Devin Nunes Interview With Laura Ingraham…

A very confident House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes appears on Fox News with Laura Ingraham to discuss the HPSCI Memo and the latest declassified release from Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley.

The latest revelation(s) from the declassified Grassley memo show how the sketchy Clinton-Steele Dossier, essentially political opposition research, was used as the centerpiece of evidence presented to the FISA Court to gain a “Title 1” retroactive surveillance warrant against Carter Page, and -by extension- the 2016 campaign of Donald Trump.

This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, media bias, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

79 Responses to Devin Nunes Interview With Laura Ingraham…

  1. Everywhereguy says:

    Zoom! Even more DemDoom material.


    Liked by 1 person

    • John Rawls says:

      Sounds like Nunes is revisiting a quid-pro-quo flap during election. Here’s an old article:

      Donald Trump, in a video message to supporters, Oct. 17, 2016

      “This is very big and frankly it’s unbelievable. What was just found out is that the Department of Justice, the State Department and the FBI colluded, got together, to make Hillary Clinton look less guilty and look a lot better than she looks. … This is collusion between the FBI, Department of Justice, and the State Department to try and make Hillary Clinton look like an innocent person when she’s guilty of very high crimes.”

      Liked by 5 people

      • Can someone kindly clear this up for me? If anyone has turned – who are they trying to? We know the doj, fbi and anyone with a 3 letter acronym is compromised who can be trusted with their singing?


        • x7f7x says:

          It is speculated that McCabe has been singing like a bird. Has ANYONE heard anything from Strzok/Page??? I am hedging bets with those 2 as well; they are in deep including sedition via their texts. Their only way to leniency at this point would be spill it all.


        • malmino says:

          If I were in that situation, I would probably go to the IG, Horowitz.

          I recall some discussion of Edward Snowden’s dilemma when he uncovered what he thought was illegal or unconstitutional or at least inappropriate NSA surveillance practices. He chose to go public and then run away. Whistle blower or traitor? You decide. Anyway, one suggestion that seemed to make sense to me at the time was that he could have gone to SEN Rand Paul, who really cares about that particular issue.


    • Dan Patterson says:

      DemDoom. Heh.
      A good interview, good information well presented and conversational. Easy to understand the scope of the problem and the sense of frustration with the Stalinist media.

      btw: What is going on with Laura’s mouth? Dental work? Cosmetic surgery? This was a good interview on her part, but something unnatural about her lower lip.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Marygrace Powers says:

    Mrs. Hannity let Nunes speak/constructive criticism works.

    Liked by 13 people

    • trialbytruth says:

      As Sundance said a “confident” chairman. Ingranm did attempt to interject and Nunes Alpha maled right over her at 0.29

      Liked by 7 people

    • T.L.T. says:

      No need to be rude MaryGrace. He’s on the same side….I think.


      • Marygrace Powers says:

        Not meant to be rude. Just pointing out
        what sundance pointed out. Much better
        interview above/ we all want our side to
        do the best possible to MAGA.

        sundance says:
        February 5, 2018 at 11:52 pm

        I can’t get through a Laura Ingraham (Mrs. Hannity) interview segment, ever.

        Liked by 19 people

        Liked by 3 people

  3. South Col says:

    “Grassley memo show how the sketchy Clinton-Steele Dossier, essentially political opposition research, was used as the centerpiece of evidence presented to the FISA Court to gain a “Title 1” retroactive surveillance warrant against Carter Page, and -by extension- the 2016 campaign of Donald Trump.”

    Riiight. Now we know lots about institutional criminality, the story is actually getting old.
    Horowitz is not needed to prosecute this stuff.

    Anything going to be done about it, do you think?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Sylvia Avery says:

      “Horowitz is not needed to prosecute this stuff.” Small detail here, but I don’t believe Horowitz has the authority to prosecute. He is an investigator. He has to hand it off to someone to bring charges and take it to trial. That is probably going to have to be a Special Counsel because anyone in the DOJ is going to be tainted/conflicted/corrupted/recused or something else.

      Liked by 5 people

      • South Col says:

        “I don’t believe Horowitz has the authority to prosecute.”
        No-one said he did, the claim out there is that his report (evidence) is needed for a prosecution. I don’t believe it is in the case mentioned.


