Posted on 02/04/2018 4:31:54 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
February 4th, 2018
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Reps. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, and Eric Swalwell, D-Calif.; Leon Panetta, a former CIA director and defense secretary.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Reince Priebus, President Donald Trump's former chief of staff; former CIA Director John Brennan.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.; Dr. Anthony Fauci, the National Institutes of Health's infectious disease chief.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Reps. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Will Hurd, R-Texas.
STATE OF THE UNION (CNN): Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.; Reps. Jim Himes, D-Conn., Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, and Karen Bass, D-Calif.
For sure, I’m thinking someone at the FBI who is beyond reproach,has his fellow agents respect, who started near bottom and worked their way up might work.
If you notice Noory seldom interacts with guests. Always a bad sign.Even with long timers he can’t to a good break away or rejoin,also a bad sign.
This is the one referenced by LC earlier this morning that I posted.IF enough of these come out the left will run out of lies to spin.
..................................
http://thegatewaypundit.com/2018/02/sara-carter-deep-state-terrified-second-anti-trump-dossier-thats-coming-video/?omhide=true&utm_source=TGP+Communications&utm_campaign=f875504aca-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_02_04_2018&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b3f16dae4d-f875504aca-18618053
Sara Carter says Deep State is “terrified” of the second bogus dossier that is coming out.
Sara Carter: The second memo that the House Intelligence Committee is putting together. We’re still waiting for the Inspector General’s report that is going to be coming out. That’s going to be directed at Andrew McCabe, now former director Andrew McCabe, and others. And I think they’re terrified what’s going to come out here.
Here’s what we know. There was a second dossier that was put together by a person named Cody Shearer. He is a very controversial activist, a former reporter who worked with the Clintons in the past. And the FBI was also using this second dossier as part of what they were doing to back up the other dossier by Christopher Steele, an unverified dossier. And we believe Chistopher Steele was also sending information to the State Department in bits and snippets. But I think the most important thing here and one of the things they are going to be looking at very closely are the leaks. There were a number of leaks out unverified information by possibly senior members of the Obama administration.
Not for satire.
Otherwise, Weird Al Yankovic would be in jail instead of a clever millionaire!
“That little faggot is a millionaire...”
I think THAT line is about Shephard Smith...
Watchew talkin’ ‘bout, Willis?
According to Andy McCabe--himself--the Assistant director of the FBI, "The FISA warrant could not be obtained WITHOU the Dossier."
No dossier, no warrant for Carter Page. No "legal" way to spy on Trump.
Ipso facto, Wallass!
That’s exactly right. They survive by deception and lies and rely on the ignorance of the dumbed down ignorant sheep.
If you ever want to know what not to do listen to George Noory late at night. He is the worst of the worst.A little leaguer in a big league.Worse yet its obvious he hates his job.
><
You certainly have that right. Noory is a fake through and through. I can’t stomach that two faced bastard.
How to Get Windows Movie Maker on Windows 10
Click the link!
No they have not and I would contend that after all the fuss, they look like idiots for not doing so.
In fact, think about Mon-Thursday, even into Friday morning when all they could talk about how the Memo “will disclose national security means and methods and put our intelligence officers lives in jeopardy!”
Then it is released, people read it and there’s none of that.
The democrat media doesn’t even try to spin it. Just drops that angle entirely. Do they really think they’re fooling anyone?!
Very interesting is that Yahoos ‘Michael Isikoff’ is the co-author on an upcoming book titled....” Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump”.... scheduled for publication March 20th.
Additionly he was a creator of the short film... “64 Hours In October”.....regarding events around October 7-9, 2016 relating to Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections.
And yet with all this research he had the gall to say....”I was as surprised as anybody that I was cited in the memo and apparently was cited before the FISA court,”
Very interesting is that Yahoos ‘Michael Isikoff’ is the co-author on an upcoming book titled....” Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump”.... scheduled for publication March 20th.
Additionly he was a creator of the short film... “64 Hours In October”.....regarding events around October 7-9, 2016 relating to Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections.
And yet with all this research he had the gall to say....”I was as surprised as anybody that I was cited in the memo and apparently was cited before the FISA court,”
Dud! < img src etc... {Before closing} width=”some number” height=”some other number” then close tag >
A nice set of numbers for a rectangle shape would be Width=”600” Height=”400”
But which one of you are STILL HUNGRY?
Ross? Anyone?
A little help here folks...
What an utter ‘stage’ performance!
The ‘chant’ is the same everywhere....that it’s about discrediting the muller Russian investigation...and attacks on the FBI and the DOJ....
Clearly the the Democratic plan is to ride the Russian Collusian story all the way to the elections...gain seats..then push for Impeachment via Obstruction of Justice.
This exchange got me thinking. Why indeed include the Steele dossier in the warrant application. Perhaps for more reason than to get the warrant, which is where most people take the reasoning. Maybe the rationale was to add heft to the dossier, or to link the warrant to the Trump campaign - a link that otherwise would not exist.
GOWDY: I would argue it's also somewhat unprecedented to rely on political opposition research to instruct and inform an application.And it's really bad precedent and unprecedented to not tell a court that a source has this level of bias. I mean, look at just the disclosure of who paid for it. They could have easily said it was the DNC and Hillary Clinton. That would have been really easy. I read the footnote.
I know exactly what the footnote says. It took longer to explain it the way they did than if they had just come right out and said Hillary Clinton for America and DNC paid for it. But they didn't do that.
BRENNAN: But short of that disclosure, you still would have believed this FISA surveillance warrant was justified? Your problem is in the disclosure within the application.
But the surveillance itself of this American Carter Page, who was named in your memo, who was at one point a Trump campaign associate, was that justified, that surveillance?
GOWDY: We will never know, because the application contained three parts. It contained -- it included the dossier. It included reference to a newspaper article which, by the way, no court in America considers a newspaper article to be evidence.
And it included other information they had on Carter Page. So, what I would say to the FBI and DOJ is, if you had enough on Carter Page with just him, why did you include something that "The National Enquirer" might not run, and why did you cite newspaper article, when there's no court in America that allows a newspaper article to be considered as evidence?
If you had enough without it, why did you use it? That would be my question to them.
We assume there is a denied warrant earlier, and further that the denied warrant was on Carter Page.
But maybe this is the first time the FBI sought a warrant on Page, and chose to investigate him not out of genuine concern he was an agent of a foreign power, but because he had some association with the Trump campaign. Look at the campaign, is there anybody there who touched Russia?
Sauce up the fictional dossier, include it in the application for warrant, and voila, the past warrantless surveillance of the Trump campaign has now been laundered by FISC.
A bit like laundering money, the FBI had to launder the evidence it had gathered without a warrant.
Maybe the dossier didn't add heft to the application, and McCabe's testimony that it was essential is misdirection.
Doesn't make much difference in the ultimate analysis - either way (dicy dossier essential to get the warrant; or dicey dossier not essential but validates surveillance of the Trump campaign) the FBI has used subterfuge to get a legal patina on spying on the Trump campaign
And ya gotcher damn Fahv Hunnert Larri!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.