Schiff Accuses Nunes Of Altering Memo Before Submission To Trump For Possible Release

440px-Adam_Schiff_115th_official_photo The plot thickened last night over the anticipated release of a four-page memo from the House Intelligence Committee.  California Rep. Adam Schiff (D) publicly accused House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) of giving President Trump a “secretly altered” version of the memo to review for possible release.  The Schiff allegation raises an interesting issue under the House that could theoretically warrant judicial review (though the outcome is far from certain).  The Committee staff is arguing that the changes were minor edits, including grammatical changes.

As discussed in my column in the Hill newspaper, subsection 11(g) of Rule X allows the members to vote to release classified information when the majority determines “that the public interest would be served by such disclosure.” With such a vote, the president is notified of the action and is given five days to determine if the material should be released to the public. If a president objects, the committee can vote to refer the matter to the entire House of Representatives for a closed session and vote on the release of the information.

However, the rule anticipates that the presidential review and later possible House vote will be the same document approved by the Committee. Otherwise, the rule would make little sense since material could be added or removed unilaterally.

That is what Schiff is alleging.  He said in a tweet (when did we shift to government-by-tweet?):

“Discovered late tonight that Chairman Nunes made material changes to the memo he sent to White House – changes not approved by the Committee. White House therefore reviewing a document the Committee has not approved for release.”

The question is how such a dispute is handled.  Schiff notably did not seek an injunction from a court. These matters are generally left to the Congress to handle and a court would likely decline to intervene. However, what is being alleged is not the merits of the decision to proceed under Rule X but the failure to follow the rules.

There is also the question of whether removing material is the same as adding material. I do not know what Schiff is referencing but if information was deleted, Nunes could claim that the “lesser is contained in the greater” of the original vote.

As for grammatical changes, it could be argued that there changes were de minimus.  However, the time to correct language and grammar was before the vote, not after the vote.  That does not mean that this is a major breach, but it should have been avoided through better staff work.

Since this rule has never been used, this is a rather novel addition to an already novel situation.

 

What do you think?

247 thoughts on “Schiff Accuses Nunes Of Altering Memo Before Submission To Trump For Possible Release”

  1. The current democrat distraction display is diversion from its “nest”.

    The democrat “nest” is Obama.
    ____________________________________________________________________________________

    Distraction Display

    Distraction displays, also known as diversionary displays, or paratrepsis, re anti-predator behaviors used to attract the attention of an enemy away from something, typically the nest or young, that is being protected by a parent. Distraction displays are sometimes classified more generically under “nest protection behaviors” along with aggressive displays such as mobbing. These displays have been studied most extensively in bird species, but also have been documented in populations of stickleback fish and in some mammal species.

    1. You’ve completely missed the important part. This section of paragraph 4 brings everything written in paragraph 5 into question,

      “….reviewed the memo and “could not point to any factual inaccuracies” in it, according to an unnamed source who spoke to Fox.”

      1. As McCarthy points out, the democrats and the FBI can produce anything they want to fill in any gaps. Btw, your snarky reference to “Fox” completely ignores the pristine reputation Catherine Herridge has a straight shooter and an accurate reporter. Broad brushes are inherently inaccurate.

  2. “But DOJ also doesn’t want this underlying report to be released, because it’s going to make it easier for defendants to see what the—what DOJ uses when it’s targeting people with FISA warrants, and they don’t want that precedent.” -Marcy Wheeler

    https://www.democracynow.org/2018/2/1/marcy_wheeler_on_showdown_over_nunes

    “There’s one other, I would say illegitimate, reason not to release this memo. And that is because FISA, the law that allows the government to target people in the United States as suspected spies rather than as suspected criminals, it’s been in place for 40 years. When it was passed, Congress envisioned that sometimes defendants who were collected on, using FISA warrants, would get to review the underlying dossier, would get to review whether the application was fair. But no defendant in history has ever gotten that review.

