Columns, Congress, Criminal law, Media, Politics, Society

The Voice From The “Grave”: How The FBI and Democrats Over-Played The Classification Card On The Nunes Memo
downloadBelow is my column in the Hill newspaper on the controversy over the four-page memo continues to simmer in Washington.  The memo will not change the course of the Mueller investigation.  It may lead however to new investigations. Indeed, Attorney General Jeff Sessions has referred the matter to internal investigators while members have called for a new special counsel.  There remains considerable questions over representations on both sides in the dispute. For example, various Democrats have publicly stated that Deputy Director Andrew McCabe did not say that, absent the dossier, the FBI would probably not have received approval of its FISA application.  What is clear is that someone is lying to the American people.  Indeed, as the column below discusses, the public was already misled on the classified content of the memo.
Here is the column:

The release of the four-page memo by the House Intelligence Committee has triggered preset responses from both sides. The memo is, in fact, enlightening in a number of respects. However, the most alarming elements may be what it does not contain.

First, it is important to start with what we previously knew. At the heart of this controversy is the dossier that was compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British spy, and Fusion GPS with funding from Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee. Previously, Clinton’s top campaign lawyer, Marc Elias, and former campaign chairman, John Podesta, denied any connection to the dossier. After news stores confirmed the funding, Elias and Clinton herself admitted that they did fund this effort.

Second, we knew that Steele shopped the information in the dossier to various reporters to try to get them published during the election. Third, the contents of this dossier were so unverified that virtually all of the reporters declined to run the story during the campaign.

The memo confirms that top FBI officials, including former director James Comey and his deputy Andrew McCabe, used the dossier to secure secret surveillance targeting a U.S. citizen. That citizen was Carter Page, an aide to the presidential candidate of the party opposing the Obama administration. Comey signed off on multiple Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) applications targeting Page.

The memo states that the applications never mentioned that the dossier was funded in significant part by the Clinton campaign, even though high-ranking officials knew about that funding. That would obviously be highly material to judging the value of the information. To make matters worse, Steele admitted to FBI agent Bruce Orr, who was later demoted, that he hated Trump and was “desperate that Donald Trump not be elected and was passionate about his not being president.”

The memo alleges that McCabe admitted in testimony that, absent the Democratic-funded dossier, there would not have been a FISA surveillance order. In fairness to the Democrats, it should be noted that this brief memo does not reveal the full record given to the FISA court. Page has a rather suspicious history in dealings with the Russians that is entirely separate from this dossier.

Moreover, this is largely a summary of testimony, and we should read that testimony once truly classified information has been redacted. Finally, there is reference to a prior investigation of George Papadopoulos, who later advised Trump on foreign affairs, which preceded the dossier and may have been an added basis for the original application.

However, my greatest concern is what is not in the dossier: classified information “jeopardizing national security.” Leaders like Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) declared that the committee had moved beyond “dangerous irresponsibility and disregard for our national security” and “disregarded the warnings of the Justice Department and the FBI.”

Now we can read the memo. There is a sharp and alarming disconnect between the descriptions of Pelosi and the House Intelligence Committee’s Ranking Minority Member Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and the actual document. It clearly does not contain information that would reveal sources or methods.

 

The memo reaffirms concerns over the lower standards that apply to FISA applications as well as the misuse of classification authority. Most of this memo references what was already known about the use of the dossier. What was added was testimonial evidence and details to the publicly known information. Yet, the FBI vehemently objected to the release of the memo as threatening “grave” consequences to national security ground.

However, even before the release, the FBI seemed to be objecting to the framing of the facts rather than the disclosure of “sources and methods.” The FBI said publicly that it had “grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy.” That is not an objection to classified material but the fairness of the portrayal. For years, many of us have objected that the intelligence agencies classified material for improper purposes to frame public debate or conceal embarrassing information. Unless there was a material change in this memo, it proved to be an empty “grave” after weeks of overheated hyperbole.

The FBI opposition to declassification of this memo should be a focus of both Congress and the public. The memo is clearly designed to avoid revealing classified information. For civil libertarians, this is a rare opportunity to show how classified rules are misused for strategic purposes by these agencies. The same concern can be directed toward members who read this memo and represented to the public that the release would clearly damage national security. In the end, there are legitimate questions of political bias raised in the conduct of some FBI officials. This does not mean that there are not legitimate answers for these questions but the effort to keep this memo classified should be itself a matter of grave national concern.

There are indeed two narratives competing in this controversy, one involving improper political influences in the FBI, and another of improper political pressure from the White House. Both could well be true but it is bizarre to suggest that only one of those allegations should be investigated. The FBI and the intelligence agencies have a long and documented history of such abuse. This includes the targeting of political leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. As I discussed earlier, Subsection 11(g) of Rule X was created to allow members of Congress to vote to release classified information when the majority determines “that the public interest would be served by such disclosure.”

