House Intel Chair Nunes Calls FBI Director Comey, NSA Director Rogers For "Closed Session" After Finding "Concerning Info" In Intel Reports

[SirLinksALot]

SOURCE: ZERO HEDGE

URL: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-24/nunes-calls-comey-rogers-closed-session-after-finding-concerning-info-intel-reports


Last night we highlighted a Fox News story which suggested that Devin Nunes expected the NSA to deliver a "smoking gun" which would prove that the Obama administration spied on the Trump transition team, and possibly the president-elect himself, as early as today.

Moments ago, Nunes fanned that speculation by holding an impromptu press conference announcing that he'll call both FBI Director Comey and NSA Director Rogers before a closed session of the House Intelligence Committee to discuss topics which "they couldn't answer in a public setting."

Here is Nunes's full statement:

CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE VIDEO

CNBC Now ✔ @CNBCnow
BREAKING: House Intelligence Committee chair Nunes says Trump's former campaign chairman has volunteered to be interviewed by the committee.
10:39 AM - 24 Mar 2017[/size]
  43 43 Retweets   25 25 likes

And some early takeaways:

"There are just questions that we have for Dir. Comey and Adm. Rogers probably that they couldn't answer in a public setting."

Fox News‏Verified account
@FoxNews

 Follow
 More
.@DevinNunes: "There are just questions that we have for Dir. Comey and Adm. Rogers probably that they couldn't answer in a public setting."

Nunes also revealed that President Trump's former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, has volunteered to testify before the House Intelligence Committee on his alleged connections to Russia.

"We thank Mr. Manafort for volunteering and encourage others with knowledge of these issues to voluntarily interview with the committee."

Nunes continues to decline requests from the press to reveal his sources...

Fox News ✔ @FoxNews
.@DevinNunes: "I'm still not going to tell you who our sources are."
10:41 AM - 24 Mar 2017
  154 154 Retweets   521 521 likes

But did confirm there was "no wiretapping of Trump Tower; That didn't happen"

This follows Nunes's appearance on Fox News last night in which he declared he had an obligation to raise issues he's discovered about the unmasking of Americans' names during serveillance.

@DevinNunes on "incidental" surveillance revelations: I had a duty and obligation to tell the President.
 
“What I saw had nothing to do with Russia. This has nothing to do with the Russia investigation.”
 
“The lack of a leak investigation is quite concerning. We need to make sure that these leaks are being tracked down.”
 
I have information that indicates Americans’ names were unmasked during surveillance.
 
“Clearly when I see a problem, I’m going to point it out.”
 
“Names for sure if they’re picked up in any incidental collection of any kind, they should be minimized.”

Meanwhile, proving that Nunes may actually be on to something here, WaPo has quickly called for an immediate investigation into his behavior.

[SirLinksALot]

Question for those in the know....

Do either Comey or Rogers have the authority to DECLINE the invitation from Nunes?

[r9etb]

Meanwhile, proving that Nunes may actually be on to something here, WaPo has quickly called for an immediate investigation into his behavior.

OK, so applying the necessary discount because it's Zerohedge making the statement, if the WaPo is calling for such an investigation, I suspect in part it's because they're pissed about being forced to cover a story they'd rather not touch.

Nunes has pretty much demolished the carefully crafted narrative about the whole surveillance issue, Obamaworld's post-election activities, and a variety of other things.

The MSM has to look at that stuff now, if only to attempt to repair the impression that they've taken sides (which they have).

[r9etb]

Do either Comey or Rogers have the authority to DECLINE the invitation from Nunes?[/size]

Interesting question.  They can decline, as they don't work for Congress and haven't been subpoenaed.  But on this it would be a very bad move.

Both of them serve at the pleasure of the president, and refusing to meet with Nunes about an issue that directly affects the president would make them vulnerable to firing.

Handled properly, their failure to come clean on apparent crimes can be made into a reasonable excuse for firing them. (OK, this is Trump -- it wouldn't be handled properly, but still....)

If neither of them is actually complicit, their best interests would be served by cooperating to a certain extent.  If either of them knew and looked the other way, their bests interests are served by showing up and being unable to recall....

Smart political strategy would have Nunes and Trump working together; but I suspect Nunes is acting on his own.

[driftdiver]

Question for those in the know....

Do either Comey or Rogers have the authority to DECLINE the invitation from Nunes?

@SirLinksALot
Normally I'd say the Congress has the power to subpeona ANYONE in the country and require them to appear.   However recently Congress requested information from the FBI and the FBI failed to even respond.

Seems to me Comey is playing his own game.

[libertybele]

Nunes has stated that the information though was collected legally and Trump was not wiretapped, so I don't see anything becoming of this.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/24/nunes-says-information-from-trump-surveillance-concerned-me.html

[r9etb]

Nunes has stated that the information though was collected legally and Trump was not wiretapped, so I don't see anything becoming of this.

