Sharyl Attkisson Interviews Devin Nunes…

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Chairman Devin Nunes sat down for an interview with Sharyl Attkisson for Full Measure News.  They discussed the HPSCI Russia probe, the FISA Court abuse and the ongoing investigative reviews of corruption within the DOJ and FBI.  [The VIDEO is Here]  The transcript is below.

Much of what Chairman Nunes outlines is a recap of current position; however, his response to the discussion of former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power is quite a shift. Mr. Nunes doesn’t see how it is possible -within the actual framework of the compartmented intelligence system- for anyone else to be using Power’s name for unmasking requests…..  {{{suspicious cat alert}}}

[Transcript] There are numerous investigations going on, but one of them, at least, is coming to a close. That is the House Intelligence Committee investigation into alleged Trump-Russia collusion. As of today, that Republican-led investigation hasn’t turned up any improper ties to Russia, but has revealed something perhaps larger and even more serious. We asked to sit down with both the top Democrat and Republican on the committee, only the Republican chairman Devin Nunes agreed.

Sharyl: What is the investigation that the House intelligence committee is covering?

Rep. Devin Nunes: Well we have a Russian Investigation going on whether or not there was collusion between any campaign and the Russians. That’s coming to a close. We’ve never had any evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

Sharyl: So you’re comfortable with saying at this point, you don’t see anything there?

Rep. Devin Nunes: No, There’s nothing there.

Sharyl: What else?

Rep. Devin Nunes: So in that investigation, we’ve unearthed things that are very concerning. We know that there are un-maskings that occurred and probably were leaked to the media. So this is, so these were, this is an intelligence products that were put together. The names or the names of the Americans were masked.

Sharyl: Because it’s so sensitive, Americans aren’t supposed to be spied on by our intelligence agencies. So when they are captured, their names are-

Rep. Devin Nunes: Are masked-

Sharyl: Right, Masked, inside the government.

Rep. Devin Nunes: And what we found was happening is, in the last administration, they were unmasking hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of American’s names. They were unmasking people for what I would say, for lack of a better definition, were for political purposes.

Sharyl: How could they use that information?

Rep. Devin Nunes: We have no evidence, that they leaked this information, okay. We only know that we only know this. That names were unmasked. And those names ended up in the newspaper.

Sharyl: In a derogatory sense, in terms of political enemies of the Obama Administration.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Right, it’s like political dirt to create a narrative and a spin with the mainstream media.

Sharyl: You reported what you learned early on, on the unmaskings to President Trump and were criticized by a Democrat counterpart of the committee, Adam Schiff. Who said you quote, Made a midnight run to the White House, where you misrepresented where you received the information. There was an ethics investigation into that, and you were cleared. But how would you answer Adam Schiff’s criticism that you behaved improperly?

Rep. Devin Nunes: Well most of the time I ignore political nonsense in this town. What I will say is that all of those stories were totally fake from the beginning. When I got that information okay, which was not at midnight. I didn’t jump out of any cars. That was totally fake. It was all made up nonsense. I went out and held a press availability, where I told the press, Look, I’ve, I found this information. It has nothing to do with Russia. I’m going to go explain this to the President of the United States. Because I’m the only one that really can do it. And then I went and did that. Briefed the President. Afterwards, I went and talked to the press at the White House. So my reward for transparency, total transparency with the with the media and everybody involved was to be brought up under a false ethics accusation. That has since everyone’s learned was total nonsense and it’s been dismissed.

Sharyl: On the unmaskings, one very tangible bit of evidence that to me looks like a crime. Is the fact that the US Ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power. It looked like she had made a masking request on a near-daily basis. Which is amazing in 2016. It’s pretty incredible. Yet she reportedly told Congress, most of those were not really her.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Yeah.

Sharyl: Wouldn’t that mean somebody committed a serious National Security Crime if they used her name to request unmaskings of US Citizens?

Rep. Devin Nunes: Yeah, so we don’t know what the truth is there. I think it would be, I think it’s highly unlikely that she was not the one who was giving permission to make those unmasking requests.