        • It is.
          The whole M.O. of Team Trump is to let the ship sail it’s course.
          Most of it Trump could have isntructed to be persecuted on day 1. He didn’t to give back the DOJ it’s impartiality and trust in the process. This will only be apparent when the whole thing is over but they are working towards it.
          Hence the IG report which is next in the natural course of events…
          The preludes of the memos are still “partisan” takes on it. The IG reprot will show the people that the partisan take is very near the truth. At that point not much the democrats and Hillarys henchmen can say agaisnt the whole case.

          Liked by 5 people

        • Inspectors General do not prosecute, but yes, their reports can be used as evidence in a prosecution, which will come from the Department of Justice, not the Office of the Inspector General.

          Liked by 3 people

      • Abdul Abulbul Amir says:

        We’re not doing much with Guantanamo at the moment.

        Liked by 1 person

    • MinnesotaMan says:

      It would be better to refer to it as “opposition fiction” instead of “opposition research”. “Research” implies verified fact.


  4. bullnuke says:

    A good interview for a change. I just wish they would stress more the fact that it was a Title I surveillance not Title VII. I bet most people don’t know the difference. Plus the hoops to jump thru are way more extensive to get FISA approval. So many corrupt people involved.

    Liked by 8 people

  5. SR says:

    These two dossier are insurance policy to take out PTrump after election. Time for John Kerry close door hearing? I noticed big people lie under oath and nothing happened – Hillary, Huma, Comey, DAG and more.

    Liked by 5 people

    • w5ovf says:

      ‘I HATE the Special Counsel law. However, if there were ever a time to appoint one, this would probably be it. I don’t see how we can trust anyone in the AG to actually handle the legalities. We “need grand juries called, and we need the people involved prosecuted if charges are brought. And I trust no one, NO ONE, in the AG to do that at this point.”
      Please trust your neighbors and their kids to help, best they can; under such violent adversity to same neighbors and kids! Have you some plan that may be more effective?


    • yucki says:

      Time for Kerry to be like the door-nail.


  6. Minnie says:

    “When the critics come after you, wear it like a Badge of Honor” – excellent, Laura!

    Liked by 4 people

  7. Minnie says:

    Congressman Nunes:

    “Obama State Department . . . gathering info and passing it to various strange places . . . John Kerry had been briefed on the (new) dossier and they provided it also to the FBI”

    Oh yea, those dominos are teetering.

    Liked by 10 people

  8. albrevin says:

    the prank call from the DJ…. wanna bet that’s the ‘source’ of Sally Yates going to PDJT saying the Russians may have compromising information on him?

    These Obama people were juveniles. Sounds like some sort of gossip elementary kids would run around with! nnnnaaaa nnnaaaa nnnnnaaaaa nnnnnnaaaaa boo boo

    Liked by 5 people

  9. Pam says:

    I really feel for Devin Nunes. I wouldn’t be in the position he’s in right now for anything but he is handling this phase of this investigation like a champ no matter what is thrown at him. You have to have a pretty tough skin to handle something so serious as this. He’s a trooper that’s for sure.

    Liked by 12 people

    • WeThePeople2016 says:

      I think he might feel like he was in the spotlight out there by himself for a while being attacked continuously (other than Trump of course). He is probably glad that Grassley is not in the same spotlight as he is and that he has another team member with him.

      Liked by 3 people

      • beach lover says:

        I’m glad they aren’t releasing this info in a “memo” like the last time. Think they learned how the other side will try to play it. Let the truth just be exposed. If the MSM want to continue to ignore it, then they prove even more what useless sycophants for the left they really are.

        Liked by 1 person

    • T.L.T. says:

      Good point. He’s manning up JUST FINE thank you. 🙂

      Liked by 2 people

    • yucki says:

      He’s a super-star!
      Hope to see him rise high in a few years.


  10. albrevin says:

    Who will be the first MSM outlet to start the walk-er-back attempt?


