haithabu wrote:Boot, you say that there is enough smoke that there should be an investigation as to whether there is a fire. Fair enough, but I have to say that I see an awful lot of smoke machines working away in the media and among leakers in the State/DoJ/FBI departments, not to mention Democratic politicians. The "dodgy dossier" is a good example of the manufactured smoke, and it appears to be the original sin that first gave the Russian collusion narrative legs and even now continues to be at its centre. Partisan animosity against Trump, both within the intelligence community and without it, has done the rest.
So we may agree that there is likely a fire beneath the smoke, but we differ as to the nature of the fire. A good dose of sunlight and transparency is called for, and a stiff wind to clear away the smoke. Maybe we'll know more tomorrow.
I can't comment on the memo until it comes out, and I'll probably give it time to hear people across the political spectrum weigh in before I say anything about it.
But Trump-appointed FBI director Christopher Wray has seen the memo, and he issued this statement:
The FBI takes seriously its obligations to the FISA Court and its compliance with procedures overseen by career professionals in the Department of Justice and the FBI. We are committed to working with the appropriate oversight entities to ensure the continuing integrity of the FISA process.
With regard to the House Intelligence Committee’s memorandum, the FBI was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo the day before the committee voted to release it. As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy.
So Trump's FBI director is calling the memo a lie, Trump's Justice Department is saying that releasing it is extremely reckless, and Trump himself decides to release it? If you don't trust the Department of Justice, the FBI, or the State Department, then who should investigate to see whether these allegations are true? If you don't trust the Trump appointees leading these agencies, do we simply have to believe whatever the president says?
The memo was released by the House Intelligence Committee, where only two members were able to see the underlying intelligence, which is classified. One of them was Devin Nunez, who wrote the memo, and who had to recuse himself last year after being caught working closely with the White House, introducing "intelligence" that the White House gave him, and was investigated by the House Ethics Committee for this. The other was Adam Schiff.
The memo is not yet public, but the meeting that voted to release it
has transcripts that are worth reading. Here's what Schiff said:
Adam Schiff wrote:I want to begin by expressing my alarm at where we are in this committee.
I have served on the committee for 10 years now. This is the first time we have sought to declassify highly sensitive information for a political reason. It is, I think, a terrible line to cross.
Do you really consider Devin Nunez a neutral party in this who should be trusted instead of the Trump-appointed officials who are conducting this investigation? He was caught working closely with the White House to influence the investigation a year ago, was investigated by the House Ethics Committee, and had to temporarily recuse himself. He refused to answer whether he had worked with the White House on this memo.
The Trump Administration appointed Bob Mueller, let him conduct his investigation. It's called the rule of law. Even the president is subject to the law, and even the president can be investigated.
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?