House Intelligence Committee Votes to Release the Nunes’ Memo
By: Diane Rufino ( More Entries )
Login to Send a Private Message to Diane Rufino
"One of the worst things a government can do is to use law enforcement as a political weapon, our Founding Fathers about that exact situation." - Tucker Carlson
This article reviews the origin of the Nunes' Memo and the decision of the House Intelligence Committee to allow it to be made public.
The infamous Nunes' Memo is a 4-page memorandum written by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), chairman of the US House Intelligence Committee, outlining a series of Obama-era abuses of the executive branch's surveillance authorities, including on ordinary American citizens, under federal law by the Justice Department, specifically the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The memorandum is the culmination of an investigation undertaken by the Committee, as announced on January 25, 2017, to investigate the unmasking of classified government information, as well as Russian meddling and any connections to political campaigns. The US House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), created in 1977, is a committee of the House of Representatives, essentially tasked with the oversight of the entire Justice Department and more. It is officially charged with oversight of the United States Intelligence Community, which includes the intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the following seventeen elements of the executive branch of the US government and the Military Intelligence Program - including Homeland Security, FBI, CIA, Director of National Intelligence, State Department, NSA, Defense Intelligence Agency, DEA, Treasury Department, Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corp.
Last evening, the House Intelligence Committee voted to release the Nunes' Memo. Currently, the memo is sitting with President Trump. Although the president now has five working days to review the 4-page memo and voice any objections to its release, it seems most likely that he will give his blessing. Republicans who have read the memo have described its severity as "Watergate on steroids" and "earth-shattering." Tucker Carlson tweeted: "Several Republicans who have seen the memo say it exposes massive and terrifying abuses of our civil liberties, presumably committed for political gain."
Unless and until we read the document, or otherwise find out what revelations it contains, what we do know is that there is definitely enough for at least one criminal conviction.
What we have learned so far, as Carlson explained on his show last evening, is that Andrew McCabe, who coincidently announced his resignation yesterday as well, is the subject of at least one internal DOJ investigation potentially linking him to politically-motivated abuses of power. DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has been in investigating politically-motivated conduct at the Bureau during the 2016 presidential election. Is the investigation the reason McCabe resigned? Is there something in the memo that prompted it?
We also know that one subject of the FISA warrants by the Justice Department was Carter Page, affiliated with the Trump campaign as a foreign policy adviser. The Obama DOJ argued before a FISA judge that Page was "an active agent of a hostile foreign government (Russia)" - that is, a Russia spy or operative. As we know now, that claim was ridiculous and fabricated. No evidence has ever surfaced to even suggest it might be true. Besides, if he were a real suspect, why wasn't he investigated or arrested? Instead, he is a frequent guest on MSNBC. Yet on the basis of that fraudulent, fabricated claim, the Justice Department was able to surveille the Trump campaign and Page. And then when the Obama administration to expand its surveillance, again centering on Page, it relied on information contained in the now-discredited Russian dossier, requested and paid-for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC (of which she had final control of its finances, per a contract agreement), and maybe even the federal government.
There are extremely good reasons for Nunes and his staff to create a summary of abuses, including: (1) There has been a severe erosion in public confidence in the US Department of Justice, a department that has historically been considered the most impartial, objection, effective law enforcement agency in the world; (2) There has been the overwhelming appearance that the Justice Department had become politically-motivated and intent on protecting Democratic political elites over ordinary Americans, and (3) The American people believe they are entitled to, and deserve, to know when their government is abusing its powers (they want transparency!).
The main questions that We the People need answered are:
• Were associates of President Trump, members of his campaign, or even Trump himself, subjected to foreign-intelligence surveillance (i.e., do the FISA applications name them as either targets or persons whose communications and activities would likely be monitored)? Loading ad Was information from the Steele dossier used in FISA applications?
• If Steele-dossier information was so used, was it so central that FISA warrants would not have been granted without it?
• If Steele-dossier information was so used, was it corroborated by independent FBI investigation?
• If the dossier's information was so used, was the source accurately conveyed to the court so that credibility and potential bias could be weighed (i.e., was the court told that the information came from an opposition-research project sponsored by the Clinton presidential campaign)?
• The FBI has said that significant efforts were made to corroborate Steele's sensational claims, yet former director James Comey has acknowledged (in June 2017 Senate testimony) that the dossier was "unverified." If the dossier was used in FISA applications in 2016, has the Justice Department - consistent with its continuing duty of candor in dealings with the tribunal - alerted the court that it did not succeed in verifying Steele's hearsay reporting based on anonymous sources?
[This list of questions comes from: Andrew C. McCarthy, "The Clamor Over the Nunes' FISA-Abuse Memo," Washington Review]
Why was the Memo created?
First of all, we must remember the reason for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) - to find out if hostile foreign governments are spying on, trying to influence our institutions, or otherwise seeking to do harm to our country. FISA was expanded after 9/11 to help in the war on terrorism. FISA proceedings are classified, and applications for surveillance warrants from the FISA court typically include information from classified sources - informants who spy at great risk to themselves, intelligence techniques (e.g., covert surveillance), etc. Disclosing such applications and/or the underlying intelligence reporting on which they are based could thus jeopardize lives, national security, and other important American interests. Thus, the problem: How do we convey important information without imperiling the sources and methods through which it was obtained?