Sharyl: So you don’t believe her?

Rep. Devin Nunes: I just don’t know how that’s possible.

Sharyl: There appears to be a serious conflict of interest that the intelligence community, FBI, who are in charge of the investigation some of these things, are implicated in some of these alleged misdeeds. How do you get around that? How can this be investigated fairly, when the only prosecutorial authority really rests with the people accused of wrongdoing?

Rep. Devin Nunes: Yeah and I think what you’re, and now what you’re getting into is the FISA abuse. So I want to, I think we want to make sure we make that change, the difference there. So there was unmaskings that we unearthed, then there are the FISA abuse that we’ve discovered.

Sharyl: That’s the secret court. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court, where intelligence officials can go to try to get wiretaps on US citizens or foreign actors.

Rep. Devin Nunes: That’s right. And so this is where the FBI and the Justice Department because they’re involved in this FISA Abuse. Because they’re the ones who make, to go before the secret court to get the warrants, they’re all involved, they’re all implicated in this.

Sharyl: But the most you can do about it to be clear, is to just raise the issue. Congress can’t prosecute or refer cases for prosecution.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Congress can, right. Congress can make criminal referrals. Congress can

Sharyl: To the people accused of wrongdoing in this case.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Right, right. So there’s really nowhere for it to go. And that’s I think a lot of people. We are a separate equal branch of government, but we don’t have the ability to prosecute people. And that’s the challenge.

Sharyl: Why is the Carter Page wiretap interview so important? Carter Page is the former Trump volunteer, advisor, who was wiretapped apparently, at least four times. Three times by the way, apparently after President Trump was elected. Why is that wiretap so important?

Rep. Devin Nunes: It really boils down to this. You had a campaign. The Hillary Campaign and the Democratic Party went out and paid for dirt. They got it from Russians by the way. Then they used that dirt and funneled it into the FBI. The FBI then used that dirt to get a warrant on a US citizen who was part of the other campaign. A limited role, yes. But still, to do that, it’s wrong.

Sharyl: We asked your Democrat counterpart Adam Schiff for an interview, but he wouldn’t do it. He said that the memo that you put out was misleading and omitted material facts.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Because we didn’t want to disclose any sources and methods. We tried to reduce the memo down to what we believed the American people needed to know. What was most important? So we put in the memo, the things that were used before the FISA court in order to justify the warrant. Was there other information? Sure. But it wasn’t, it wasn’t important in terms of the justification of the warrant.

Sharyl: Congressman Adam Schiff says, your goal is to put the FBI on trial, and to put special council Bob Mueller’s investigation on trial.

Rep. Devin Nunes: Yeah, well FISA abuse has nothing to do with, with the Mueller investigation. As it relates to Department of Justice and the FBI, if they need to be put on trial, we will put them on trial. The reason that Congress exists is to oversee these agencies that we created. DOJ and FBI are not above the law. Congress created them, we oversee them, and we fund them. And if they’re committing abuse for a secret court, getting warrants on American citizens, you’re darn right that we’re going to put them on trial.

Sharyl: What would you say is the takeaway?

Rep. Devin Nunes: And I think people are just starting to learn now what really happened. Because as we peel more and more of this back, I think more and more Americans get educated. And I think that they’re gonna demand that changes are made. [Link to Transcript and Video]

This entry was posted in AG Jeff Sessions, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

239 Responses to Sharyl Attkisson Interviews Devin Nunes…

  1. DanO64 says:

    Worth the watch.

