Last quote by Devin Nunes
Devin Nunes quotes
Well if you look at the reporter, he wrote the story in The Washington Post.
At the end of the day, sometimes you make the right decision, sometimes you make the wrong one. But you've got to stick by the decisions you make.
The intelligence community incidentally collected information about American citizens involved in the Trump transition. From what I know right now it looks like incidental collection, we don't know exactly how that was picked up, but we're are trying to get to the bottom of it.
It's all classified information.
It's perhaps legal but I don't know that it's right and I don't think the American people would be comfortable with that. I think the president is concerned. He should be. I think he would like to see those reports.
It was a lot of information on the President-elect and the transition team and what they were doing.
But, What I read was clearly significant information about Trump and his team.
I recently confirmed that, on numerous occasions, the intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition. Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration, details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value, were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.
It looks like it was legal, incidental collection that then made its way into intelligence report. Nothing criminal at all involved. I have seen intelligence reports that clearly show that the president-elect and his team were I guess at least monitored and disseminated about in the intelligence community.
What I have read seems to me to be some level of surveillance activity, perhaps legal, but I don't know that it's right, I don't know that the American people would be comfortable with what I read, but let's get all the reports.
What I've read bothers me, and I think it should bother the president himself and his team. It all depends on one's definition of spying.
From what I know right now, it looks like incidental collection. We don't know exactly how that was picked up, but we're trying to get to the bottom of it.
I don't know these people. No, I've heard of Manafort. I think where people are getting confused at is, there was a New York Times story where three Americans were named in that story. And I was asked whether or not I was going to bring those people before the committee and ask them questions. And I said.
I said we cannot go on witch hunts against the American people just because their name ends up in a newspaper story, because look, we know this, all newspapers are biased … I have to be very careful not to start hunting down Americans and bringing them before the legislative branch of government just because they appeared in a newspaper story as being a friend of some foreign government.
For me, this healthcare bill is an absolute no-brainer. Any conservative group who opposes it, I don't even understand how they can categorize themselves as being a conservative group.
Details about persons associated with the incoming administration, details with little apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.
The faster you can get to the bottom of this, it's going to be better for all Americans.
The faster you can get to the bottom of this, the better it's going to be for all Americans.
Let me be clear: We know there was not a wiretap on Trump Tower. However, it's still possible that other surveillance activities were used against President Trump and his associates.
We know there was not a physical wiretap of Trump Tower. However, it's still possible that other surveillance activities were used against President Trump and his associates.
No, there was no FISA warrant that I'm aware of to tap Trump Tower. We know a law has been broken and we need to get to the bottom of it. I'm not asking for any profile. Everything we do around here is really important. I wouldn't put one in front of the other. The intelligence committee – that's a committee that I call the tip of the spear, because without national security it's tough to keep those trade routes open.
For the first time the American people, and all the political parties now, are paying attention to the threat that Russia poses. We know that the Russians were trying to get involved in our campaign, like they have for many decades. They're also trying to get involved in campaigns around the globe and over in Europe.
We aim to determine who has leaked or facilitated leaks of classified information so that these individuals can be brought to justice.
That's the only crime we know has been committed right now.
The one crime we know that's been committed is that one: the leaking of someone's name. Were there any other names that were ... leaked out?
We need to get to the bottom of that. Was there a physical wiretap of Trump Tower? No there never was. The information we received Friday continues to lead us in that direction. There was no FISA warrant I am aware of to tap Trump Tower.
Was there a physical wiretap of Trump Tower? No, but there never was, and the information we got on Friday continues to lead us in that direction.
There was no FISA warrant that I'm aware of to tap Trump Tower.
That is very possible, and we don't have the answers to those questions yet. We had a deadline of Friday for the NSA, FBI and CIA to get us those names that were unmasked through the FISA system. We didn't get those names on Friday, and until we get those names, we can't rule this out.
There was no Fisa warrant that I'm aware of to tap Trump Tower. I don't think there is anyone in the White House today that is under any type of surveillance at all.
Clearly the president was wrong.
I don't think there was an actual tap of Trump Tower.
Are you going to take the tweets literally? And if you are, then clearly the president was wrong.
I think you're going to find some very interesting items coming to the forefront over the next two weeks.
Are you going to take the tweets literally? If so, clearly the president was wrong.
This has become a bit of a stumbling block for our investigators to actually be able to compile and get through the information. The bottom line is, we don't have a computer out there to actually be able to catalog the information.
No, I don't. I have great confidence in Mike Flynn. He's probably the best intelligence officer of his generation. And Neil, he's being attacked maliciously by the press, which is not uncommon in this town. I would find that hard to believe because they were so busy, and I think these conversations were all very short. The president is a neophyte to politics.
