GOP Memo Criticizing FBI Surveillance is Released (washingtonpost.com)

The controversial four-page memo created by Republican staffers on the House Intelligence Committee alleging abuse of surveillance authority by the Justice Department and FBI has been released Friday after being declassified by the president. The memo is unredacted. (Alternative link for the memo.) The Washington Post: The four-page, newly declassified memo written by the Republican staffers for the House Intelligence Committee said the findings "raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain (Justice Department) and FBI interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) calling it "a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from abuses related to the FISA process."

The memo accuses former officials who approved the surveillance applications -- a group that includes former FBI Director James B. Comey, his former deputy Andrew McCabe, former deputy attorney general Sally Yates and current Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein -- of signing off on court surveillance requests that omitted key facts about the political motivations of the person supplying some of the information, Christopher Steele, a former intelligence officer in Britain. The memo says Steele "was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations -- an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI." The FBI Agents Association on Friday said that agents "have not, and will not, allow partisan politics to distract us from our solemn commitment to our mission." The full statement: The men and women of the FBI put their lives on the line every day in the fight against terrorists and criminals because of their dedication to our country and the Constitution. The American people should know that they continue to be well-served by the world's preeminent law enforcement agency. FBI Special Agents have not, and will not, allow partisan politics to distract us from our solemn commitment to our mission.

Comments

Re:Good IT work

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

Full text (copy/paste from https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/read-the-full-text-of-the-nunes-memo/552191/):

January 18, 2018

To: HPSCI Majority Members

From: HPSCI Majority Staff

Subject: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses at the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation

Purpose

This memorandum provides Members an update on significant facts relating to the Committee’s ongoing investigation into the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and their use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) during the 2016 presidential election cycle. Our findings, which are detailed below, 1) raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), and 2) represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from abuses related to the FISA process.

Investigation Update

On October 21, 2016, DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA probable cause order (not under Title VII) authorizing electronic surveillance on Carter Page from the FISC. Page is a U.S. citizen who served as a volunteer advisor to the Trump presidential campaign. Consistent with requirements under FISA, the application had to be first certified by the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI. It then required the approval of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General (DAG), or the Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division.

The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC. As required by statute (50 U.S.C. §,1805(d)(l)), a FISA order on an American citizen must be renewed by the FISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a separate finding of probable cause. Then-Director James Comey signed three FISA applications in question on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one. Then-DAG Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ.

Due to the sensitive nature of foreign intelligence activity, FISA submissions (including renewals) before the FISC are classified. As such, the public’s confidence in the integrity of the FISA process depends on the court’s ability to hold the government to the highest standard—particularly as it relates to surveillance of American citizens. However, the FISC’s rigor in protecting the rights of Americans, which is reinforced by 90-day renewals of surveillance orders, is necessarily dependent on the government’s production to the court of all material and relevant facts. This should include information potentially favorable to the target of the FISA application that is known by the government. In the case of Carter Page, the government had at least four independent opportunities before the FISC to accurately provide an accounting of the relevant facts. However, our findings indicate that, as described below, material and relevant information was omitted.

1) The “dossier” compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application. Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign, via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS, to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.

a) Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.

b) The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person,

Not the partisan smoking gun they wanted

[GameboyRMH]

Apparently the argument boils down to the fact that the accusations in the Steele dossier were cited as a reason to surveil Page, therefore he shouldn't have been surveilled. But it doesn't say what other reasons were cited. One of them could be "Was spotted taking a stack of cash with the note 'FOR ALL THE COLLUSION' on it from head of the KGB" for all we know.

Re:Not the partisan smoking gun they wanted

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently the argument boils down to the fact that the accusations in the Steele dossier were cited as a reason to surveil Page, therefore he shouldn't have been surveilled. But it doesn't say what other reasons were cited. One of them could be "Was spotted taking a stack of cash with the note 'FOR ALL THE COLLUSION' on it from head of the KGB" for all we know.

Wrong.

You seem to have missed the key point that the FBI and DoJ deliberately left out the political origins and the fact the the Steele dossier was uncorroborated from the FISA court.

FOUR TIMES.

And the guy at the center of it all was Andy McCabe, whose wife got $1 million from Hillary! while he was in charge of investigating her email server.

