instead, the application still relied primarily, remember, the bulk of the application as the foldinglinton bought and paid for dossier. go back -- scroll down my hair, the other weight. against the application, we are six months into this thing, relying on his credibility even though he fbi knew he was not credible at that point. especially as it relates to the media incident, which pushed him out of the fbi's way in october, the same month the first fisa warrant was granted. here is what is on page six. whether mr. steele lied about his media contacts is relative for at least two reasons. it's relevant about his credibility as a source. second, it is relevant to the reliability of his information gathering efforts. mr. steele conducted his work for fusion gps compiling the pre-election memoranda between june and early november 2016. there was this british litigation, it talks about it and that grassley and graham memo tonight. mr. steele acknowledged briefing journalists about the dossier memorandum in late summer, autumn 2016. yeah, he was the source for isikoff. surprisingly, duri

for each applicant there is a staff report, draft resolution, application, case report in the planning department staff and resolution from the historic preservation commission. there are copies on the table for the public. item 3a. babb bilon screen printing shop specializing in bulk production. founded by steve patent in 1980 he started in 19676 as a small -- 1976 in his garage. in the 1980s it was located in a store front at 21st andval epsia -- valencia. it is 63 buckston street today with one large 10 color automatic press, three, six color manual presses and sing l-1 color press. it is owned by michael lynch since 1999. item 3-b. the organization known as the lash is nonprofit arts and performance base founded in 1984 by art students from the san francisco state university. the lab is a catalyst for artistic experimentation. along with year around multi-disciplinenary programs. the lab commissions three art projects per year. they seek out extraordinary artists who are underrepresented as a result of gender, class, race, sex orgy graffiti. o -- other mal mal-- the lab relocated o

the bulk of the application. the application still, we are six months into this thing, relied on his credibility even though the fbi knew he was not credibility at this point. especially as it relates to the media incident which pushed him out of the fbi's way in october, the same month the first fisa warrant was granted. now, here's what's on page 6. whether mr. steele lied to the finn about his media contacts is relevant for at least two reasons. first, it's relevant to his credibility as a source, particularly given the lack of corroboration for his claims, at least at the time they were included in the fisa applications. second, it t. is relevant to the reliability of the information-gathering efforts. mr. steele convicted his work for fusion gps, compiling the preelection memoranda between june and early november 2016. now, there was this british litigation. there is talks about it in the grassley and graham memo here tonight. mr. steele acknowledged briefing journalists about the dossier memorandum in late

fees which are $50 per applicant. the historic preservation commission reviewed 8 application. the small business commission reviewed 8 applications and listed all 8 businesses on the legacy business registry. since the program began there have been 20 200 nominations. $750 in applications received. 120 were review and 119 businesses were listed on the registry. nominations received in october through december were for legal referral panel. babylon screen prints. motor lodge. eddie's cafe. little joe's pizza, mindful body. the bakery. pioneer and san francisco market corporation. many have been legacy businesses. >> i have a quick question. you go back to the last slide. some of these have not come up yet. they are still in process? >> in processor just been nominated and haven't provided us with an application. >> okay, thank you. >> sometimes the supervisors nominate the businesses and we reach out to see if they are interested in applying. >> thank you. >> for business assistance services the legacy provided techni

so about this one warrants an application that has been withheld from the public. that's why doesn't feel like a full throated debate. >> we for democrats say that if you could get our version of events clarify things that may not have been seen from the original release. what type of things could democrats rely on. >> the democratic memo could have examples of other evidence that had nothing to do with the steel dossier that were submitted to the fisa court. we know from google that carter page is the target and has been on tv and he talked about his connections to the russian government. there's possibly more information like that. they might have quotes suggesting that the government did tell the fisa court the steel dossier had been funded by specific political party which would get rid of the narrative that this was all a fraud. we don't know everything unless we see the application but the memo that the house is voting on could add further information shows a more complete picture of what the fisa court had. >> before we go, what does history tell us about th

