What To Learn From The Nunes Memo

The biggest issue in American politics correct now is something called "the Nunes memo."

The iv-folio document, prepared past Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), alleges serious abuses of ability past the FBI during its investigation into the Trump campaign's ties to Russia. House Republicans and bourgeois media have cast information technology as proof of President Donald Trump's long-running allegations of FBI bias against him; Democrats say it'south securely misleading, twisting and crimson-picking classified intelligence to make the president seem right.

The memo was finally released to the public on Friday afternoon, 4 days later Business firm Republicans voted to release information technology. It focuses almost entirely on FBI surveillance of i Trump campaign adviser, Carter Folio, and is very sparse on evidence of actual wrongdoing by the FBI.

Nonetheless, its release all the same threatens special counsel Robert Mueller's Trump-Russian federation investigation. The document could be used as an alibi by President Trump, who authorized the memo's release, to clean house at the Department of Justice — firing top officials he perceives equally comparatively loyal, like Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Trump did tweet something ominous just a few hours before the memo was released to the public:

The peak Leadership and Investigators of the FBI and the Justice Department take politicized the sacred investigative process in favor of Democrats and against Republicans - something which would accept been unthinkable only a short time agone. Rank & File are great people!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February ii, 2018

Ultimately, the document raises the question: Is in that location an anti-Trump bias at the FBI, and if so, does it justify placing the historically independent bureau under Trump's personal control? Information technology'due south a question with profound implications for the health of American republic, and i that explains why the memo became such a source of controversy.

What follows is a guide to the biggest questions swirling around the Nunes memo.

ane) Who is Devin Nunes, and why did he prepare this memo?

House GOP Leaders Preview Trump's State Of The Union Speech And GOP Priorities — Devin Nunes

Devin Nunes is the chair of the House Intelligence Committee and a longtime Trump ally. He served on Trump's transition team afterwards the ballot and defended erstwhile national security adviser Michael Flynn when he was (credibly, it turns out) accused of lying most his contacts with Russia last February.

Nunes "seemed to get out of his way to defend Trump," the Washington Post's Aaron Blake wrote, "in a way few others did."

Perchance the clearest example arose later on Trump tweeted in March that President Obama had "wiretapped" Trump Tower during the 2016 presidential campaign. The heads of both the NSA and the FBI categorically denied that whatever such wiretapping had occurred. Only Nunes quickly came to Trump's defence force, holding a printing conference to announce that "the intelligence customs incidentally nerveless information near The states citizens involved in the Trump transition."

What this actually meant is that some Trump transition personnel had been in contact with foreigners legally under surveillance, and their conversations were intercepted as role of that surveillance (that'south what "incidentally collected" means). This, needless to say, did not justify Trump's merits that the Obama administration was spying on his campaign headquarters.

However, the timing of Nunes's press conference and the confusing fashion in which Nunes presented the information made it seem like he was trying to provide embrace for Trump. The president himself said Nunes's revelation "somewhat" vindicated his tweets.

And so it turned out that Nunes got his information from the Trump White Firm itself. Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the National Security Council's senior managing director for intelligence, uncovered the information; Michael Ellis, a White House attorney who worked for Nunes prior to the Trump administration, personally took information technology to Nunes.

To recap: Nunes released data in such a fashion as to make it look like Trump's claims of existence persecuted by police enforcement were true — and did and then later secretly getting the information from the Trump White Business firm. The situation proved to exist such an embarrassment that Nunes was forced to recuse himself from the intelligence committee's investigation into Russia for eight months during a House ethics investigation into his conduct.

So when news broke in mid-Jan that Nunes had been working in secret to prepare a memo on FBI surveillance of the Trump campaign, the initial sense among intelligence experts was that it would be a repeat of the wiretapping debacle — Nunes misrepresenting intelligence to back up President Trump's political position.

But many of Nunes's colleagues in the Business firm saw information technology as damning proof of anti-Trump counterinsurgency at the FBI. They started a public campaign, backed by bourgeois media, to #ReleaseTheMemo. This culminated in Fri's release.

2) What does the Nunes memo allege?

Trump's ex-adviser Carter Page gives presentation in Moscow — Carter Folio

The memo focuses on surveillance of Carter Folio, a Trump campaign foreign policy adviser with business ties to Russian federation and open sympathies with the Kremlin'south foreign policy. The key accusation is that the surveillance of Page was improperly authorized — and potentially politically motivated.

In July 2016, while advising the Trump campaign, Page flew to Moscow and met with Russian officials. This raised eyebrows amid Us intelligence officers, to say the least. So the FBI and DOJ put together an awarding to a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) courtroom — a court that approves surveillance warrants pertaining to national security and foreign intelligence — to starting time watching Page. The court granted the application.

