FBI Director Wray Read Nunes FISA Memo on Sunday – House Intel Committee Vote TODAY!

IT WILL PASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Update as of 4:03pm EDT:

1. Devin Nunes, Chairman 202-225-2523 YES!

2. Mike Conaway (202) 225-3605 YES!

3. Peter King 202-225-7896 YES!

4. Frank LoBiondo 202-225-6572 YES!

5. Thomas J. Rooney (202) 225-5792 YES!

6. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (202) 225-3931 YES!

7. Michael Turner (202) 225-6465 YES!

8. Brad Wenstrup 202) 225-3164 Non-committal

9. Chris Stewart 202-225-9730 press 3 YES!

10. Rick Crawford (202) 225-4076 YES

11. Trey Gowdy (202) 225-6030 YES!

12. Elise Stefanik (202) 225-4611 YES!

13. Will Hurd (202) 225-4511 Non-committal

Gowdy is a YES, That makes 11! IT WILL PASS TONIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOOOOHOOOOOO!!!!!

Just talked to Trey Gowdy’s Office. They are not sure if there is going to be a vote today!

My opinion:

It gave Wray a way to cover his a$$.
Wray now looks pro-active, even though he had the same documents
for a while and did nothing about McCabe.

It’s just an opinion.

Conaway and Hurd got my call from Texas .....

Wray now looks pro-active, even though he had the same documents for a while and did nothing about McCabe.

I agree, although I wouldn't be surprised to find that Wray is just a fool and the bad actors kept him ignorant.

Thanks janetjanet998.

Jeeze I hope that’s just what they are supposed to say. I heard 5:15-5:30. In about an hour we will know.

We used to say, “Someone got quit.”

>>If Wray took that long to read the Memo he needs to go, also.<<

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I am confident that Christopher Wray is a white hat.

We must not start shooting at our own team!

"Wray now looks pro-active, even though he had the same documents for a while and did nothing about McCabe.

Seems more re-active than pro-active. Just a week ago it was reported Wray refused to fire McCabe, and threatened to quit when pressured by the White House to do so. What could have been in the Nunes memo that changed his mind? I'm thinking something he already knew, but didn't realize was going to be revealed.

Good point.
Of course he knew.
And re-active is the right word.

The book is "Media Madness" by Howard Kurtz.

Rush talked about Kurtz's book this morning:

"Have you all seen Howard Kurtz’s new book or heard about Howard Kurtz’s new book? (interruption) Who’s having a cow about it? Well, they damn well ought to have one! “Some of his mainstream colleagues” damn well ought to be having a cow about it. The name of the book is called Media Madness, and there is a story on this. I remember it. We talked to Reince Priebus about it on this program! It turns out that this event — which I’m gonna remind you in a moment — is what led to, what initiated the leak of that Russia-Trump collusion narrative. It’s how McCabe spread this to the mainstream media at large.

This goes back to February 2017, and in this… Here, let me give you Priebus’ version of the story ’cause Kurtz writes about it, and he’s got it right. There was a meeting at the White House. The FBI people were there and a number of other people were there on, I think, a related matter. Andrew McCabe, who was the deputy director of the FBI, asked for a meeting with Priebus (who was the chief of staff at the time), and he told Priebus that everything in the current New York Times story that was written by three people — Michael Schmidt, Mark Mazzetti, and Matt Apuzzo — was total BS.

It was a story about Trump-Russia collusion. It was a story with anonymous sources claiming this or that. There was no evidence supplied because no story ever said that. They didn’t have any evidence. But the allusions were clear that there were deep state sources telling the New York Times that collusion between Trump and Russia was a real thing and that they were getting close to nailing it down. The purpose for McCabe’s meeting with Priebus was to tell him that the FBI knew that it was BS. McCabe specifically asked for a meeting with Priebus to tell him, quote, “Everything in that New York Times story was wrong.”

Now, this story was one of those endless, seemingly daily bombshells that were happening during the transition and the early days of the Trump administration. This New York Times story’s headline was “Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts with Russian Intelligence.” It was sourced by four current and former American officials. It was like every other story of its genre. There was never any named source. There was no verification of the claims. It was just reporting what four unnamed people told the New York Times.