we need to see the application. if it created the momentum to release more things, the andrew mccabe quote that's being disputed. the reference to what he said, that interview need to be released. and the democrats' memo needs to be released. this may if not open the floodgates at least open the floodgates for things we can see. david: the actual criticism of this memo lend support other suspicions that the focusing on carter page, you didn't need the trump dossier for that because he had went in cross-hairs of the fbi for quite some time. his russian connections were considered very important. but the fact that they brought trump dossier in shows you their target was not carter page, their target was donald trump. am i wrong on that? byron: you are right about the dossier. target of the dossier was donald trump. first installment said there was a long relationship between trump and the crippl -- and then going back for years. the dossier made very, very specific accusations. it said that carter phage when he visite

or that they cannot release the application, i think it is further proof that this whole parade has looked to do with transparency and a lot to a preset andlling rather partisan political narrative. host: stephen vladek joining us from the university of texas. he is joining us from austin, texas. if you want to asking questions about the release of the memo, what it does for the larger aspect of the mueller investigation and other matters, 202-748-8000 for republicans --202-748-8001 for republicans, 202-748-8000 for democrats, 202-748-8002 for independents. does the onus come upon those who presented to say where the information is coming from? guest: to a point. it is incumbent on any law enforcement officer applying to a court for a warrant to provide at least some information about the source of the information, about the identity of the informant or at least is reliability. whereare so many cases the police go to a court and get a warrant based on information from a clearly biased informant and the reason for that is not because something sketchy has happened. the reason is beca

the specifics of the application itself there's a lot of detail in there. several of the key things that we're looking for that were i think challenging for some of the operators to come up were detailed lab testing documenting the safety of the vehicles used and insurance requirements and data sharing requirements shared and not let some data be withheld. affordable membership for low-income members. the jump system offers a $5 annual pass that offered one hour of reuse for the day. that met our affordable membership requirement. and to a broad geographic area. those were some of the key things we looked for and happy to provide more detail on that or the application submittal itself if that's of interest. >> how did you know jump was the best company for san francisco? >> they were the first company to meet our requirements and we wanted to proceed cautiously with the program and not issue a large number of permits. >> you didn't do a comparative analysis with the other companies so how can you discern one is better than the other when you don't take into

in your experience, is it all the sf-05 and the g-23, so they're the first round of applicants, applications to come in. you sit down with the fire, everybody sits there, and they tick those boxes, right? >> correct. >> that document, is that document good enough to pretty much look that project in the eye and say okay, if you don't change anything, and you present what you have presented here, and what the information you told us today, we'll stand behind that decision, and you can go forward to all the next -- you know, go ahead with your design team, go ahead everything with that? >> it answers the question, how far -- to what extent do i sprinkleer the building. i'm changing the use from r-3 to r-2. do i springler the whole building? it answers those type of questions. it does not answer questions on egress and other life safety provisions in the code. so -- so yes and no. it gets you halfway there. you still -- you still have require -- other oth-- other requirements to meet for code. >> i think we're talking about the same issues here, the exiting and so on, the fireproofing of those c

what's the application of an underwater drone? >> guest: well, there are many applications. we're designed for recreational use, so you can use it for -- [inaudible] for divers, and when you go fishing, you can see the fish. take videos for that. and also you own a boat, you can use it to check the bottom of your boat. >> host: and industrial applications, maybe inspections of pipelines? >> guest: yeah. of course you can use it for that as well. although we're designed for recreational use because it can only go 130 feet, yes. >> host: is this on the market yet? >> guest: it's not. it's only our prototype, but we're hoping for that in a couple of months. .. [background sounds] >> host: "the communicators" is on location in las vegas for the consumer electronic show, ces. we talked to a company called suitable tech which produces a product called beam and we were in vegas but what to talk to dominique who is in colorado. >> guest: how is nevada? >> host: very sunny today. it's not raining which is nice. >> caller: this is our latest model. we have an anticipated release date