The Nunes memo alleges that this surveillance was not properly vetted past the courtroom; specifically, that it relied on the now-infamous Steele dossier, the document prepared by former British spy Christopher Steele alleging the being of a conspiracy between Donald Trump and the Russian government. Steele's enquiry was, partially and indirectly, financed past the Clinton campaign — which the memo alleges is a major problem.

The Steele dossier, Nunes writes in the memo, "formed an essential part of the Carter Folio application." Nunes goes on to suggest that the application omitted several central facts about the Steele dossier that undermine its credibility, the virtually notable existence the dossier's fiscal backing from Democrats, and that Steele himself expressed opposition to Donald Trump becoming president.

At that place are lots of bug with the memo's line of reasoning. For ane thing, Steele is a respected investigator, and some of his dossier's less explosive allegations accept so far proven to be true. The FBI'due south surveillance awarding may have relied on Steele's findings, just if that'south true, it doesn't necessarily discredit the application.

The memo'due south claims are also impossible to evaluate without seeing the underlying intelligence information technology was based on. Nunes could have highlighted the FBI's commendation of Steele without mentioning other, more physical sources the agency listed.

Moreover, the FBI relies on sources with axes to grind all the time — people typically don't go to the government with damaging information nigh people they similar. The key question in an application like this isn't whether the source liked the target; it'south whether the specific claims they're making are credible. The memo doesn't address this at all.

Perchance most fundamentally, the memo doesn't ever substantiate core assertions about political bias on the FBI's part. The memo'southward overall method of argument is to imply something suspicious without asserting malfeasance outright.

For example, the memo repeatedly notes that the DOJ knew that "political actors" were involved in the financing the Steele dossier. Information technology implies that the FBI knew they were Democrats and chose to ignore it.

But that'south never clearly stated, and for skillful reason. The house that employed Steele was initially contracted by a bourgeois publication, the Washington Costless Beacon, not any Democrats or Autonomous political campaign. It's possible the FBI knew of the Gratis Beacon's involvement or was aware that some political actor was involved in funding it — but didn't know about the Clinton campaign'south interest. The memo never clarifies which "political actors" it means.

This is why the early assessment from intelligence experts is that in that location isn't really a lot of there at that place.

"If this is their evidence of 'Worse than Watergate,' it'due south thin," Julian Sanchez, an good on surveillance at the libertarian Cato Institute, writes. "This reads like something y'all'd put together to *sound* scandalous to someone who isn't going to parse it closely."

3) Does the Nunes memo implicate anyone important?

Deputy A.G. Rod Rosenstein Addresses The State Of The Net Conference — Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

The memo isn't simply about the initial FISA application. FISA warrants on Americans, like Folio, expire after 90 days — which ways the Bureau needs to petition for a renewal every ninety days if they want to keep snooping on a target.

This happened repeatedly with Page. One of those renewals was signed off on by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein — the man currently supervising special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation.

Rosenstein is only mentioned once in the memo — he'southward i of several officials who signed off on renewing the Folio warrant. Merely his inclusion is specially important. "Republicans," the New York Times speculates, "could potentially apply Mr. Rosenstein's decision to corroborate the renewal to suggest that he failed to properly vet a highly sensitive application for a warrant to spy on Mr. Page."

Simply it's actually deeper than that.

The memo somewhat implies that the Russia investigation is a corrupt partisan hatchet chore. By bringing Rosenstein into information technology, it also ends up indicting the man currently in charge of the Russia investigation — suggesting he'due south at best incompetent and at worst corrupt. Theoretically, this would provide cause for Trump to dismiss Rosenstein.

Trump currently can't fire Mueller without Rosenstein's blessing and Rosenstein said in December that in that location is no "good cause" to burn down Mueller. If the president were to fire Rosenstein based on the memo, he might eventually be able to dismiss Mueller.

There isn't a lot of support for such a firing in the memo. Typically, FISA warrants only get renewed if they uncover new evidence that justifies continuing the surveillance. It seems plausible that this could take happened with Page, given his Russian connections. In 2013, for example, Russian agents approached him with the intent of turning him into an asset (a point the Nunes memo never notes).

This, experts say, is nigh certainly what happened.

"Information technology's [the FISA awarding] reapproved if you accept new data justifying the original likely crusade and the regime's demand to listen," writes Asha Rangappa, a onetime FBI special agent and current Yale lecturer, suggesting the memo really shows that the government had good cause to surveil folio.

So if Trump wants to fire Rosenstein based on 1 line in the Nunes memo, it would be quite a stretch.

4) Why did House Republicans desire to release the memo so much?

State of the Union — Rep. Matt Gaetz with Trump.

Ostensibly, Republicans in the Business firm pushed to release the memo because they believe it outlines surveillance abuses the American people need to know about.