This serves the public interest, as would a response from the Democrats and the FBI. Regardless of what comes out of the merits of the Russian investigation, Congress should investigate the misuse of classified proceedings in both the securing of the FISA applications and the later effort to prevent the release of this memo.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He has been lead counsel in national security cases for more than two decades and has testified before the intelligence committees. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

342 thoughts on “The Voice From The “Grave”: How The FBI and Democrats Over-Played The Classification Card On The Nunes Memo”

  1. Let’s not forget, this is our country and we have a right to know what our government is doing on “our behalf,” unless national security might be compromised. Why the secrecy? Why the hype? Obviously someone is trying to hide something from the American people. It is a scientific fact that sunshine kills germs and is a powerful disinfectant. A little sunshine on this matter might provide a little sanitation and cleanse the dirt from the facts.

    1. You have no idea how national security can be compromised or what top secret intelligence looks like. Only a very few people do.You think its some James Bond movie and Top Secret plans are some blueprint for a laser than can blow up the Earth? No. Top Secret information is time and places. That’s it. Very simple. If Russians know the dates and times Carter Page was under surveillance I can imagine there are many assets we had in Russia that were protecting your ignorant asses that are now on the run for their lives. You know longer trust our government? I do not blame you. People in government have lied. They have twisted the truth. I have seen it. There are bad people in government and their are people like me who believed in truth justice and the american way. They are fighting and dying for you right now so both of us can sit on the couch safe and warm and comment on blogs.

      1. OMG!

        The personification of “Affirmative Action Privilege”, generational welfare and $22 trillion in redistributed

        wealth since 1965, all wrapped up in one.

        Good people of River City, step right up.

        One thin dime will buy you a peek at the “Welfare Frankenstein” your wages have been confiscated to

        create.

        OMG!

        Is this for real or are we “twinners” who have “flipped” (Talisman, Stephen King, 1984) into an alternate

        dimension to escape the impenetrable communistic Great Society?

        Is this what our appropriated “tax” dollars look like?

        OMG!

  3. The Democrats did not “overplay” their statements about the Memo. No, Democrats do what Democrats almost always do, and simply lied about it for political purposes. That is why it is a waste of time to take anything a Democrat says seriously, as if their words and sentences have some sort of meaning, or even a casual relationship to reality.

    Democrats will say anything that they thinks helps them politically. For example, Nancy “Demento” Pelosi’s canard that secure borders and presumably immigration laws in general, are racisssst! But there is a difference when she says it, and a run of the mill Democrat or SJW says it. Nancy Pelosi knows that her statement is bullsh*t, and she that she is saying it for political brownie points.

    But, those Democrats further down the food chain do not really know that at all,. They believe it! They have swallowed the cynical crap hook, line, and sinker as a matter of faith, as sure as that expressed by any backwoods rattlesnake-handling, holy-rolling, speaking in tongues, Pentecostal.

    That is why you can not get a straight answer on this website from the Democrats. They haven’t thought about their positions at all. What you get from them is the same disjointed grunts and disconnected syllables you get from the Pentecostal when the Holy Ghost is moving in him. That is to say, unintelligible garble.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. David:

      Thank god a reliable outlet like the NYT is making this stand. I bet Janet Cook wrote it and it was edited by Walter Duranty and attested to by Jayson Blair after vetting it through Glenn Thrush who, of course, ran it by Hillary. Good stuff!

        3. A trial attorney with experience like mespo prolly gets a lot of “objection to sidebar, counsel is testifying.” The objection is usually sustained, maybe gets an instruction to disregard, but you can’t un-ring the bell. The jury still heard it.

      2. God. You guys. Do you understand sarcasm and irony. I think the author was hoping to trick you into reading the article so you can get some other viewpoint than the propoganda from Fox news. If you want to understand why us liberals look down on you and your intellectual abilities its because of things like this.

              1. And sometimes people are to smug to admit when they don’t understand something. The article title fooled you and you look like a fool for not admitting you didn’t read the article.

                1. Sometimes the fool, Jacquie is the one who doesn’t answer legitimate questions and comes to the table without any proof being smug and insulting people. You are beginning to sound like a nutcase.

                    1. You think you are so smart because you put 2+2 together and came up with 7 just because the word foreign is included in the name. That is not what appears to be happening. FISA requests are mandated to prevent hanky-panky by a few or many so that rogue agents are accountable. Now answer the question.

                      “Tell us Jacquie, what did the memo say that was untrue? Should the FBi not release to the FISA court both the positives and negatives in their FISA request? I want to hear from someone who believes they have news that mespo doesn’t.”

