House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, left, said the Board is mulling testify about the idea of inviting Chief Justice John Roberts, prior to the Congress.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said Wednesday the panel has to testify mulling over the idea of inviting Chief Justice John Roberts, to the Congress as part of his Committee’s investigation of the FISA courts.
In an interview with radio host Hugh Hewitt, Nunes was asked if he spoke with Roberts about his knowledge of the intelligence abuses by the Ministry of justice and the FBI during the 2016 Trump campaign, The hill reported.
“This is something that we fought,” said Nunes, to speak to his colleagues, the members of the Committee.
As chief justice Roberts appoints the FISA court judges.
“We decided that we wanted to conclude the FISA part of the abuse, before we get to the courts. In a next step, with the courts is not to make you be aware of if you already know that this is happening by watching the news. So we will have a letter to the court.”
The Dems are protecting Obama in the FISA memo-fight?
Nunes added that the Committee is struggling with his next step, because of the “separation of powers Problem.”
“It is, it is a debate now on whether to just send it to the Supreme court or send it to the FISA court,” he said, referring to the letter.
“If, somehow, in this case lands before the Supreme court, somehow, in some way, by sending a letter to Roberts, they do conflict-court?”
NUNES TOLD FOX NEWS THE MEMO WAS PUBLISHED, THE PUBLIC OBLIGATION
Just last week, the House Intelligence Committee, has a four-published-page memo, written by Nunes, who claims that intelligence abuse by the DOJ and FBI during the 2016 Trump’s campaign, citing a high-ranking government officials, who said the two authorities would never surveillance sought guarantees in the absence of the controversial anti-Trump dossier financed by the Democrats.
When speaking about the probability that Roberts would speak to the Committee, Nunes said that he was “not aware of any time where a judge is, for lack of a better term, testified before the Congress.”