ADAM SCHIFF CROSSES LINE: He’s Obtained Phone Records of Devin Nunes, Nunes’ Aide, Rudy Giuliani and John Solomon

I wonder why Nunes isn’t complaining as to how Schiff aquired these phone records. Anyone have any idea?

1 Like

No subpoena was issued that I’m aware of.

This is like watching a jv team battle the red sox and claim the sox are cheating because they are professionals and not morons

2 Likes

You have no idea what he’s complaining bout other than what he says to the press.

Does the HPSCI typically notify you when they issue subpoenas?

5 Likes

Never said they did.

Do they notify you? You brought it up.

1 Like

Why was Nunes communicating with Parnas who is now indicted on a bunch of charges?

2 Likes

It’s important to choose good company to keep ha g with scum and you risk getting your records looked at.

You have nothing

2 Likes

This can all be solved if the GOP gets the correct candidates elected.

I bet you Schiff broke into AT&T in the middle of the night and stole those records. Yeah, that’s got to be it.

So like the whistleblower, the argument is that the public shouldn’t know about this.

Cool.

3 Likes

Our gracious host: Did you ever talk to this guy Lev Parnas?

Devin Nunes: You know it’s possible but I haven’t gone through all my phone records. I don’t really recall that name.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

https://twitter.com/acyn/status/1202054386081361920?s=21

5 Likes

Well what kind of crappy lawyer can att afford anyways? Not like they have trump money to afford the Cohen and Guiliani caliber.

2 Likes

When Nunes was asked point blank whether he went to Vienna to meet with Shokin, and went off on a rant instead of answering, I knew it would come to this.

Yes these are phone records with Parnas and not proof of any meetings with Shokin, but it ain’t looking good for the guy…

So what a subpoena issued?

Do you think illegally or improperly obtained evidence should be allowed in court?

2 Likes

You just made that up…

You also assume they came from Nunes. Calls are two way.

3 Likes

You have no evidence to support the claim that this evidence or the whistleblower evidence was improperly obtained. In fact, there is substantial testimony for the ICIG that the whistleblower followed the process to the letter.

1 Like

No.

This evidence was not improperly or illegally obtained.