Congress addressed that problem by prescribing a process for dealing with such potentially classified information by passing the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA). There are various remedies: Sometimes the classified information can be declassified and disclosed without causing danger; sometimes the classified information can be redacted without either jeopardizing sources or compromising our ability to grasp the significance of what is disclosed. When neither of those solutions is practical, the preferred disclosure method is to prepare a declassified summary that answers the relevant questions without risking exposure of critical intelligence secrets and sources. (See CIPA section 4 - Title 18, U.S. Code, Appendix.)
The preparation of a summary (ie, Memorandum) is a routine and sensible way of handling the complicated tension between the need for information and accountability, on the one hand, and the imperative of protecting intelligence, on the other. Conforming to House rules, Chairman Nunes has taken pains to make his memo available to all members of Congress before proceeding with the steps necessary to seek its disclosure. Interesting, outside the Committee, 190 Republican members of Congress have read the memo while only a dozen Democrats have bothered to read. Yet every Democrat, to the man, has expressed opposition to its release. Without reading it, they contend that it is misleading and partisan, and a stunt designed to discredit Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, or at least distract attention from its subject matter - Russian interference in the 2016 election. They demanded that a memo drafted by the Democrat members of the House Intelligence Committee be made public. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) led that effort, but the Committee voted it down.
Congressman Nunes is a smart guy, and he clearly knows he will look very foolish if he plays fast and loose with the facts. It is in his interest not to do that, and the careful way he has gone about complying with the rules, rather than leaking classified information, as Trump's opponents have been, wont to do suggests that his memo will prove to be a fair representation of the underlying information. On that last point, it would be hard to imagine a more one-sided partisan screed than the Steele dossier. Democrats seem to have had no hesitation about using it as a summary of purported Trump collusion with Russia. The Justice Department and the FBI are reportedly angry that, after they complied with the Intelligence Committee's demand that they make classified and investigative materials available for inspection, Nunes will not permit the FBI to inspect his memo summarizing that information before moving to disclose it. The irony here is rich. These executive-branch agencies did not cooperatively comply with congressional investigators; they stonewalled for five months. To this day they are stonewalling: Just this past weekend, they belatedly fessed up that the FBI had failed to preserve five months' worth of text messages (including between key characters Peter Strzok and Lisa Page), something they had to have known for months. An American who impeded a federal investigation the way federal investigators are impeding congressional investigations would swiftly find himself in legal jeopardy - obstruction of justice.
Moreover, it is not like the Justice Department and FBI did Nunes a favor and are thus in a position to impose conditions; Congress is entitled to the information it has sought in its oversight capacity. There is no Justice Department or FBI in the Constitution; rather, these agencies are part of the executive branch, created by statute. Congress created them, they are dependent on Congress for funding, and Congress has a constitutional obligation to perform oversight to ensure that the mission they are carrying out - with taxpayer support and under statutory restrictions - is being carried out appropriately. Republicans tend to be favorably disposed toward law enforcement's preferences. They would surely have preferred to have non-confrontational interactions with vital executive agencies led by Republican appointees of a Republican president. Indeed, most Republicans are puzzled by the lack of cooperation - by the failure of the White House to direct the president's subordinates to comply with congressional requests for information about potential abuses of power carried out under the prior, Democratic administration. This is a reciprocal business. If the Justice Department and FBI want accommodations, they have to exhibit cooperation - they have do the little things, like maybe remember that congressional subpoenas are lawful demands, not suggestions or pleas. On the record thus far, the committee has every reason to believe that submitting the Nunes memo for review by the Justice Department and FBI will result in more delay and foot-dragging. Clearly, there is a strategy to slow-walk compliance in hopes that events - such as, say, a midterm-election victory that returns the House to Democratic control - will abort congressional investigations of the investigators. Nunes is wise not to play into that strategy. As he knows, if the House ultimately moves to declassify and publicize information, the chamber's rules require giving the president five days' notice. (See Congressional Research Service, "The Protection of Classified Information: The Legal Framework" page 3 and note 23.) Thus, the Justice Department and FBI will have an opportunity to both review the memo and try to persuade the president to oppose disclosure. There's no reason to hold up the works at this point. [This paragraph comes in most part from Andrew C. McCarthy's article, "The Clamor Over the Nunes' FISA-Abuse Memo"]
As Tucker Carlson said: "One of the worst things a government can do is to use law enforcement as a political weapon." But perhaps the worst thing it can do is to collude - that is, to use its greatest resources - in order to influence a political election and assure a certain outcome. That would deny We the People of our most precious guarantee: "a government of the people, by the people, for the people" (or as the Declaration of Independence promises: "government among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.."). A government that can influence elections destroys our constitutional republic and creates a government established by a political party for political elites who never have to live under the laws it passes.
In the coming week, or perhaps even next week, the 4-page Nunes memo should be read into the Congressional Record for all to hear and all to access. We already know the allegations and crimes are far more troubling than the underlying crimes committed in the Watergate scandal. The questions will be: How will the Democrats react to its wrong-doing and complicity in the constitutional crisis of our time? How will Congress respond to the wrongdoing and how will it attempt to repair the reputation of the US Department of Justice? How will the liberal media treat the accusations and crimes? And perhaps most importantly: How will voters react in the mid-term elections this November?