He's been doing this a little over a year. And I think a lot of the things that he says, you guys sometimes take literally. Sometimes he doesn't have 27 lawyers and staff looking at what he does – which is, I think, at times refreshing and at times can also lead us to have to be sitting at a press conference like this, answering questions that you guys are asking. But at the end of the day, I think tweets are a very transparent way for a politician of any rank to communicate with their constituents. So I don't think we should attack the president for tweeting.
Then clearly the president is wrong.
If there is no warrant, then we'll have solved this problem: There was no wiretapping.
The president is a neophyte to politics â he's been doing this a little over a year.
I don't think we can be rightly criticized for trying to be transparent and holding a public hearing for an investigation that has received an extraordinary amount of public attention.
But we also don't have any evidence of many people who have been named in multiple news stories that supposedly are under some type of investigation.
I don't believe that to be the case. I don't think the evidence exists for that.
The point of – if I'm understanding the point of [the tweets] -- is he's asking the question about whether or not he was – was he or any of his associates targeted.
We don't have any evidence of that.
One of the focus points of the House Intelligence Committee's investigation is the U.S. government's response to actions taken by Russian intelligence agents during the presidential campaign. As such, the committee will make inquiries into whether the government was conducting surveillance activities on any political party's campaign officials or surrogates, and we will continue to investigate this issue if the evidence warrants it.
I think it's very problematic. I've expressed this concern to the IC [intelligence community]. We have sent them many followup questions as it relates to intelligence that's been collected. And we expect prompt answers. I think we also expect unprecedented answers from them of the information that we're going to be asking for. Typically we've had great trust with our intelligence agencies.
And I continue to have that trust, but we have to verify, in fact, that all of the tools that are in place, that we oversee, are being used ethically, responsibly and by the law. And if anybody has abused those, we want to know about that. And that's part of the reason why it's important for us to know whether or not, as some press reports have indicated, the Department of Justice or any other agency tried to get the warrant on anybody related to the Trump campaign or any other campaign for that matter.
At this point, we don't have any evidence of that. As you all know, the president is a neophyte in politics. And I think a lot of the things he says, you guys sometimes take literally. Sometimes he doesn't have 27 lawyers and staff looking at what he does … I don't think we should attack the president for tweeting.
The Committee will make inquiries into whether the government was conducting surveillance on any political party's campaign officials or surrogates. We will continue to investigate this issue if the evidence warrants it.
It's not paranoia at all when it's actually happening. It's leak after leak after leak from the bureaucrats in the [intelligence community] and former Obama administration officials – and it's very real. The White House is absolutely concerned and is trying to figure out a systemic way to address what's happening.
On a bipartisan basis, we will fully investigate all the evidence we collect and follow that evidence wherever it leads.
We can't have McCarthyism back in this place. We can't have the government, the U.S. government or the Congress, legislative branch of government, chasing down American citizens, hauling them before the Congress as if they're some secret Russian agent.
There is no evidence that I've been presented of regular contact with anyone in the Trump campaign. All it was was a White House communications person passing a number and a name of a reporter over for me – if I would talk to them following up on what I had already told all of you in the days before that. How is it compromised when I'm trying to be transparent with the press?
What are we going to appoint a special prosecutor to do, exactly? It's been looked into and there's no evidence of anything there. Obviously, we would like to know if there is.
I want to be very careful that we can't just go on a witch hunt against Americans because they appear in a news story somewhere. We still have not seen any evidence of anyone that's – from the Trump campaign or any other campaign for that matter – that's communicated with the Russian government. What I've been told is, by many -- by many folks, is that there's nothing there.
In this case, as it relates to any campaign officials dealing with Russians, we don't have any evidence right now.
We just cannot go on a witch hunt.
I don't know any other way to do it. We've long looked at this. We've had exhaustive hearing after hearing after hearing for eight years. This is the only way to leapfrog United States tax code in front of every other tax code around the world.
I'm just shocked that nobody's covering the real crime here. You have an American citizen who had his phone call recorded and then leaked to the media.
I don't know any other way to do it. We've long looked at this. We've had exhaustive hearing after hearing after hearing for eight years.
This is the only way to leapfrog United States tax code in front of every other tax code around the world.
The President needs a National Security Advisor whom he can trust and I defer to him to decide who best fills that role.
I think this is a very simple way to border-adjust. It's not a VAT (value-added tax). It's not a sales tax. It's not a tariff. We want to have business taxes completely revamped in this country because we want to encourage people to invest in the economy so that jobs can be created. We can get out of debt financing and into equity financing, so it's a plan that will really make America great again.
I'm just not sure it's possible. I've cautioned his administration to be careful with Putin, as he remains a bad actor.
The committee is vigorously looking into reports of cyber-attacks during the election campaign, and in particular we want to clarify press reports that the CIA has a new assessment that it has not shared with us.
Russia's cyber attacks are no surprise to the House Intelligence Committee, which has been closely monitoring Russia's belligerence for years.