‘There is literally a picture of them’: Ex-US Attorney destroys Devin Nunes for claiming Papadopoulos never met Trump House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) insisted Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos never met the president — but a former U.S. Attorney smacked down his easily rebutted claim. Nunes appeared Monday on “Fox & Friends,” where he tried to walk back unintentionally damaging evidence from a memo issued by his office about the special counsel probe in which Papadopoulos pleaded guilty. “If Papadopoulos was such a major figure, you had nothing on him, you know, the guy lied,” Nunes told Fox News. “As far as we can tell, Papadopoulos never even knew who — never even had met with the president.” However, the former foreign policy adviser was photographed meeting during the campaign with Trump and then-Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL). That fact wasn’t lost on Preet Bharara, the former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. “This man @DevinNunes is the chair of the Intelligence Committee,” Bharara tweeted. “There is literally a picture of Papadopoulous meeting with the President. As far as we can tell, Nunes is not good at his job.” Nunes also downplayed the drunken boast by Papadopoulos that triggered the FBI investigation of Trump campaign ties to Russia.
I think it was pretty obvious what Nunes meant. One on one type meeting, not being an anonymous guy someone let sit in at the table. No one disputes that he was a very peripheral figure. Trump fired Preet Bhara, who had turned the Manhattan US Attorney's office into a vehicle for him to pursue political jihads. Good riddance.
It was a foreign policy council meeting, not a dinner party where they just let you sit on the table. Peddle your lies on Breitbart. Bharara went after corruption, no wonder Trump University dean fired him.
The lefties like to point out that Preet Bahara (and comey too but I will leave him out for now) had active investigations open against trump/trump business whatever and that therefore trump tried to get rid of preet to tamp those investigations down. Well, first of all there is the obvious. Most u.s. attorneys go after an election if they are not of the same party as the president. Preet hung on a little longer because schumer directly pleaded for him to stay and trump thought he could get points with schumer, then schumer knifed him real nasty and so trump cut preet loose with the rest of the u.s. attorneys. too and stopped making an exception for him just because schumer wanted. Alright, a little trip down memory lane there but put that aside too for a minute. What I am getting at is that preet went to Trump Tower to meet with Trump for the specific purpose of discussing the continuation of his job- ALL WHILE KNOWING THAT HE HAD ACTIVE INVESTIGATONS OPEN AGAINST TRUMP OR TRUMP BUSINESSES. The tards agree that this is true. So you can see where I am headed with this. All the focus is on the actuality or the appearance of Trump looking for favors from preet - such as looking the other way- on investigations as a condition of continuing in his job. But where is the discussion about the appearance or actuality of Preet Bhahara either directly or indirectly trying to shake the president down for a job by agreeing to suddenly become part of Team Trump and thereby having a vested interest in the outcome of any investigations in his district under his scope of authority? WHERE IS THE DISCUSSION OF THAT? A U.S. Attorney showing up for a job interview to be hired/continued by a person who he has an active investigation against? How is the public interest protected in that arrangement?