We always knew Schiff was a liar, but now the IG report gives us specific proof of what lies he told us.
Not so very long ago, we might remember a time when Nunes pissed off all of the lockstep Democrat media by releasing what was then known as the Nunes memo.
Of course they were upset. They were echoing their elected counterparts:
“The decision of Chairman Nunes and House Republicans to release a bogus memo has taken the GOP’s cover-up campaign to a new, completely unacceptable extreme,” House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., wrote in a letter to Ryan.
“From the start, Congressman Nunes has disgraced the House Intelligence Committee,” she added. “Since pledging to recuse himself from the Trump-Russia investigation, Congressman Nunes has abused his position to launch a highly unethical and dangerous cover-up campaign for the White House.” (Read more)
Not to be outdone, Schiff released his own memo in response to Nunes.
The new inspector general report on FISA abuse settles the debate between Republicans and Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Both groups put out memos about the Department of Justice’s efforts to secure a warrant to wiretap Carter Page.
At the time of their release, the media praised Democrat Adam Schiff and his memo and vilified Republican Devin Nunes and his memo. Nearly two years later, the inspector general’s report vindicates the Nunes memo while showing that the Schiff memo was riddled with lies and false statements. — Federalist
Can we be more specific?
Sure we can.
You can read the full 6-page Nunes memo here.
What did it allege? As the Mollie Hemmingway piece reminds us, there were four key takeways, we’ll summarize them as:
– a bogus dossier was used to open a FISA warrant against a Trump affiliate, and used Hillary’s campaign dirt to do it
– it used bogus circular ‘confirmation’ with a Yahoo story also relying on the same source
– Nellie Ohr’s role and personal conflict of interest were not acknowledged.
– the dossier was uncorroborated, despite a requirement that it be vetted before being used as FISA evidence
Meanwhile, in Democrat la-la-land, what was Schiff claiming?
– nothing was omitted from the FISA warrant
– only ‘narrow use’ of the Dossier was used
– Steele was corroborated in later renewals
– PAGE allowed the collecting of ‘valuable’ intelligence
– DOJ was transparent about Steele’s deficiencies
– a ‘rigorous’ process vetted Steele report
– Steele’s prior reporting had been used in ‘criminal proceedings’.
After the Horowitz Report dropped, what have we learned?
Horowitz affirmed the claims of the Nunez Report, and even said the rampant abuse went further than the concerns that Memo had flagged.
As for Schiff’s claims?
Hemmingway proceeds to knock them down one by one, starting with the sentence:
“Each of these claims were found by Horowitz to be false.”
Oof. Schiff’s dunking isn’t going so well.
Here’s what she said about just the first two on the list:
Horowitz found that FBI and DOJ officials did in fact omit critical material information from the FISA warrant, including several items exculpatory to Page. Material facts were not just omitted but willfully hidden through doctoring of evidence.
The warrants were based on Steele’s dossier, which was known by January 2017 to be ridiculously uncorroborated. The renewals did not find information that corroborated Steele’s reporting. The warrants clearly didn’t allow the FBI to collect valuable intelligence. And Steele’s prior reporting was not used in criminal proceedings.
Source: Mollie Hemmingway
She’s one of the rare investigative journalists we’ve got left, it’s well worth the read.