    “And Devin Nunes didn’t care about that until Carter Page was targeted. But it is something that I think Congress should revisit—should have revisited, by the way, in the 702 reauthorization that was just passed a couple weeks ago. But DOJ also doesn’t want this underlying report to be released, because it’s going to make it easier for defendants to see what the—what DOJ uses when it’s targeting people with FISA warrants, and they don’t want that precedent. But the precedent would be, I think, useful.””

  3. Just release the damn original memo. You have to wonder how many congressmen does it take to change a light bulb.

    1. So we’ll then get a cherry-picked, biased version that attempts to deliberately mislead the public by its omissions and that allows Nunes to continue to be the president’s consigliere, and protect himself in the process? You mean THAT memo?

      We’re not all stupid.

      1. Well, stupid enough to assume the Nunes version is as you stated and the Schiff version is not. They could both be utter horseshit or closer to the truth than we now know. So much for your objective analysis.

      2. No, but many are–especially those who do not properly read the comment.

        Didn’t I write release the ORIGINAL memo?

        1. Yes, you did and that’s the one I commented on . Do you support releasing the Democratic memo at the same time? If you don’t, why not?

            1. Of course not. The Rs don’t want it released at the same time. If they were honest, they would have released both at the same time. But it’s not about honesty at all. It’s to give Trump cover to fire Rosenstein for signing an extension of a FISA warrant that originated long before his tenure on a guy who the Trump team says was a peripheral player.

              1. How do you know what it’s about? Unless you’re privy to the intelligence data used to create the memo, you have no idea. I’m confident once the memo(s) get released, that will only be the beginning of the battle for the hearts and minds of the public.

      3. maria:

        “So we’ll then get a cherry-picked, biased version that attempts to deliberately mislead the public by its omissions and that allows Nunes to continue to be the president’s consigliere, and protect himself in the process? You mean THAT memo?

        We’re not all stupid.”
        ************************
        No, but I think a lot of you are to comment on the veracity of a memo you have neither read nor even seen. That seems the very dictionary illustration of “stupid” to me.

      1. I think is exactly what will happen, making the whole thing meaningless. Criminals writing their own rap sheet.

        My only hope is that someone is brave enough to leak it to wikileaks so we see the whole thing. Otherwise, this is just playing to the useful idiots who are partisans in the legacy parties. It gets them all riled up then, once again, they are betrayed by their “betters”.

        We want full transparency, sh&^holes.

    1. Mespo and Olly,
      The actual release of the memo will prove to be anti-climatic.
      Since we’ve already heard from several people here who “know” beforehand what’s in it, why bother with the minor details tomorrow?

      1. Tom,
        At this point I don’t think it’s a mystery the lengths a weaponized, administrative state will take to keep and grow power. It would also be wise to note the efforts being made to maintain the corruption and power of the state, and who’s behind it. These people are no ally of this country. These people are either being willfully ignorant or worse, willful enemies of this constitutional republic.

      2. ‘Cause it’s always more persuasive when it’s in writing. Moses didn’t bring the Ten Commandments down on audio tape did he?

            1. 13. No swimming until an hour after you eat.
              14. Big Foot is to be revered as a Holy Man
              15. No children under this height is be allowed on a ride.

          1. I don’t think so, but Exodus does talk about the Ten Plagues which is code word for
            Democrats! Note Democrats with the ! has ten characters, the number of plagues. Also, note that Plague #8 is an additional hint… locusts. Locusts are pests and pests are Democrats!

            Don’t take my word for it. Just look around and see all the pests around us and how they litter the blog with nonsense. Moses was a smart man, but too many of his followers didn’t believe him and started to worship idols again. Today their followers are known as Democrats that bow to their idol Obama who bows to Arab Sheiks.

              1. No Olly. I wrote this. I was just playing, However, someone did post under the name Allen using an ‘e’ instead of an ‘a’ and that is not me.

  4. Contempt of Congress Eric Holder is in full-blown meltdown on twitter today. Why?

      1. Autumn – since much of this went on while Holder was AG, I think he has something to hide.

  5. In 2016, 20 GOP house members didn’t run for re-election. In 2018, it’s 34 and counting. Two GOP senators didn’t go up for re-election, in 2016. In 2018, it’s 3.