The same Andy McCabe who was unceremoniously dumped out of the FBI the day after the FBI director saw the memo...

Re:Not the partisan smoking gun they wanted

[Mashiki]

That's exactly how law works in the US, Canada and most western countries. There's a thing called "chain of evidence" it deals with the initial source, through the people who carry it, to where it ends up in court and who signs for everything. Warrants filed under false pretenses and used to gain evidence are void.

If you want to see this in action read Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States. It's a very well known case where the US government seized tax records, then tried to present it as evidence before the court. There is also something called "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree" in US law it boils down to this; and this is a very slim definition. There is a lot of case law on this.

n. in criminal law, the doctrine that evidence discovered due to information found through illegal search or other unconstitutional means (such as a forced confession) may not be introduced by a prosecutor. The theory is that the tree (original illegal evidence) is poisoned and thus taints what grows from it. For example, as part of a coerced admission made without giving a prime suspect the so-called "Miranda warnings" (statement of rights, including the right to remain silent and what he/she says will be used against them), the suspect tells the police the location of stolen property. Since the admission cannot be introduced as evidence in trial, neither can the stolen property.

Mr Steele

[leelapolis]

Except for an obvious omission, when Mr Steele went to the FBI about his concerns about Trump Russian connections, the FBI said, Yep we know about already.

Carter Page is a known Russian Agent

[Anonymous Coward]

The Nunes memo revolves around the assertion that Carter Page's collusion with Russia's spy agency should not have been caught by a FISA warrant.

By the time Carter Page was caught committing treason for the Trump campaign, he had already been caught communicating with and offering help to Russian spies in a completely separate spy ring.

In other words, the Trump / Russia collusion is the second time Carter Page has been investigated in connection to Russian spies he was working for.

Interestingly the Russian spies in the first investigation (1 did prison time, 2 fled to Moscow) thought Carter Page was an idiot who craved money. Watch one of his bumbling television appearances where he incriminates himself multiple times while trying to pretend nothing happened. Really quite amazing spectacle, and you have to conclude the Russians are right about this guy...

Re:Carter Page is a known Russian Agent

[PopeRatzo]

I am not sure what you are trying to say here.

I think what he's trying to say is that the FISA warrant for surveillance on Carter Page happened before there was ever a Steele dossier. That means there was already probably cause for a warrant before the dossier.

Re:Carter Page is a known Russian Agent

[PopeRatzo]

Wrong! Authorities exonerate.

No. If you ware investigated by the FBI and they don't have evidence to bring charges, they do not write you a note saying, "He's exonerated, signed, the FBI".

And in this case, not only didn't they exonerate Carter Page, but they presented further evidence to continue the FISA warrant, which the federal judges (all appointed by a Republican, by the way) looked at and said, "Yep, you keep watching this guy. There's sufficient probably cause."

By the way, here is an unretouched, actual photo of Carter Page so everybody knows who we're talking about.

https://media.gq.com/photos/5a...

And here is a photo of Carter Page "giving a speech" in Moscow, in 2016.

https://static01.nyt.com/image...

Re:Carter Page is a known Russian Agent

[Rei]

Also, I'm amazed that nobody has yet posted the House Intelligence Committee minority's response. They're still legally prohibited from releasing their memo (is their any way that Nunes could possibly have made this look more like a partisan hack job than that?), but they've stated all that they're legally allowed to:

“The Republican document mischaracterizes highly sensitive classified information that few Members of Congress have seen, and which Chairman Nunes himself chose not to review. It fails to provide vital context and information contained in DOJ’s FISA application and renewals, and ignores why and how the FBI initiated, and the Special Counsel has continued, its counterintelligence investigation into Russia’s election interference and links to the Trump campaign. The sole purpose of the Republican document is to circle the wagons around the White House and insulate the President. Tellingly, when asked whether the Republican staff who wrote the memo had coordinated its drafting with the White House, the Chairman refused to answer.

“The premise of the Nunes memo is that the FBI and DOJ corruptly sought a FISA warrant on a former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, Carter Page, and deliberately misled the court as part of a systematic abuse of the FISA process. As the Minority memo makes clear, none of this is true. The FBI had good reason to be concerned about Carter Page and would have been derelict in its responsibility to protect the country had it not sought a FISA warrant.