"Let'south accept a neat debate about its consequences and the opportunity it presents to brand things better, so these things never happen over again," Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) said in a Jan 30 spoken communication on the Firm floor.

But experts on the FISA system, even civil libertarians disquisitional of the way law enforcement uses it, note that these Republicans aren't proposing any changes to how FISA works, or even suggesting that the system in general needs reform to stop whatsoever future abuses.

"In that location's a conspicuous lack of interest in drawing any policy conclusions from what they purportedly consider a major institutional scandal," said Sanchez, the Cato proficient.

Instead, the motivation for the push to release the memo seemed purely political. Many of the most vigorous supporters of #ReleaseTheMemo, similar Gaetz, have also chosen on President Trump to get rid of Robert Mueller. "I call back the president should've fired Mueller long ago," Gaetz said in a December interview with Vox.

These are people who seem to either genuinely believe that the Russian federation investigation is a partisan witch hunt targeting the president or believe there's some political reward to exist gained from championing an anti-FBI crusade near and dear to both the president'southward and Pull a fast one on News'south middle.

Either way, experts say the motivation behind the memo's release seems pretty clear — it'south a style of waging war on the Russia investigation specifically and the FBI in general.

"The release of the memo, and the fabrication of a set of ideas around the memo, empowers Trump to go subsequently the FBI," Ryan Goodman, a old Defense Department special counsel and current editor of Merely Security, said. "The ultimate goal is undermining the Mueller investigation. There doesn't seem to be some other reason for the president to be so obsessed with Rod Rosenstein and to be gunning for him."

5) Why did the FBI and Democrats oppose it?

The FBI and Democrats don't like the Nunes memo for 1 big reason: They think it'southward total of lies.

On Midweek, the FBI put out a strongly worded statement signaling the agency'due south worry with the memo's accuracy:

The FBI takes seriously its obligations to the FISA Courtroom 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 twenty-four hour period before the committee voted to release information technology. As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo'south accuracy.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the top Democrat on the Firm Select Intelligence Committee, said after the statement that he sided with the FBI. "I think the FBI is exactly right. I accept the same grave concerns over information technology." He added that he knew of the FBI's concerns before he voted against the memo'southward release.

Schiff and his beau Democrats on the committee also went the extra step of compiling a 10-page memo of their own. It reportedly asserts two things: Kickoff, that the FBI didn't abuse its FISA ability when requesting the Folio warrant, and second —more importantly — that the Nunes memo is only an endeavor to aid the White Business firm ignominy the Mueller probe.

On Monday, Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL) asked Nunes if his staffers worked with the White House on his memo. Nunes originally answered the question by saying "as far as I know," no one collaborated with the White Firm. Ultimately, though, he refused to reply the question — perhaps suggesting that there may actually have been some collusion there.

The House Intelligence Commission, yet, voted non to make the Autonomous memo public on Monday. There have been no moves towards releasing it since.

6) Why did Trump approve releasing the Nunes memo?

Trump Holds Tax Reform Discussion With American Workers At The White House

Trump didn't offer a clear public explanation. But based on other things he'due south said, the reason seems articulate: He has publicly stated several times that the Trump-Russian federation probe is a "witch chase" perpetrated by rogue partisans inside the FBI. The memo, he and his allies on the Hill believe, support this position.

"Trump is shockingly overt near believing that the problem here is that the FBI is staffed by loyalists to the wrong person," Sanchez said. "He does, in fact, seem to think that the job of the DOJ, and the FBI, and the rest of the intelligence community is to protect the president and follow his orders — including going after his political enemies based on stuff he saw on Play a joke on News, if that'southward what he wants to do."

Ironically, the memo concludes on a note that really could vindicate the broader Russia investigation.

The concluding paragraph of the memo is all about the FISA application's references to George Papadopoulos. The Trump campaign foreign policy adviser also had connections with Russia — he had been approached by a Russian-linked professor in London in the spring of 2016 who told him the Kremlin had dirt on Hillary Clinton.

The memo admits, crucially, that the Trump-Russia investigation originated with Papadopoulos'southward misbehavior, non Page's. "The Papadopoulos information," the memo says, "triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in belatedly July 2016."

This shows that even if the Carter Page FISA application were flawed, the Trump-Russia investigation had another foundation — evidence about Papadopoulos's Russian contacts. That ways you tin't discredit the unabridged Russian federation investigation by pointing to the Folio warrant.

The memo tries to insinuate that this likewise was biased confronting Trump — noting that one of the FBI agents handling the Papadopoulos situation, Peter Strzok, had sent some text messages critical of Trump to his "mistress," FBI attorney Lisa Page. Just at this betoken, we know that the information on Papadopoulos was true — because he pled guilty to lying to the FBI and gave a ton of data to special counsel Robert Mueller'southward office.

