DOJ Initial Russia Hearings

Clinton supporters are doing this
default_banghead2.gif
after Comey's testimony. Comey has lost all credibility now.

If there was indeed a Trump/Russian investigation then the voters should have know about it. As you all know, I wasn't a Clinton supporter and

am confused by Comey's actions of July and Oct on the emails, but how in the world could he have spoken up about
Clinton without saying anything about Trump. He should have kept his mouth shut on both if both were on going or come clean on both.
default_dunno.gif


So frustrating when you cannot trust the FBI or DOJ.

https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/843840260085813248?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Brian Fallon‏Verified account @brianefallon

Russia probe that Comey confirmed was, as best we can tell, in effect before Nov 8. Fair to ask why he didnt think voters deserved to know


C7X4rIDWkAELti-.jpg


 
Further, Trump's tweets on this should out him as an unrepentant, vile liar. As if that wasn't clear enough already.

 
Fru said:
For those unable to listen at the moment, could you summarize their exchange?
Click to expand...
So in a nutshell (*I had to get on a plane for perhaps others can fill in blanks)

  • Opening 5mins was Nunes saying that there were no wire taps in Trump Tower but there was no way to yet know if there was "Other" monitoring going on
  • Nunes says that Russia has been a known trouble maker for a long time but the Obama administration did nothing with what they knew
  • Schiff (15mins) painted a picture of "coincidences" from summer til now - "could they be coincidences - yes, could they be connected in a sinister way - yes"
  • we need an independent investigator to look into this in addition to/compliment to the committee to insure it's unbiased/unpartisaned as it would be human nature to view things by party, and that they are elected officials w/many other things to do so this needs to be done properly similar to 911 panel
Questioning begins from those on the dais .... Nunes makes a big point in the first round of questions to ask if there was evidence of any specific voter fraud in specific states (MI, FL, NC ...) that could be attributed to Russia. Any actual votes changed. No

Trey Gowdy from SC makes a point to revisit the lack of proof of votes changed, then launches into the importance of FISA being understood and who would be someone who might disclose unmonitored US citizens who were caught during an international listening tap. How important it is with next month it coming back up for vote to insure that there is an understanding that people can not be identified if they are unknowingly taped - that this could ruin the whole program. Then he spent his 15 mins first go round digging into who leaked the info about Flynn. Made a dramatic point about 9 sources being quoted by WaPo, NYT etc and how can that be - isn't that a federal offense? Isn't that a huge problem? He launched back into this focus during his second 15 mins (focused on leakers not content of what has come to light)

I then got to the airport and was hearing things in bits and pieces. Essentially lots of NSA and FBI saying they couldn't get specific on people (i.e. couldn't say out loud who was in the room during the briefings) and wouldn't speaking to leaks etc.

I am biased - but my opinion was that Nunes danced around trying to defend Trump, Gowdy was a nutjob and off base, angry and aggressive with his questioning and Schiff was focused, prepared and deliberate. I saw a few others speak (D's) and they were interestingly taking their time to more so make statements than question people. The R from NYC tried to drill down on both NSA and FBI to get them to admit that in the past Russia has always aligned to Republicans - honestly I don't know what he was getting at, but he was asking, "so if Mitt Romney was running would Russia have helped him? McCain?. It was bizarre and watching the two guys he was directing the questions to was pretty funny - they weren't sure what he was going for.

It was interesting, I was surprised that at the gate with hundreds of people standing around there were only maybe 3 of us listening. I'll look forward to seeing who adds to the commentary.

 
MFW my boss is tweeting while I'm testifying in front of Congress and one of the Congress members pulls up a LYING tweet from my boss on their phone and I have to react to it in real time...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just read somewhere that Mannafort, Page and Stone have all volunteered to testify ... rumbles are that they are all scrambling to beat each other to the bench and the MIA name in all this mess is Flynn. Who has already flipped evidence (some think to save his military pension, others to stick it to Trump after the firing). Thought that theory carried some potential weight, and might be the 'more than circumstantial" evidence Schiff has referred to.

 
Back
Top