                    2. Nothing in the FISA court is supposed to be released. When times dates people and places are revealed it allows Russia to figure out our ways of being able to spy on them.

                    3. Jacquie – Judicial Watch already has a FOIA suit to get the entire application for each.

                    4. These are different debates. I actually hate FISA. Its big brother. It was the RIGHT that was a proponent of FISA. Its suppose to limit the ability to use this surveillance technology to foreign threats but it had the capability of spying on everyone in the US. Correct me if I’m wrong.

                    5. Jacquie – it is supposed to be for foreign intelligence gathering, but it has only rejected 0.03% of all applications. It is a rubber-stamp.

                    6. “Nothing in the FISA court is supposed to be released.”

                      That is not entirely true, but recognize, one of the reasons Nunes likely released very little information was to protect our methods and our people. I’m sure more will be released after Schiff’s report comes out. When it appears that wrongdoing has occurred the American people have a right to know. Nothing released by Nunes was false according to you while nothing vital to our security was released.

                      If and when The US falls it will fall from within and what has happened at the DOJ, State Department and IRS is very unsettling and dangerous for our, yours and mine, freedom. Therefore the FBI and DOJ must either weed out those that participated in wrongdoing or prove no wrongdoing occurred. The FBI was created by Congress, is funded by Congress and is supposed to be overseen by Congress something the FBI has refused to permit and has delayed for months document releases to Congress intentionally preventing Congress from doing its job.

                    7. So I’m a liberal according to you and I’m defending FISA. The proponents of FISA argue it has kept another 911 from happening? The pros and cons against FISA is a complicated discussion. I’m not sure Trump understands the complexity of the arguments about it. So why do you think, out of over 1000 warrants that this particular FISA warrant is of a concern to him?

                    8. Where did I call you a Liberal?

                      “I’m defending FISA.” What you are really saying is that you are trying to defend our security agencies and the methodology that keeps them honest. Most of us want security, but we also don’t want our agencies acting in a political fashion. We also need a FISA that works.

                      Most of the work done by our FBI is professional and I am sure that most of the FISA requests are appropriate. Trump is asking for these specific requests because they may be illegal and Congress has been investigating. In fact, we might see some of the people involved losing their law licenses because as lawyers they have a special duty to the court. We also might see some going to jail.

                      No one man knows everything, but I think Trump is shrewder than many.

                    9. Trump want to taint this particular warrant because it incriminates him. The left has been trying to reform the FISA court for years. Yes the democrats you hate are the ones who want the most restrictions on the FISA court. Now this supposedly Republican President and Republican house and Senate that is so worried about a overpowerful FISA court has produced no laws to change it.
                      What reforms have the suggested? Please don’t think they are worried about FISA for any other reason than for any other reason than it produces evidence that incriminates our current president.

                    10. Jacquie, you accused me of calling you a liberal. I asked “ Where did I call you a Liberal? “ You never responded to the accusation you made against me.That seems to be a bad habit.

                      At first, it seemed you wanted to protect our security services and the country from the Russians. You agreed that the memo was correct. Schiff reportedly has come out with a memo that is more specific with regard to names and methods. If so are you going to criticize Schiff?

                      In this posting, you draw a conclusion as to why Trump released the memo. Have you suddenly become a mind reader? Do you read tea leaves as well? Nunes and Congress released the memo, not Trump.

                      It sounds like you are upset that the Nunes memo was released even though you agree with its findings. That means you agree there were legitimate concerns about the legality of DOJ and FBI interactions with FISA which represented a breakdown of legal processes meant to protect the American people. You also would believe the “dossier” collected by Christopher Steele was on behalf of the DNC and Clinton campaign. Steele was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.You agree to a lot more than just that, but knowing your love for this country I think you agree that any sane and fair-minded individual would agree that such actions warrant investigation.

                      Add to that the document was an essential part of the four FISA applications and that Andrew McCabe said there would have been no FISA warrants without the Steele document. Additionally, add that the political origins of the dossier were known to DOJ and FBI officials.

                      The question is whether you can deal with an individual topic or due lack of knowledge have to flitter from one topic to another. At Present the FISA memo is under discussion not your political feelings against Trump.

                      Finally, you say “Please don’t think they are worried about FISA for any other reason than for any other reason than it produces evidence that incriminates our current president.”

                      Why don’t you list the exact evidence that incriminates our current president and the illegal acts it seems you believe he has performed. But while you are at that continue discussing the points involving the actual thread Turley wrote.

        2. Tell us Jacquie, what did the memo say that was untrue? Should the FBi not release to the FISA court both the positives and negatives in their FISA request? I want to hear from someone who believes they have news that mespo doesn’t.

