Posted on 05/24/2018 2:21:57 PM PDT by navysealdad
Congressional Democrats say that a classified briefing held Thursday for top leaders about the FBI's investigation into President Trump's 2016 campaign did not offer evidence that supports the allegation that an intelligence agency placed a spy in the campaign. "Nothing we heard today has changed our view that there is no evidence to support any allegation that the FBI or any intel agency placed a spy in the Trump campaign," said a statement Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., read to reporters on behalf of himself, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. and Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
There are no spies. Just paid operatives. So yes, the FBI didn’t have spies.
I wouldn’t trust Adam Smith to tell me the time.
He is a pathological liar.
Republicans aren't incontinent. You know, leaky.
Parse his statement. lol
I smell an impeachment vote of Dr. Rosenstein...
I believe that what was said to Nunes and Gowdy in private in the first meeting is what is most important. No way were they going to present key evidence to the leaking Schiff...
Who’s Adam Smith?
You mean Adam Schiff-for-brains, now him I don’t trust.
Schiff-for-brains still desperately seeking relevance.
He needs to sit down, shut up, and let the adults get this resolved.
The document release issue is now way beyond insane. There is no legitimate national security reason for refusing to release incriminating documents and that is the only conceivable reason for the stone walling. Let’s get real. All talk and no action. It is high time Trump calls the obstructionist hand and orders the release forthwith.
They didn't place a spy: they placed seven.
True. But you could have (and probably did) say the same thing when Schiff released his response to Nunes. Both Nunes and Schiff's documents contain redacted details (Schiff's has more). Schiff claims those details are about corroborating evidence for the dossier and other independent sources that make the FISA application legitimate.
But now we know some of those redactions. In fact if you look at Schiff's document you can see where a redaction has enough room for "an FBI informant" and the "t" is partly visible. A latter redaction probably explain that the particular informat was Halper. Other redactions probably contain the names of Mifsud and others paid by the FBI to spy on the campaign.
Why do we need to know these names now (or back then)? The fact is, we don't. They are still secret FBI sources and should be left secret until around Sept. Then by October the names can be released along with the IG report with more details of improper (or illegal) FBI activity, and undoudtedly other material that backs up spygate.
Why Septemeber or so? I'll answer that with a question: why the rush?
I don’t like the term “ gang” of eight. It harkens back to the Chicoms. Although it is appropriate given there’s no daylight between these so called lawmakers and commies.
News reports like this are the reason that Trump must declassify and publicly release EVERY document related to the Russia Collusion investigation.
Do it now, Trump.
You have let this political infection bleed for 16 months.
Give a blanket pardon to everyone involved - Republican or Democrat.
Then, release EVERY document.
Let the voters decide who is corrupt, and who is not.
Wow. All those Democrats....
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/05/24/big-day-for-the-swamp-gang-of-eight-plus-gowdy-and-kelly-meet-with-doj-fbi-and-dni-to-debate-transparency/
Kind of the same way they troll internet forums, one troll is always backed up by a bunch of “confirming trolls” to make it look like whatever bullcrap they are peddling is a widely held opinion.
This is exactly why nobody wanted them there.
“...did not offer evidence...” is a totally different event activity. To “offer” means the source was soliciting the audience and the Dems say that was not done. What was probably done instead was a data dump whether they asked for it or not, was offered or not.
Word slime of lawyers.
Now if the wording was “did not present evidence” then it’s significant.
Didn’t Clapper go on The View and admit they had inserted one or more “informers” (he didn’t like the word spy) into the Trump campaign?
Schiff has always been a liar.
good catch.
It was Schiff for Brains.
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.