Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. 53 Transcripts: Whose Testimony Was Accurate?

Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
By Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Thatcher
Mostly retired guy. For some more information you can go to my blog <a href="http://havechanged.blogspot.com/">Things Have Changed.  About my avatar: In these days of diversity and multiculturalism, I wanted to ensure no microaggressions were caused. Picking an avatar that was non-threatening, flexible, and sexually ambiguous seemed to fit the bill. I hope I did not offend anyone with my choice.
|
12 COMMENTS
 

Scene One:

On July 17, 2017, James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) during the Obama Administration, testified at a session of the House Intelligence Committee.

Rep Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio) read him two quotes from testimony the National Intelligence Officer (NIO*) for Russia had given when briefing the committee on December 5, 2016:

“In terms of favoring one candidate or another, you know, the evidence is a little bit unclear.”
“It’s unclear to us that the Kremlin had a particular – that they had a particular favorite or they wanted to see a particular outcome. That is what the reporting shows.” (pp16-17)

Yet on January 6, 2017 Clapper released the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) on Russian interference with the election which concluded, ” We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump“. Wenstrup asked if the statements made by the NIO on December 5 were accurate and complete. Clapper said no, they were not. Because of extensive redactions in the transcript that followed this exchange it is not possible to determine if Clapper offered an explanation as to why the assessment changed in the intervening month or, in the alternative, why a senior CIA official was giving inaccurate information to the Intelligence Committee.

Clapper also testified that the ICA didn’t talk about collusion because they didn’t have any evidence “that met the evidentiary threshold“(p.46), yet the FBI and DOJ had vouched for the reliability of the collusion allegations made in the Steele Dossier when officials from both agencies signed the Carter Page FISA warrant application in October 2016.

Scene Two:

On June 22, 2017, Dan Coats, DNI testified. In March, after Coats’ confirmation, James Comey briefed him on collusion, telling Coats, “There is smoke but no fire on the issue of collusion” (p.6), “There is nothing to indicate collusion with the President” (p.27), and then adding:

“We are only looking at one person who had some role in the campaign [Carter Page]”. (p.6)

Yet the Crossfire Hurricane investigation specifically named four targeted individuals, Page, Papadopolous, Manafort, and Flynn, while the most recent FISA renewal application in January 2017 had referenced Papadopolous and Manafort, in addition to Page. Moreover, as was recently revealed, the investigation into Flynn was not closed as recommended in early January.

Scene Three:

Andrew McCabe testified on December 19, 2017. Consistent with prior testimony given by Comey, McCabe stated that the FBI Director began writing memos of his meetings with Trump because of concerns about the frequency and content of his conversations with the President. However, Rep Gowdy pointed out that could not be true because Comey began writing memos right after his first meeting with Trump on January 6 – indeed Comey arranged in advance to have a setup in his car that would allow him to write a memo immediately upon ending his initial meeting with the President-elect. After that meeting, Comey told Clapper the “President-elect was very defensive about it” (Clapper interview p. 51), the “it” being the allegation he consorted with several prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room (I’m being circumspect here about the specifics of the allegation). Very clearly, Trump’s defensiveness (about an incident that never happened) was an indication of guilt in Comey’s mind.

Gowdy also asked why the FBI began drafting a non-indictment statement when Clinton and others were still to be interviewed in the email investigation; why wasn’t there also an indictment draft? McCabe stated there was no consideration given to drafting a statement regarding an indictment recommendation.

——————————————————-
* National Intelligence Officers are appointed by the Director of the CIA, report directly to the Director, and are responsible for all intelligence matters within their geographical area.

Published in General
Tags: ,
Join Ricochet!
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 12 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
Join Ricochet
  1. Bruce Caward Thatcher
    Bruce CawardJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Grrrr.

    • #1
    • May 24, 2020, at 11:51 AM PDT
      • ⋅
    • 4 likes
  2. Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Thatcher
    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
    Post author

    Bruce Caward (View Comment):

    Grrrr.

    Imagine how I felt reading 5000+ pages of this stuff!

    • #2
    • May 24, 2020, at 11:56 AM PDT
      • ⋅
    • 8 likes
  3. StChristopher Member
    StChristopher

    This makes my blood boil and is obviously outrageous. Its clear that Republicans will never get a fair chance in office. Republicans will be undermined by the use of state power colluding with big media, tech, universities, etc.

    The public seems not to care about the serious misuse of power by the Obama administration and its holdovers in the bureaucracies and their lies to cover it up. My liberal friends are consumed with Trump hatred and not one has re-examined whether Trump colluded with Russia. Not one is interested in the facts. Truth be told, they never did have facts and didn’t reason into a belief that Trump colluded with Russia. Its an article of faith. Worrisome.

