to suspect he was working for the fbi, seeking to gather information surreptitiously on the campaign? well, our meeting was like two faculty members in the faculty lounge. i didn t think any of it until i started to see the reporting that came out recently. then i started to put two and two together. then it made sense to me that he was probing to find a weak spot in our campaign, someone who might be vulnerable to connecting things back to those elusive 30,000 emails that supposedly the russians had. i really think that s what his task was, was to create an audit trail back to those emails from someone in the campaign or someone associated with the campaign so that they could develop a stronger case for probable cause to continue to issue warrants and to further an investigation. i really felt after hearing all of these other things, listening to the reports that i ve read,
russian agents while russia was interfering in the election. even in the abstract, that kind of information is the holy grail for the justice department and the fbi, right? you don t you don t out your confidential sources. if you do, why would anybody ever be a confidential source for the fbi ever again? you don t reveal the identities of your sources who take action and collect information surreptitiously for the fbi or for the cia. you don t expose them because you don t want to engage those endanger those sources. you don t want to blow any investigations they might be part of in an ongoing way. that s supposed to be sacrosanct, right? well, in this case, republican congressman devin nunes, the head of the intelligence committee in the house, his subpoena for information about the confidential source that talked to members of the trump campaign, his subpoena reportedly demands all information that the justice department has related to that individual, which means what devin nunes
interfering in the election. even in the abstract that kind of information is the holy grail for the justice department and the fbi, right? you don t you don t out your confidential sources. if you do, why would anybody ever be a confidential source for the fbi ever again? you don t reveal the identities of your sources who take action and collect information surreptitiously for the fbi or the cia. you don t expose them because you don t want to engage those sources. you don t want to blow any investigations they might be part of in an ongoing way. that s supposed to be sacrosanct, right? well, in this case republican congressman devin nunes, the head of the intelligence committee in the house, his subpoena for information about the confidential source that talked to members of the trump campaign, his subpoena reportedly demands all information that the justice department has related to that individual, which means what devin nunes has demanded from the justice department is not just
fisa warrant request or application. when did he live? october 2016 2016 or january 2? i think director comey has a series of serious legal challenges. he testified under oath and that question by john radcliffe about when did he make the decision whether or not she was guilty or not guilty or was she going to be charged? i should say. and it was clearly writing this out to multiple times before. you had senator grassley ask him directly with the to releasing information surreptitiously? he was definitive in saying no, only to learn later that that wasn t true. sean: isn t it illegal? if i went to congress and live for congress. you remember, we asked the fbi, we asked director comey directly, myself and bob goodlatte, chairman of the judiciary committee, did hillary clinton lie under oath? they said they never had a referral. we sent them a referral.
andrew weissmann said, no dossier, no fisa warrant request or application. when did he lie?be october 2016 or january 2017? i think director comey has a series of serious legal challenges. he testified under oath inh tht question by john radcliffe about when did he make the decision whether or not she was guilty or not guilty or was she going to be charged? i should say. and it was clearly writing this out multiple times before. s you had senator grassley ask him directly, was he party to releasing information surreptitiously? he was definitive in saying no, only to learn later that that wasn t true. sean: isn t it illegal? if i went to congress and lied before for congress. what i would be in? you should. you remember, we asked the fbi, we asked director comey directly, myself and bob goodlatte, chairman of the judiciary committee, did hillary clinton lie under oath? he said they never had a referral. we sent them a referral.