  6. Distraction Display

    Distraction displays, also known as diversionary displays, or paratrepsis, re anti-predator behaviors used to attract the attention of an enemy away from something, typically the nest or young, that is being protected by a parent. Distraction displays are sometimes classified more generically under “nest protection behaviors” along with aggressive displays such as mobbing. These displays have been studied most extensively in bird species,[1] but also have been documented in populations of stickleback fish and in some mammal species.

    Killdeer Distraction Display

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nmzi_mlFXQ
    ______________________________________

    The current democrat distraction display is diversion from its “nest”.

    The democrat “nest” is Obama.

  7. What do I think? Trump is seriously mentally ill to a degree that is debilitating and disqualifying. He has illusions of grandeur. He wanted to be President of the United States because of the power and prestige of the office, and for no other reason. He is no patriot. He will literally say and do anything to get what he wants and keep what he wants, and is a sociopathic liar. In the realm of street smarts and carnival huckstering, he’s a genius, but he either doesn’t know or doesn’t care how democratic government works or what the role of the President is in a tripartite system of democratic governance. He thinks he is the king or an emperor and honestly doesn’t care why it’s wrong to ask for a loyalty pledge from agency heads. Like the gutter snipe he really is, he will attack and try to destroy anyone or anything that stands in his way, including the FBI, the Justice Department, the Federal Court system (i.e., the Hispanic judge in California who ruled against him on the Muslim travel ban). If he can’t destroy them, he’ll try to bribe (i.e., the rubber-boobed porn star) or sabotage them (Nunes memo, attacking the FBI and the Justice Department even before the Russian investigation is over).

    At the time he colluded with the Russians to get dirt on HRC and to help sway the election because he was down in the polls, he either didn’t understand or didn’t care that it was not only wrong, but illegal. He couldn’t bully or bluff the Justice Department and FBI into stopping the investigation into his crimes, even after firing Comey, and despite the fact that Comey, under pressure, reopened the HRC email matter right before the election so that voters with some doubts might be swayed, so he is attacking the FBI, via Nunes. According to sources I trust, like Congressman Schiff, Nunes cherry-picked information out of context and will try to paint a picture of partisan and illegal investigation into Trump based solely on the so-called “dossier”, which isn’t the case. Indeed, the dossier facts that have been investigated so far have been proven true. The dossier was the product of an investigation into Trump and his connections and activities started by a fellow Republican Presidential candidate, who abandoned the investigation after the convention. At that point, HRC’s campaign was contacted about what was discovered so far, and they continued the investigation. What ought to alarm every patriotic American is the fact that Republicans on Nunes’s committee won’t allow a Democratic response. Has anyone ever heard of a partisan Congressional committee attacking the work of a Special Prosecutor during on ongoing criminal investigation, long before it is completed? What are they afraid of? Why won’t they allow the Democrats a platform to respond to the misleading allegations and half-truths?

    Every single day, Fox News, his personal media outlet, continues to insist that there is no evidence of Russian collusion, and keep pounding home the message that the FBI and Justice Department cannot be trusted, and that Trump will be exonerated. They even harp on the theme that his disciples are being cheated out of their candidate by Democrats–a “soft coup”. The sad thing is that his base, many of whom post on JT’s blog, buy it. This is just a bully who will lie, cheat and do anything needed to survive and to protect his precious ego. If there were truthfully no facts about Trump that could constitute a crime, he wouldn’t be fixated on attacking the FBI. His connections with Russians go very deep. He hides his finances for a reason. A bigger fallout from all of this, which was pointed out by a former federal prosecutor, is that every single day, juries are seated all over this country and hear testimony from FBI agents who have investigated all sorts of federal crimes, such as kidnapping, bank robbery, forgery, wire fraud, etc.. Undermining the integrity these fine career professionals for political reasons is un-American.

    Trump’s conduct is truly unheard of in modern politics. That’s because of the fundamental reason he wanted to occupy the White House: personal aggrandizement. Republicans, unfortunately, are enabling him. What will be left of the FBI and Justice Department once he’s through with them and gets rid of anyone who won’t concede to his demands? Emperor Trump who can commit crimes that cannot even be investigated? That’s his aim. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

    1. “Indeed, the dossier facts that have been investigated so far have been proven true.”