          1. Putin is a genius I’ll give him that. Let me start from the beginning. When the Russian bots were promoting you to believe that Trump needed to “release the memo” did you even know why or what for?

            1. You must still be sleepy from your long rest. Answer the question.

              Tell us Jacquie, what did the memo say that was untrue? Should the FBi not release to the FISA court both the positives and negatives in their FISA request? I want to hear from someone who believes they have news that mespo doesn’t.

              1. Russia needed that information. He needed to know when Carter Page was being spied on while he was talking to Russians. Trump would be happy to hand it over but that would looks soo bad. Putin was able to brain wash you and so many like you into demanding we hand over the information to him. Absolutely genius. No it doesnt look like Trump handed over top secret information. Did you consider why this memo which explained nothing to but plenty to Russia was put out in the public?

                  1. Jacquie, now along with calling people smug and fools you continue to ask questions without ever answering some basic questions involving the memo. That demonstrates your understanding of FISA, The Constitution and who the FBI is responsible to, is near nil. Maybe you should return to your coma. You will sound smarter.

              2. Allan-

                Did she ever answer your simple question, or did she keep obfuscating?

                I am curious to see what the Left comes up with, because it is not only Jacquie who won’t answer, but it’s the Democratic Party in general. I have seen this question asked of various Democrats, and they just won’t answer it. What in the world could their answer be?

                The public already knew everything in the memo, with the exception that the fake dossier was the reason why the FISA court granted the application for surveillance.

                Russia has known, as we have known, that not only was Carter Page spied on while discussing anything with Russia, but so was every other Republican. That’s been in the mainstream media for quite a while, now. Is this the new talking point? That it tells Russia they were being surveilled? Russia quite likely has all of Hillary’s emails that she left strewn about on the Cloud, and that includes classified information. What could Russia possibly not know by this point?

                1. Karen, she has yet to answer the questions. She doesn’t know anything. She can only parrot what she thinks are legitimate questions, but they are only legitimate when there is proof and when she can respond to questioning. She is typical of all too many on the left.

                  Smug is a great word to describe these people that mindlessly try to project their intelligence with sounds bites when all they are doing is projecting their ignorance. My guess is she knows little of history and even less of politics.

                2. Time dates and people. I know there is truth in the memo otherwise the FBI would not wanted it released.
                  Top Secret data is very very boring. If you have ever been in the military or governement or held a clearance you would understand this. You guys were screaming to release this memo do you even remember why?

                  1. “Why?”

                    Because we can’t permit the FBI and the DOJ to become political actors. That is what seems to have happened.

                    1. Jacquie, do you wish the FBI and DOJ to only enforce laws against their political enemies?

                      You assume none of us know about the military or Top Secret. I’ll bet without naming names some of the people on this list have had to swear to secrecy in the defense of our citizenry and country. Some will never mention that to you because it is secret. By the way, Top Secret generally isn’t very secret at all. Some people require code secret. Unfortunately, what appears likely to be true in this case is that secrecy is only needed to protect people that weren’t following the law. Is that what you want?

                    3. “Okay so were they political actors that tried to get Hillary Clinton elected?”

                      Based upon some of the phone text messages it seems that way.

  5. Pingback: VIDEO Needed reason to spy, so they made it up – FBI, Dems Over-Played Classification Card On the Memo | Reclaim Our Republic

  6. @CNN

    Former CIA counterterrorism official Phil Mudd: The FBI people “are ticked” and they’ll be saying of Trump, “You’ve been around for 13 months. We’ve been around since 1908. I know how this game is going to be played. We’re going to win”

    1. Mudd: We will destroy you if you allow the public to see our abuse of power –

      That sure is a fun way to confirm the corruption and abuse……..

    2. That 1908 stuff rand a bell from a visit I made as a kid to an army base for the 4th of July. In that year, at Fort Myer, Virginia, Thomas Selfridge died in an airplane crash. The pilot, Orville Wright, was severely injured in the crash but recovered. Do you know that before that day nobody had died in an airplane crash but lo and behold it happened. Mudd’s never seen a force of nature like Trump. Go get ’em The Donald.

  7. One year later into the Russian investigation, there’s no there, there. Now Meuller and his posse are hoping to find somethimg, anything. I know the democrats and the rinos hate this guy, but for God’s sake’s, he won the election. These people just can’t handle the simple fact that Donald Trump won the election.

  9. I went back to Obama press statements assuring everyone that the Russians could not and will not affect our election. This was the best part “the American people will decide who is president”. So is all this bullswipe the “insurance” Strozck and Page spoke of to prevent the American people from deciding who will be President.