Timeline of Events Leading up to the Nunes' Memo: [From: Philip Bump, "A Complete Timeline of the Events Behind the Memo That Threatens to rip D.C. in Two," The Washington Post]
Sep. 11-12, 2012. Terrorists attack two American facilities in Benghazi, Libya, killing four people including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.
Feb. 1, 2013. Hillary Clinton steps down as secretary of state. During her tenure, she used a private email address for department business, hosted on a server located at her home in Chappaqua, N.Y.
June. Carter Page, an energy industry consultant, is interviewed by the FBI after it records a Russian agent, Victor Podobnyy, discussing a plan to hopefully leverage a relationship with Page to get information. "It's obvious that he wants to earn lots of money," Podobnyy allegedly said of Page. [No evidence and no information obtained by the FBI investigation was able to show that such a plan really existed or was ever discussed personally with Page]
July 29. James B. Comey becomes director of the FBI, replacing Robert S. Mueller III.
May 8, 2014. The House votes to establish a select committee to investigate the attacks at Benghazi and any failures of Clinton's State Department to prevent them.
2015
March 2. The New York Times reports that Clinton used a private email account during her time as secretary of state. The revelation came after the Benghazi committee requested records of communications between Clinton and her staff.
March 11. Jill McCabe, wife of FBI then-associate deputy director Andrew McCabe, announces her candidacy for the Virginia state Senate. McCabe begins the process of resolving any conflicts within the FBI that day.
April 12. Clinton announces her candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination.
June 16. Donald Trump announces his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination.
Summer. Hackers believed to be linked to the Russian Federal Security Service access the servers of the Democratic National Committee. This is one of the first overt acts the Russians take as part of what American intelligence officials come to believe is an attempt to influence the results of the 2016 election.
July. The State Department inspector general alerts the FBI's counterintelligence office that classified information was being stored on Clinton's private server. The FBI initiates an investigation. Among those involved in the investigation is an agent named Peter Strzok.
Autumn. The conservative website Free Beacon hires a firm called Fusion GPS to investigate Republican candidates for the presidency, including Trump.
October. A PAC called Common Good VA, tied to Terry McAuliffe, then Virginia's governor, makes several large donations to Jill McCabe's campaign, as it does to other Democrats seeking office.
Nov. 3. McCabe loses her bid for the state Senate.
2016
Feb. 1. Andrew McCabe is promoted to the position of deputy director. In that role, he assumes responsibility for the Clinton email server investigation.
March 4. FBI agent Strzok texts with an FBI attorney named Lisa Page (not related to Carter), with whom he's involved in an extramarital affair. Among the texts are a series, following a Republican primary debate, in which Strzok calls Trump "an idiot" and says that Clinton should win "100,000,000 - 0." (He later jokes that he may vote for Trump because "he was pretty much calling for death for Snowden." He adds: "I'm a single-issue voter.... Espionage Machine Party.")
The texts continue for the duration of the campaign and include disparagement of Trump by Strzok as a "f-ing idiot."
March 21. During a conversation with The Post, Trump announces his foreign-policy team, including Page and an energy consultant named George Papadopoulos.
April. With Trump's nomination all but inevitable, Fusion GPS approaches the Clinton campaign and the DNC about continuing its research into Trump. Marc Elias, a lawyer representing the two organizations, hires the firm.
April 26. Papadopoulos is told by a contact with connections to the Russian government that it has "dirt" on Clinton in the form of emails. The next month, Papadopoulos mentions this during a conversation with an Australian diplomat.
May 26. Trump clinches the Republican nomination.
June 6. Clinton secures the Democratic nomination.
June 15. The first documents stolen from the DNC are released, including a party opposition research file on Trump.
June 20. Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer hired by Fusion GPS, files the first of 17 reports that, together, will come to be known as the "dossier." The first report focuses on what Steele describes as Russian efforts to "cultivate" Trump and suggests that the Russians have dirt on both presidential candidates.
Early July. Steele, after consulting with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson, reaches out to the FBI about what he has heard.
July 2. Clinton is interviewed by the FBI.
July 5. Comey announces that the FBI has completed its investigation and that he would not recommend charges against Clinton, despite "evidence of potential violations."
July 7. Page travels to Moscow with the campaign's approval to give a speech.
July 19. Steele writes a report alleging that Page met with high-ranking Russians during his trip to Moscow. At some point in this period, Steele writes an undated memo outlining allegations from an "ethnic Russian close associate" of Trump that the campaign is conspiring with Moscow.
July 22. Shortly before the Democratic convention begins, WikiLeaks starts releasing more emails stolen from the DNC.
July. After receiving a tip from the Australian diplomat apparently spurred by WikiLeaks' release of material stolen from the DNC, the FBI begins a counterintelligence investigation into Russian meddling, including any connections between the Trump campaign and Russian agents.
Summer. At some point, without information or evidence to support the claim (the FBI interview/ investigation yielded nothing), the FBI obtains a warrant to surveil Page. The secret warrant is authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA.
