Here's a breakdown of their claims, the truth about the dossier, and everything in between.
"We had a major American political party hire a foreign national, Christopher Steele, to dig up dirt on an American presidential candidate," he said. "As if that was not bad enough, the foreign national compiled an unverified dossier that was then used by the FBI to obtain a warrant against an American citizen and surveil an American presidential campaign."
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, the top Republican in the lower chamber, said he opposed any foreign interference in US elections but blasted the Democrats in the same breath.
"I watched in the last campaign, the Democratic presidential campaign send $6 million to a foreign entity to travel the world and find something," McCarthy said. "When they could not find something, they made false accusations, salacious accusations at that, drove this country into a special counsel lasting more than 22 months, using this false information, sending it to the FBI and went to get a FISA court then to spy upon Americans."
Additionally, much of what McCarthy said about the dossier is wrong. Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton's campaign indirectly paid for the dossier through a US law firm, which then hired an American opposition research company, which in turn hired Steele. Also, the special counsel investigation was triggered by Trump's firing of FBI Director James Comey, not the dossier.
All of this happened after Page left the Trump campaign amid scrutiny of his Russian ties.
Third, this discussion only revolves around the first of four FISAs against Page. Investigators went back to the court repeatedly, with new information, and demonstrated that they were collecting valuable information. All four FISA applications were granted by federal judges.
The dossier said Page had a secret meeting with Igor Sechin, the president of Rosneft, a state-run oil company. Steele claimed that they discussed a potential deal for Trump to lift US sanctions in exchange for future energy cooperation between the two countries. Part of the alleged quid-pro-quo would have included the planned sale of a 19% stake in Rosneft.
Steele also claimed that Page met with another Kremlin official, Igor Divyekin, who raised the prospect of political "kompromat" with Page, dirt they allegedly had on both Clinton and Trump.
The FISA application, parts of which were declassified last year, cited the alleged meeting with Sechin, the discussion of sanctions, the alleged meeting with Divyekin, and the discussion of "kompromat." The information was attributed to "Source #1," a reference to Steele, and the application disclosed that Steele was hired as part of an effort to discredit Trump's campaign.
No public evidence has emerged to support the allegation that Page colluded with the Russian government or was sent to Russia by the Trump campaign to coordinate on the election.
There is no proof Page met with Sechin, and Page has denied it.
Page denied ever meeting Divyekin, and there's no proof that Page discussed "kompromat" with anyone in Russia. But during his closed-door congressional testimony, Page acknowledged that he also had a conversation with Arkady Dvorkovich, a deputy Prime Minister.
Some of the details in the dossier were wrong. But Steele was right that Page attended high-level meetings with Russians during his trip, even though Page was denying it at the time.
"Russian intelligence officials had formed relationships with Page in 2008 and 2013 and Russian officials may have focused on Page in 2016 because of his affiliation with the Campaign," the report said. "However, the investigation did not establish that Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election."
The Mueller report also cited Page's history with Russian spies in Manhattan, referring to much of the same information that federal investigators used in the initial FISA application.
There were still some questions about Page that Mueller couldn't answer.
"The Office was unable to obtain additional evidence or testimony about who Page may have met or communicated with in Moscow; thus, Page's activities in Russia-as described in his emails with the Campaign-were not fully explained," the report said.