Sorry for the delay in my answer.

    “Since Obama unveiled John Brennan as his preferred intelligence expert during the 2008 presidential campaign, non-partisan American interests have been sacrificed for the interests of Politically Correct Progressivism.”

    By non-partisan it means those who supported torture. And by “Politically Correct Progressivism”, it means respect of the Geneva Convention, and respect of American law.

    This is not politicization of an institution, this is governing and different president can have different philosophy and different objective. If the CIA was made into hunting exclusively GOP politician you might have a case

    Politicization of an institution is the President asking a pledge of loyalty to the FBI director or asking for whom the #2 at the FBI voted for.

    Obama appointed known Republican supporter at the head of the FBI and CIA.

    “rewarded with the counterterrorism czar throne, Homeland Security Advisor”

    Trump nominated Flynn National Security Advisor after he was part of his campaign. This is the definition of politicization. And there is always someone named at this post and at least Brennan was not fired for incompetence like Flynn. Brennan did not violate the Logan Act like Flynn did.

    Concerning the CIA:

    You can read these fast fact or they provide the link to the actual report at the beginning. Notice that Bush was briefed on the program for the first time in 2006. The Program started in 2002.

    Scotus ruled against Bush 2002 executive order.

    https://www.cnn.com/2015/01/29/us/cia-torture-report-fast-facts/index.html

    No CIA interrogators were ever prosecuted for torturing people link to the 2002 program.

    You really believe that Obama ordered the CIA to spy on democrat in congress. That it wasn’t just a few bad apple trying to save their but.

    As for Clinton, what is her crime? Using her private server for non classified email? Can you provide the article of law that made it a crime?

    That she received 108 emails or chain emails that were classified at a later date for the most part and none that she instigated.

    Again why should she be sent to jail?

  12. Dav,

    1- While you might think the memo is classified because it is damaging, it is probably classified because there is nothing to it. Being classified give the chance to republican the chance to complain without having to provide any proofs.

    2- The memo in itself is no proof and has been written by Nunes (who will not be back after the next election, and will probably end up in jail for obstruction of justice). It is his opinion. If there was anything to hit the republican could start an inquiry or commission and subpoena the people involved.

    3- FISA warrants are given to intercept communications that at least one callers is not on US ground. It can be ingoing or outgoing the USA. Although an American citizen might be caught in the a call. The warrant cannot be issued about an American.

    4- What Carlson is saying that is that Obama was so powerful that he was able to coerce judges into disobeying the law.

    5- Chief Justice John Roberts named by GW Bush a Republican and hardliner conservative is the one person who appoints the Judges to the FISA court.

    Of the 10 judges presiding in the FISA court, only 3 were originally nominated to federal court by Democrat President 2 Obama, 1 Clinton, at least 2 Reagan and both Bush.

    And you would want people to believe that Obama was able to influence John Roberts and all those other Republican.

  13. it is probably classified because there is nothing to it
    It’s a secret because it contains nothing of importance?
    Like your posts?

    What Carlson is saying …
    What Carlson is saying is that the memo should be released so we can evaluate it.
    Says so quite clearly.
    However the Democrats don’t want it released. Why?

    The warrant cannot be issued about an American.
    Those who have read the memo are saying otherwise; that the FISA warrants were abused.
    When did you read it?

    Strange that you don’t have a good command of English yet can claim to interpret nuances of U. S. law written in that language.
    What a Honker!

    5 …
    Why is it that the Loosey Goosey Left can’t stick to a topic?
    We see this nightly in Tucker’s interviews where they dodge direct questions with utter nonsense.

    The Silly Geese wander all over the place in their quest to fertilize the Earth.
    Maybe they just want us to clean our shoes more often.

  14. Dav,

    Answer this:

    Why did the house voted yes to release the Nunes memo to its member, but voted no to give access to the the actual document that the memo mentions.

    Only one answer, the memo is BS and doesn’t hold to scrutiny of fact.

    Also when you can’t counter argue it means you lost the argument. As a Trump voter you must be accustomed to losing.

  15. Only one answer, the memo is BS and doesn’t hold to scrutiny of fact.
    Why are you so afraid of its release?
    Why do you parrot Dem spin instead of waiting (demanding!) to see what it contains?
    Answer: you want to argue from ignorance. In your eyses any counter means you don’t lose.

    Silly Goose. Relying on Mother Goose Tales instead of getting the facts.
    Typical of you.
    Not fond of Twitter but do agree with this: #releasethememo

  16. Dav,

    I’m not afraid of its release, but why not release the original documents. Why not have a public House hearing.

    The memo is Nunes opinion. It is not proof. The proof is the document that the memo is claim to be based on. If their was really something underlying the memo the republican who control all branches of government would be able to do something else than posturing.

  17. The memo is Nunes opinion
    No. It’s a summary.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/455757/release-the-memo-lets-see-in-it

    Thus, the problem: How do we convey important information without imperiling the sources and methods through which it was obtained?