  10. Another excellent independent analysis of the FISA warrant fraud and corruption by Styx:

  11. Look! I have a MEMO too. And I read as much of the underlying intelligence as Devin Nunes:

    DARRIN’S MEMO

    Vlad Putin approves of this Nunes Memo development!

    Any of you boys on the Right need more Russian help? More money from the NRA? More of your election propaganda?

    Da! We are all Russians now…at least in the Republican party. Damn Democrats.

    The republican party is flush in Russian money and pro Trump propaganda. And all you guys had to do was betray America.

    1. Never mind all of that, the Democrats clearly overplayed their hand, and that’s the important issue here! Really, it’s the only issue here.

      Seriously, of all things to address about this idiotic memo, THIS is what you write about, Turley?

    2. If conservatives weren’t attacking the FBI and the judiciary, it would be shocking. The Paul Weyrich Teaching Manual includes the following statements, ” We will try to weaken and then destroy existing institutions…We will maintain a constant barrage of criticism against them…We must be feared so that (our opponents) will think twice before opening their mouths.” Weyrich founded the Heritage Foundation (Koch funding- Clarence Thomas’ wife received almost $700,000 from Heritage as an employee, information that Thomas did not disclose until media scrutiny).

      Providing background- Weyrich is quoted at Wikipedia as saying his political movement began when Bob Jones University was threatened that it would lose its tax exempt status because of its racial discrimination. Less than 20 years ago, Bob Jones U. was still prohibiting interracial dating and marriage.

      We can speculate about the current situation- the dovetailing of the interests of the right wing and Putin. Weyrich recognized the “soviets spent millions infiltrating U.S. media”. And, it’s clear that the right wing is running interference for Russia in Mueller’s investigation.

      ALEC (Koch funding) is an example of a parallel institution existing side by side with the state legislature, in drafting laws. The Weyrich Manual prescribed parallel institutions as the means to weaken existing structures, so that they could be driven to extinction. The Kochopus which claims libertarian views, devotes a lot of money and attention at the state level creating the government policies they want e.g. State Budget Solutions, State Policy Network, and American City and County Exchange.

      American oligarchs today, have economic and political views in tandem with dictatorial strong men like Putin. Their agenda, quashing democracy and weakening the American people, lines up with Kremlin goals.

      1. I’ve never read “Paul Weyrich’s Teaching Manual”.
        Is it anything like “Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals”?

  12. Did I see that Turley referenced the fact that the Nunes memo was decried by the democrats, the head of the FBI, Trey Gowdy, and FBI rank and file employees as incomplete, out of context, cherry picking info and a misrepresentation of the underlying intelligence?

    No?

    Turley, you are a poor excuse for a lawyer. You bitch about this Russiagate scandal to the detriment of the FBI, democrats and normal people with your hitpiece articles couched in hypotheticals and smeared with the patina of legal expertise.

    You didn’t see any disclosure of sensitive national security information in the memo? Well huzzah for you. This BS memo should have been addressed behind closed doors where the FBI and all interested parties are under oath and testifying to the oversight committee. Instead, we get this pathetic excuse for oversight in the form of a memo that looks like it was drafted by a high schooler targeting bullies.

    And that’s good enough for you apparently, Turley. Again, the FBI is a counter-terrorism law enforcement entity. If sources and other countries cannot trust America to do its Intelligence business behind closed doors then we all suffer. In a post 9/11 world, that is nothing to denigrate by slobs like you.

    If we accept Turley’s view of Russiagate in different terminology, here’s what we get: Tony Soprano is a community organizer who is being harassed and is hated by various entities in the FBI and local law enforcement. We have competing narratives of a man who is merely putting bread on his table by developing consulting relations with various local businessmen. The FBI calls him mafia and organized crime and have even developed a memo and picture board alleging that Mr. Soprano is a mob style boss routinely breaking the law and his neighbors kneecaps as well. The 5 families in New York have offered all sorts of support to Mr. Soprano since he was besieged by a biased FBI….

    Hey Turley, where are your hypothetcials now? You know, the same ones you used to bash the FBI and democrats a week or two ago? You accept the Memo at face value and that is pathetic.

    You’re either a sucker or an inveterate careerist who’s paycheck from FOX News takes precedent over fidelity to the USA.

  13. I found this woman even more entertaining than Diamond and Silk… Of course she’s a Putin bot…

    1. A superb video. And “using The Onion is where they draw the line.” LOL! Of course, you know you’re ad hominem that the video presenter is a “Russian bot” is merely a reflection of your naturally perverse Leftist requirement to label anyone who tells the truth, which, of course, will be something you violently disagree with (being a natural hater of the truth), a “Russian bot.” No cure for stupid, as Autumn well knows, since Autumn has given up long ago on trying to develop a scintilla of intelligence because of repeated failure.