my favorite application is the equalizer. it's really given people a lot of autonomy and independence. >> that's dominique in colorado. and this is the communicators in las vegas. >> thank you for your time. i hope you enjoyed. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] >> if we think of this section some of the products and hope to be products on the market one of the left-handedness products is a kick starter. >> how does this work? >> creek starters a place to bring your creative project to lie. showcasing our partnership where we can bring together resources to help people manufacture the product. >> tell us about the relationship. >> for both experts and electronic manufacturing. what they do is provide resources to creators so they can plan and prepare for manufacturing in advance. >> heather they get connected? do you go to a website or app to find projects? >> the studio is our website. go to hardware.studio and we have laid out our resources and you can even apply for more hands-on progra

fisa courts grant some number like 95 to 98% of all application. that doesn't necessarily mean it's a rubber stamp, though. on the other hand, the requirements of fisa are so strict, there's such a long laundry list of things the executive branch has to do that the argument could be made by the time they get to fisa, they've written an a-plus term paper to get their application, which is probably a little different and, you would agree, in state court where warrants are made relatively quickly. >> unfortunately because fichlt sa's critics are from the left and now on the right have primed the public to distrust the people involved the damage has been already done. let me ask you a bit about that, the reputation of fisa and what recourse someone has when a fisa warrant is brought against him or her. >> let me just say, i want to piggyback off what danny said. >> please. >> what this memo is doing is not only omiting important information that gives proper context, but misleading the american people on what the actual process, the rigorous process th

you can cherry pick any search warrant application or fisa court application and do the sa same thing. >> all right. your response? >> yes, just simply not true. and time will show that it's not true. we look forward to the democratic response to this. we look forward to the fbi response. i hope the fbi does respond. i hope we can declassify and show more and more of this information. when we do, just like a couple days ago when we talked we said let's let the memo be judged on its own merit. let the memo and the democratic response to be judged on its own merits. everything in the memo is accurate and true. >> so one of the things that democrats are saying is that this statement is misleading. that deputy director andy mccabe testified before your committee in december 2016 no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the fisa court without the steele dossier information. is that what he snad. >> yeah. i have heard people say that. it's in the true. the accusations or the sub position that's not what he said. it's not true. i was there for his testimony. i helped to question h

this is application to a court. i get that adam schiff and others are -- i wish that they were equally concerned about what's not in the fisa application. which is a lot of really important information about the source and sub-source and fact that he was hired by the dnc and the clinton campaign and fact that he was biased against president trump. that is all information that the find are of fact is in titled to. >> brennan: now, we should dig into this because you are, from my understanding, the only republican vest gator on the house intelligence committee who actually viewed the fisa application, everything that went into putting together this memo. when you're talking about this steele memo, you are not saying that it was the sole piece of evidence used to justify these four authorizations of the surveillance warrant, are you? >> no. it was not the exclusive information relied upon by the fisa. >> brennan: would it have been authorized? >> no. it would not have been. >> brennan: how can you say that? it was auth

but the e-mails that i have seen, i am not aware of those applications. so again, the process is not being followed properly, and i think we could head off a lot of these problems if it was followed properly. and i'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> thank you, fire marshal. if -- if i may, i have a few questions. >> absolutely. >> and i -- you stress about getting into the weeds. i would never dare get into the weeds with the fire marshal. >> all right. >> i'm just talking about in the spirit of the conversation, and terminologies you use of less restrictive codes. >> yeah. >> partnership was a big one that kind of jumped out at me, and i'm glad you said it, because this is a partnership. with regard to the adu's, now that we've kind of -- i think one thing that's coming out, and the feedback i'm geding,--s getting, as well, is it's a very successful program, and it's a great option to provide housing in existing structures, and looking at these numbers, please correct me if i am wrong if i'm wrong, but we're looking at well over 1,000

