Chris Stewart: House Intel released memo to inform public on FBI abuses, not to exonerate Trump

[mystery-ak]

Chris Stewart: House Intel released memo to inform public on FBI abuses, not to exonerate Trump
by Kyle Feldscher | Feb 4, 2018, 10:18 AM

A Republican on the House Intelligence Committee wants President Trump to know the memo released by the committee Friday doesn’t mean he’s completely exonerated in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, said on “Fox News Sunday” Trump was mistaken when he tweeted Saturday that the memo “totally vindicates ‘Trump’” in the Russia probe.

“It doesn't end that need [at] all. I think it would be a mistake for anyone to suggest that the special counsel shouldn't complete his work. I support his work,” Stewart said. "I want him to finish it. I hope he finishes it as quickly as possible. This memo has frankly nothing at all to do with a special counsel.”

more
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/chris-stewart-house-intel-released-memo-to-inform-public-on-fbi-abuses-not-to-exonerate-trump/article/2648053

[Oceander]

Exactly

[edpc]

As I'd posted on another thread....

The last sentence in Section 4, page 5 says.....

Furthermore deputy director McCabe testified before the committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.

Chris Stewart, R-Utah, was on FNS and Wallace asked him specifically if this is what McCabe said.  Stewart replied it may have not been the exact quote, but that's what he meant.

Nunes says there's a different process to release the actual quotes.  We'll see if they ever do.  Otherwise, that portion loses credibility.

[Oceander]

As I'd posted on another thread....

The last sentence in Section 4, page 5 says.....

Furthermore deputy director McCabe testified before the committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.

Chris Stewart, R-Utah, was on FNS and Wallace asked him specifically if this is what McCabe said.  Stewart replied it may have not been the exact quote, but that's what he meant.

Nunes says there's a different process to release the actual quotes.  We'll see if they ever do.  Otherwise, that portion loses credibility.

The memo still doesn’t exonerate Trump. 

[edpc]

The memo still doesn’t exonerate Trump.

Of course it doesn't.  My comment is from the other thread.  The subject of it is Gowdy saying the investigation happens without the dossier because of other factors unrelated to FISA and the dossier.  I agree, but since you're on that thread, too, you already know that.

[Oceander]

Of course it doesn't.  My comment from the other thread was about Gowdy saying the investigation happens without the dossier because of other factors unrelated to FISA and the dossier.  I agree, but since you're on that thread, too, you already know that.

Then we agree that the investigation is not solely dependent on the memo or the Page FISA warrant?

[edpc]

Then we agree that the investigation is not solely dependent on the memo or the Page FISA warrant?

Yes, because you also have to factor the Trump Tower meeting, Cambridge Analytica, and Manafort's past associations.

[Oceander]

Yes, because you also have to factor the Trump Tower meeting and Manafort's past associations.

Then I apologize for thinking that you were saying otherwise.

[endicom]

The memo still doesn’t exonerate Trump.

From what?

It does vindicate Trump.

[edpc]

Then I apologize for thinking that you were saying otherwise.

No problem.  I still don't believe there was any actual collusion with Trump and Russia.  At the worst, he hired the wrong people, relied on politically ignorant family members in the beginning, and it's come back to haunt him.

[skeeter]

From what?

It does vindicate Trump.

I'm not sure if it vindicates him or not.

What would vindication here even look like? I'm unclear as to what Trump's supposed to be guilty of - collusion isn't a crime. Neither is having advisors and associates who've spoken with Russians.

[Oceander]

No problem.  I still don't believe there was any actual collusion with Trump and Russia.  At the worst, he hired the wrong people, relied on politically ignorant family members in the beginning, and it's come back to haunt him.

I tend to agree. 

[jpsb]

I'm not sure if it vindicates him or not.

What would vindication here even look like? I'm unclear as to what Trump's supposed to be guilty of - collusion isn't a crime. Neither is having advisors and associates who've spoken with Russians.

I keep waiting for someone to tell me what crime Trump committed via vi Russia. I see lots of criminal
activity by Clinton, DOJ, FBI, IRS, CIA but thus far none by Trump.

[Cyber Liberty]

I keep waiting for someone to tell me what crime Trump committed via vi Russia. I see lots of criminal
activity by Clinton, DOJ, FBI, IRS, CIA but thus far none by Trump.