    • #3
    • May 24, 2020, at 12:07 PM PDT
      • ⋅
    • 5 likes
      • ⋅
    • This comment has been edited.
  4. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    John Berg (View Comment):

    This makes my blood boil and is obviously outrageous. Its clear that Republicans will never get a fair chance in office. Republicans will be undermined by the use of state power colluding with big media, tech, universities, etc.

    The public seems not to care about the serious misuse of power by the Obama administration and its holdovers in the bureaucracies and their lies to cover it up. My liberal friends are consumed with Trump hatred and not one has thought to re-examine if Trump Russia collusion is true. Not one is interested in the facts. They never did have facts and didn’t reason into a belief that Trump colluded with Russion. Its an article of faith. Worrisome.

    Why should the public care if Republican office holders don’t? No Republican should grant any interview on any topic except this one. They all need to have the facts and timeline straight. They should have been doing this in 2017 because we knew enough back then to know that this was all wrong. Instead Ryan blocked subpoenas; Graham grandstands on TV.

    • #4
    • May 24, 2020, at 12:18 PM PDT
      • ⋅
    • 7 likes
  5. Columbo Member
    Columbo

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo&hellip; (View Comment):

    Bruce Caward (View Comment):

    Grrrr.

    Imagine how I felt reading 5000+ pages of this stuff!

    We HAVE known this for going on two years! All of it!

    Honey, you’re home.

    The Biggest Scam In American History

    • #5
    • May 24, 2020, at 12:58 PM PDT
      • ⋅
    • 2 likes
      • ⋅
    • This comment has been edited.
  6. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo&hellip; (View Comment):

    Bruce Caward (View Comment):

    Grrrr.

    Imagine how I felt reading 5000+ pages of this stuff!

    Let alone committing to memory!

    • #6
    • May 24, 2020, at 1:38 PM PDT
      • ⋅
    • 5 likes
  7. DonG (Biden is compromised) Coolidge
    DonG (Biden is compromised)

    Ed G. (View Comment):
    Why should the public care if Republican office holders don’t?

    The Swamp is bipartisan. I also suspect that some of the oversight members of Congress are compromised and controlled by the IC. It is JE Hoover and Watergate rolled into one.

    • #7
    • May 24, 2020, at 7:45 PM PDT
      • ⋅
    • 3 likes
  8. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):
    Why should the public care if Republican office holders don’t?

    The Swamp is bipartisan. I also suspect that some of the oversight members of Congress are compromised and controlled by the IC. It is JE Hoover and Watergate rolled into one.

    I suspect the same thing, but simple disinterest is almost as bad.

    • #8
    • May 24, 2020, at 8:31 PM PDT
      • ⋅
    • 1 like
  9. Ontheleftcoast Member
    Ontheleftcoast

     

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo&hellip;:

    Yet the Crossfire Hurricane investigation specifically named four targeted individuals, Page, Papadopolous, Manafort, and Flynn, while the most recent FISA renewal application in January 2017 had referenced Papadopolous and Manafort, in addition to Page. Moreover, as was recently revealed, the investigation into Flynn was not closed as recommended in early January.

    That was just a convenient oversight. Uh huh. You bet. 

    What a choice: either misfeasance and sloppiness or malfeasance at the highest levels of the FBI. 

    • #9
    • May 25, 2020, at 11:13 AM PDT
      • ⋅
    • 1 like
  10. Ontheleftcoast Member
    Ontheleftcoast

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    The Swamp is bipartisan. I also suspect that some of the oversight members of Congress are compromised and controlled by the IC.

    The SSCI would be a good place to start looking for that.

    • #10
    • May 25, 2020, at 11:16 AM PDT
      • ⋅
    • Like
  11. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN

    I was looking for a comprehensive list of all 53 names, as Ive heard about some of the people who lied on TV. Fortunately lying on TV is not a crime, but what I was looking for was a list of commentators I could use as a control group. You know a starter list of known lairs of whose opinion I can completely disregard. I found this website listing all 53, and linking to all transcripts:

    https://www.dni.gov/index.php/features/2753-53-hpsci-transcripts

    You’ve all probably all seen this (or something similar) but if not…

    • #11
    • May 25, 2020, at 12:13 PM PDT
      • ⋅
    • 2 likes
  12. Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Thatcher
    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
    Post author

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    I was looking for a comprehensive list of all 53 names, as Ive heard about some of the people who lied on TV. Fortunately lying on TV is not a crime, but what I was looking for was a list of commentators I could use as a control group. You know a starter list of known lairs of whose opinion I can completely disregard. I found this website listing all 53, and linking to all transcripts:

    https://www.dni.gov/index.php/features/2753-53-hpsci-transcripts

    You’ve all probably all seen this (or something similar) but if not…

    Thanks. I’m going to do a summary post with some of this background info.

    • #12
    • May 25, 2020, at 12:45 PM PDT
      • ⋅
    • 1 like