we still won't know everything until and unless we see the underlying application. certainly, the memo that the house intelligence committee is going on releasing today could add yet further information, could show us a more complete picture of what exactly the fisa court had when it agreed to authorize the surveillance of carter page. host: before we go, the calls, what does history tell us -- the republicans willingness to release this? do you think that will happen? time the house intelligence committee considered this very question was two weeks ago. they voted not to release mr. schiff's memo, the ranking member of the house intelligence committee. the political pressure may have changed. now it would look rather heavy-handed on the part of the republicans on the intelligence committee given all the noise out there to not release the shift memo. frankly, it is more likely than not at this point that the democratic memo that some would see the light of day. again, it will still be he said, a said until folks are in position to evaluate the underlying application

colleagues that that was included in these applications here. it's a lot to digest. i would say the headline there, dana, is this claim that andrew mccabe told the committee that those warrants, four of them, one warrant and three renewals, would not have been initiated without the dossier. but i will say that cnn's previous reporting is that the fbi had other corroborating information about carter page beyond what was contained in the dossier. the fact is my colleagues evan perez, barbara brown, i'm told from intelligence officials this is not the way the fisa court works. you don't come before that court with information obtained by a third party and say, listen, this is all we got. you would need, and it is cnn's reporting that the fbi had further corroborating information on that. a lot to digest there and i know i've got a lot of colleagues with a lot of depth of knowledge here, but that's our best first reading of what's in here. >> very important, and i think that last point is so key, jim, about the fact that this is a memo of allegations, but our source for

we do have the grant program, which is a separate application from the application to be placed on the registry, and that is handled through the office of small business, so it's unlikely that the grant could be approved in such a short amount of time; however, that -- that program is there, and the legacy business program is also working on developing other tools to support these businesses and i'm hoping to come back to this commission in a few weeks or few months, possibly, to tell you about these tools. >> president wolfram: thank you. director ram? >> thanks. i have also been troubled by this particular case, and the redstone building was recently sold, and it was full of nonprofits, including artists and the theater. it happens to be a block from where i live. it is ae a great resource in the mission. it's very troubling that because of state law, we are limited in how much we can control not only evictions, but commercial rent control. we can't apply commercial rent control because of state law. we can do it on the residential side, not on the commercial side. it's really troubl

then you have the actual fisa warrant application.e also haven't seen that. >> we will never seen that. >> and devin nunes has not seen it. trey gowdy has seen it. he said this yesterday on another network, that only one person and investigators could see it. he sent trey gowdy because that would be better spaoert tease for him. he has not seen it because it is so closely held. that's how few people have seen it. so that also makes it difficult to determine how much the steele dossier was the basis. >> would rod rosenstein have seen it all? yes. what is the reaction in the white house -- no one wants to fire him, but do they think he ought to recuse himself from the supervision of mr. mueller? >> that's not what donald trump said yesterday. when he was asked about it directly, he said you figure that out for yourself. which that wasn't a yes. that wasn't a no. and so i think that president trump will probably get asked about this again. he will have to take a very firm position on that. >> eli, this is to me the key issue. i signed of

mapping is a big application for drone like this. could you webcast live with the drone question mark >> absolutely. a live feedull out and it shows up on their phone in real-time up to seven dormers away. >> my background was in so and doingy years ago government policy work. someone called up and said do you want to work for this company question mark -- company? >> this one could also be used for moviemaking? yes. other piece of technology are wanted to ask about. >> it stabilizes a camera while it is in motion. it stabilizes smartphone footage so you can create cinematic drone videos. are curious to understand what is the potential? many people have heard about drone technology for several years. now, it is what can i do with that? >> what about privacy concerns? [indiscernible] ways applied to drones as well. >> this is a company called the products and we are >> this is the underwater drone we wanted. you have a forte camera. 130 feet deep in the water. it can see what is underwater. at?ho is driving is driving iteone for the f