“In order to understand the context in which the FBI sought a FISA warrant for Carter Page, it is necessary to understand how the investigation began, what other information the FBI had about Russia’s efforts to interfere with our election, and what the FBI knew about Carter Page prior to making application to the court – including Carter Page’s previous interactions with Russian intelligence operatives. This is set out in the Democratic response which the GOP so far refuses to make public.

“The authors of the GOP memo would like the country to believe that the investigation began with Christopher Steele and the dossier, and if they can just discredit Mr. Steele, they can make the whole investigation go away regardless of the Russians’ interference in our election or the role of the Trump campaign in that interference. This ignores the inconvenient fact that the investigation did not begin with, or arise from Christopher Steele or the dossier, and that the investigation would persist on the basis of wholly independent evidence had Christopher Steele never entered the picture.

“The DOJ appropriately provided the court with a comprehensive explanation of Russia’s election interference, including evidence that Russian agents courted another Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, George Papadopoulos. As we know from Papadopoulos’ guilty plea, Russian agents disclosed to Papadopoulos their possession of stolen Clinton emails and interest in a relationship with the campaign. In claiming that there is ‘no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos,’ the Majority deliberately misstates the reason why DOJ specifically explained Russia’s role in courting Papadopoulos and the context in which to evaluate Russian approaches to Page.

“The Majority suggests that the FBI failed to alert the court as to Mr. Steele’s potential political motivations or the political motivations of those who hired him, but this is not accurate. The GOP memo also claims that a Yahoo News article was used to corroborate Steele, but this is not at all why the article was referenced. These are but a few of the serious mischaracterizations of the FISA application. There are many more set out in the Democratic response, which we will again be seeking a vo

Re:Spying on Americans...

[Locke2005]

The Republican majorities in the House and Senate just renewed the FISA laws back in December, spearheaded by an impassioned speech demanding the Justice Department be allowed to do whatever it felt necessary. And impassioned speech by... Devin Nunes. Hypocrisy, thy name is Republican!

Re:FBI used unconfirmed hit piece to spy on citize

[Anonymous Coward]

No they didn't. Carter Page had been under investigation since 2013. The dossier wasn't even the reason for the warrant.

Re:FBI used unconfirmed hit piece to spy on citize

[mea2214]

Carter Page is the lynch pin that will sink Trump and his children and son in law. This memo is a looky loo to turn real criminal infractions by these people into a partisan football where facts do not matter. The Steele Dossier was merely corroborating information. The FISA application is classified so no one can dispute this memo without leaking classified information, means and methods. Trump is the true heir to P.T Barnum. Mueller's team hasn't said anything. What are they afraid of? Criminals know the crimes they committed.

Re: partisan politics

[Green Mountain Bot]

Carter Page was under investigation before even the GOP contracted GPS Fusion.

Re:Good IT work

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahem -

Fusion in 2015 began investigating Trump under a contract with the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website financially supported by GOP megadonor Paul Singer. That assignment ended once Trump was on track to win the nomination. But in April 2016, Fusion was hired by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee to keep funding the research. (Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained the firm.)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/01/09/what-you-need-to-know-about-christopher-steele-the-fbi-and-the-dossier/?utm_term=.4f4132d1b442

Re:FISA Courts are cool with Slashdot now!

[Aqualung812]

Now that there's pretty solid evidence that the DNC basically used the DOJ to lie to the FISA courts as part of its campaign...

Where is that solid evidence? The memo didn't include that.

Re:Nothing partisan about the memo

[reg]

No.

Re:FISA Courts are cool with Slashdot now!

[Aqualung812]

Steele was paid $160,000 by the DNC and the Clinton campaign to write that dossier.

Incorrect.
The dossier was started by the request of The Washington Free Beacon while Trump was a Republican Primary candidate. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/1...

After Trump was likely going to win, Free Beacon stopped paying Fusion GPS for this research. The DNC then contracted Fusion GPS to continue doing the research.

Fusion GPS then hired Steele, and did not tell him who the client was.

That is a far cry from what you just said happened, and what that memo claims happened.