      Natacha, your post is practically irrelevant as the above line is nowhere near the truth. In fact none of the details of the dossier have been corroborated. Mr. Comey said so himself.

      You accuse him of colluding with Russia, but there’s been zero proof so far. And your trust of Rep. Schiff should have been dismissed months ago. He has constantly hinted at all this collusion, but has yet to produce any results.

      And why should any of us trust what the FBI has become? You don’t feel an investigation is warranted? The same FBI that has proof that Huma Abedin lied but no charges. Cheryl Mills lied but no charges. Sec. Clinton had her team destroy 30,000 emails after receiving a subpoena, but no charges. Gen. Flynn lied, he gets charged. Mr. Papadopoulos lies, he gets charged.

      And you don’t think there’s anything fishy about that? Hopefully someday you’ll come from behind the rock you’ve been living behind and join the real world. Best of luck.

      1. “zero proof so far”? What about the 4 indictments, so far and the guilty pleas? What about Flynn lying about meeting with Russians? Why are you willing to believe Fox News when it claims there is “no evidence”? Mueller’s investigation is far from complete, and unlike the White House, that group doesn’t leak. Why is the FBI being investigated, anyway? To cast doubt on the evidence of Trump and his crimes and his connections with Russians long before Mueller’s investigation is complete, that’s why. Why do you, as a Fox disciple, listen to the garbage about Democrats from years ago? What does that have to do with Trump and his crimes? Don’t you see how you’re being used here?

        1. Natacha,….
          Can you give is a summary of Trump’s crimes?
          Just to define that request a bit, tell us what the ultimate charges against Trump will be as a result of these investigations.
          Your accusations, suspicions, or rants are not evidence.
          But since you “know” all about “Trump and his crimes”, tell us what you anticipate in the way of criminal charges against him.
          If I get an answer to this question, it’d be a first.

          1. How about we all wait for the Mueller investigation to be completed? I never said I know “all about” his crimes, but there are a lot of ties to shady Russians. Trump went ballistic at the thought of Mueller obtaining his financial records and he won’t voluntarily disclose them. He made a $40 million profit from the sale of a Florida mansion he never lived in or did any work to 2 years after purchasing it. He sold it to a shady Russian, whose private jet has been seen at the same airport near Mar A Lago when Trump is in town. I also know that Trump is a chronic, habitual liar.