      1. I was joking you idiot.

        It’s ignorant PARTISANs like yourself – in your case “Rep good Dem bad” vs the “Dem good Rep bad” nitwits who dismiss other POVs who are ruining this country. Keep it up you morons. Both the RNC RINOs and DNC DINOs are laughing like crazy as they enrich themselves and screw over citizens.

        FU LOSER boy

        1. I understood your feeble attempt at sarcasm, but you failed at that too. No cure for stupid, Autumn. And when you’ve plunged to the depths of the superultrasubcretin level, there’s no entering even the lofty level of stupid for you. So you might as well enjoy it.

            1. He knows you are a loser so he can not be all bad. He is ignorant like you but does not pretend to be an independent thinker (chuckle) like you

  14. While there is no question that the DOJ and the FBI participated in a fraud on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) to surveil Carter Page, a U.S. citizen, the Deep State is not so foolish as to engage in such fraud without having all bases covered, and that includes the FISC who issued the FISA warrant. The Deep State has long ago stacked that deck with judges possessing not an ounce of integrity and are always ready to act on behalf of the Deep State when called upon to do so.

    In the end, the entire case against the DOJ and the FBI, just two government agencies under the control of the Deep State, rests with the FISC that agreed to rely on two sources as a basis for the eventual issuance of the warrant: the dossier authored by a foreign agent, Christopher Steele, and a Yahoo News report that Steele gave to Yahoo News. (Though some may argue otherwise, the fact is ironclad that Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe testified before the Committee that but for reliance on Christopher Steele’s 35-page “dossier,” the FISA warrant would neither have been sought nor obtained.)

    But common sense should tell everyone that a FISC with any integrity and intellectual honesty would never rely solely on such flimsy “evidence” as a Yahoo “news” article to “corroborate” the claims made in the so-called “dossier.” A real FISC Court with any integrity and intellectual honesty would demand that the DOJ present proof that both the “dossier” and the Yahoo article were legitimate sources of information before granting the FBI the right to conduct surveillance activities of a private citizen who was not even charged or suspected of committing any crime.

    But this FISC did not perform its job, and merely rubber-stamped the DOJ’s and the FBI’s request. This is a red-flag that the fraud extends beyond the DOJ and the FBI.

    Thus, I can predict here and now that if a full investigation is ever conducted going all the way up to the FISC, the FISC, if called upon, will be fully prepared to affirmatively state that although the “dossier” and the Yahoo “news” article were considered in the decision to approve the warrant, the “support” was considered “holistically” and was not dependent on those sources. In other words, the FISC is fully prepared to state that the warrant would have approved without the “dossier” and the Yahoo “news” article regardless of the fact that the DOJ and FBI would not have sought the warrant without them!

    Courts to do this sort of thing all of the time when a flagrant judicial “error”has been made. Courts do not like to admit that they were wrong, let alone that they failed to properly do their jobs under the law. And no judge is going to admit that they felt pressured into approving the warrant. Thus, the FISC will go into ass-covering mode, just as the DOJ and the FBI have already done and continue to do.

    In the end, the late, great comic and visionary George Carlin is right. The game is, indeed, rigged.

    1. System rigged? So many things have transpired in the past 12 months that run counter to a “rigged system”:
      • Pres. Trump was elected against the wishes of the federal bureaucracy
      • the possibility of undue, secret Russian influence over the President was investigated and didn’t pan out
      • Carter Page is still a free man
      • none of the individuals indicted or pleaded out by Mueller are in prison….they all have credible appeals
      • individual freedoms are as safe or safer than under previous administrations (although hedonism is not
      celebrated as “chic” anymore)
      • women have a new layer of social protections against sexual harassment and assault
      • the media world is undergoing a major disruption — demanding new levels of journalistic responsibility,
      a trend that hasn’t played out fully yet

      1. Yes, the system’s still rigged. Although Trump is President, he’s still surrounded by Deep Staters infesting everywhere. The “Russian Conspiracy” hoax continues unabated. Carter Page was just a pawn to get to Trump sufficiently to start-up the Mueller &Co. Deep State Machine. And so on.

        But the rigging that I spoke of refers specifically to the FISA Memo scandal. Read my post again and maybe you’ll understand. I’m saying the FISC will BAIL out the DOJ and FBI fraudsters. When you have top-level judges going along with the DOJ’s and the FBI’s fraud, that’s some serious rigging.

        1. Ralph Adamo said, “Carter Page was just a pawn to get to Trump sufficiently to start-up the Mueller &Co. Deep State Machine.”

