OuterBanksVol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2011
- Messages
- 3,064
- Likes
- 5,138
Re: Nunes memo... why it has no merit legally...
What does the Republican memo say?
According to people familiar with it, the Republican memo contends that the application for an order authorizing surveillance of Mr. Page relied on information provided by Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence agent who compiled a notorious dossier about President Trump and Russia, without adequately explaining that the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clintons campaign was funding his Trump-Russia research. The suggestion is that the court was misled about Mr. Steeles credibility.
Democrats on the committee, led by Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, maintain that the Republican memo is misleading both making inaccurate assertions and omitting context in order to support a Republican narrative that the Russia investigation stems from a conspiracy by partisan F.B.I. officials who were biased against Mr. Trump. For example, people familiar with the memo have said it omits discussion of other evidence cited in the application that stemmed from other intelligence sources and methods, exaggerating the importance of Mr. Steeles information.
David Kris, who ran the Justice Departments National Security Division early in the Obama administration and helped write a book about FISA, says that when the department submits material from sources to the court, it should also include information that would cast material doubt on their credibility sources often come with bias or baggage of one sort or another.
But, he said, there is no requirement for elaborate accounting: Courts routinely accept and uphold affidavits that generally describe a sources shortcomings without every specific detail.
William C. Banks, a Syracuse University law professor who has studied the FISA Court, said that without reviewing all the documents involved in the surveillance request, it was impossible to judge the importance of how Mr. Steele was described. But he emphasized that the government had broad leeway in seeking FISA warrants.
Carter Page was doing business in Russia, talking to Russian diplomats who may have been involved in intelligence activities directed at the United States, Mr. Banks said. Game over. The standards are incredibly open-ended.
What does the Republican memo say?
According to people familiar with it, the Republican memo contends that the application for an order authorizing surveillance of Mr. Page relied on information provided by Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence agent who compiled a notorious dossier about President Trump and Russia, without adequately explaining that the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clintons campaign was funding his Trump-Russia research. The suggestion is that the court was misled about Mr. Steeles credibility.
Democrats on the committee, led by Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, maintain that the Republican memo is misleading both making inaccurate assertions and omitting context in order to support a Republican narrative that the Russia investigation stems from a conspiracy by partisan F.B.I. officials who were biased against Mr. Trump. For example, people familiar with the memo have said it omits discussion of other evidence cited in the application that stemmed from other intelligence sources and methods, exaggerating the importance of Mr. Steeles information.
David Kris, who ran the Justice Departments National Security Division early in the Obama administration and helped write a book about FISA, says that when the department submits material from sources to the court, it should also include information that would cast material doubt on their credibility sources often come with bias or baggage of one sort or another.
But, he said, there is no requirement for elaborate accounting: Courts routinely accept and uphold affidavits that generally describe a sources shortcomings without every specific detail.
William C. Banks, a Syracuse University law professor who has studied the FISA Court, said that without reviewing all the documents involved in the surveillance request, it was impossible to judge the importance of how Mr. Steele was described. But he emphasized that the government had broad leeway in seeking FISA warrants.
Carter Page was doing business in Russia, talking to Russian diplomats who may have been involved in intelligence activities directed at the United States, Mr. Banks said. Game over. The standards are incredibly open-ended.