    Fortunately, this is far from a unique problem: It comes up all the time in court cases that involve intelligence matters, and Congress has prescribed a process for dealing with it in the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA). There are various remedies: Sometimes the classified information can be declassified and disclosed without causing danger; sometimes the classified information can be redacted without either jeopardizing sources or compromising our ability to grasp the significance of what is disclosed. When neither of those solutions is practical, the preferred disclosure method is to prepare a declassified summary that answers the relevant questions without risking exposure of critical intelligence secrets and sources. (See CIPA section 4 — Title 18, U.S. Code, Appendix.)

  18. Dav,

    “The person who wrote the memo in the first place — Nunes, the controversial chair of the House Intelligence Committee — won’t give the memo to the FBI or the Justice Department or allow Democrats to describe it in public. ”

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/1/24/16919910/releasethememo-explained-trump-russia

    Who is preventing the republican from releasing it? Nothing. They control both chambers and the presidency, it would take them 2 minutes to release it if they wanted to, and the democrat couldn’t do a thing to stop it.

    So why don’t they release it? Because it’s the most they can do with it? Since there are no proof to back it up. That’s why they don’t want to release it. It is just posturing to excite the extremists.

  19. Who is preventing them? They control everything. Even the Supreme Court after having stolen Scalia’s vacant seat.

    Nothing preventing them to release it publicly. They could also release to a special prosecutor that could lead the inquiry.

    Also, you know that the Strokl text with his girlfriend were even more criticizing of Clinton. Or do you only have the selective version of Fox News.

  20. Who is preventing them?

    Asked and answered. Here’s one reason:

    According to a committee source, no final decision was made on making it public because the three want to give lawmakers “who haven’t read it yet a chance to do so and weigh in.”
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bob-goodlatte-trey-gowdy-discuss-releasing-fisa-memo-with-devin-nunes/article/2646688

    Strange that you now cry for its release (good for your) but have parrotted talking points arguing against the release. Your owners will not be pleased. You must think you’re the Golden Goose.

  21. Where did I say not to release it? I did explain why they won’t. They already have the extremist believe the Fox News talking point. For them it’s more efficient not to release, than getting caught hyping something that’s not real.

  22. Where did I say not to release it?

    You didn’t directly but parroted the talking points against the release.
    http://wmbriggs.com/post/23789/#comment-175159
    http://wmbriggs.com/post/23789/#comment-175168
    IOW: Schumer’s (paraphrasing) “This is nonsense. Nothing to see here. Move along”.
    The Democrats of (which few if any have read the memo) are truing to get out in front and head off any impact of a future release. IOW: why bother releasing it? We have better things to do.

    Remember?

    In the latter link:
    Nunes … [won’t} allow Democrats to describe it in public. ”
    Wouldn’t the Democrats have to read it before commenting on it???
    Which Democrats have read it?
    Why won’t the rest read it?

    If you didn’t mean “don’t release it” you were far less than clear.

  23. 2 représentatives read the memo and underlying document Shift D and Trey Doughty. Nunes didn’t even read the document the memo are based on.

    Why won’t the republican read those document before inflaming the situation?

    Answer: They don’t care about releasing it, they believe that the simple appearance of malfeasance is enoug to excite the extremist. I guess they are right about that.

  24. 2 représentatives read the memo and underlying document Shift D and Trey Doughty. Nunes didn’t even read the document the memo are based on. Why won’t the republican[s] read those document before inflaming the situation?

    Only 2? Last I heard some 200** Republicans have read it while only 1 Democrat has.

    You are now claiming that the Nunes’s summary is not only incomplete but utter fabrication.
    Really? How do you know? Have you read it?

    Are you sure you’re not a Loon instead of a Goose?
    My bad for feeding you. I’m going to stop now.

    **200 according to NPR (“Some 200 House Republicans have made a trip to a secure facility in the Capitol to read the document.”) and the Washington Post (“around 200 House Republicans have privately read the Nunes memo”).

  25. No one needs to read to know that Nunes is a bulls$$$$er.

    You realize that republicans don’t even have confidence to give to Chris Wray or Session information they already have.

  26. “It’s likely that this is a first step in a strategem to provide cover for actions necessary to de-classify the memo.”

    As I said 9 days ago…they were taking measured steps to set the stage to release the memo.

    It will come out tomorrow, God willing and the creek don’t rise, and the cards will begin to settle in the hands of the poker players.

    The worm will turn.

    And the Obama/Hillary/Brennan clique will begin to taste the sour fruit of their crimes.

    McCabe’s quick “retirement” is just the beginning.

    These pricks didn’t know who they were messing with.

    Grave miscalculations, the arrogance of power.

    May they all get what they deserve.

  27. After the release of the memo, my idea that not releasing it, was a better strategy than releasing it is confirmed.

    The GOP only discredited itself.