were not forth coming or truthful to the court, but the washington post reported today that in fact, the government did inform the court about their assessment of the reliability of steel and that information, and the public is left with a very confusing story. more questions than answers no doubt about it. and catherine, democrats are saying on one hand, this memo is a dud and it does not push the story forward but it is called dangerous, and so which does it fa fall? what is important to fall is that it is not only the three of us in the american public who have not seen all of the underlying documents that were part of the fisa court warrant application, but nunes himself had not read that application, and how do you write a book report when you have not read the book? you are summarize the talking points that you are hearing on hannity, and the fellow republicans who are hell bent on
fbi director andrew mccabe testified before the house intelligence committee in november of 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the fisa court without the steele dossier information and except that we have not seen the transcripts of the testimony and not everybody who was at that hearing agrees. listening to the ranking d democrat on the house intel committee who was in the room for mccabe s testimony. what it ended up delivering is criticism of a single fisa application involving carter page and the renewals that cherry picks information that does not tell the reader the whole of the application, and as the d.o.j. and fbi have said deeply misleading and you can cherry pick any fisa court application or fbi application and do the same thing. and joining us now is congressman who supported the memo release, and thank you for
omissions. and it is the omissions that i was trying to get at when i was questioning representative turner in our earlier block, because that, too, is what, i guess creates the full picture of what the truth is, what the facts are. he kept on saying that opposition research that is politically motivated should never be used in order to get any kind of fisa warrant. does that make sense to you? well, i understand his point with respect to political research, but the issue is when information is presented to the fisa court, the fbi and the department of justice in making that application will give the court an assessment of the reliability of those sources. and an application in establishing probable cause would not be based on one specific fact that is presented. so if they have presented the information po the court they would have to say, this is how we assess the reliability of this source, and what the nunes memo argues and the thenarrativ is, is that the fbi and the doj