"For any American who wants an answer sooner, there are just five words, among the thousands of suggestive texts Page and Strzok exchanged, that you should read. That passage was transmitted on May 19, 2017. “There’s no big there there,” Strzok texted. The date of the text long has intrigued investigators: It is two days after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein named special counsel Robert Mueller to oversee an investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and the Russia campaign. Since the text was turned over to Congress, investigators wondered whether it referred to the evidence against the Trump campaign. This month, they finally got the chance to ask. Strzok declined to say — but Page, during a closed-door interview with lawmakers, confirmed in the most pained and contorted way that the message in fact referred to the quality of the Russia case, according to multiple eyewitnesses. The admission is deeply consequential. It means Rosenstein unleashed the most awesome powers of a special counsel to investigate an allegation that the key FBI officials, driving the investigation for 10 months beforehand, did not think was “there.” By the time of the text and Mueller’s appointment, the FBI’s best counterintelligence agents had had plenty of time to dig. They knowingly used a dossier funded by Hillary Clinton’s campaign — which contained uncorroborated allegations — to persuade the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court to issue a warrant to monitor Trump campaign adviser Carter Page (no relation to Lisa Page). They sat on Carter Page’s phones and emails for nearly six months without getting evidence that would warrant prosecuting him. The evidence they had gathered was deemed so weak that their boss, then-FBI Director James Comey, was forced to admit to Congress after being fired by Trump that the core allegation remained substantially uncorroborated. In other words, they had a big nothing burger. And, based on that empty-calorie dish, Rosenstein authorized the buffet menu of a special prosecutor that has cost America millions of dollars and months of political strife." http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/39...e-in-russia-probe-should-alarm-every-american
Free advice. You might want to evaluate the sources you quote in public. Quick google on Washington Examiner (I had never heard of it): “With such an ideologically stacked crew, it’s not surprising that the Examiner has become a transmitter of conservative misinformation”
No, Nunes made a big deal, huge deal that the FISA warrant request had used the dossier as a source without any disclosure to the courts. The recently released document clearly shows that not the case. You got me though, I’m too lazy to lay out the refs for you, but Nunes’ assertions were a big deal at the time.
Then freely discredit the portions that are wrong. Attacking the source with "thin air" doesn't support your case.
Not going to waste my time . . . The cases are laid out in all major media today. Both sides with equal fervor. Someone said the heavily redacted disclosure would give some amount of ammo to any and every side in the argument. I have read several perspectives, and am satisfied with the conclusions I have drawn. Sorry to start an argument. I am certain there is nothing that could be said as to change opinions. I know better than to make political posts, not sure what got in to me this morning. I truly hope, for the good of the Country and the office of the President, that the investigation finds nothing and does so sooner rather than later. Finally I wish both the left and the right could separate Russian interference from Trump “collusion.” To date, neither side has demonstrated that skill set.
PS. I am not the least bit bothered by Russian interference. It is what Intel agencies do. We, as a population have to have both the intelligence and the wherewithal to reject their efforts.