That's not the issue, though.  The law says that American citizens are supposed to be "masked" in this sort of data collection, and apparently were not, which is illegal.  Moreover, it appears quite possible that the choice of who was "unmasked" was driven by political considerations, which makes it a bigger deal.

This goes to the heart of what concerns a lot of people about FISA in the first place, regardless of their political views.  And, unlike Obama's DOJ, I think the current DOJ will go after those who broke the law.

[Bigun]

That's not the issue, though.  The law says that American citizens are supposed to be "masked" in this sort of data collection, and apparently were not, which is illegal.  Moreover, it appears quite possible that the choice of who was "unmasked" was driven by political considerations, which makes it a bigger deal.

This goes to the heart of what concerns a lot of people about FISA in the first place, regardless of their political views.  And, unlike Obama's DOJ, I think the current DOJ will go after those who broke the law.

Absolutely right!  Intelligence gathering being weaponized for political purposes IS the ONLY thing at issue and it is clear to me that it HAS been done!

[SirLinksALot]

That's not the issue, though.  The law says that American citizens are supposed to be "masked" in this sort of data collection, and apparently were not, which is illegal.  Moreover, it appears quite possible that the choice of who was "unmasked" was driven by political considerations, which makes it a bigger deal.

And not only that, Nunes also stated that This has nothing to do with the Russia investigation.

So, if the surveillance of American citizens had nothing to do with Russia, what was it done for?

[r9etb]

So, if the surveillance of American citizens had nothing to do with Russia, what was it done for?

The intel agencies are interested in more countries than just Russia -- Turkey, to name just one.

And we already knew that Michael Flynn was dealing with them during Trump's campaign (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/10/us/politics/michael-flynn-turkey.html?_r=0). 

So that seems like one likely scenario, especially since "intel leaks" are what brought Flynn down in the first place.

[corbe]

Nunes Backs Down From Assertion Trump Was Monitored

by Ken Dilanian and Ali Vitali 
Mar 24 2017, 1:39 pm ET


The chairman of the House intelligence committee has backed down from his dramatic assertion that Donald Trump and his aides were "monitored," by U.S. spies — a claim the Republicans have cited this week in emails to loyalists.

Rep. Devin Nunes told reporters Friday he can't be sure whether conversations among Trump or his aides were captured in the surveillance that has become a source of controversy since Nunes made it public in two news conferences this week.

"He said he'll have to get all the documents he requested from the (intelligence community) about this before he knows for sure," his spokesman, Jack Langer, said earlier.

Nunes continued to refuse to say how he had learned about the surveillance, including whether his source was in the White House.

Langer asserted that Nunes did not explicitly say Trump was spied on when he briefed reporters Wednesday that he was "very concerned," that "the intelligence community incidentally collected information about American citizens involved in the Trump transition."

As for Trump's assertion that Obama wiretapped him, Nunes repeated Friday what he has said previously, telling reporters, "That didn't happen."

Related: Trump Says He Feels 'Somewhat Vindicated' By Nunes Disclosure

However, Nunes on Wednesday had left an impression — widely repeated in the news media — that the conversations of Trump and his aides were picked up by American spies.

"I have seen intelligence reports that clearly show the president elect and his team were at least monitored and disseminated out," Nunes told reporters.

On Thursday, the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee sent out an email about Nunes' remarks with the subject line, "Confirmed: Obama Spied on Trump."

Nunes himself said he wasn't making that claim — he said the surveillance was legal and there was no wiretap of Trump Tower. But those sorts of assertions by Republicans raised the question about whether what Nunes did was intended to give Trump cover for his discredited claim that Obama "wiretapped" him.

Current and former officials say that it's possible that Trump or his aides were picked up "incidentally" by surveillance, if a foreign diplomat or other target called them or emailed them. But it is far more likely, they say, that what Nunes was talking about was surveillance of foreigners talking to foreigners, who were speaking about Trump and his aides.

Those conversations were then excerpted in intelligence reports that circulated around the government.

Surveillance of those conversations required warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court if the foreigners are in the United States — as diplomats, for example — or if the communications traverse U.S. cables.

"I think this is overwhelmingly not information from or to an American," former NSA and CIA director Mike Hayden told Chuck Todd Thursday on Meet the Press Daily. "I think this is overwhelmingly information about an American, foreign to foreign, in which they are doing what you would expect them to do."

<..snip..>

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nunes-backs-down-assertion-trump-was-monitored-n738151

[Bigun]

Nunes Backs Down From Assertion Trump Was Monitored


http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nunes-backs-down-assertion-trump-was-monitored-n738151

So what was he told behind closed doors that he can't talk about?

[Emjay]

OK, so applying the necessary discount because it's Zerohedge making the statement, if the WaPo is calling for such an investigation, I suspect in part it's because they're pissed about being forced to cover a story they'd rather not touch.

Nunes has pretty much demolished the carefully crafted narrative about the whole surveillance issue, Obamaworld's post-election activities, and a variety of other things.