    Liked by 17 people

  2. John says:

    Yep – we know Page, Strok, Comey and Schiff are all leakers. The Flynn leak would also take the whole thing back to the January 5th meeting with Obama. The timeline is too close

    Flynn – met with Kisylak on Tuesday Dec 29th
    WH Meeting – Obama, Comey, Yates, Rice meet on Monday Jan 5th (MEMO to self)
    Washington Post – leaked Flynn conversation with Kisylak on Monday Jan 12th
    Mike Pence – Face the Nation – Jan 15th
    WSJ – leaks Counterintelligence is investigating Flynn -Jan 22 (day Flynn is sworn in)
    FBI – Interviews Flynn.- Jan 24th
    Yates – meets with Mcgahn – Jan 26th

    This went at exponential speed for the government – they setup Flynn in the Dec 5th meeting.
    First question to Rice is when she became aware of the Flynn matter.

    Liked by 20 people

    • Carrie2 says:

      John, I remember reading that Flynn said that Obama made him make the call. The puzzle is getting together with so many more pieces and it is wonderful that we the People are finally awakening to the fact we have been conned and gulled for way too long and are angry as heck to see all these traitors hanged and all assets confiscated. Call it a learning education to others who think treason is okay for a certain party.

      Liked by 5 people

  3. tazz2293 says:

    I’m not only demanding changes are made but heads roll!

    Liked by 17 people

  4. josco scott says:

    Can’t wait to see Yates get the thumb screws.

    Oh please please let us see Yates sweating it out.
    Also Ben “The Leaker” Rhodes. (I just have to believe that loud little twerp strutted around leaking to make himself feel important)

    Liked by 27 people

  5. Sylvia Avery says:

    There’s a lot in this interview. Devin Nunes is pretty plain spoken for a politician.

    The Samantha Powers unmasking deal puzzles me. Why would she do that rather than someone else? Her connection as UN Ambassador seems awfully tenuous to this whole DOJ/FBI/Intel Community nexus. But Nunes says he doesn’t see how it could have been anyone else.

    In any event, I am always delighted to see the creeping vines of kudzu slowly, slowly reaching their tentacles into the BO Administration.

    Liked by 30 people

  6. coltlending says:

    Biggest take-a-way I get from this is the brainwashing, there’s no proof who was a party to the unmasking.

    I don’t believe that for one second, and it sickens me that even gets put out there.

    The FBI needs to be Dis-assembled and rebuilt from the ground up.

    FISA court should be abolished.

    I’d rather Achmed blow himself up next to me, if I’m clueless enough to not get away from him or attempt to stop him.

    At least in that scenario I might have a chance of seeing it coming.

    No so with my own government.

    Liked by 7 people

  7. georgiafl says:

    Why do I not find a video at the link? Do I need to disable AdBlock?


  8. says:

    We need a lot more citizen/farmer patriots in DC. Thank you Mr. Nunes.

    Liked by 20 people

  9. f.fernandez says:

    I pray daily the criminal referrals will be acted upon swiftly and completely. That the White Hats maintain their fortitude and not cut people deals and/or grant immunity to anyone.

    Liked by 6 people

  10. All Too Much says:

    Loved this

    “Sharyl: Congressman Adam Schiff says, your goal is to put the FBI on trial, and to put special council Bob Mueller’s investigation on trial.

    Rep. Devin Nunes: Yeah, well FISA abuse has nothing to do with, with the Mueller investigation. As it relates to Department of Justice and the FBI, if they need to be put on trial, we will put them on trial. The reason that Congress exists is to oversee these agencies that we created. DOJ and FBI are not above the law. Congress created them, we oversee them, and we fund them. And if they’re committing abuse for a secret court, getting warrants on American citizens, you’re darn right that we’re going to put them on trial.”

    Liked by 27 people

  11. Angry Dumbo says:

    How is it, even in interviews such as this, that former President Obama’s name is never even mentioned?

    Liked by 3 people

  12. What if Powers wasn’t unmasking? Who else would have her passwords?


  13. Brant says:

    I wonder if his, “it’s over, it’s done”, is more baiting a trap for leakers than just saying it’s done? Will also be interesting to see who gets on MSM and retorts. Will show who is watching Sharyl.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Peter says:

    After the Devin Nunes interview, at 7:41, Sharyl provides an update of the events on Friday. The last thing out of Sharyl’s mouth is that the Mueller investigation found that Russians were in contact with the Trump campaign. What load of crap.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. rlc970582410 says:

    BOOM! Sharyl is so damn good.
    And I am proud of Nunes, proof there is at least one honest Rep from CA in DC,, serving his constitutents and ALL Americans.