And it’s important: The key element is that Priebus was sought out by McCabe to tell him that the FBI… Essentially, “Reince, don’t worry about it. We know this is not true.” So imagine you’re Priebus! You’re in your office as chief of staff, and the FBI deputy director comes in and tells you that what’s in the latest bombshell New York Times story, the FBI knows is not true. So Priebus says, “Well, what good does this do me? You coming here telling me this, what good’s it do me? You need to make an announcement! You need to somehow let the American people know that this isn’t true.”

Of course, McCabe refused to do this. But McCabe was insistent that Priebus know that the FBI knew the story wasn’t true. Priebus says, “Look at the TVs, Andrew. Everyone’s going nonstop with this. It’s gone beyond the New York Times,” and Priebus asked the FBI deputy director if he could publicly say what he just told him, and McCabe said, “I gotta check; I’ll get back to you.” Priebus told us the same thing on this program. It was — ’cause he was minding his own business. He wasn’t doing anything. He didn’t seek McCabe out. McCabe sought him out.

So McCabe called back, according to the Kurtz book, and said he couldn’t do anything about it. That led to Comey calling, because McCabe had gone back and told Comey what Priebus wanted. Comey called and said he couldn’t do anything either. Even though they knew the story was totally wrong, they couldn’t do anything about it for the sake of the investigation. They don’t respond, day to day, to media assertions. But Comey did offer to brief the Senate Intelligence Committee on the matter later that week, and that suggested to Priebus that they would spill the beans publicly in testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. So, according to Kurtz’s book, you know what happened next?

“Now, a week later, CNN was airing a breaking news story naming Priebus. According to ‘multiple U.S. officials,’ the network said, ‘the FBI rejected a White House request to publicly knock down media reports about communications between Donald Trump’s associates and Russians known to U.S. intelligence.'”

I remember this like it was yesterday. McCabe calls Priebus — he’s at the White House anyway, he sees Priebus, says, “Look, we know it’s not true.” Priebus says, “Can you do something, can you help us out here?” “No, sorry, we can’t.” Then what does leak is that Priebus wants the FBI to shoot down the story!

So Priebus was set up! McCabe goes in there and tells him, “We know it’s BS.” Priebus says, “Well, okay, fine. How does that help us? You gotta say this publicly.” McCabe says no. Now, CNN, a week later, is running a story saying that Priebus had asked the FBI to publicly shoot down the story. The FBI rejected Priebus’ request. Priebus was gobsmacked by this. He minded his own business. He didn’t pressure anybody. They brought the story to him.

So Kurtz writes: “Had he been set up? Why was the FBI leaking this information when one of its top officials had initiated the conversation?” CNN’s story that got all this going was authored by Jim Sciutto, Perez, Shimon Prokupecz and Manu Raju. Raju is the reporter who messed up a massive Russia collusion story by not verifying underlying details in any serious way. Jim Sciutto is a former Obama administration appointee who is close to Obama officials. Evan Perez has extensive ties to Fusion GPS.

So the CNN journalists had ties to Obama, had ties to Fusion GPS, and had ties to the Obama administration as well. So this, bottom line, was a total set up, and McCabe is the guy who orchestrated it. McCabe sought out Priebus to tell him, “Nope, this New York Times story, it’s BS, we know it.” Priebus says, “You gotta go public with that. It’s the only way it helps us.” He says, “Sorry, we can’t.”

A week later a story appears that Priebus had requested the FBI to shoot down the story. Well, that’s what happened, but that’s the second half of it. It’s being reported as what initiated it and it didn’t. Somebody had to tell CNN. Somebody had to lie, somebody had to leak a bunch of BS to CNN to get that story, which they were more than happy to report.

So that was the double whammy. The New York Times story was the first whammy. The double whammy was CNN picking it up making it look like Priebus was desperate to get a story killed because it was true when it wasn’t. And we talked to Priebus, he was on this program. Maybe it wasn’t on the air. I talked to him, I don’t know if it was on the air or not. But I remember this verbatim as though it were yesterday.

The point of this, the point Kurtz is making here, is that this meeting between McCabe and Priebus led to the leak that the Trump administration was trying to squash the story because it was true. And this led to months and months of additional stories. And it culminates with Comey getting canned."

McCabe's resignation is exactly on schedule. He had accumulated enough leave time that stepping out today equals retire in March with full benefits.

Just saying that his stepping down today isn't necessarily a sign of something bigger going down today. Maybe it is, maybe not (today), but Mccabe's being done as of today is direct in line with his announced retirement in March.

When I retired from the military they let me take leave to look for a house to live in and it was something like 45 days before my official retirement date. Just saying!

bkmk