2 Weeks After Trump Blocked It, Democrats Release Rebuttal of G.O.P. Memo

[highplainsdem]

Source: NYT

House Democrats released a heavily redacted memorandum on Saturday that was drafted to counter Republican claims that top F.B.I. and Justice Department officials had abused their powers in spying on a former Trump campaign aide.

President Trump blocked the memo’s outright release two weeks ago, with the White House counsel warning that the document “contains numerous properly classified and especially sensitive passages.” Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee had since been haggling with the F.B.I. over redactions.

Democrats have insisted that Mr. Trump’s deference to national security concerns in the case was hypocritical and politically motivated. Just a week before blocking their memo’s release, the president had ignored similar objections from the Justice Department and the F.B.I. to declassify the contents of a rival Republican memo, which was based on the same underlying documents. Mr. Trump asserted, incorrectly, that the Republican document vindicated him in the special counsel investigation into Russian election interference.

The release of the Democratic rebuttal was expected to be the final volley, at least for now, in a bitter partisan fight over surveillance that has driven deep fissures through the once-bipartisan Intelligence Committee and at times pitted Mr. Trump against his own Justice Department and F.B.I.

-snip-

Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/24/us/politics/democratic-memo-released-fbi-surveillance-carter-page.html

---

The redacted memo:

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/ig/ig00/20180205/106838/hmtg-115-ig00-20180205-sd002.pdf

[BumRushDaShow]

1. Just about to post

I guess there was so much going on yesterday that they had to adjust the release date.

Edit to add WaPo article that just came out -

House panel releases Democrats’ memo defending FBI surveillance of ex-Trump campaign aide

By Karoun Demirjian and David Weigel February 24 at 4:21 PM

The House Intelligence Committee released a redacted version of a Democrat-written memo rebutting GOP allegations that federal law enforcement agencies used politically-biased information to conduct surveillance on one of the president’s former campaign aides.

President Trump had argued that making the Democrats’ memo available to the public would reveal intelligence gathering sources and methods.

The 10-page document contains more classified information than the four-page Republican memo to which it responds. Intelligence Committee Democrats, led by ranking Democrat, Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), had pledged to heed recommendations from the FBI and Justice Department regarding any redactions of sensitive information — something, the Democrats say, the GOP did not do.

Read the Democrats’ memo

But on Saturday, committee chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) accused Democrats of colluding with the government in a “cover up” of information as he announced the memo had been posted online

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/house-panel-releases-democrats-memo-defending-fbi-surveillance-of-ex-trump-campaign-aide/2018/02/24/4cff92f4-164f-11e8-92c9-376b4fe57ff7_story.html?utm_term=.0dea05578d0e

[elleng]

17. Nunes (R-Calif.) accused Democrats of colluding with the government!

[BumRushDaShow]

19. Yes! That statement makes no sense and is just insane

[pangaia]

22. Insanity from the insane.

[BumRushDaShow]

25. It only makes sense if "his government" is Russia

and Schiff's and our government is that of the suddenly "evil U.S.A."

[George II]

28. Congressional Democrats ARE part of the government, the twit!

[still_one]

2. Too bad it was released on the weekend, and not during a standard news day

[riversedge]

3. Oh, some use the weekend to catch up on the news and it will be on the Sun talk shows I hope.

[still_one]

6. That is true. What I briefly observed on CNN it seems they are more concerned about what the

republicans have to say about it then what the memo says.

I really hope that is not how this gets reported, "getting the republican view of the memo"

[Cha]

27. Of course. It's always what the pubs

have to lie about.

[still_one]

31. ....................................................

[LiberalLovinLug]

38. Yup

They have on Republicans to explain the Nunes memo

And then have on Republicans to explain the Dem's memo.

Its only fair

[Rhiannon12866]

37. Joy Reid is also excellent on breaking news

Among other issues. She keeps us up to speed on weekends. Last night she was in for Lawrence O'Donnell and she and Rachel discussed her weekend contributions in the hand off.

[highplainsdem]

4. New York mag's Yashar Ali is posting screenshots in case the site goes down due to traffic:

Link to tweet

[BumRushDaShow]

5. Thre is a PDF version too

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4387022/Democrats-memo-rebutting-Republican-claims-of.pdf

[highplainsdem]

8. Entire memo also available here, from Lawfare:

https://lawfareblog.com/document-house-intelligence-democrats-release-rebuttal-memo

[highplainsdem]

7. CBS story here:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-intelligence-memo-released-today-2018-02-24-live-updates/

[Eliot Rosewater]

9. The people who Need to read it wont get within 10 feet of it

[displacedtexan]

15. I hate to say this, but they won't understand it, either.

This is not Nunes' 5th grade book report of lies and accusations, based on material he hadn't even read.

[joshcryer]

32. This is an actual, sincere, rational, honest memo. Not the BS tabloid crap Nunes wrote.

The people who "need it" wouldn't trust a condensed version of it, and they certainly wouldn't attempt to seek out the full truth. They're far gone.

[brooklynite]

10. Opening page...

The HPSCI Majority's move to release to the House of Representatives its allegations against the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) is a transparent effort to undermine those agencies, the Special Counsel, and Congress' investigations. It also risks public exposure of sensitive sources and methods for no legitimate purpose.