Sep. 21. Former New York congressman Anthony Weiner, husband of top Clinton aide Huma Abedin, is accused of sexually explicit online interactions with a minor.
Late September or early October. Steele again meets with an FBI contact in Rome.
Early October. FBI agents investigating the Weiner allegations find emails on one of Weiner's computers that were sent using Clinton's private server to and from Huma Abedin.
Oct. 7. The government issues an unusual warning about attempts by Russian actors to influence the election.
That same day, WikiLeaks begins releasing emails stolen from the email account of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.
Oct. 23. Trump tweets out a Wall Street Journal article about the contributions that McCabe's wife received.
McCabe becomes a fixture in Trump's stump speeches about the corruption of Washington.
Oct. 28. Comey informs Congress about the discovery of the new emails and indicates that they are being assessed to determine if they include classified information or are otherwise pertinent to the email server investigation.
Oct. 31. The New York Times reports that the FBI doesn't see a clear link to Russia. According to later testimony from Fusion GPS's Simpson, this alarms Steele and prompts him to cut off contact with the Bureau. There had reportedly been some discussion about the FBI paying Steele for his research, which didn't come to fruition, though the Bureau did reimburse Steele for some of his expenses.
Nov. 6. Comey announces that the new emails don't change the FBI's position on charges against Clinton.
Nov. 8. Trump wins the presidential election.
Dec. 13. Steele writes the last of the dossier's reports, dealing with an alleged trip to Prague by Trump Organization lawyer Michael Cohen to contact Russian actors. Cohen denies that he took such a trip.
2017
Jan. 6. Comey, along with other intelligence officials, travel to Trump Tower to brief Trump on the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Comey briefs Trump on the dossier.
Jan. 20. Trump is inaugurated as president.
Jan. 24. National security adviser Michael Flynn is interviewed by the FBI about his conversations with the Russian ambassador the previous month.
Jan. 25. The House Intelligence Committee, chaired by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), announces its intent to investigate Russian meddling and any connections to political campaigns.
Jan. 26. The Trump White House learns that Flynn provided information to the FBI that conflicts with what Vice President Pence was saying publicly.
Jan. 27. Trump invites Comey to dinner at the White House. Comey later testifies under oath that Trump asked him for his loyalty during that meeting.
Feb. 8. Jeff Sessions is confirmed as attorney general.
Feb. 14. At another meeting in the White House, Trump indirectly asks Comey to drop the investigation into Flynn, who had resigned the previous day.
March 2. After it is revealed that he had provided inaccurate information about his contacts with Russian officials during his confirmation hearing, Sessions recuses himself from anything involving the Russia investigation.
March 4. Trump, spurred by a Breitbart report, alleges on Twitter that the administration of Barack Obama had wiretapped Trump Tower prior to the election.
March 20. The House Intelligence Committee holds a hearing in which it takes testimony from Comey and the head of the National Security Agency. It is at this hearing that Comey publicly reveals the existence of the investigation into meddling and Trump's campaign. During the hearing, Comey also denies that Trump was the focus of wiretapping.
March 21. Nunes is invited to the White House complex to view information about surveillance of people associated with Trump's campaign. At least some of the intelligence was collected by surveilling foreign agents, which would normally mean that Americans whose communications were "incidentally" collected - meaning they were not the targets of the surveillance - would not be identified. (There are restrictions on surveillance of American citizens that do not apply to foreign individuals.) Nunes is shown "unmasked" intelligence - meaning that this anonymity has been removed. Some of the intelligence appears to involve Flynn's conversations with the Russian ambassador. *** Nunes's visit is not revealed until several days later.
March 22. Nunes holds a news conference accusing the Obama administration of unmasking the names of Trump transition team members even though the intelligence is not related to the Russia investigation. He does not indicate how he learned about this unmasking - a term that becomes central to Trump's defense of his tweets about having been wiretapped.
April 6. Nunes recuses himself from the Intelligence Committee's Russia investigation after the House Ethics Committee announces that it is investigating whether he made an unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
April 25. Rod J. Rosenstein, the U.S. attorney for Maryland since his appointment under George W. Bush, is confirmed as deputy attorney general following a nomination from Trump. With Sessions' recusal, this effectively puts Rosenstein in charge of the FBI's Russia investigation.
May 9. Trump fires Comey, citing as his rationale a report from Rosenstein criticizing Comey's handling of the investigation into Clinton's email server. (Trump later tells NBC's Lester Holt that he was thinking about "this Russia thing" as he contemplated axing Comey.) With Comey out, McCabe becomes the acting director of the FBI.
May 10. Trump reportedly calls McCabe to chastise him for allowing Comey to return to D.C. on an FBI-owned plane after being fired.
May 12. Apparently responding to a Times story detailing Trump's request for loyalty from Comey, Trump tweets out a threat. This inspires Comey to ask a friend to leak information to the Times about Trump's request to let the Flynn investigation go. That story, implying an attempt to obstruct the investigation, runs on May 16. (Trump later accuses Comey of leaking classified information, an allegation that is not supported by the available evidence.)
May 17. Rosenstein, as acting lead on Russia following Sessions' recusal, appoints Mueller as special counsel to investigate Russian meddling and any links to the Trump campaign. Strzok and Lisa Page are both included on Mueller's team.
