This tale of two reps involves two California congressional districts. The 28th district, represented by Democrat Adam Schiff, includes Hollywood and Burbank. The 22nd district, represented by Republican Devin Nunes, includes the agricultural San Joaquin Valley. It’s obvious each congressman represents the worldview of his constituents: Schiff voters know what’s best for America, and Nunes voters know what’s best for their families and farms.
The two men have little in common. The IG report proved Schiff to be dishonest and corroborated Nunes’s honesty. In addition, it shamed the mainstream media that accepted every word from Adam Schiff as gospel and dismissed Devin Nunes as a Trump sycophant. Because Schiff is a stranger to truth, justice, and the American way, he undermined his party’s impeachment dreams.
It is now possible to fact-check Schiff’s and Nunes’s 2018 FISA memos to know whose reading of the FISA warrant process was accurate. Based on the factual evidence in the DOJ Inspector General’s report, I found seven false claims in Schiff’s memo:
- The DOJ and FBI FISA warrants did not omit material information. False. Horowitz found the FBI and DOJ omitted material facts and altered evidence.
- The FBI used a “rigorous process” to vet Steele’s allegations. False. By January 2017, the FBI knew Steele’s reporting was uncorroborated and continued using it as its primary basis for warrants.
- The FBI’s FISA application proclaimed Steele’s reporting was credible because his prior reporting had been used in criminal proceedings. False. Steele’s reporting had never been used in criminal proceedings.
- The DOJ “made only narrow use of information from Steele’s sources about Page’s specific activities in 2016.” False. The renewals never included information beyond that provided by Steele’s sources.
- Additional information in FISA renewals corroborated Steele’s reporting. False. Horowitz writes: “we found the FBI did not have information corroborating the specific allegations against Carter Page in Steele’s reporting when it relied upon his reports in the first application or subsequent renewals.”
- The FBI collected valuable information from the Page FISA warrants. False. There was no valuable information collected because Page was up to no wrong.
In stark contrast, the Nunes memo made four now-verified claims: (1) an unverified dossier, bought and paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign, was essential in obtaining FISA warrants to surveil Carter Page, (2) FBI officials admitted the Steele dossier was “only minimally corroborated,” (3) the application used a Yahoo News story, leaked by Steele, as corroboration and the FBI denied Steele was the source, and (4) Nellie and Bruce Ohr had ties to both the Steele dossier and the Clinton campaign.
I live in red-state America, where Adam Schiff is the poster child for anti-Trump hysteria. He carefully chooses his words for maximum deniability, but everyday Americans know he has lied to the press. Right-thinking Americans are left to wonder: how can voters in California district 28 elect Schiff? I suspect they ignore his dishonesty because Trump hatred clouds their judgement (which also created sanctuary cities).
Voters in District 28 should question Adam Schiff’s role in the impeachment process. He once alleged clear “quid pro quo” before focus groups convinced him to allege clear “bribery.” And, when evidence did not support his allegations, his party settled on “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress” as grounds for impeachment: an obvious walk-back from Schiff’s headline-grabbing false claims. Again, this begs the question: who wants such a man to represent their interests in Congress?