FBI and DOJ officials did not "abuse" the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) process, omit material information, or subvert this vital tool to spy on the Trump campaign. In fact, DOJ and the FBI would have been remiss in their duty to protect the country had they not sought a FISA warrant and repeated renewals to conduct temporary surveillance of Carter Page, someone the FBI assessed to be an agent of the Russian government. DOJ met the rigor, transparency, and evidentiary basis needed to meet FISA 's probable cause requirement, by demonstrating:

o contemporaneous evidence of Russia's election interference;

o concerning Russian links and outreach to Trump campaign officials;

o Page's history with Russian intelligence; and

o (redacted) Page's suspicious activities in 2016, including in Moscow.

The Committee's Minority has therefore prepared this memorandum to correct the record:

• Christopher Steele's raw intelligence reporting did not inform the FBI's decision to

initiate its counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016. In fact, the FBI's closely held investigative team only received Steele's reporting in mid-September- more than seven weeks later. The FBI- and, subsequently, the Special Counsel's- investigation into links between the Russian government and Trump campaign associates has been based on troubling law enforcement and intelligence information unrelated to the “dossier”.

• DOJ's October 21, 2016 FISA application and three subsequent renewals carefully

outlined for the Court a multi-pronged rationale for surveilling Page, who, at the time of the first application, was no longer with the Trump campaign (redacted). DOJ detailed Page's past relationships with Russian spies and interaction with Russian officials (redacted) During the 2016 campaign, DOJ cited multiple sources to support the case for surveilling Page - but made only narrow use of information from Steele's sources about Page's specific activities in 2016, chiefly his suspected July 2016 meetings in Moscow with Russian otlicials. In fact, the FBI interviewed Page in March 2016 about his contact with Russian intelligence, the very month candidate Donald Trump named him a foreign policy advisor.

[highplainsdem]

11. Adam Schiff's statement:

https://democrats-intelligence.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=358

[spartan61]

12. Why did the memo have to be redacted?

If trump can let his family and friends read all the government secret briefs and high security info without a security clearance, why can't we read the Democrats memo that is in response to Nunes' memo?

[highplainsdem]

13. Why? It was redacted to cover up for Trump and Nunes. One of the most heavily

redacted sections is the one about the DOJ having "provided additional information obtained from multiple independent sources that corroborated Steele's reporting" in the application to renew the Carter Page FISA wiretaps. Trump doesn't want us to know what that additional info was.

Link to tweet

[Hortensis]

14. Because it contained information that could be

damaging to our nation's interests if it got out, and very possible endanger intelligence sources, both people and their operations. In not doing this adequately, the Republicans betrayed their country, something they've been doing a lot of course, so why not more?

Not all classified information is actually dangerous to release, though (perhaps the agents who gathered it closed down their operation some time before, a source died and can't be hurt, or once-sensitive data are now well known, etc.), which is why we negotiated with the intelligence services to okay release of what they felt could be.

[Ligyron]

24. I wonder whose names were redacted throughout the document?

It's obvious in places that it refers to individual(s). A congress critter or two maybe?

[joshcryer]

33. Because it gives away sources and active investigation information.

There may be people named or sources suggested that could be compromised before the investigation is able to be completed.

In other words, the piss tape is real.

[Honeycombe8]

16. So the Dems caved? Hate to hear that. They had said they wouldn't.

I'm sorely disappointed. There's no point in releasing a heavily redacted document, esp after you already took a stand that you wouldn't.

I have no interest in reading a document that's been redacted according to Trump's instructions.

[BumRushDaShow]

23. Drumpf has no idea what WTF he is talking about and they are not listening to him

This has nothing to do with any "caving".

Democrats know how to govern and how to go about releasing info without compromising the sources of that info who may still be out in the field working the case.

[Cha]

29. Why would you go to "cave" immediately?

As BRDS pointed out.. this is NOT about "caving".

[JNelson6563]

40. Yes, interesting word choice.

[Cha]

41. Aloha, Julie..

It's not helpful.. our Dems are responsible leaders, out there on the front lines, watching out for our Planet and Country.

[JNelson6563]

43. Always good to see you Cha!

So help me Bob, one day I will make it out to see you in Paradise!

[Cha]

44. Good on you, Julie!

An admirable goal!

We're here.. how's the weather in Michigan?

[C Moon]

18. We have a criminal traitor in the White House. There is zero doubt about it.

It still boggles my brain when I think about it.

[Sneederbunk]

20. Remember the Nunes memo? Neither do I.

Superseded by 13 Russian indictments.

[BumRushDaShow]

21. Benjamin Wittes tweet

Link to tweet

TEXT
Benjamin Wittes
✔
@benjaminwittes

Thanks to @RepAdamSchiff for ruining the first peaceful work-free day I have had in rather a while. @qjurecic and I will have an analysis as soon as we can. #sigh.
4:49 PM - Feb 24, 2018

(he is the guy with the miniature cannon videos in his "Boom!" tweets )

[Cha]

30. Mahalo, BRDS!

[BumRushDaShow]

36. I cracked up when I saw that he was enjoying a "peaceful" day until this released.

[Cha]

39. Nice try, Benjamin!

lol

[sfwriter]

26. CNN coverage...

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/24/politics/democratic-memo-house-intelligence-released/index.html

[highplainsdem]

34. Thanks!

[PSPS]

35. LOL. I'll file "Mr. Trump asserted, incorrectly,..." with "enhanced interrogation"

The press always has a way to avoid using the proper descriptive terms.

[Yupster]

42. Does anyone know who made all the redactions?

Was it the comnmittee (Nunes) or was it the Democratic members of the committee?

Anyone know?