takes time. so there aren t a lot of options, but it will certainly appear that the white house is trying to stonewall again if, in fact, they make these political redactions that we fear. there are a couple of headlines from the nunes memo i want to bounce off of you. i know this is a challenge because until the president says you can release it, i know your rebuttal is classified. but this is out there. i want you to respond to it as best you can. one is that the deputy director of the fbi, mccabe, testified before your committee in december of 2017 that no surveillance warrant, no fisa court to the fisa court would have been sought without the steele dossier information. that s not exactly what mccabe said. while i can t go into the details of what he said, essentially his argument is we look at this as a complete whole.
we made exception with both of us who supported the release of simpson s transcripts. i think we do need to be concerned about selectively releasing testimony and the overall impact on the investigation. here is another headline from the nunes memo that i want you to comment on. i m taking it directly from it. neither the initial application in october of 2016 nor any of the renewals disclose or reference the role of the dnc, clinton campaign or any party campaign in funding steele s efforts, the dossier. even though the political origins of the dossier were known to fbi officials. as we will send out in the response, the fbi did contain information about a potential political bias. it sent out information about who supported christopher steel is the way they re
and it s wrong. it should never be done. that someone is carter page. the memo says the fisa court gave the okay to the fbi to spy on him, based in large part on material collected by former british spy christopher steele. he was paid $160,000 by the democratic national committee and the hilary clinton campaign via a law firm and a research firm to dig up dirt on trump s ties to russia. the memo says, quote, neither the initial application to surveil page they are talking about there in october 2016 nor any of the renewals disclose or reference the role of the dnc, clinton campaign or any party or campaign in funding steele s efforts. even though the political origins of the steele dossier were then known to senior doj and fbi officials. democrats dispute the significance of the steele dossier and say it was not the basis for the warrant being
the hilary clinton campaign. that s what this is about. and it s wrong. it should never be done. that someone is carter page. the memo says the fisa court gave the okay to the fbi to spy on him, based in large part on material collected by former british spy christopher steele. he was paid $160,000 by the democratic national committee and the hilary clinton campaign via a law firm and a research firm to dig up dirt on trump s ties to russia. the memo says, quote, neither the initial application to surveil page they are talking about there in october 2016 nor any of the renewals disclose or reference the role of the dnc, clinton campaign or any party or campaign in funding steele s efforts. even though the political origins of the steele dossier were then known to senior doj and fbi officials. democrats dispute the significance of the steele dossier and say it was not the basis for the warrant being
russian intelligence officers? shannon: do you not think it s important they didn t tell them a lot of information? if you don t tell them this information some of it at least comes from someone being funded by the democrats and opposition campaign and the fact that the fbi was paying him at one point that there were other allegations that the judge never knew about, if i was one of the fisa judges i would have a lot of questions about what i learned today. that s very legitimate. what has and has not been clarified so far today? first of all mr. steele was never paid by the fbi as part of this particular issue. they were considering it, ultimately backed off on doing that. that we now know is this memo was a three page summary of a 50 something page submission. ken knows about how detailed they are, and the fact it s presumed that an informant such as mr. steele will have some kind of bias, judges are used to that, they understand that. what we don t know is how much was truly tol