            1. Natacha,. – When you make statements about “Trump and his crimes”, “he colluded with the Russians to get dirt on HRC….that’s not only wrong, but illegal”, and similar statements like that, it is saying that you have knowledge of his crimes.
              I’ve been all through the “Trump Tower/ Russian collusion” debate before on these threads, and I’m not going to try to rehash that entire debate now.
              But when the DNC and the Hillary Presidential Campaign fund an operation to send a British spy to gather opposition research from Russians against the Trump campaign, that is collusion.
              If that’s legal, then in the future candidates using Russian, or any foreign entities, for opposition research, need only to hire a lawyer like Mark Elias to hire a firm like Fusion GPS to hire a spy like Steele to go to Russia.
              That’s a lot more clever, and hard to trace, than those idiots who met with Veselnitskay at Trump Tower….just use a bunch a intermediaries.
              Everybody stonewalled the helk out of investigators, it took at least a year to find out for sure that the DNC and Hillary campaign funded it, the Russian Dossier project started AFTER the DNC/ Hillary campaign authorized and funded it, and it took pressure from subpeonas, and a year, to even trace to funding and the links between DNC/ Elias/ Fusion GPS/ Steele.
              Adam Schiff tried to thwart the efforts to subpeona Fusion’s
              bank records, which is the only way all of those involved in the funding and compiling of the dossier were revealed.
              NOBODY volunteered anything, nobody “took credit” for initiating that Russian,opposition research…..when the links were established, the story of those involved was that it was a patriotic venture out of “national security concerns” to the U.S.
              We have the DNC and the Hillary campaign funding…PEOPLE within those groups had to authorize the Steele/ Russian Dossier venture, had to pay Mark Elias/ Perkins Coie.
              What I’ve seen to date is that “nobody seems to know” who that was….Hillary said “IF I’d known about it, the DNC chairs, DWS and Donna Brazille deny knowledge, Podesta seems to have clammed up, so we still don’t know who did what in authorizing this Russian opposition research.
              The Florida mansion sold about 12 years ago…I’ve been through this before, too.
              And the people who keep bringing up the “profitable sale to the Russian” fail to mention that it was long before Trump was a candidate.
              I don’t feel like double-checking all of the dates again, but I think Trump bought when the Florida market was depressed, and made the profit on the sale a few years later.
              These half-facts and wild accusations and suspicions about Trump won’t cut it.
              I don’t care if Trump goes or stays, but if he’s pushed out, there’d better be a damn solid basis for it.
              I’ve never expressed an opinion about Mueller…..the end result of his investigation will be the benchmark for me, as far as judging his integrity and competence.
              But Mueller has a sizable minority, possibly even a majority, of Americans, who alreadt question his fairness and objectivity.
              If he nails Trump on legitimate charges, they’ll be a segment that does not trust him.
              If he goes after Trump based on questionable evidence, I think Mueller is toast….there are too many people who would support Trump if Mueller presses a questionable case.
              What I see here on these threads are wild, insubstantiated allegations that are nowhere near solid evidence of criminal ( or impeachable) offenses.
              It’d be nice to fast-forward these investigations and get the results tomorrow, but it’ll keep dragging on and on, with wild speculation and preconceiced “convictions” at each and every turn.

              1. Should be “if he nails Trump on legimate charges, there will STILL be a segment that does not trust him.

        2. Natacha, yes zero proof. The 4 people that have been charged, 2 were charged for crimes before they worked with candidate Trump and the other 2 were for lying to the FBI. NOTHING TO DO WITH COLLUSION.

          Yes, wait for Mr. Mueller, but your claims of all these crimes are unfounded

          And why the FBi should be investigated? Let’s see….Huma Abedin caught lying to the FBi…no charges. Cheryl Mills caught lying to the FBi….no charges. Sec. Clinton destroying 30,000 emails AFTER receiving a subpoena….no charges. Gen. Flynn and Mr. Papadopoulos caught lying to the FBi….charges

          That doesn’t warrant an investigation?

      2. Of course Putin sent T rump da hookers that peed on da bed. Some of da other ones did far worse. Putin and Stormy got da goods and T rump has to keep em both happy.

    2. I think we could all benefit from Natacha’s dispassionate, objective analysis of all issues arising from the 2016 election.😏😂

      1. Just like your hero: can’t counter facts or arguments with anything reasonable, so attack whomever criticizes you.

        1. I think you missed my drift. the gulible dupes were the wack-job trump-bots. My reference to you and your post was so the dupes would know to which post I was referring.

          this is to Natacha

          1. Looks like Natacha and Mark M are having a tiff. Apparently one has a problem with reading comprehension and the other lacks writing skills.

            1. Haha. Loosen up your tinfoil hat; the fibbies can’t get a signal from the bug they planted in your molar.

              this is to “I didn’t plan on being a GD fool when I grew up, it just happened, I guess” allan

              1. I caught your drift just fine, Mark M. Maybe Natacha clicked on the wrong reply button. Her comment fits Tom Nash well enough. Or maybe Natacha can’t keep her cool under fire quite so well as enigmainblack can. Who can match enigmainblack at keeping cool under fire? Not me. He is the undisputed master. I’m beginning to suspect that enigmainblack may have received training from The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. Makes sense to me. But he might not be old enough.

                P. S. Allan was obviously dropped on his head as a child at least one time too many–possibly several times too many. Poor Allan. He really, really, truly, truly admires and believes in Trump.

              2. Mark M. Tinfoil wrap (Diane) down below is providing you support. That must mean you are in a lot of trouble. Go on with your little tiff with Natacha. Make-up time is much more fun, but I think Diane wants to engage as well. I leave both of them in your small hands.