July. Mueller learns about the Strzok-Page texts. Page has already left his team; Strzok is reassigned.
Aug. 1. Christopher A. Wray is confirmed as director of the FBI.
Aug. 22. Fusion GPS's Simpson testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Sep. 1. Nunes, despite his recusal, sends a letter on behalf of the House Intelligence Committee to Sessions claiming that the Department of Justice has been slow to respond to subpoena requests.
Oct. 24. The Post reports that the Steele dossier was funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign.
Oct. 30. Mueller's team charges Trump's former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, with conspiracy and money laundering. The team also reveals that Papadopoulos has admitted lying to the FBI and has apparently been cooperating with the investigation.
Dec. 1. In documents released by Mueller's team, Flynn admits lying to the FBI.
Dec. 2. The Strzok-Page texts are reported by The Post.
Dec. 7. Nunes is cleared of wrongdoing by the Ethics Committee on charges that he revealed classified information. This was the predicate for his recusal from the Intelligence Committee's Russia investigation.
2018
Jan. 4. In a letter to Rosenstein, Nunes suggests that his committee is expanding its investigation to include the Department of Justice's handling of the Russia investigation itself.
Jan. 9. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) releases the transcript of Simpson's Senate testimony.
Mid-January. Staffers for Nunes compile a four-page document summarizing classified information to argue that the FBI abused its power in its investigation of Trump's campaign. While the document is not public, it appears to argue that the FISA warrant issued for Page relied on information compiled by Steele, implying that the warrant should not have been issued and, apparently, that the process for requesting it was tainted by politics.
Jan. 18. Republicans and their allies - particularly in the media - rally around the memo, arguing that it should be released to the public.
Jan. 23. Axios reports that Sessions, at Trump's behest, had been pressuring FBI Director Wray to fire McCabe. In response, Wray reportedly threatened to quit.
Jan. 24. The Justice Department, which was not allowed to view the memo, warns the House Intelligence Committee that releasing it without allowing the FBI and Justice to review its contents would be "extraordinarily reckless," risking the sources and methods used to collect the information underlying the information it contains.
Jan. 28. Wray is allowed to review the memo. Politico reports that Wray was told he could flag any concerns. Intelligence Committee ranking member Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) tells the outlet that Wray informed him that his concerns about the release of the memo were not entirely addressed.
Jan. 29. McCabe leaves his position as deputy director of the FBI effective immediately. Wray suggests that McCabe's early departure (he was scheduled to retire later this year) was in part a function of an upcoming inspector general's report about the Clinton email investigation. The Times reports that Trump's interest in the memo may stem in part from his belief that it casts Rosenstein in a negative light, since Rosenstein approved a request to renew the Page warrant after taking office last year. Rosenstein, as lead on the Russia investigation, is the only person directly authorized to fire Mueller.
Jan. 29, evening. The House Intelligence Committee votes, along party lines, to release the memo.
References:
Andrew C. McCarthy, "The Clamor Over the Nunes' FISA-Abuse Memo," Washington Review, January 25, 2018. Referenced at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/455757/release-the-memo-lets-see-in-it
Zack Beauchamp, "The Real Reason the Nunes Memo Matters," VOX, January 30. 2018. Referenced at: https://www.vox.com/world/2018/1/30/16950782/numes-memo-release
Tucker Carlson, FOX News, January 29, 2018. Referenced at YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBpZ2wLcOfw
Philip Bump, "A Complete Timeline of the Events Behind the Memo That Threatens to rip D.C. in Two," The Washington Post, January 30, 2018. Referenced at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/01/30/a-complete-timeline-of-the-events-behind-the-memo-that-threatens-to-rip-d-c-in-two/?utm_term=.05c6da3df6e6
This article reviews the origin of the Nunes' Memo and the decision of the House Intelligence Committee to allow it to be made public.
The infamous Nunes' Memo is a 4-page memorandum written by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), chairman of the US House Intelligence Committee, outlining a series of Obama-era abuses of the executive branch's surveillance authorities, including on ordinary American citizens, under federal law by the Justice Department, specifically the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The memorandum is the culmination of an investigation undertaken by the Committee, as announced on January 25, 2017, to investigate the unmasking of classified government information, as well as Russian meddling and any connections to political campaigns. The US House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), created in 1977, is a committee of the House of Representatives, essentially tasked with the oversight of the entire Justice Department and more. It is officially charged with oversight of the United States Intelligence Community, which includes the intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the following seventeen elements of the executive branch of the US government and the Military Intelligence Program - including Homeland Security, FBI, CIA, Director of National Intelligence, State Department, NSA, Defense Intelligence Agency, DEA, Treasury Department, Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corp.
Last evening, the House Intelligence Committee voted to release the Nunes' Memo. Currently, the memo is sitting with President Trump. Although the president now has five working days to review the 4-page memo and voice any objections to its release, it seems most likely that he will give his blessing. Republicans who have read the memo have described its severity as "Watergate on steroids" and "earth-shattering." Tucker Carlson tweeted: "Several Republicans who have seen the memo say it exposes massive and terrifying abuses of our civil liberties, presumably committed for political gain."