    “Rep. Devin Nunes: And I think people are just starting to learn now what really happened. Because as we peel more and more of this back, I think more and more Americans get educated. And I think that they’re gonna demand that changes are made. “

    Liked by 8 people

  16. ZurichMike says:

    Surprises for me:
    (1) The quantity : “they were unmasking hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of Americans’ names” — one would be enough to cause constitutional concern, and I had though “many”, but not “hundreds and hundreds and hundreds”.
    (2) Samantha Power: The fact that she is a sleazy Democrat is not surprising, and probably lied to Congress (typical of Democrats) but that she requested unmasking almost on a daily basis. For what purpose? Why would a UN ambassador need to unmask anyone? A UN ambassador needs to implement what the administration wants. Period. Was she funneling unmasked Americans to other ambassador-spies or back to the Clinton campaign?
    (3) House investigation on “whether there was collusion between *any* campaign and the Russians” coming to a close (emphasis mine). This investigation will probably result in memo far more damaging to Hillary, the DNC, and the Obama administration.

    Liked by 6 people

    • tageweb says:

      I caught the “hundreds and hundreds and hundreds……” also. My guess: this goes back years and years and years under the Obama administration. Tea Party members, conservatives, Judges, etc. etc. etc. TIP of the Iceberg of Obama corruption.

      Liked by 9 people

    • lastinillinois says:


      Not thousands?

      I bet it was actually thousands.

      Liked by 2 people

    • A2 says:

      That struck me ZurichMike. I don’t know, but surmise that any conversations with foreigners by a US person that was of ‘interest’ to them in the national security briefings that was under Zero going to a very large number of people in his administration would have to be ‘unmasked’ again with each report. It may have been any number from 1- 100s. In other words, if US person talked to the Russian ambassador, or the Turkish ambassador or the Chinese ambassador, let’s say, then each would be a separate unmasking, but may have involved one person or several. They may have even been unmasking their own people. 😀

      Liked by 2 people

    • Donna in Oregon says:

      Probably got your name ZurichMike.

      I would not be surprised in the least to see how petty the unmaskings were. These people are on a total power trip. Nothing and no one is beyond their reach.

      I say in the present tense because a lot of money disappeared and the rumors that Obama created a parallel Intel command center have not been investigated.

      There is a ton of money missing.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Deplorable_Infidel says:

        This “alternate command center” could have been built under the ruse of being a backup. The CIA has hundreds or thousands of shell companies and the off-the -government-books income from them and their drug dealing. That could finance something you describe without a whiff of scrutiny from Congressional oversight or a request for funds. Don’t put anything past Brennan & Clapper.

        Liked by 2 people

    • georgiafl says:

      They unmasked opponents.

      “Republicans that starts with R and that stands for Russians”

      And that was good enough reason for the FISA judges to stamp the warrant forms.

      Liked by 1 person

  17. If there were hundreds of requests for unmasking of US citizens via the FISA courts, isn’t there a paper trail for each request stating both the REASON and the PERSON requesting it? If the FISA court does not keep copies of the requests (unbelievable) certainly the requesting agency does. Is this something the IG is “investigating” and will report on?

    Liked by 1 person

    • All Too Much says:

      I’m not sure the court is involved in unmasking.
      The court would be presented with the unmasked data, as backup for the application to the court.


      • cboldt says:

        Masking and unmasking is all by the executive. The process used for masking is also referred to as “minimizing.” The executive presents the FISC with a minimization plan, how it intends to protect the 4th amendment rights of persons not in the “sphere of the investigation.”
        Blanket unmasking is another end-around the court. Tell the court, in the application, these names will be hidden. Then don’t do what you claimed you would, in the snoop application, and effectively gut the minimization spelled out in the warrant application.

