Initially, I was underwhelmed by the Nunes FISA memo release because it didn’t appear to reveal anything we didn’t already know, or at least suspect, especially for anyone who watched the exceptional Daily Caller interview with former Federal Prosecutor Joe diGenova.
Over the past two days, I have read several articles requesting more disclosure, and although I think much of the clandestine cover our intelligence agencies ‘require’ would be unnecessary if they were not engaged in nefarious activity (read Confessions of An Economic Hitman), we the people do deserve to know the truth, good or bad.
In the meantime, Representative Paul Gosar (R-AZ) is calling for action. Excellent!
On the other side of the spectrum, I read a New York Times op-ed this morning by Josh Campbell, a former Supervisory Special Agent with the FBI, who claims to be quitting to fight the political attacks against his agency. Admittedly, he made some excellent points.
“When the F.B.I. knocks on someone’s door or appeals to the public for assistance in solving crime, the willingness of people to help is directly correlated to their opinion of the agency… To be effective, the F.B.I. must be believed and must maintain the support of the public it serves.” ~ Josh Campbell
I couldn’t agree more. However, there is a reason for the erosion of trust over the years under former FBI Director Comey.
For those who may have forgotten, Bloomberg documented the out-of-control data mining of U.S. citizens in cooperation with the NSA back in 2013. We also have Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) proof regarding the unconscionable ends-justifies-the-means allowance of criminal activity by FBI informants between 2011-2014.
Despite the protests of Mr. Campbell, the actions of the FBI begin to form a pattern for those willing to look.
Just consider the mishandling of Hillary Clinton’s email investigation under Comey: Questionable immunity deals given to key witnesses/participants in the scandal, Bill Clinton-Attorney General Loretta Lynch tarmac meeting cover-up, AG Lynch giving instructions to call the investigation “a matter”, and the Comey exoneration memo drafted months prior to the end of the investigation. It all adds up to coordination between the FBI and DOJ to let Hillary Clinton off the hook for gross negligence, which doesn’t require the ‘intent’ motive used as an excuse for not pursuing an indictment.
Now, as a result of the Nunes-FISA memo, we know FBI and DOJ officials used unvetted (Fusion GPS/Steele dossier) opposition research paid for by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary for America (HFA) to obtain FISA surveillance probable cause actions for a U.S. citizen (Carter Page), with the ultimate intent of targeting a political opponent (Donald Trump).
Of course, it’s likely no one will admit the target was Trump, but there is no other logical explanation for the accumulation of facts, especially when we add the classified information we now know was provided to Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) to undermine Trump. It was clearly a coordinated political effort.
In addition, the Nunes-FISA memo clearly states the probable cause action authorization obtained for Carter Page was not covered under Title VII, referring to the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. Title VII deals with “Additional procedures regarding certain persons outside the United States.”
If “F.B.I. agents are dogged people who do not care about the direction of political winds,” as Mr. Campbell suggests, I have a few questions, along with a few suggestions.
1.) How, exactly, were the FISA probable cause actions approved, not once, but four times for Carter Page based on a dossier compiled against Donald Trump? Carter Page left the campaign no later than September 26, 2016, yet the FISA probable cause action was obtained October 12, 2016.
2.) If the FBI is apolitical, why didn’t someone from the FBI warn the Trump campaign that Carter Page was already under surveillance for potential Russian connections going back to 2014? Were they trying to entrap Trump?
Speaker of the House Paul Ryan said the Nunes memo is not an indictment against the Mueller investigation, but there are questions about the investigation that need to be answered, as well.
The Nunes-FISA memo states, “Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance probable cause action would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.”
4.) How does the classified information dump by the Obama administration fit into the picture?
5.) What exactly is Mueller investigating? What is his exact directive and/or parameters? Is it even about collusion anymore or is it about obstruction of justice?
After one year, we have seen very little to justify Mueller’s ongoing probe, yet there appears to be ample cause to shut it down.
7.) Since Michael Flynn was found guilty of lying to the FBI under oath, are we going to begin similar proceedings against other individual suspected of lying under oath to the FBI?
8.) If the Mueller probe is truly seeking justice, is he investigating the possibility of collusion between the DNC, HFA, and Russian operatives affiliated with Christopher Steele?
"So there's clear evidence of collusion with the Russians. It just happens to be with the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee." ~ Devin Nunes
9.) Given the expert analysis by Joe diGenova, is there going to be an investigation that ties all the apparent loose ends together between Uranium One, the Clinton email scandal, the Clinton Foundation pay-to-play allegations, and DNC/HFA/Russia collusion? More than that, will we ever see convictions?
President Trump is not a perfect man, but Mueller’s investigation has not provided one indictment against him to prove illegal conduct. Maybe it’s time the anti-Trump movement started seeking truth and justice instead of trying to reshape it to fit their narrative. Maybe then we can begin to restore faith in a justice system that's supposed to be blind.