March 23, 2017

Rep. Mike Quigley joined Chris Matthews on Hardball tonight to discuss the latest news coming out of the House Intel Committee, which is currently being run by former Trump Transition Team Member (and current Trump bootlicker), Devin Nunes.

When asked about whether Nunes can be considered impartial after he chose to run to the White House with shady intel he may he received via a leak (ironic) versus talking to the Intel Commitee, Quigley said the following:

"Well, it makes it far more difficult for him. He has to overcome this assumption he has a different master than a chairman of this important investigation. I have to be fair the first two years that I have served with him, he has been a good chairman. He's run his meetings very well. Ever since Mr. tTrump has become President, though, unfortunately, it's been a different story.... I can't stress enough. This is the most important investigation of a President in our history since Watergate. The person investigating it has to be of an open mind and has to understand he cannot serve the President, he's a member of Congress."

After a little chit chat they went back Matthews proposed that the White House may have put some "heat on" Nunes to take a stand to support Trump.

Mieke Eoyang from the National Security Program responded "I think that's absolutely right and people forget that when Nunes talks about the wiretapping of the Trump transition team the person at the head of the transition for administration was Devin Nunes, He has been on both sides of this thing from the beginning. So now as the committee chairman, he is grading the work as national chairman he was putting together as the head of the transition."

Back to Quigley...

Matthews pulls up the Congressman Schiff clip from just yesterday where he talks about actual collusion, not just circumstantial and then asks Quigley what he thinks.

Matthews: Congressman, do you go on more than circumstantial evidence at this point?

Quigley: As an old trial attorney I'd say there is probable cause to believe there was coordination.

Wow. Not just evidence but probable cause. For those not up on legalese, probable cause is the legal standard by which a police officer has the right to make an arrest or obtain a warrant for a search or an arrest. This is not a term that any lawyer or politician would make lightly. This means he believes there is enough proof to pursue possible charges against Trump or someone in his campaign and that the charges, combined with the evidence, would be enough to convict in a court of law.

This is not smoke. This is fire.

Can you help us out?

For 18 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit, but now Facebook is drowning us in an ocean of right wing lies. Please give a one-time or recurring donation, or buy a year's subscription for an ad-free experience. Thank you.


We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service for information on our posting policy.