I see that as well.  I also see a concerted effort to look away from the crimes of the Dems (not just Clinton, but she seems to be the worst of them, even more-so than Bubba).

[corbe]

   They both (DNC and RNC) colluded with foreign entities to help secure the election of their respective nominees. DNC in financing GPS for the dossier and Trump people meeting Russian agents in Trump Tower to get Hillary's emails.
   Remember obummer interfering in the Israeli and Brexit vote and Manafort in the Ukrainian vote as recent examples of what is considered ethical behavior these days, doesn't make it right, just the way it is these days, geopolitically.

[edpc]

I keep waiting for someone to tell me what crime Trump committed via vi Russia. I see lots of criminal activity by Clinton, DOJ, FBI, IRS, CIA but thus far none by Trump.

So far he's guilty of hiring 30-something foreign policy advisors with no experience and shady connections.  That itself is not a crime. However, if he's covering up for that by misleading and obstructing an investigation because he's embarrassed about it - that is a crime - and a really stupid one at that.

[Cyber Liberty]

   They both (DNC and RNC) colluded with foreign entities to help secure the election of their respective nominees. DNC in financing GPS for the dossier and Trump people meeting Russian agents in Trump Tower to get Hillary's emails.
   Remember obummer interfering in the Israeli and Brexit vote and Manafort in the Ukrainian vote as recent examples of what is considered ethical behavior these days, doesn't make it right, just the way it is these days, geopolitically.

Meddling in foreign elections seems to be a universal past-time in DeeCee.  Obastard practically made a career of trying to get rid of Netanyahu.  People shouldn't be all that shocked some foreign people want to meddle in ours.

[skeeter]

So far he's guilty of hiring 30-something foreign policy advisors with no experience and shady connections.  That itself is not a crime. However, if he's covering up for that by misleading and obstructing an investigation because he's embarrassed about it - that is a crime - and a really stupid one at that.

Is there any real evidence - besides offhandedly expressing hope that investigators will go easy on good guys like Flynn - to suggest he's done anything of the sort?

Honest question - I really don't know.

[jpsb]

   Trump people meeting Russian agents in Trump Tower to get Hillary's emails.

Trump got Hillary's emails from Russian agents in the Trump Tower. Wow, that I did not know.

[Cyber Liberty]

So far he's guilty of hiring 30-something foreign policy advisors with no experience and shady connections.  That itself is not a crime. However, if he's covering up for that by misleading and obstructing an investigation because he's embarrassed about it - that is a crime - and a really stupid one at that.

You are correct:  Hiring idiots is not a crime.  And I don't see him trying to cover it up or obstruct justice either. He's fired a few and threw some to Mueller.  It's early in the game, so we don't know.  Just like with the original Trump War and the Roy Moore thing, I see people jumping in on all sides without knowing the facts yet.

[Cyber Liberty]

Trump got Hillary's emails from Russian agents in the Trump Tower. Wow, that I did not know.

I don't think he got any from that meeting.  If he really wanted Hillary's emails he would have been better off asking Julian Assange.

[edpc]

Is there any real evidence - besides offhandedly expressing hope that investigators will go easy on good guys like Flynn - to suggest he's done anything of the sort?

Honest question - I really don't know.

No and without him answering questions, we may never know.  That is a process fraught with peril and you'd better have great lawyers.  From what I've seen from Cohen, Dowd, and Sekulow....he doesn't.

[edpc]

I don't think he got any from that meeting.  If he really wanted Hillary's emails he would have been better off asking Julian Assange.

That was the problem with Cambridge Analytics.  They did contact Assange about the possibility.  That's why the campaign ran from them so quickly.

[jpsb]

I don't think he got any from that meeting.  If he really wanted Hillary's emails he would have been better off asking Julian Assange.

No, it was a 15 minute meeting with a Russian lawyer set up by Fuson GS (the memo people) that went nowhere. If you want Hillary's emails ask the NSA, they likely have them. Almost two years of investigating Russia Russia Russia and not one piece of evidence that Trump did anything wrong. Witch hunt.

[endicom]

What would vindication here even look like?

That the Steele dossier is bunkum. That there was no collusion with Russians to influence the election.