… or, much ado about nothing.
The text of THE Memo (cobbled together by congressional Republicans) was published in The Richmond Times-Dispatch on Feburary 4, 2018, so I decided to read it a couple of times. One must get information "from the horse’s mouth” if at all possible. I must admit that I have not seen any of the classified material that purportedly undergirds the “damning” conclusions in the Memo concerning the recent machinations about the "Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act" (FISA), but I doubt there is any “there” there. The Memo's “conclusions” are pretty much bootstrap fluff that amount to the same-ol’/same-ol’. We’ve heard all that blustering crap before. But for a couple of minor revelations therein concerning "sources and methods," I really don’t understand why the Memo was classified material in the first place!
I must first get something off my chest: most Democrats have really blundered in their response to the Memo. Their near-hysterical reactions have basically invested the thing with much more significance than to which it is entitled. I realize they had no way to know in advance what the Memo would say, but they behaved as if it would likely be a serious condemnation of Robert Mueller's "Russia" investigation, James Comey, Rob Rosenstein, et als. RELAX! Calm down! The Memo is utter nonsense. Democrats, however, seem incapable of playing things “cool.” They need to take a chill-pill, but I doubt they will. They seem to think they will achieve political advancement with their self-righteous, histrionic, paw-wringing contortions.
I feel somewhat hypocritical even defending the FBI or Justice Department because I have been seriously concerned about the establishment of the FISA courts and the wanton, gratuitous, routine spying on Americans by the federal Security State. But the incongruity of REPUBLICANS worrying about government spying is just too much of an incredible provocation for me to resist. What is WRONG with that picture? Not that Democrats are rushing to defend our rights against such stuff. They have carefully avoided expressing any concerns about government spying, also. They seem to be buttressing the work of the Security State! So, I don’t trust Democrats any more than I trust Republicans. Neither group is committed to protecting us from wanton government snooping.
The document that I read in no way presents anything credible along the lines of what Donald Trump and many others have said about it. It is certainly no exposé of anything significant, and it does not validate any hostility toward the FBI or the Justice Department nor any of the prominent persons thereabout. Carter Page is the central figure in the Memo. He is identified in the Memo as a “volunteer advisor to the Trump presidential campaign” that did not get cranked up until 2016, so it is curious that the Trump campaign engaged Page AFTER he had been under close investigation for his machinations with the Russian government since 2011! The Memo takes up as the FISA court was approached to issue (renew?) a warrant for “electronic surveillance” (wiretaps) of Page. The Memo seems to imply that the initial Page wiretap was first sought in 2016, not in 2011. Such warrants must be renewed every 90 days under FISA.
As someone else pointed out in criticizing the revelations of "sources and methods," the Memo does impugn the work of a British spy, Christopher Steele, who compiled a “dossier” that was allegedly used to buttress the FISA wiretap warrant. Steele was purportedly employed by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign, which facts were apparently not revealed to the FISA court. Part of Steele’s mission was to dredge up negative information on Trump’s dealings in Russia. Steele had been "methodically" used by the FBI as a “reliable source” in the past, but his overt ties to the Hillary Clinton campaign and some indiscretion with Mother Jones Magazine (properly) cost him his FBI connections. So what? The Memo asserts that none of this was revealed to the FISA court in the wiretap application and should have been. As a major justification, the Memo asserts that Andrew McCabe, the Deputy Director of the FBI, testified under oath that the 2016 wiretap warrant would not have been sought without the “Steele dossier information,” [my emphasis] but of course there is no way to know if there were other sources for that information, or that other information might have been sufficient. So, "but for" Steele's corrupt work, Carter Page would have been totally vindicated? That is what Donald Trump is claiming for himself, but I failed to see either vindication. Sometimes what is NOT said is every bit as important as what is said.
The Memo also asserts, incorrectly I think, that FISA wiretap applications “should include information potentially favorable to the target of the FISA application that is known to the government.” I practiced criminal-defense law for about 12 years and have never known of any obligation put upon any prosecutorial operation to reveal “favorable” information about a suspect. If there is known EXCULPATORY information that shows that a suspect is INNOCENT, then I think it would be bad faith to thus proceed. But there is NOTHING in the published Memo that suggests that there was ever ANYTHING FALSE asserted against Carter Page, nor did it contain any EXCULPATORY information seemingly withheld. True, the DNC and Clinton connections make Steele look bad, but they don’t suggest Page’s INNOCENCE! There is NOTHING in the Memo that suggests that Steele’s information procured a phony wiretap. There is NOTHING in the Memo that suggests that any information ever obtained by the FISA wiretaps demonstrated Page's INNOCENCE! Even if Steele is totally prejudiced against Page, the FISA courts issued wiretap warrants against Page numerous times, so there must have been SOMETHING going on! But the Memo tells us nothing of that.
If Donald Trump were capable of feeling embarrassment about anything at all, he ought to be embarrassed that the tepid contents of the Memo do not in any way vindicate his silly bloviations about it. But Trump has never demonstrated he is thus capable, so I guess he is also incapable of shame, REGARDLESS of what his thugs and sycophants do. I am not going to hold my breath, waiting for him to act “presidential” for a change! I hope Robert Mueller will eventually tell us what we need to know.
And, speaking of “shame,” EVERYONE I grew up with was scornful of “brown-nosers”! They were the scum of the Earth, dismissed derisively! What has happened to all those people I grew up with? Where are they now? If there was EVER someone who almost begs people to “brown-nose” him, it is Donald Trump, and there are scads of such earnest little “puppies” out there, all lined up to just burrow right on in! And I am talking about people with advanced degrees and a fair amount of presumed intelligence!
Good grief!