          The deep state didn’t fire James Comey. Trump did. Oh! Wait. Did Rosenstein trick Trump into firing Comey? Can Trump be tricked that easily? Which deep-state operative is trying to trick Trump into firing Rosenstein? Director of the FBI Christopher Wray? Well, which deep-state operative tricked Trump into hiring Wray? Rosenstein? Well, which deep-state operative tricked Trump into hiring Rosenstein, who tricked Trump into firing Comey? “Ernie the Keebler Elf” [a.k.a. A.G. Sessions]???

          Is Ralph Adamo really a Tasmanian dreidel? Well, if Ralph Adamo truly were spinning as fast as a Tasmanian dreidel, then of course the system would appear to be rigged to Ralph Adamo. So which deep-state operative tricked Trump into hiring Ernie the Keebler Elf??? Sloppy Steve Bannon???

          1. Diane – you clearly need more coffee. That argument, if you want to call it that, does not make a lot of sense. It is all over the place. Focus.

            1. Ralph Adamo said, “Carter Page was just a pawn to get to Trump sufficiently to start-up the Mueller &Co. Deep State Machine. And so on.”

              A) Trump hired Rosenstein. B) Sessions recused himself. C) Trump fired Comey. D) Rosenstein hired Mueller as Special Counsel. The October 2016 FISA warrant for Carter Page had nothing whatsoever to do with A) Trump hiring Rosenstein; B) Sessions recusing himself; C) Trump firing Comey; D) Rosenstein hiring Mueller as Special Counsel.

              The only way fro Ralph Adamo to get from the October 2016 FISA warrant for Carter Page to the rigging of a system of deep-state machinations culminating in the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller The Third, who will not be deterred, is for Ralph Adamo to spin as fast as a Tasmanian dreidel whilst abjectly denying that Trump had anything to do with A) hiring Rosenstein and B) firing Comey.

  15. So, Nunes crafted a memo using select parts of FBI files. He edited the files to suit his agenda. Even with the opportunity to edit the files, craft a memo, and rev up the media, there is next to nothing in the accusation. The Republicans refuse to allow the ‘whole’ file along with a Democrat ‘memo’ to be released; which, as the Democrats attest, contains much info that will put the ‘cherry picked’ items presented by Nunes into a different perspective.

    The Republicans and Trump accuse the Democrats of orchestrating stuff. The Republicans ‘cherry picked’ items from FBI files. Hypocritical? Naw.

    If ever there was a circus, this is it.

    Let’s have a look at Trump’s tax returns. Naw.

    1. Rick Wilson [the most fun Never Trump conservative]: “Everything Trump touches dies.”

      Keep your eye out for his documentary of the same name.

  16. So a foreign agent tells the FBI he wishes to disrupt our election and they decided to take him up on it? How is that o.k

  17. Comments from the “Right” I read right to left. Makes more sense that way.

    1. LOL. There is a lot of gibberish in there.

      Who introduced Carter Page to Trump/Trump’s team in the first place? Can’t wait until someone finds out.

      1. Ed Cox, Corey Lewandoswki and Sam Clovis brought Carter Page on board the Trump campaign.

      1. Hebrew is not the only language with a boustrophedonic writing system, putz.

  18. Thanks to the Internet, distrust in government and institutions has grown exponentially during the last 20 years. Not only that, thanks to Donald Trump, distrust in the mainstream media has also grown exponentially.

    Had the media actually been a Fourth Estate all along, doing honest bidding for its employer (the public) rather than fake bidding for government, corporate, and elite criminals, the public would have known much more real truth about all corruption, not just in recent time but going all the way back to the carpetbaggers, the Civil War, and even origins of the pro-government/Wall Street, anti-consumer banking system today, making the media itself equally as guilty as the outlaws they have always sided with.

    There are upsides to the public’s distrust. Inasmuch as juries are (still) selected from the public at large, accounts for why all charges against Cliven Bundy, two sons, and a co-defendant have been dismissed in Nevada. The jury believed the defendant witnesses more than it believed corrupt prosecutots who rigged evidence in vain attempt to demonize Bundy.

    Demonization is paramount when you need 12 jurors to agree. The only problem for the prosecutors, the jury saw that the demon was not Bundy but rather the government itself.

    Once a defendant is properly demonized, such as sexual predator, Larry Nasser, any fifth grader could prosecute the case and actually win.

    But if you want to convict an innocent person, screwing him over or denying life, you have to use the corrupt U.S. judicial system, made up of corrupt, impartial hoodlums, which system can now be described only as Star Chamber justice.