        Liked by 4 people

    • Chewbarkah says:

      I think the unmasking requests go to the NSA. There would definitely be a paper trail. But the trail evidently shows Samantha Power as the authorizer. Nunes did not explain the details of the verification process for unmasking requests, but he certainly seems to believe identity fraud is not plausible. That suggests biometric id, not just an easily forged signature, required. Did Samantha Power “loan” elements of the Obama NSC her credentials, plus they somehow evaded all the access security including bio? Unravelling this is a key to some major criminal activity. Odd that no one is investigating it.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Deplorable_Infidel says:

        There is some type of electronic record of what was accessed and by whom. Adm. Rogers had the NSA Compliance Officer do an audit which revealed the unlawful access to the database(s). He reported that to the FISA Court upon the completion, which was a month after the FBI did (to CYA). The FBI/DOJ knew that Adm. Rogers found their crimes almost as soon as the Compliance Officer started running audits of the access records.

        Liked by 2 people

  18. marinovibe says:

    Confession: If I didn’t follow news for a living (in radio), I’d tune out.

    ‘Be patient’. Easier said than done when all current events become negative attacks on lame Repubs. Sure, Trump fights. But his team of supporters seems small, and thin skinned.


    • lastinillinois says:

      You mustve just started paying attention a couple weeks ago.

      Otherwise youd know that our Pres’ “team of supporters” is anything BUT thin skinned or we never would be gotten close to where we are today.

      Liked by 5 people

    • billrla says:

      marinovibe: Buck-up, soldier. We’re Deplorables.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Concerned Virginian says:

      Nice try, friend. Now go on over and cozy up to BILL KRISTOL.
      If it’s too “hot for you” in the kitchen here at CTH, by all means, leave.
      And BTW, last time I checked, there are MILLIONS and MILLIONS of us “team of supporters” for our POTUS. Too bad you aren’t one of them.

      Liked by 1 person

      • marinovibe says:

        Rrright. Mr Concerned. I posted my thoughts. Trump’s PUBLIC army is thin, weak, outside of a few gutsy staffers and lawmakers. I am not referring to Conservative Treehouse readers.

        He needs more vocal people to help shape the narrative. That’s what I study.

        But you do you.


    • Deplorable_Infidel says:

      Walk softly and carry a big stick. And/or train with a good sensai. Brush up on your tactics. Stealth has its advantages.


  19. Cat Lady says:

    Courage is sexy. Devin Nunes. I’m just sayin.

    Liked by 5 people

  20. Pyrran says:

    I have a vision of the lot of them, their underwear caught in the great grinding gears of justice, drawing them inexorably closer to their destruction….

    Liked by 2 people

  21. BiggUggly says:

    My concern is what I perceive to be the lack of urgency on the part of our elected representatives. While I have hope that the GOP will retain both houses, that is not guaranteed.

    Hopefully, the urgency will come.

    Liked by 2 people

  22. EbonyRapror says:

    Sharyl tried twice to lead Nunes to discuss the need for a 2nd Special Council but either he completely missed it or didn’t want to go there.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Let's roll says:

    Time to turn the lights on, start the cameras. Indictments please. Mueller’s 13 Little Pigs, 100 pages of nothingness is Horowitz prosecutor’s cue. Shame on Mueller. How dare he try and destroy a duly elected president. Cover up of USSR Uranium gift by Mueller, Comey, Hillary, Obama – is that the genesis for millions of dollars spent, the dishonor and the deceit? Or is it the billions in cash O gave Iran? Follow the money…

    Liked by 3 people

  24. ForGodandCountry says:

    Nunes: “they were unmasking hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of American’s names.”


    …not “she”

    Who was doing the unmasking?

    How were they connected with any known DOJ/FBI “black hat” players?

    Why were they doing this?

    What was the goal or goals of the unmasking?

    Who were the targets of the unmaskings?

    What MSM players were fed this information?