these applications contain all sorts of information. but the notion that they never would have gone after carter page is just inaccurate and as we know, carter page had been an interest to the fbi years prior. >> why didn't they do it before? why didn't they do it before? why was it that the dossier prompted it. >> the dossier -- to answer your question is the dossier did not exist when the fbi first started investigating carter page. >> hang on for one second. this is a great discussion but i would like to take a quick break and continue this discussion in just a minute. # money managers are pretty much the same. all but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investments never does. and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly

so, the fact that a fisa application was made in october 2016 shows that that application was not the basis for the mueller investigation. i think it's important also to note, nicolle, that this memo released today by nunes is totally incomplete. it cherry picks all kinds of information. it doesn't say what other information the fisa court relied on. and i also think its revelation is dangerous. for the first time the russians now know the precise dates that carter page was under electronic surveillance. and if he was their probable agent which is what the court found, they know when their communications with him -- to him were discovered by u.s. law enforcement. >> and chuck rosenberg, i'm guessing that you either turned in fisa applications or you helped submit the kind of intelligence that would have gone on an application. can you just do a brief explainer, what is the fisa court, what is the bar for surveilling a u.s. citizen, and why would someone want to continue to listen to someone like carter page? >> well, nicolle, you're right. when i worked for bob mueller at the fbi post

quite frankly, early in my career, i did a lot of title 3 applications, wiretap applications. one of the always routine things when we got them to trial was a pretrial motion to suppress the evidence of the wiretap. and they would challenge a wiretap affidavit all the time. we were always successful. this four-page or five-page memo reads very much to me like a motion to suppress wiretap evidence. and we were always successful because you always did verify and corroborate a lot of the information. you worked with many different sources and conducted surveillance and did all your due diligence before you went in to obtain a wiretap because one of the things is it's a very intrusive method. and one of the things you have to show is you exhausteded all other investigative avenues to get the evidence you need to get, and you can only get it through a wiretap. this very much reads like a motion to suppress to me as an attorney and an agent who has been involved in viwiretaps. i don't think there's anything new here. i don't think the fbi director should engage in a public debate ov

and fbi have said deeply misleading and you can cherry pick any fisa court application or fbi application and do the same thing. >> and joining us now is congressman who supported the memo release, and thank you for spending the time with us on this weekend, and what you believe is the intention of publicizing this? >> well, ana, an excellent description of all of the different interpretations of the memo, and i appreciate this chance. and the headline is the foreign intelligence fisa act abuses. and it is the material ps from e hillary clinton campaign used to obtain the fisa warrants against members of the trump campaign or affiliated with the trumple campaign which is inappropriate. it does not matter if you are a democrat or the republican, and that is why the crux of it should be sent out and why it should be part of the debate. and never in a situation of the campaign-funded material are used in this way as evidence in the court. in your broadcast, if you used a campaign materials that were commercially given to you by a candidate as news, that would be wrong, and similarly in this

if that is not disclosed in the application. is that wrong do you think? >> that fact was disclosed to the fisa court. part of the evidence was from a politically motivated source. >> true? >> no. these are things i said earlier. these guys tell so many lies, you can't keep track of them. >> that's not true? >> no. the court was not made aware. i would think that a judge -- in the judge knew we have an investigation of the trump campaign. going after the trump campaign advisor and hillary clinton's campaign paid for this information. if that did happen, which it didn't, the judge would have to be i think considered very suspect. i don't believe that happened. >> the former fbi director james comey tweeted out went on to criticize this entire operation. your thoughts on that tweet and comey's reaction? >> well, mr. comey had a chance in january, february, march, april, i believe all the way until june to come clean on who paid for the dossier. he asked about it in january. he said clearly he knew that republicans started the dossier which was a lie. then wh