  11. John Rawls says:

    Sounds like Nunes is revisiting a quid-pro-quo flap during election. Here’s an old article:

    Donald Trump, in a video message to supporters, Oct. 17, 2016

    “This is very big and frankly it’s unbelievable. What was just found out is that the Department of Justice, the State Department and the FBI colluded, got together, to make Hillary Clinton look less guilty and look a lot better than she looks. … This is collusion between the FBI, Department of Justice, and the State Department to try and make Hillary Clinton look like an innocent person when she’s guilty of very high crimes.”

    Liked by 4 people

    • John Rawls says:

      So this ostensibly involves State asking FBI to reclassify an email on Clinton server as a B9 doc in exchange for more FBI agents in Baghdad.

      B9 is intended to protect geological and geophysical information.

      maybe like info on uranium:)


      • trialbytruth says:

        Well I am glad they cleared that up.

        If two people are colluding but both people say they were not well then it isn’t collusion. Case closed.

        I love the clarity WAPO gives everything. “Democracy dies in darkness” somebody get them a flashlight.

        Liked by 4 people

    • KBR says:

      Interesting that he says “and look a lot better than she looks.”

      I believe he was not just repeating himself, but that means exactly what it says.

      Recall her looks. How they changed suddenly and drastically. Side of beef then out walking down the sidewalk fresh as a daisy. The enormous differences in her looks from one appearance to the next, sometimes from one hour to the next.

      Liked by 6 people

      • Dekester says:

        KBR, of the countless highlights of the run up to the Presidential election, that was one of the more fascinating scenes.

        When the individual came out her daughters apartment building, and participated in the choreography with the little girl. It was so obvious that, that was not HRC.

        The voice was even noticeably different, the smile too.

        Of course my disgust for “ rotten” has rendered all my opinions of her, to be poisoned beyond cure.

        God bless PDJT, and Congressman Nunes. He was fantastic.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Pat Frederick says:

        as in the movie “Dave”? (Corrupt President has a stroke while he’s doing a Bill Clinton impression with an intern and a look alike fills in for him as President. His Chief of Staff I think, thinks he will control the look alike, but Dave loves the country and of course, there’s a happy ending…) anyway…I agree about Hillary—total transformations on the campaign trails and debates.


      • Patriot1783 says:

        And usually, the fresh as the daisy Clinton is wearing those purple glasses or sunglasses of some kind, thinner and a few inches shorter.


      • rvsueandcrew says:

        Well, think about it.

        If you realized your puppet was sick, decrepit, and falling off her beam like Hillary Clinton and you had a highly trained look-alike capable of fooling the public, wouldn’t you have that look-alike appear in public more and more until the public accepts the look-alike as the “normal” Clinton? Then when the original Hillary Clinton becomes totally incapacitated or dies, you’re still in the game with the look-alike.

        Call me crazy, but I’ve been saying for a long time that the Hillary Clinton we often see is not the original Hillary Clinton.


  12. hellinahandbasket says:

    “Goin’ Down”

    Liked by 2 people

  13. nimrodman says:

    Gowdy squawking a bit about Rosenstein on McCallum show:

    TREY GOWDY: Rod Rosenstein is the Mastermind Behind Giving Mueller Broad Jurisdiction in Russia Witch Hunt (VIDEO)

    “When asked why Special Counsel Mueller was given such a broad jurisdiction to basically investigate whatever he wants under the guise of the ‘Russia investigation’, Gowdy confirmed it was Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein who was the mastermind behind the language giving Mueller broad jurisdiction to go on a fishing excursion.

    “Gowdy responded by saying he believes Special Counsel Mueller has already gone off course and said the person to blame for that would be Rod Rosenstein because he is the mastermind behind giving Mueller broad jurisdiction.”


    • Aubergine says:

      I remain convinced that Mueller is working for PDJT.

      Our President promised us a Special Counsel to look into Hillary Clinton at one of his debates with her. He also said she would be in jail.

      The mandate for Mueller was broadly written because as he investigated the non-existent Trump-Russia collusion, they all knew he would find Hillary’s crimes. Thus, he could investigate HER completely under the radar.

      I refuse to believe that Trump met with Mueller the day before he became special counsel because Trump thought to make him FBI Director. That wasn’t going to happen, he was ineligible.

      Trump TROLLS. We know he does it. So he threw out this “Special Counsel” investigation into “muh Russia” to keep the media dogs chasing their tails until it was too late. When Hillary goes down, they won’t know what hit them.