    What links does this activity have with the FISA apps?

    What connections does Powers have with Clintons? Same question re: all other players?

    Who are their spouses? The Ohrs were a couple. Who else??

    How do DNI James Clapper and CIA Dir. Brennan fit into this picture??

    Liked by 1 person

    • KBR says:

      I am wondering when cia will be outed like fbi has been. Or when their propaganda branch ciann will be taken out permanently.

      Liked by 1 person

    • dutzie60 says:

      I’m going to ask what might be the stupidest of all questions, but here goes …

      Can someone explain exactly what it means to be ‘unmasked’ other than just your name being known. Do you get endlessly surveilled, put on a list of some kind, probed, etc. Thanks.


      • Aubergine says:

        No such thing as a stupid question if you need the answer 🙂

        Unmasking just means that an American was caught in a FISA warrant surveillance of a foreign person, and that someone (Powers or whoever) asked that the American name be revealed. FISA is meant for foreigners only, and American’s names are supposed to be revealed only in rare cases.

        It was set up that way to make such an intrusive practice more palatable to freedom-and-privacy loving Americans. But Obama abused the power to unmask, bigly.


        • dutzie60 says:

          Aubergine, Thanks for the answer. So, then any further surveillance or snooping on the American is not done and it’s illegal to continue to monitor them. Just their name is released that indicates they spoke to so and so from ‘somewhere’. I say ‘just’ but I understand how illegal and possibly damaging this could be.
          However, suspicious cat, me, thinks the snooping doesn’t stop with the release of the name. 🤔👁

          Liked by 1 person

          • Aubergine says:

            Don’t confuse the different kinds of spying that the FISA court allows. Unmasking of names would come under 702 FISA warrants. THe spying that was done to Carter Page was under Title 1. That type of warrant allows for the surveillance of EVERYTHING, every person around the target, every email, phone call, etc. And it ripples outward, so if I contact the target and then contact you, you are then fair game for the spying. This is why the Carter Page warrant is so bad.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Isman says:

              I’m still a bit unclear on this. My understanding is that EVERYTHING is collected and masked domestically, and with Carter Page, EVERYTHING in his circle of contact was unmasked. However, I think Nunes was describing the Obama administration using “queries”, or searches of the “EVERYTHING” domestic database to segregate and then unmask “hundreds and hundreds and hundreds” of targets or communications. In other words, Obama’s people were not operating “by the book”.


              • Aubergine says:

                Again, two different types of FISA surveillance.

                With Title 1 FISA, no unmasking is required, all names appear. With 702 FISA warrants (to and from queries), all US citizens names are masked and have to be unmasked by request. FISA 703 covers “about queries,” (contents of emails, messages, etc) but after Admiral Rogers audit of the system, those are no longer allowed. These also had names of US citizens masked.

                The Obama administration DID use about queries and unmask “hundreds” of citizens. But they also authorized Title 1 surveillance of Carter Page, which is as described by me above. They did BOTH things.

                Make sense?


      • Montana says:

        Correct me if I am wrong but isn’t there also a transcript of the conversation between the two people also?


      • Hoosier says:

        What I am not seeing discussed is this glaring issue

        Liked by 1 person

    • anthonydog says:

      Brennan-Clapper and The HAMMER…And Dennis Montgomery…”Worse than Watergate”

      Liked by 1 person

  25. Brant says:

    How is this for strategery? Sharyl said they asked Schiff to come for interview. He said his little spin. But, he will be watching…… Nunes said, they haven’t found anything and basically about to wind it down. Schiff will go bonkers. I think Nunes has set a trap for him. Put up (the fixed memo, among other things if he lets something slip) or shut up. I think Nunes called him out. He was talking to us, but he was speaking to Schiff.

    Liked by 9 people

  26. lfhbrave says:

    It’s so assuring, given all the depressing MSM/DOJ/FBI talking heads insisting there is nothing wrong, that there are at least one decent Congressman in the right place and one decent reporter with courage to expose the bad acts.

