The Democrats have launched an all-out assault on the House Intelligence Committee’s memo–no shock there. Some of their assaults shortly proved groundless, just like the suggestion that releasing the memo would someway imperil nationwide safety. Anyone who has learn the memo is aware of that’s foolish. Roger Simon takes up this subject and asks, “Why Did the Democrats Lie So Baldly about the Memo?”
Byron York addresses the extra believable claims the Democrats have made concerning the memo, and finds them primarily with out advantage:
1) What did Andrew McCabe say?
The subject right here is whether or not McCabe testified, because the memo says, that “no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court] without the Steele dossier information.” The Democrats say that characterization overstates the case, however they received’t say what McCabe truly testified to, which makes their objection suspect. My reply is straightforward: launch the transcript, and allow us to see for ourselves.
2) Did the FBI inform the courtroom concerning the Hillary Clinton marketing campaign’s involvement within the Steele file?
The subject right here is whether or not the FBI disclosed to the FISA courtroom that its software was primarily based totally on opposition analysis financed by the DNC and the Hillary Clinton marketing campaign. The Democrats say that whereas the applying didn’t disclose that, it–as Byron places it–“kinda, sorta gave the court the idea that a source was politically motivated.” But why didn’t the FBI stage with the courtroom concerning the file’s origins? Presumably as a result of it knew the courtroom would view with skepticism a warrant software primarily based on unverified allegations paid for by an opposing political marketing campaign. Once once more, the answer is straightforward: launch the FISA software, and allow us to see precisely what the FBI informed the courtroom.
three) Why didn’t the memo point out Carter Page’s historical past?
Here, Byron thinks the Democrats have a barely higher level, however I don’t purchase it. The FBI wiretapped Page in 2013, however so what? The FBI wouldn’t have gotten far with a FISA software that stated, “We spied on this guy a few years ago, let’s do it again.” Obviously the brand new “facts” about Page taken from the Steele file had been the idea for the brand new warrant software.
York goes on to speak concerning the sources that the FBI relied on within the software:
After conversations with a number of sources, it seems the FISA surveillance software relied on 5 classes of knowledge: 1) the file; 2) a Yahoo News article primarily based totally on the file; three) the George Papadopoulos case; four) Page’s historical past; and 5) a normal survey of Russian dangerous deeds.
According to these sources, the file made up by far the most important a part of the case for wiretapping Page. The Yahoo story was “cited extensively,” as nicely.
Am I the one one who thinks it weird that the FBI relied on a Yahoo News story as the idea for a supposedly secret intelligence investigation? Maybe I’m naive, however I at all times thought the FBI and CIA had higher sources of knowledge than Yahoo News. Apparently not.
I believe the House memo raises a number of questions, the solutions to which might be extremely uncomfortable for the Democrats. Hence their hysteria. First, the memo says that the FISA order was renewed thrice, every apparently for 90 days. This implies that the FBI continued to spy on Carter Page nicely after President Trump was inaugurated, till the autumn of 2017. Why? Was there legit suspicion of one thing Page was doing, or was it a part of the Democrats’ effort to deliver down the president?
Second, we don’t know what was accomplished with the knowledge the FBI collected on Page and anybody he communicated with. We do know that Obama administration hacks like Susan Rice made a unprecedented variety of “unmasking” requests through the related time interval, which allowed them to entry the communications of American residents, together with Page and anybody with whom he was involved. Were these officers colluding with the FBI to attempt to acquire “dirt” on, first, the Trump marketing campaign and, later, the president-elect? If not, what was the aim of their lots of of unmasking requests? Did among the data obtained via the FBI’s ailing-gotten FISA warrant discover its approach into the press throughout or after the presidential marketing campaign, by way of the Obama administration? Or was the complete operation unsuccessful, i.e., the surveillance by no means turned up something ok to make use of?
This is, I believe, the main shoe that has but to drop.