it is clearly a sketchy account of what went into that fisa application. there's so much more you would want to know. listen, there is, they cite at one point, they say the deputy -- then deputy director andrew mccabe told the committee that, but for the steel dossier, they would not have grounds for the fisa application. if true, that would be disturbing information. it is being disputed by others. there's going to be a transcript, there is a transcript of what it is mccabe said, what the back and forth is. let's see the transcript. >> i cover this stuff too. i am not familiar with fbi veterans entertaining hypotheticals about what an independent federal judge would approve or not in surveillance. i can tell you and we'll have more of this later in the show. that the fisa court surveillance approval rate is over 99.9%. so his notion of whether he would go to the court or not is a hypothetical. when you do go to that court, they approve a lot. >> this is a highly sensitive investigation. and the fact that they mention that george popadopoulos was cited in

i have looked at these applications before. and i just, as i looked at the underlying applications, i kept coming to the same conclusion. i wouldn't make these representations to any federal judge, much less a fisa judge. >> laura: yeah. >> if you were a fisa judge, wouldn't you want to know if someone was asking for a warrant. >> laura: yeah, i get that congressman. we got to get to byron and vicki. my question to you was there something in that application that referenced a political motivation for the dossier in the democrats have got swalwell was over there talking about that today. that was -- he said that was in the document. in the application. not mentioning hillary by name but there was a political motivation. was that in there. >> well, i don't know why eric swalwell would know that because he hasn't had an opportunity. >> laura: was it in there? did they reference a political motivation for the dossier in the application? >> well, i can't disclose anything specifically that's in the underlying document. >> laura: oka

i asked christopher wray, director wray, show us the application. show us what was put together to go get this warrant to spy on a fellow citizen at a secret court. show us that information. we haven't seen it. >> well, he was a suspected foreign agent. that was why they were asking for a warrant to surveil him. >> if you had -- i heard congressman schiff say on the previous segment, if you had other information on carter page, why didn't you use it? why did you rely on the dossier? >> hang on. >> why tell the court -- >> let's ask congressman himes. >> congressman himes is clear. they didn't tell the court that the democratic national committee paid for it. that's an important fact. >> okay. did they rely exclusively on the dossier, congressman himes? >> like the nunes memo, that's a complete misrepresentation of the facts. the fbi has been keeping their eye on carter page long before christopher steele was in the picture. remember this, congressman jordan said that four times they went to the fisa court, and that's exactly right. four times in whi

the page application before the fisa court was not made until october. the other points that schiff's memo makes is that the doj subsided multiple sources in seeking this fisa warrant on carter page. and that it made only, quote, narrow use of information from the steele dossier. republicans have really tried to argue that the steele dossier was a primary source of launching the entire russia investigation. what schiff's memo was saying it was only narrowly used in one fisa application here on carter page. the other point that's made, which is something that we want to i think continue to read more on as we go through this memo is that the fbi's interest in seeking this fisa application on carter page sprang from what george papadopoulos was able to tell them as they began speaking with him, which is that russian officials really began to express an interest in members of trump's foreign policy team developing contacts with them as perhaps a way into understanding more about the trump campaign, gaining influence in trump's campaign. that's a very importa

there are legal bantered for warrant applications, but it does not reference them. do youthat important or think this memo is just meant to make a statement? >> i do not know what the intention is. i am wary of anybody, including the authors of this memo who are trying to make assessments about people's motives. ut it is interesting to me that there is a pretty clear fourth amendment standard. there are hundreds of fairly recent cases on this about what kind of information the government has to put into a warrant application. and the memo does not really say how, leaving out the fact that oppositiona paid operative, would violate the standard. the memo talks about what was left out of the fisa application, but not what was included. we do not know what other fbi evidence they had. do not know what the fbi said about steele to begin with. >> when the committee decided to release the republican report, they at the same time did not agree to releasing the democrats' report. we'll let happen, and what is expected to be in the democrat'' memo on this? seeheath: you can r