Unless and until we read the document, or otherwise find out what revelations it contains, what we do know is that there is definitely enough for at least one criminal conviction.
What we have learned so far, as Carlson explained on his show last evening, is that Andrew McCabe, who coincidently announced his resignation yesterday as well, is the subject of at least one internal DOJ investigation potentially linking him to politically-motivated abuses of power. DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has been in investigating politically-motivated conduct at the Bureau during the 2016 presidential election. Is the investigation the reason McCabe resigned? Is there something in the memo that prompted it?
We also know that one subject of the FISA warrants by the Justice Department was Carter Page, affiliated with the Trump campaign as a foreign policy adviser. The Obama DOJ argued before a FISA judge that Page was "an active agent of a hostile foreign government (Russia)" - that is, a Russia spy or operative. As we know now, that claim was ridiculous and fabricated. No evidence has ever surfaced to even suggest it might be true. Besides, if he were a real suspect, why wasn't he investigated or arrested? Instead, he is a frequent guest on MSNBC. Yet on the basis of that fraudulent, fabricated claim, the Justice Department was able to surveille the Trump campaign and Page. And then when the Obama administration to expand its surveillance, again centering on Page, it relied on information contained in the now-discredited Russian dossier, requested and paid-for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC (of which she had final control of its finances, per a contract agreement), and maybe even the federal government.
There are extremely good reasons for Nunes and his staff to create a summary of abuses, including: (1) There has been a severe erosion in public confidence in the US Department of Justice, a department that has historically been considered the most impartial, objection, effective law enforcement agency in the world; (2) There has been the overwhelming appearance that the Justice Department had become politically-motivated and intent on protecting Democratic political elites over ordinary Americans, and (3) The American people believe they are entitled to, and deserve, to know when their government is abusing its powers (they want transparency!).
The main questions that We the People need answered are:
• Were associates of President Trump, members of his campaign, or even Trump himself, subjected to foreign-intelligence surveillance (i.e., do the FISA applications name them as either targets or persons whose communications and activities would likely be monitored)? Loading ad Was information from the Steele dossier used in FISA applications?
• If Steele-dossier information was so used, was it so central that FISA warrants would not have been granted without it?
• If Steele-dossier information was so used, was it corroborated by independent FBI investigation?
• If the dossier's information was so used, was the source accurately conveyed to the court so that credibility and potential bias could be weighed (i.e., was the court told that the information came from an opposition-research project sponsored by the Clinton presidential campaign)?
• The FBI has said that significant efforts were made to corroborate Steele's sensational claims, yet former director James Comey has acknowledged (in June 2017 Senate testimony) that the dossier was "unverified." If the dossier was used in FISA applications in 2016, has the Justice Department - consistent with its continuing duty of candor in dealings with the tribunal - alerted the court that it did not succeed in verifying Steele's hearsay reporting based on anonymous sources?
[This list of questions comes from: Andrew C. McCarthy, "The Clamor Over the Nunes' FISA-Abuse Memo," Washington Review]
Why was the Memo created?
First of all, we must remember the reason for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) - to find out if hostile foreign governments are spying on, trying to influence our institutions, or otherwise seeking to do harm to our country. FISA was expanded after 9/11 to help in the war on terrorism. FISA proceedings are classified, and applications for surveillance warrants from the FISA court typically include information from classified sources - informants who spy at great risk to themselves, intelligence techniques (e.g., covert surveillance), etc. Disclosing such applications and/or the underlying intelligence reporting on which they are based could thus jeopardize lives, national security, and other important American interests. Thus, the problem: How do we convey important information without imperiling the sources and methods through which it was obtained?
Congress addressed that problem by prescribing a process for dealing with such potentially classified information by passing the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA). There are various remedies: Sometimes the classified information can be declassified and disclosed without causing danger; sometimes the classified information can be redacted without either jeopardizing sources or compromising our ability to grasp the significance of what is disclosed. When neither of those solutions is practical, the preferred disclosure method is to prepare a declassified summary that answers the relevant questions without risking exposure of critical intelligence secrets and sources. (See CIPA section 4 - Title 18, U.S. Code, Appendix.)
The preparation of a summary (ie, Memorandum) is a routine and sensible way of handling the complicated tension between the need for information and accountability, on the one hand, and the imperative of protecting intelligence, on the other. Conforming to House rules, Chairman Nunes has taken pains to make his memo available to all members of Congress before proceeding with the steps necessary to seek its disclosure. Interesting, outside the Committee, 190 Republican members of Congress have read the memo while only a dozen Democrats have bothered to read. Yet every Democrat, to the man, has expressed opposition to its release. Without reading it, they contend that it is misleading and partisan, and a stunt designed to discredit Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, or at least distract attention from its subject matter - Russian interference in the 2016 election. They demanded that a memo drafted by the Democrat members of the House Intelligence Committee be made public. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) led that effort, but the Committee voted it down.