The MSM has to look at that stuff now, if only to attempt to repair the impression that they've taken sides (which they have).

This makes Trump's original tweet look pretty spiffy.  It was widely discussed and disseminated, mostly in an effort to make fun of Trump and to make him look bad.  So now, things are coming out and the press is so involved, they can't sweet it under the rug.

[r9etb]

This makes Trump's original tweet look pretty spiffy.  It was widely discussed and disseminated, mostly in an effort to make fun of Trump and to make him look bad.  So now, things are coming out and the press is so involved, they can't sweet it under the rug.

No, it doesn't quite do that.  Trump made a specific accusation against Obama personally, for which he has still offered no evidence. 

This is a different sort of thing -- incidental information being misused for political purposes, and Trump was not even aware of it (Nunes told him about it just the other day).

It seems like the same thing but it's really not.  In many respects this is potentially a much bigger deal, as it puts the intelligence agencies themselves in the crosshairs.

[Emjay]

Trump is free to make an accusation.  He is under no obligation to provide evidence.  However, the evidence is surely there as Obama is a total creep and was surely investigating Trump in every way possible to try and stop his election.

I'm not a Trumper but I owe Trump a lot and I'm not gonna forget it at least not for a while.

[r9etb]

Trump is free to make an accusation.  He is under no obligation to provide evidence.

Wrong.  You and I are free to make accusations.  You and I are under no obligation to provide evidence.  The same might even be said of Donald Trump the private citizen.

The same cannot be said of the President of the United States.  What the president says, and how he says it, matters to the entire world.

Trump behaves like a petulant child, and we're all the worse off for it.

[Emjay]

Wrong.  You and I are free to make accusations.  You and I are under no obligation to provide evidence.  The same might even be said of Donald Trump the private citizen.

The same cannot be said of the President of the United States.  What the president says, and how he says it, matters to the entire world.

Trump behaves like a petulant child, and we're all the worse off for it.

That's my point.  What Trump says matters and he says it to me at the same minute he says it to the New York Times.

If he had credible sources that Obama had spied on him (and, by the way, Obama spied on him like crazy) why shouldn't he use his communication method to mention it.  It got the media stirred up, it got you stirred up and it is resulting in a far more thorough investigation than what might have happened otherwise.

[XenaLee]

Nunes has stated that the information though was collected legally and Trump was not wiretapped, so I don't see anything becoming of this.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/24/nunes-says-information-from-trump-surveillance-concerned-me.html

Legally, maybe.  Ethically, hell no.  Unprecedented, definitely.

Yet another bad standard of behavior to set for America's future as a free nation.... that it's A-OK to spy on the incoming administration and president elect.

Not....looking....good.

[Emjay]

Legally, maybe.  Ethically, hell no.  Unprecedented, definitely.

Yet another bad standard of behavior to set for America's future as a free nation.... that it's A-OK to spy on the incoming administration and president elect.

Not....looking....good.

Not at all and yet we have people here calling Trump a petulant child for complaining about it.

[Smokin Joe]

@SirLinksALot
Normally I'd say the Congress has the power to subpeona ANYONE in the country and require them to appear.   However recently Congress requested information from the FBI and the FBI failed to even respond.

Seems to me Comey is playing his own game.

There is that little thingy called "Contempt of Congress", if Congress will invoke it.

[DB]

Trump is free to make an accusation.  He is under no obligation to provide evidence.  However, the evidence is surely there as Obama is a total creep and was surely investigating Trump in every way possible to try and stop his election.

I'm not a Trumper but I owe Trump a lot and I'm not gonna forget it at least not for a while.

Presidents lead based on authority given to them by its citizens. That authority is based on trust. When the President cry's wolf repeatedly and destroys his credibility so goes his ability to lead.

[SirLinksALot]

There is that little thingy called "Contempt of Congress", if Congress will invoke it.

That little thingy as you call it is pretty useless in practice. Both Eric Holder and Lois Lerner were held in contempt and the end result was.... well nothing.

Holder held on till he stepped down and Lerner is enjoying her yearly 6 figure retirement.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

What a clown show. All you idiots who believed Trump's garbage should now hang your foolish heads in shame.

There's simply nothing there. I haven't seen a scintilla of any evidence that what Trump said was right.

[Bigun]

What a clown show. All you idiots who believed Trump's garbage should now hang your foolish heads in shame.

There's simply nothing there. I haven't seen a scintilla of any evidence that what Trump said was right.

@Weird Tolkienish Figure

And YOU are a dammed fool for saying that because there is plenty there as you and the world will soon see I hope!

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Wrong.  You and I are free to make accusations.  You and I are under no obligation to provide evidence.  The same might even be said of Donald Trump the private citizen.

The same cannot be said of the President of the United States.  What the president says, and how he says it, matters to the entire world.

Trump behaves like a petulant child, and we're all the worse off for it.

It's amazing how stupid these people are.