Warrants . The concern grows out of the fact that all of the failures and the and The Information that shouldved been given and wasnt given. And the question being what was the intent . What what washa their intention . Their motivation there. And what we determined was we couldnt definitively say what the motivation was. Are these pretty smart people . Fairly welleducated . At least welleducated. I dont know if theyre smart. I dont know if were very smart to beow honest with you. I was b going to say they have law degrees, right . At least somehe of them do. So you think the woods review for people at this level of the organization. To be clear, the stuff that didnt happen on the woods review was basic stuff. Yeah. You didnt need to be a deeplyexperienced fbi agent to be able to do it the right way. Well, thats my point. So wouldnt you think that would almost be muscle p memory for people who are going through this process to know they had an obligation to go through that . They clear
going it was going to come to this. that it was going to be scrutinized. regardless of who the subject of the investigation was. if the if the names were changed and the parties were changed, we d still be here. and it looks like they were trying to skate along the edges and get away with something to me. and i can t imagine that they did it for any other reason than a political motivation. and i don t expect you toa respond to that because you re doing a great job of holding to the scope of your report.re but nobody can tell me, with people of thisl caliber, with e record of partisan, vitriolic, to say we just forgot to do a standard procedural review that you would probably expect one of their staff twora or three levels down to know you need to do it. it just doesn t make sense to me. now, you vet gottenen a lot of questions today that had nothing to do withqu your report. i think you ve done a very good job of saying i m here to talk about my report. you didn t do a russia coll