So if this is an endeavor to buttress Trump'southward entrada against the Russia investigation, equally his by behavior would suggest, information technology's not an especially successful one.

seven) What happens at present that the memo has been released?

FBI Director Comey Testifies At Hearing On Alleged Russian Election Meddling — Rep. Adam Schiff (Fifty) and Rep. Nunes.

The issue at present moves beyond the realm of fact and into politics. The question isn't so much what the Nunes memo says, but how those findings are interpreted by diverse different political actors.

The many holes in the Nunes memo'southward reasoning and evidence could end upwardly undermining the case against the Russia probe. Worse, the fallout of the release could atomic number 82 to more leaks proving that Nunes'due south business relationship is wrong. In that scenario, it would end upward as an unforced mistake.

Merely it's also possible that this gets coded in entirely partisan terms — with conservatives and Republicans seeing the memo as damning and information technology leading to a renewed assault on the FBI and the Mueller probe. Some conservatives are already taking Nunes's memo at face value and lambasting the FBI equally a partisan, anti-Trump agency.

Since Republicans control the majority in both Houses of Congress, their reaction in the next few days is vital. Information technology's all the same too early to tell just what that'll be.

8) Does this threaten the Mueller probe?

Possibly.

The entrada to release the memo was role of a much larger conservative effort to discredit the Mueller investigation. Its release could cease upwardly serving as pretext for removing those responsible for the Mueller probe.

Co-ordinate to the Washington Post, Trump told his close advisers prior to the memo'southward release that it could give him the ammo he needs to fire Rosenstein or forcefulness him to resign. Trump could supersede Rosenstein with someone friendlier to the Trump administration and more than willing to constrain Mueller. That could prove more detrimental to the Mueller probe in the long run.

Rangappa, the Yale expert, writes that the deputy chaser general could effectively cripple the Mueller investigation by rejecting Mueller's requests to investigate more people, obtain new show, or pursue charges against additional people, for example. More merely, the new appointee could just burn Mueller.

Again, this is more of a political game than a legal one. Nunes and many conservatives say there's proof in the memo that the FBI is corrupt, and the FBI and Democrats say this is all a smokescreen to protect the president.

So what's likely to happen in the coming days is escalating disharmonize between House Republicans and Trump administration officials who want the president to fire Rosenstein and shut down the Russia probe, and the FBI and Democrats who oppose all of this.

9) How bad could the memo fallout become?

There are two broad ways an extended political war between the FBI and Trump and his allies could go. In the starting time, the FBI is brought to heel, and Rosenstein and other senior FBI executives are fired and replaced with more Trump-friendly appointees. The Mueller investigation is quashed, and the bureau substantially serves more like an arm of the Trump administration than as a quasi-contained agency.

The implications of this scenario for American democracy are pretty scary.

"I shudder to recollect what the [2020] election looks similar when y'all've got a guy who says, 'I saw Trick & Friends this morning and my opponent is a crook' ... except now you've got an FBI and a DOJ that say, 'Yes, sir,'" says Sanchez.

In the 2nd scenario, the memo leads to a lot of FBI-Republican skirmishing only no actual showdown. Trump either decides not to fire Rosenstein or is somehow stopped from doing so, the Mueller investigation continues unhampered, and the FBI remains relatively untainted by political influence.

There are many factors that could make up one's mind which of these two outcomes plays out. Two of the central ones are congressional Republicans, specially Senate Republicans, and Trump's own staff.

Senate Republicans have been notably quieter and more restrained about attacking the FBI than their peers in the House. Senate Republicans besides take to ostend Trump appointees to the Justice Section; they could make clear that if he fires Rosenstein/Mueller and tries to appoint a crony to take their place, they won't confirm whomever he picks.

What influential Senate Republicans say and do in the days afterward the memo'south release, in brusk, could bespeak to Trump whether he has plenty bankroll to actually accept on the FBI.

"This particular president advances when he senses weakness," Goodman said. "The disquisitional factor is the will of many Republicans to stand upward."

There are some encouraging signs on this forepart. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), for example, responded to the memo with a condemnation of the entire entrada to undermine the DOJ and FBI. "The latest attacks on the FBI and Department of Justice serve no American interests — no political party's, no president'southward, only Putin'due south," he wrote.

Members of Trump's White Business firm are also an important check, having blocked his moves to interfere with the Mueller probe in the past.

The New York Times reports that in June, Trump ordered White House counsel Don McGahn to burn down Mueller. McGahn said he'd rather resign than do that, and Trump backed downwards. He was, according to the Times, "concerned that firing the special counsel would incite more questions most whether the White Business firm was trying to obstruct the Russian federation investigation."

If McGahn and other voices of relative restraint in the White House succeed in constraining the president's impulse to act, or even refuse to conduct out his orders, and so it's possible that the whole memo mess will amount to niggling in the end.