    Liked by 4 people

  27. KBR says:

    Obviously the links to FISA applications with Mueller investigation were the members of his original investigating team that were part of the group working on those FISA apps, and with Fusion GPS.

    Mueller investigation is poisoned because the Steele Dossier was the reason for the investigation to begin. Mueller investigation is poisoned because while you can take the Strzok and friends out of the investigation– a year after it began–, you cannot take the Strzok and friends taint out of their work product that went into the Mueller investigation.

    I don’t get that Nunes said the FISA had nothing to do with Mueller investigation: it had EVERYTHING to do with it.

    Liked by 3 people

  28. Iamcat says:

    We want more than changes made. Who was forcing Samantha Powers to unmask people daily? For what? The presidents daily brief? Valerie Jarret? Obama? I want to see people actually punished.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Your Tour Guide says:

      Wild card. Conjecture: Hillary wins. Hillary’s sick ( physically, mentally).
      Hillary’s greedy, immoral. Will do anything for money, power. Hillary’s also
      lazy (witness her campaigning).

      Powers is a confirmed globalist, communist. Tied to the UN. The
      unmasking, for Obama, Powers, Hillary, Soros, and their above
      handlers? To get rid of the last bit of opposition in the last free
      country on the planet. Advance planning on who to go after once
      Hillary is elected. All she cares about is being first woman president.

      Hillary would be like Obama, probably worse. Lazy, more then
      willing to do none of the work, take all of the credit. Powers, her
      hubby, the big boys over them would be more then willing to help
      the globalists do their final end play in destroying the US. All they
      need is lazy Hillary to hand them the keys to the car. And she would.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Peter Rabbit says:

        Spot on Your Tour Guide. No one lazier than Hillary in a town full of lazy people. Her ONLY interests are power, both self aggrandizement/ego, AND building.even more incredible wealth. She is the most vile person observed in my lifetime, and no one else comes close.

        Zero learned quickly from Clinton Inc. but he remains the student, yet he was awed by their audacity and greed.

        Will we ever track his payoff from the Iranian cash? AG Sessions, this one’s for you. Sec. Mnuchin can help.

        Uncover the entire fraud that is Zero’s life!!!

        Liked by 1 person

      • Deplorable_Infidel says:

        Why do you think BHO purchased that house right down the street (and promptly had a WALL built around it!) ? It was for his 3rd and 4th term with Valerie Jarrett.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Apollo says:

      Me too!! I know it’s not a popular opinion with the powers that be here, but it’s not “game over” for me—this isn’t really done—until we’ve actually got prosecutions of the conspirators. Or at least indictments.

      Liked by 1 person

  29. Donna in Oregon says:

    Fairly certain that once Adm. Mike Rogers realized what the Obama admin was doing he would be putting away the information necessary to take out the Clinton/Obama cartel.

    Sundance was onto the schemes of the Obama admin here:

    Liked by 2 people

    • Deplorable_Infidel says:

      I read somewhere (probably here) very recently that hiding evidence of a crime in the library is not a legitimate use of that. If Ryan and McConnell were on our President’s side, that law would have been changed by now.


      • Deplorable_Infidel says:

        I just read that again, it is an executive order -not a law passed by Congress. Which means our POTUS also has a pen to undo it (a big pen).


  30. jstanley01 says:

    Don’t tell my girlfriend, but I’ve got a secret crush on Sharyl Attkisson. Okay, well, she may have figured it out already…

    Liked by 2 people

  31. The Devilbat says:

    I want to know when these rats are going to be tried for treason and sedition.


    • Deplorable_Infidel says:

      All good things to those that wait. The brainwashed masses that are mind-controlled by MSM have not heard hardly anything from their “news sources”. Look up “I am the Slime” by Frank Zappa on YouTube. It was posted on this site over the weekend in another thread, I am not going to repeat it here. The next ax to fall is the IG report.
      The average reader on this site probably knows vastly more than his fellow citizens that are not watching FNN, FBN, OANN, The Blaze or Newsmax on their boob tubes (or streaming/reading on-line for those that have cut the cable to TV services)


  32. albrevin says:

    hundreds and hundreds of unmasking requests on their political ‘enemies’…. unbelievably naziesque of them. Pathetic.

