So…you didn’t actually read the memo, huh? I mean, it’s not something I’d expect the kind of sources you get your news from to report, but, it’s in the memo…
Here are a few facts:
The FISA order on Page was issued Oct. 21, 2016. That timing proves that the Page warrant didn’t authorize any surveillance of the Trump campaign — because Page and the Trump campaign had parted ways before the warrant was issued. In fact, the Nunes memo makes it appear that the FBI was trying to avoid surveillance on the Trump campaign as the FBI had known about Page for quite some time but waited until after he parted ways with the Trump campaign before applying for a FISA warrant to surveil him.
If you believe Trump (which I don’t but you might), Page was hardly involved in the campaign at all…
“I don’t think I’ve ever spoken to him. I don’t think I’ve ever met him. And he actually said he was a very low-level member of I think a committee for a short period of time. I don’t think I ever met him. Now, it’s possible that I walked into a room and he was sitting there, but I don’t think I ever met him.”
If you’re not familiar with that quote, just Google it.
Or this one reported by The Hill:
“Mr. Page is not an advisor and has made no contribution to the campaign,” the campaign’s communications director Jason Miller said in an email to The Hill. “I’ve never spoken to him, and wouldn’t recognize him if he were sitting next to me.” (emphasis mine)
Thus, it’s hard to imagine how surveillance on a person who “had an informal role” and “never met Trump” and never made contributions to the campaign could be considered spying on the campaign.
(This is what happens when Trump and everyone around him lies all the time)
Then there’s Nunes’ appearance on Fox and Friends where he admits that the FBI disclosed the political nature of the Steel dossier (though, after confronted with thius fact Nunes moves the goal-post)…
Nunes conceded that a “footnote” to that effect was included in the application while faulting the bureau for failing to provide more specifics.
“A footnote saying something may be political is a far cry from letting the American people know that the Democrats and the Hillary campaign paid for dirt that the FBI then used to get a warrant on an American citizen to spy on another campaign,” Nunes said on “Fox & Friends.”
Of course, he goes on to say that a footnote on the warrant disclosing the political nature of the dossier is not the same as letting the FISA court judge and the American people know that Clinton and her campaign paid for the dossier.
The document was never intended “for the American people”, it was intended for a judge and for all we know the judge may have asked about the political nature of the dossier, we just don’t know because we haven’t seen the whole thing yet.
But here’s the smoking gun, if you will, that proves that the dossier was not the justification for the original FISA warrant on Page, and it comes from the Nunes memo itself.
See the little part there, the second sentence?
“The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok.”
Even the Nunes memo itself admits that the justification for opening the investigation on Page wasn’t, in fact, the dossier.
Now I said:
Care to change your mind or are you, somehow, going to deny these facts or change your story?