Two Congressmen are furious with the Attorney General’s decision not to appoint a second special counsel to investigate corruption in the justice department. “I think he’s being poorly served,” one notes. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) has spoken recently with both Sessions and the Deputy Attorney General. “It’s almost like they have a set of talking points that they go to,” he says, “but the facts don’t support those talking points.”

“It’s supposed to be the truth, the whole truth,” Congressmen Mark Meadows insists, “not part of it, not redactions.” Especially when the things that are being struck out are the ones that show the FBI was committing crimes themselves.

What can be more extraordinary than the nation’s highest law enforcement officials illegally hiding material facts with a magic marker, to cover up evidence of even worse crimes?

The only reason Rep. Meadows can think of for A.G. Sessions to be so reluctant is that he is being convinced to pull back by his underlings.

Rep. Meadows appeared on The Ingraham Angle, Thursday. He was joined by Jim Jordan (R-OH) to weigh in on Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ announcement not to appoint a second special counsel. It should only be done, Sessions insists, under extraordinary circumstances.

Rep. Jordan was shocked. The Director of the FBI, James Comey, had been fired. His second in command, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, has been fired. How much more does Sessions need?

Jim Baker, the former chief counsel at the FBI has been demoted and reassigned. Peter Strzok, who was once deputy head of counter-intelligence, has been demoted and reassigned along with his adulterous lover, Lisa Page, former FBI counsel. The two cooked up a scheme of what to do if President Trump happened to win the election.

The plot was hatched in FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe’s office. Everyone is convinced the Robert Mueller witch hunt is the insurance policy they came up with.

“If those aren’t extraordinary circumstances warranting a second special counsel I don’t know what the heck is.”

Rep. Meadows would like to know “When you go to a court… you have to give them the whole truth.” They didn’t do that at the FISA court. “Two of them have been fired, three of them have been demoted and we don’t think that’s extraordinary circumstances warranting a second special counsel… I mean, tell me some fact pattern that would then, Mr. Sessions.”

As congressional watchdog committees try to put the puzzle together, the DOJ is “keeping some of the pieces.” They are about to be found in contempt of congress.

“I went through and reviewed some redacted things that were given to our committee and on 7 pages there were 12 material facts… Material facts, not just names… material facts that were omitted by the Department of Justice.” Meadows wants some justice from the Justice department.

“It’s time that they come clean, and give Congress what we need.”

Specifically, Justice Department officials ran a sharpie over everything that had to do with a White House meeting between FBI Director James Comey and Obama’s chief of staff, Dennis McDonough. “That was redacted.” It wasn’t the only key point that was either.

One isolated example would not be alarming but Meadows notes, but the multiple redactions show a pattern of abuse. The department of justice “is not complying with the subpoena, and with the oversight responsibility that we have in Congress.”

Rep. Jordan agrees that marking out information about things like “a reference to a friendship” between Peter Strzok and FISA judge Contreras doesn’t make them look good.

“That’s right. They’ve been trying to hide information from us.” It’s bad enough, he says, that they have to physically walk over to the Justice Department, where a special viewing room lets staff look at the information. “It’s ridiculous.”

Rep. Jordan demands to know how the investigator appointed by Sessions can investigate his own boss.

“How can Mr. Huber… He’s probably a great lawyer, I don’t know much about Mr. Huber from Utah but how can he investigate his boss?” Huber reports directly to Rod Rosenstein. “Mr. Rosenstein is involved in all this FISA abuse that we think took place.”

Rosenstein signed the application for Trump wiretaps used to defraud the FISA court into approving surveillance on Carter Page. “He signed the FISA application. That’s the problem.”

The facts speak for themselves, Meadows adds. “Is it a material fact that Peter Strzok had a relationship with a FISA judge and they concealed it. The answer is yes.”

A select group of five people at the top echelons of the FBI, put the file together, “dressed it all up like it was legitimate intelligence,” and took it to the FISA court.

The Hillary Clinton fan club didn’t tell the court the whole truth. They kept silent on who paid for the dossier. The hid the fact that the FBI dumped Christopher Steele as informant when they found out the dossier’s author was peddling the same things he was telling them to the press.

Material facts aren’t only being held from Congress, they were withheld from the FISA judge too. “They didn’t disclose that to the court so… Those are all key facts.”

The investigation of alleged Donald Trump collusion started in late July. A week later there was a meeting with the Department of Justice “where they said the White House is leading this.”

Another week after that, Director Comey paid a visit to the White House. “We can’t draw a conclusion but we can certainly look at the facts and the facts do speak to further investigation.”

They will certainly bring Mr. McDonough in for questioning now that they know what was under the redaction blocks but the lawmakers point out the example only highlights that they can’t interview people when the underlying facts were conveniently hidden, to begin with.

“Some of the redactions that the Department of Justice have, they keep the names so we don’t even know who to bring in.”