Congressman Nunes is a smart guy, and he clearly knows he will look very foolish if he plays fast and loose with the facts. It is in his interest not to do that, and the careful way he has gone about complying with the rules, rather than leaking classified information, as Trump's opponents have been, wont to do suggests that his memo will prove to be a fair representation of the underlying information. On that last point, it would be hard to imagine a more one-sided partisan screed than the Steele dossier. Democrats seem to have had no hesitation about using it as a summary of purported Trump collusion with Russia. The Justice Department and the FBI are reportedly angry that, after they complied with the Intelligence Committee's demand that they make classified and investigative materials available for inspection, Nunes will not permit the FBI to inspect his memo summarizing that information before moving to disclose it. The irony here is rich. These executive-branch agencies did not cooperatively comply with congressional investigators; they stonewalled for five months. To this day they are stonewalling: Just this past weekend, they belatedly fessed up that the FBI had failed to preserve five months' worth of text messages (including between key characters Peter Strzok and Lisa Page), something they had to have known for months. An American who impeded a federal investigation the way federal investigators are impeding congressional investigations would swiftly find himself in legal jeopardy - obstruction of justice.
Moreover, it is not like the Justice Department and FBI did Nunes a favor and are thus in a position to impose conditions; Congress is entitled to the information it has sought in its oversight capacity. There is no Justice Department or FBI in the Constitution; rather, these agencies are part of the executive branch, created by statute. Congress created them, they are dependent on Congress for funding, and Congress has a constitutional obligation to perform oversight to ensure that the mission they are carrying out - with taxpayer support and under statutory restrictions - is being carried out appropriately. Republicans tend to be favorably disposed toward law enforcement's preferences. They would surely have preferred to have non-confrontational interactions with vital executive agencies led by Republican appointees of a Republican president. Indeed, most Republicans are puzzled by the lack of cooperation - by the failure of the White House to direct the president's subordinates to comply with congressional requests for information about potential abuses of power carried out under the prior, Democratic administration. This is a reciprocal business. If the Justice Department and FBI want accommodations, they have to exhibit cooperation - they have do the little things, like maybe remember that congressional subpoenas are lawful demands, not suggestions or pleas. On the record thus far, the committee has every reason to believe that submitting the Nunes memo for review by the Justice Department and FBI will result in more delay and foot-dragging. Clearly, there is a strategy to slow-walk compliance in hopes that events - such as, say, a midterm-election victory that returns the House to Democratic control - will abort congressional investigations of the investigators. Nunes is wise not to play into that strategy. As he knows, if the House ultimately moves to declassify and publicize information, the chamber's rules require giving the president five days' notice. (See Congressional Research Service, "The Protection of Classified Information: The Legal Framework" page 3 and note 23.) Thus, the Justice Department and FBI will have an opportunity to both review the memo and try to persuade the president to oppose disclosure. There's no reason to hold up the works at this point. [This paragraph comes in most part from Andrew C. McCarthy's article, "The Clamor Over the Nunes' FISA-Abuse Memo"]
As Tucker Carlson said: "One of the worst things a government can do is to use law enforcement as a political weapon." But perhaps the worst thing it can do is to collude - that is, to use its greatest resources - in order to influence a political election and assure a certain outcome. That would deny We the People of our most precious guarantee: "a government of the people, by the people, for the people" (or as the Declaration of Independence promises: "government among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.."). A government that can influence elections destroys our constitutional republic and creates a government established by a political party for political elites who never have to live under the laws it passes.
In the coming week, or perhaps even next week, the 4-page Nunes memo should be read into the Congressional Record for all to hear and all to access. We already know the allegations and crimes are far more troubling than the underlying crimes committed in the Watergate scandal. The questions will be: How will the Democrats react to its wrong-doing and complicity in the constitutional crisis of our time? How will Congress respond to the wrongdoing and how will it attempt to repair the reputation of the US Department of Justice? How will the liberal media treat the accusations and crimes? And perhaps most importantly: How will voters react in the mid-term elections this November?
Timeline of Events Leading up to the Nunes' Memo: [From: Philip Bump, "A Complete Timeline of the Events Behind the Memo That Threatens to rip D.C. in Two," The Washington Post]
Sep. 11-12, 2012. Terrorists attack two American facilities in Benghazi, Libya, killing four people including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.
Feb. 1, 2013. Hillary Clinton steps down as secretary of state. During her tenure, she used a private email address for department business, hosted on a server located at her home in Chappaqua, N.Y.
June. Carter Page, an energy industry consultant, is interviewed by the FBI after it records a Russian agent, Victor Podobnyy, discussing a plan to hopefully leverage a relationship with Page to get information. "It's obvious that he wants to earn lots of money," Podobnyy allegedly said of Page. [No evidence and no information obtained by the FBI investigation was able to show that such a plan really existed or was ever discussed personally with Page]
July 29. James B. Comey becomes director of the FBI, replacing Robert S. Mueller III.
May 8, 2014. The House votes to establish a select committee to investigate the attacks at Benghazi and any failures of Clinton's State Department to prevent them.
2015
March 2. The New York Times reports that Clinton used a private email account during her time as secretary of state. The revelation came after the Benghazi committee requested records of communications between Clinton and her staff.
March 11. Jill McCabe, wife of FBI then-associate deputy director Andrew McCabe, announces her candidacy for the Virginia state Senate. McCabe begins the process of resolving any conflicts within the FBI that day.
April 12. Clinton announces her candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination.