    SCOTUS, itself, is the worst perp of all, made up of judges who routinely interpret the Constitution to favor corporations, rewarding stockholders by rule, the hell with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all. SCOTUS actually ruled personhood for corporations while denying it, unbelievably, for unborn babies. SCOTUS’ worship of sacrifice of human life on altars and Ginsberg’s public hatred of Trump exemplifies just how corrupt and unblinded justice is at the highest level in the land.

    The only way you get rid of a corrupt official or a whore in media today is by demonizing him/her, first. In other words, so long as s/he is not a Larry Nassar, s/he stays and corruption grows while public injustice and exploitation continues.

  19. It remains to be seen how well our system of governance can stand up to the malicious interference of foreign adversaries. After the election of 2016, most everyone agrees with the fact that the Kremlin used cyberattacks and social media trolling/propagandizing to disrupt our process. That said, we ourselves are responsible for the hyper-polarization that makes us more vulnerable to outside shenanigans.

    Many commentators have pointed out that defending our open-free-pluralistic way-of-life from infowar attack from authoritarian regimes will require much stronger unity and solidarity than we can currently muster. Others argue that to defend ourselves, we must go that, and mount a unified, aggressive infowar to weaken the nations that attack us….identifying and exploiting their vulnerabilities. The most likely countermeasure is truth-warfare. To fight it effectively requires exquisite media and communication discipline, and the highest standards of objective journalism — these are the weapons of truth-warfare.

    Silicon Valley has ventured into a brave new world of unsupervised, unmoderated communications — a propagandist’s dream come true — an anarchist’s playground. Belatedly, the question of the value of journalistic standards is beginning to make a revival. However, the discipline it will take to recover these standards in practice is a monumental challenge in a media environment where everyone with the skills to type, shoot still photos and videos, and employ multimedia software tools and webapps can publish! How do we rapidly teach a hundred million Americans the truth-gathering process that is taught in journalism schools? How do we achieve a critical mass of truth-gatherers? We have to become that critical mass before we can start to prevail as global truth-warriors facing down our adversaries.

    What does this have to do with the Memo? It’s the larger context — foreign infowarfare attack by Russia — one that we must successfully reverse — that got us started with the current Mueller / FBI-DoJ eruption of suspicions, conspiratorial thinking, and — yes — official misconduct. The Russians are driving us to see if we’ll go over a cliff of our own excesses. The way we begin to pull back from self-destruction is to insist on the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. That last phrase is crucial. It is not sufficient to have truth drowned out in a cacophony of half-truths and uninformed opinion. To succeed at unified truth-warfare, we have to first and foremost quell the impulses in our own brain saying that we are 100% confident that our understanding of reality is complete and correct. We have to remain open-minded, and be good at spotting areas of ambivalence, and pose questions to fill in missing gaps. During all this, we have to maintain our loyalty and goodwill toward one another, not succumbing to alienation or demonization. We have to stop the impulse to believe we can read the other person’s mind, especially in a way that exacerbates a conflict.

    Civics 101 and the interpersonal skills of trust-keeping and collaborative problem-solving are the foundation for the strength of our polity and way-of-life. We can conquer our foreign adversaries with these values, but only if we master them faultlessly in the way we resolve conflicts here in the US.

    We all have to become good journalists, and our professional journalists have to become super-journalists
    who not only know how to get to the relevant truth, but also can teach the unskilled in the audience how to sort and sift out the subtlest misrepresentations and exaggerations, and to never be the one to pass along or amplify unjustified conclusions.

    Are we ready to give each other the benefit of the doubt in terms of each other’s goodwill and loyalty?…while being as politely inquisitive as we need to be to get at the truth? Are we ready to keep the political problem-solving safely out of the reach of the police function? These are the questions raised by the Memo, and the questions JT is elevating about civil liberties and surveillance abuse.

    Because, we could lose the infowar battle with the Russians (or Chinese) by one of two extremes: We become too authoritarian (give up our freedoms), or we become intractably divided and alienated (impotent and dysfunctional). Our system can only persevere by each of us becoming a sophisticated, critical-thinking, engaged truth-gatherer, and a foe of self-deception, complacency, defensive thinking, conspiratorial theatricality, and overconfident speculation. We have to prove that self-disciplined freedom is a superior alternative to authoritarian government — better than a police state. A universal commitment to unity and allegiance to truth-gathering is the foundation of that alternative.

    1. pbinca re: “After the election of 2016, most everyone agrees with the fact that the Kremlin used cyberattacks and social media trolling/propagandizing to disrupt our process.”

      Who is “most everyone”?? Many people know that is bs. Especially true Progressives such as Caitlin Johnstone and Jimmy Dore

    1. I imagine they have a whole lot more actual evidence than the “evidence” you pretend to have . So it’s up to them.

Comments are closed.