Posted on 02/10/2018 8:08:41 AM PST by MarvinStinson
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the criminal referral is "not based on any allegation" that Christopher Steele, the author of the infamous Trump-Russia dossier, lied to FBI investigators about former Trump aide Carter Page, or what was included in the dossier.
Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., slammed the criminal referral of Christopher Steele by Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., saying it has numerous “flaws” and “omits key facts.”
In a five-page analysis released Friday, Feinstein says the criminal referral is “not based on any allegation” that Steele, the author of the infamous Trump-Russia dossier, lied to FBI investigators about former Trump aide Carter Page, or what was included in the dossier.
“[N]either provide any evidence that any of the information in Steele’s dossier is wrong. Instead, the referral is limited to a single baseless allegation: that Steele lied about his contacts with the press,” the analysis says.
This week Grassley made public more details from the Jan. 4 unclassified criminal referral of Steele. The referral asks the Department of Justice to investigate whether Steele lied to FBI investigators about his communications with the press.
The referral, which was first released in heavily redacted form on Monday, appears to confirm some level of coordination between the extended Clinton circle and the Obama administration in the effort to seek damaging information about then-presidential candidate Donald Trump.
The less-redacted referral fails to provide further illumination on the memo mentioned in the dossier obtained by BuzzFeed, which laid out how Steele allegedly received information from "a foreign sub-source who is in touch with [redacted], a contact of [redacted], a friend of the Clintons, who passed it to [redacted]" — redactions that appeared in the first issuance of the referral.
The unredacted referral does discuss the controversial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court applications seeking permission for the government to spy on Page.
Feinstein’s analysis claims the Grassley-Graham referral omits “key facts,” because they failed to modify the referral “before and after” the Justice Department provided the committee with documents about its interactions with Steele. This includes an Oct. 19, 2016, report that Steele received information from a “friend of the Clintons.” According to Feinstein, 14 of the 17 memos within the Steele dossier were created by him before the Oct. 19. report.
Feinstein’s analysis concludes that the criminal referral “fails to make a case” that Steele actually lied o the FBI.
“The criminal referral contains no new information. All the information in the criminal referral was already available to the FBI and the Department of Justice,” the analysis concludes. “In fact, the referral relies on publicly available information and information that was provided to Congress from DOJ and the FBI.”
In a statement accompanying the analysis, Feinstein said the Grassley-Graham referral has goals that include “undermining the FBI and Special Counsel [Robert] Mueller’s investigation, attacking Christopher Steele and deflecting attention from collusion and obstruction of justice investigations.
“Not a single revelation in the Steele dossier has been refuted. Unfortunately, the claims in the criminal referral rely on classified information, so it’s difficult to fully repudiate them here. However, as much as possible using unclassified information, the following points lay out the flaws in the criminal referral,” she said.
The Justice Department has not yet publicly commented on the Grassley-Graham referral.
Feinstein couldn’t “analyze” her own bowel movements!
Not a single revelation in the Steele dossier has been confirmed either.
Try that tack, Dirty Diane.
And the burden of proof is on Feinstein and her comrades.
Well, I heard that she has an "interning couch" to see which of the young boys earns the right to be a congressional page.
Refute that, Honey!
You mean like that (wink).
It really is disconcerting that someone with this slant on justice actually serves on the Committee of Justice Oversight. Eeh. Gads.
The contents need not be refuted, lol.
It’s the framework of what transpired and how it transpired which is the issue.
Obama weaponized all intelligence, the DOJ, all security like a tyrannical dictator would to oppress the opposition.
It was a direct attack on liberty, freedom, rights and the American constitution by the marxist muslim coalition led by BHO and others above him.
There is nothing in the Steel dossier that has been verified and substantiated - it is just a set of claims. Therefor, why does anyone have to “refute” an unsubstantiated unproven dossier of claims? They don’t.
Rest of the Headline:
and she has the Urine Stained Mattress to prove it...
She’s using the Global Warming standards - consensus.
For starters she is flat out wrong
But be that as it may I would suggest not a single allegation has been proven to have happened
Classic “do you still beat your Wife” accusation?
That ancient supporter of baby killing doesn’t have many more years to repent. Instead, she traffics in Clinton lies, led by the Father of Lies.
Note Diane’s morph: guilty until proven innocent.
hire hookers to pee on a bed that the Obama’s slept on in the past
makes perfect sense Diane, being someone who drinks her own pee
I keep thinking ... What law has been broken? What exactly is collusion — because we’ve certainly have seen enough of it from the Democrat side.
Tricky play with words that I hope better people in the media can point out and beat Feinstein over it. One does not need to disprove an item in the dossier when the whole dossier itself is suspect. Now that we’re getting closer to the provenance of the dossier we’re starting to see the whole truth and it’s not looking like Dianne Feinstein’s has a clue about it.
Her comments on the matter that make her sound like a somewhat sensible adult in the past are causing her problems with her re-election campaign, so she’s realized she needs to abandon it.
—
I think that’s correct. California’s Hate America Majority is fuming that she made statements in the past that lack 100% commitment to a Hate America Agenda... and she has to correct that.
“If she can’t prove its not true.. than it must be true.”
Yes, someone do it.
Maybe then she’ll see how it feels to try and prove a negative or else lose her job.
Senility is a sad thing to witness.
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.