    Bet they shuffled many of these over to the FBI to investigate. No wonder the agency dropped the ball on Boston Marathon, San Bernadino, Pulse, etc….. too busy doing Obama admins political purges. Clean the hacks out. Put the unmasking abusers in a cell and throw the key away.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Jack Rail says:

    Buncha dang crooks. Hang ’em high!

    Liked by 1 person

  34. Yancey Ward says:

    I think Powers is probably telling the truth about her not doing the majority of the unmasking requests done under her name and credentials, but she is lying if she has stated she doesn’t know who did it, and she has apparently claimed she doesn’t know.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Andy says:

    “Rep. Devin Nunes: (The) Russian Investigation (is) coming to a close. We’ve never had any evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.”

    That’s about as definitive as you can get. It means it’s over. Just like Sen. Burr of the Senate Intelligence Committee said way back on Oct. 4. that there was no hint of collusion. So now we have two major Intelligence Committees saying there was no collusion. Isn’t it time for Mueller to come clean and tell us what he has found on collusion. His mandate was to investigate links or coordination between Trump’s campaign and the Russian Government. It wasn’t to indict Russian trolls, or to indict people who lied to the FBI, or to indict Manafort and Gates for crimes committed years ago unrelated to collusion, or to manufacture an obstruction charge against the President. It’s time for him to wrap up his investigation and tell us what he has found on collusion so we don’t have this cloud that looks like myth hanging indefinitely over President Trump and the country.

    When they get to the point where they talk about prosecutions, Nunes says Congress can make criminal referrals, but then says “we don’t have the ability to prosecute people. And that’s the challenge.” What is the challenge? I wish she had asked him exactly how the prosecutions would come about, because he sounded iffy on that issue. How does the referral system work? Is the DOJ required to prosecute, or is a referral merely a recommendation? I wish also that she had asked him when the report on the first part of the investigation would be coming out, along with criminal referrals. Will they come out now, or only after all five parts of the investigation are completed?


    • G. Combs says:

      Congress would refer prosecutions for federal crimes to the DOJ. That is what the DOJ is SUPPOSED to do, indict people for federal crimes if there is enough evidence.


  36. Beth Ferejohn says:

    From his lips to God’s ears. Let’s hope they get prosecuted. Every last one of them.


  37. jeff says:

    GREAT INTERVIEW .it declares NO RUSSIAN COLLUSION BY TRUMP and It ends begging the Question that SUNDANCE asked . It also asks . If Samantha Powers was unmasking someone every day , and if it wasn’t her alone , who was it and what names were unmasked and why ”


    ” Someone’s doing the DOJ FBI interrogations and it’s not congress ” so who is ????

    Answer …Military Intelligence


    Liked by 1 person

  38. iRock says:

    House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Chairman Devin Nunes placed a target on his back. If NSA, DIA, FBI, DOJ or DNC had any dirt on Nunes they would have silenced him by now or else exposed the dirt. Blackmail was the only reason Chief Justice Roberts affirmed Obamacare and other decideders appeared compromised during the Obama Presidency. President Obama was incapable of working with congress when first elected until his Chicago mafia learned how to work the levers of power provided by the spy agencies.

    Liked by 1 person

  39. Pete says:

    As always, great reporting by Sundance. But, it’s time he updated his collage to include Obama and now Powers.


  40. Isman says:

    I’m still a bit unclear on this. My understanding is that EVERYTHING is collected and masked domestically, and with Carter Page, EVERYTHING in his circle of contact was unmasked by the FISA court. However, was Nunes describing the Obama administration using “queries”, or searches of the EVERYTHING domestic database to segregate and then unmask “hundreds and hundreds and hundreds” of targets or communications?


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