  8. Did Schiff say “…secretly altered…”?

    PJ Media

    “I have been told tonight by a number of sources … that McCabe may have asked FBI agents to actually change their 302s,”

    – Sara Carter
    Circa
    __________________________

    Civil Liberties
    July 8, 2015 | Matt Connolly
    FBI’s Amazing Trick to Avoid Accountability

    “How credible are the reports of interviews filed by FBI agents working a case? In fact, such reports are known to be so unreliable that in one case, a federal judge refused to be interviewed by agents unless he was allowed to review their report and make corrections.”

    https://whowhatwhy.org/2015/07/08/fbis-amazing-trick-to-avoid-accountability/

  9. Glenn Greenwald in mid-January:

    January 19 2018, 3:23 p.m.

    “Republicans Have Four Easy Ways to #ReleaseTheMemo — and the Evidence for It. Not Doing So Will Prove Them to Be Shameless Frauds.”

    “4. Republicans can leak everything to the news media.

    If for some reason Trump and the congressional leadership refuse to use any of the above options to vindicate themselves, a brave member of Congress could turn whistleblower and transmit the classified proof of the GOP’s claims about the memo to the news media.

    Many outlets now have secure methods of sending sensitive material to them, such as Secure Drop. Those for The Intercept can be found here. (All leaking entails risks, as we describe in our manual for whistleblowers.)

    So that’s that. All Americans, particularly conservatives, should ask every Republican making spectacular assertions about this memo when they will be using the above ways to conclusively demonstrate that everything they’ve said is based in rock-solid fact.

    If they do not, Republicans will conclusively demonstrate something else. They will prove conclusively that all of this is about them shamelessly making claims they do not actually believe, fraudulently posturing as caring about one of the most vital, fundamental issues facing the United States: how the U.S. government uses the vast surveillance powers with which it has been vested.” -Glenn Greenwald

    They should stop pussy-footing around, wasting time. Release both versions of the memo, as well as the underlying corroborating evidence.

    1. Anon- spot on – is it theatre? Should have been released thru Wikileaks. NOT via The Intercept – I think highly of Glenn, but it was his paper who outed Reality WInner – not trustworthy.

  10. Well Nancy Pelosi says the integrity of the House is at stake! OMG!!!! That is just awful. I can’t believe anyone would mess with the integrity of the House–Nooooooooo,

    Actually Nancy, how does one interfere with something which doesn’t exist? Inquiring minds want to know!

    1. Jill,…
      Well maybe we should have Pelosi write up the final memo.
      With Maxine Waters as her co-writer.
      If you think anticipation of the memo’s release is at a fever pitch now, think of the excitement that would build up, possibly explode, guessing what their draft would look like.😉

      1. Thanks for the reminder, Adam W.

        The look on Putin’s face in that photo really says it all. Somebody funnier than I needs to put a cartoon caption balloon on Putin’s thoughts in that picture.

  11. The committee should simply re-vote on the edited document. We already know Democrats will vote against transparency to keep potential FBI wrongdoing secret.

    Re-vote. Give the amended doc to Trump. The 5 day clock providing presidential review is already ticking.

    1. If the Republicans are so keen on transparency why did they vote to suppress the Democratic Memo even as they voted to release their own? Hypocrites!

  12. Oh, this is easy to fix. Send the President the original document. Send the House the Trump document.

    If it is found that the changes were in fact grammatical, then the public needs to know what this means about Schiff’s actions. If Nunes did something egregious like reverse the memo, then that needs to come to light.

    The solution is transparency, something the Democrats are on the record now opposing.

    1. If government agencies have been abusing the people, then the people have the right to know.

      1. Karen S wrote: “If government agencies have been abusing the people, then the people have the right to know.”

        “If”?????

    2. This would be a good day for T rump to release his tax returns and show that he cares about transparency. T rump is just trying to protect his mobster money laundering activities and does not gives rat’s ass about transparency.