      The IG report, when it comes out, will be the catalyst for the explosion. At least, that’s what I think.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Summer says:

        No. If that was remotely the case,
        1… we would have had gallons of leaked info by now because many staffers would have known what was going on;
        2…Strzok/Page et al. would have been texting about this because they were part of the Mueller’s Clinton donors-infested team;
        3…someone other than Flynn and Manafort would have been indicted after a year of the investigation;
        4…Trump family would not have to endure so much BS.
        5…Rosenstein would not have signed a FISA.


  14. skeinster says:

    Compare Rep Nunes’s demeanor to Sen Pelosi and the Rep. Tucker Carlson had on his show re:
    the Memo. Calm determination vs. “spittle-flecked nutters”.
    Cold anger vs. fear and guilt.

    Liked by 3 people

  15. Donzo says:

    I know Ingraham is on the right side of things, but the comment in this interview about her being accustomed to taking more heat than Nunes really lowered my opinion of her. She’s not in the trenches. She imagines Fox News is a fox hole and it is SHE about to storm the gates.


    • That’s a way that some people, particularly women, show empathy for others….to say, I know how you feel etc, is a way of showing that you has nothing to do with ego.

      Liked by 1 person

      • yucki says:

        Prof. Jordan Peterson makes that point explicitly.*
        Females score high on the “agreeable index”. Often doesn’t work in their favor in the professional context. Nodding, smiling, ‘I know how you feel’, etc.
        *In the recent viral video with the leftist enemy witch interviewing him.


  16. I hope there is not going to be any criticism of Laura on this interview; she did not interrupt. She is listening to criticism and what people are suggesting and she is making changes in her style. Let’s give her credit.

    Liked by 1 person

    • missilemom says:

      It was light years ahead of her first interview of Nunes.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Ackman420 says:

        Agreed. I watched the same interview. Laura was restrained, relatively. Nunes pushed back early on in one instance where Laura instinctively tried to interject during a brief pause in Nunes commentary, but Nunes continued and Laura deferred.

        She appears to have learned something. Pretty decent show last night.

        Liked by 2 people

  17. On a side note, I love Nunes’s voice…was he ever a radio announcer?


  18. Anyone remember this Tweet on Shiffty? He needs to be removed from that Committee


  19. sunnydaze says:

    *Much* better interview.

    Can’t wait to hear about the State Dept.


  20. ristvan says:

    Lurking Lawyer again. Upthread Aubergine made a most interesting comment. I just spent some time researching the legal basis. Rosenstein’s letter appointing Mueller as special counsel is available on line and must be read carefully. There are three parts to the charter: (paraphrased)
    1. Any dealings between Russian government and Trump campaign.
    2. Any matter that may arise DIRECTLY from 1.
    3. Any other matter within scope of 28 CFR 600(4)(a).

    Now, 28 CFR 600(4)(a) is the Special Counsel law jurisdiction. It requires (a) that tha AG (in this case Rosenstein given Sessions recusal) must set out the scope clearly and explicitly. That is letter 1&2. (B) Criminal acts related to interferring with 1&2 are also automatically included in the scope. Specifically mentioned are perjury, destruction of evidence, and so on. It is NOT what Trey Gowdy lambasted Rosenstein about. It is what the General Flynn perjury charge is about.

    So the essential operatives are 1&2.1 looks to be a nothingburger. 2 is where the action is. And there are two large easy conclusions.
    The Manafort indictment is quite arguably outside the Special Counsel’s scope. At the time Manafort was involved with Ukraine in 2013, Trump had no campaign. He will likely win his dismissal suit. Shows clear Mueller team bias.
    The uncovering of Fisa abuse, Hillary funding the dossier, and all the associated criminal activity including Obama demanding a full FBI briefing all flow directly from 1, exposed by congressional oversight. If Mueller does not put that on his plate, more evidence of clear wit hunt bias. But he must be under enormous pressure, incliding from Rosenstein, to do so. It is clearly within his written jurisdiction—as this comment explains for all here. But we won’t know for sure until the indictments start to fall. I think there is a hidden story within the story much more potent that what we are seeing via congressional oversight.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s