      1. Let me explain something to you about tax returns. His personal return isn’t going to show you anything that is suspicious. It shows income and deductions. That’s it. If he has a mortgage on a property, then it would show how much in bank interest he has paid. If he’s profited in a venture, then it would show how much money was earned.

        And if all these years of tax returns and he wasn’t paying them, don’t you think we would have all heard about it? Like Wesley Snipes? Like Al Sharpton?

        The tax return angle is pointless.

        1. Your talking points convince of nothing. He could have write offs on interest paid on massive debt. But to whom?

          1. I didn’t expect to convince you as you’re just being ignorant of what’s on a personal tax return. Nothing would show.

            1. Trump’s tax returns could be compared to various bank loan agreements. The banks might have a fiduciary interest in such a comparison. Trump has favorably renegotiated his debt to Deutsche Bank. You know?

  13. Merriam Webster – Since 1828

    Schiff

    noun I \ schi ff /

    1. a person who makes deceitful pretenses; sham; poseur.

      1. Ad Hominem attacks are what people like you resort to when the facts are too daunting.

    1. George, I love your definition. It’s great and as far as Schiff goes he is a POS. However, in German Shiff is ship so it probably stands for sailor.

    2. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

      “Schiff is a Jewish and German surname meaning “ship”. The Schiffs are known from “about 1370, the earliest date to which any contemporary Jewish family can be definitely traced.”

  14. First let me comment on Turley’s statement that nobody even knows what’s in the memo (from his Hill article). Really? I can assure you the memo is not complimentary to the people investigating Trump and his cohorts. Nunes has stated as much…FISA abuses by the FBI and DOJ that must be fixed… (Nunes can’t prove it, that’s why we have a memo instead of hearing in Congress).

    So Schiff goes through the motions of seeking an injunction only to have the president declassify the memo anyways. Seems like a waste of time to even mention that.

    We have a Memo authored / orchestrated by Devin Nunes. Nunes, let alone his staff, is not competent to interpret the data on which the memo is based. Nunes has relied on discredited ploy after discredited ploy to undermine the criminal investigation of the Trump administration: unmasking fiasco, Secret Society, Deep State, Corruption at the highest echelons of the DOJ and FBI, wiretapping of Trump towers.

    Nunes, part of the nefarious Trump transition team composed of felon Mike Flynn and recused liar Sessions…and Nunes, all of whom had executive leadership roles in the process. Nunes’s lies, distortions and fabrications imply the image of a man trying to save his own skin by obstructing justice.

    The memo is coming out one way or another. Schiff is not part of that calculus Mr. Turley. Nor are any democrats, the FBI and the DOJ. They aren’t under investigation (a memo is not an investigation it’s an opinion and everyone has them) only the Trump Administration is under criminal investigation.

    Ain’t it terrific that the republicans and Trump sound like patent Fascists? Cleanse the FBI and DOJ, accusing the accusers, tall tales of conspiracy that designed to kill the investigation?

    Obvious obstructive ploys are obvious. Sometimes tautologies work. Where’s Turley on this besides taking broad shots at Democrats?

    1. Darrin,
      You’ve said several times that Nunes is not qualified to handle or review classified material.
      I let that statement slide to first couple of times that you made it, then I pointed out that Nunes is one of eight
      ( out of 435) members of the House with the clearance to view that level of classified material.
      Now, you re-word your claim, and state that “Nunes, let alone his staff, is not competent to interpret the data on which the memo is based”.
      I don’t know what your next modification of the same lie might be, but leaving that aside for the tine being, do you understand the concept of Congressional oversight?
      I won’t bother to ask if you think that role should fall solely to Schiff, because I know you’d be wildly enthusiastic about declaring him as “qualified”.
      If there is ever an opening for Minister of Propaganda, you should apply.

  15. Shiffty Shiff is a real b s thrower and ought to be kicked in the butt-not that it may help in his disillusionment.

  16. OT – anyone else using Hotmail having problems? I am having issues composing emails. I think it’s a plot to drive me to gmail =)

    1. The best option is to dump all free email services and use your own server. This requires a bit of setup and costs money but in the end you will be better off.

Comments are closed.