June 16. Donald Trump announces his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination.
Summer. Hackers believed to be linked to the Russian Federal Security Service access the servers of the Democratic National Committee. This is one of the first overt acts the Russians take as part of what American intelligence officials come to believe is an attempt to influence the results of the 2016 election.
July. The State Department inspector general alerts the FBI's counterintelligence office that classified information was being stored on Clinton's private server. The FBI initiates an investigation. Among those involved in the investigation is an agent named Peter Strzok.
Autumn. The conservative website Free Beacon hires a firm called Fusion GPS to investigate Republican candidates for the presidency, including Trump.
October. A PAC called Common Good VA, tied to Terry McAuliffe, then Virginia's governor, makes several large donations to Jill McCabe's campaign, as it does to other Democrats seeking office.
Nov. 3. McCabe loses her bid for the state Senate.
2016
Feb. 1. Andrew McCabe is promoted to the position of deputy director. In that role, he assumes responsibility for the Clinton email server investigation.
March 4. FBI agent Strzok texts with an FBI attorney named Lisa Page (not related to Carter), with whom he's involved in an extramarital affair. Among the texts are a series, following a Republican primary debate, in which Strzok calls Trump "an idiot" and says that Clinton should win "100,000,000 - 0." (He later jokes that he may vote for Trump because "he was pretty much calling for death for Snowden." He adds: "I'm a single-issue voter.... Espionage Machine Party.")
The texts continue for the duration of the campaign and include disparagement of Trump by Strzok as a "f-ing idiot."
March 21. During a conversation with The Post, Trump announces his foreign-policy team, including Page and an energy consultant named George Papadopoulos.
April. With Trump's nomination all but inevitable, Fusion GPS approaches the Clinton campaign and the DNC about continuing its research into Trump. Marc Elias, a lawyer representing the two organizations, hires the firm.
April 26. Papadopoulos is told by a contact with connections to the Russian government that it has "dirt" on Clinton in the form of emails. The next month, Papadopoulos mentions this during a conversation with an Australian diplomat.
May 26. Trump clinches the Republican nomination.
June 6. Clinton secures the Democratic nomination.
June 15. The first documents stolen from the DNC are released, including a party opposition research file on Trump.
June 20. Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer hired by Fusion GPS, files the first of 17 reports that, together, will come to be known as the "dossier." The first report focuses on what Steele describes as Russian efforts to "cultivate" Trump and suggests that the Russians have dirt on both presidential candidates.
Early July. Steele, after consulting with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson, reaches out to the FBI about what he has heard.
July 2. Clinton is interviewed by the FBI.
July 5. Comey announces that the FBI has completed its investigation and that he would not recommend charges against Clinton, despite "evidence of potential violations."
July 7. Page travels to Moscow with the campaign's approval to give a speech.
July 19. Steele writes a report alleging that Page met with high-ranking Russians during his trip to Moscow. At some point in this period, Steele writes an undated memo outlining allegations from an "ethnic Russian close associate" of Trump that the campaign is conspiring with Moscow.
July 22. Shortly before the Democratic convention begins, WikiLeaks starts releasing more emails stolen from the DNC.
July. After receiving a tip from the Australian diplomat apparently spurred by WikiLeaks' release of material stolen from the DNC, the FBI begins a counterintelligence investigation into Russian meddling, including any connections between the Trump campaign and Russian agents.
Summer. At some point, without information or evidence to support the claim (the FBI interview/ investigation yielded nothing), the FBI obtains a warrant to surveil Page. The secret warrant is authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA.
Sep. 21. Former New York congressman Anthony Weiner, husband of top Clinton aide Huma Abedin, is accused of sexually explicit online interactions with a minor.
Late September or early October. Steele again meets with an FBI contact in Rome.
Early October. FBI agents investigating the Weiner allegations find emails on one of Weiner's computers that were sent using Clinton's private server to and from Huma Abedin.
Oct. 7. The government issues an unusual warning about attempts by Russian actors to influence the election.
That same day, WikiLeaks begins releasing emails stolen from the email account of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.
Oct. 23. Trump tweets out a Wall Street Journal article about the contributions that McCabe's wife received.
McCabe becomes a fixture in Trump's stump speeches about the corruption of Washington.
Oct. 28. Comey informs Congress about the discovery of the new emails and indicates that they are being assessed to determine if they include classified information or are otherwise pertinent to the email server investigation.
Oct. 31. The New York Times reports that the FBI doesn't see a clear link to Russia. According to later testimony from Fusion GPS's Simpson, this alarms Steele and prompts him to cut off contact with the Bureau. There had reportedly been some discussion about the FBI paying Steele for his research, which didn't come to fruition, though the Bureau did reimburse Steele for some of his expenses.
Nov. 6. Comey announces that the new emails don't change the FBI's position on charges against Clinton.
Nov. 8. Trump wins the presidential election.
Dec. 13. Steele writes the last of the dossier's reports, dealing with an alleged trip to Prague by Trump Organization lawyer Michael Cohen to contact Russian actors. Cohen denies that he took such a trip.
2017
Jan. 6. Comey, along with other intelligence officials, travel to Trump Tower to brief Trump on the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Comey briefs Trump on the dossier.
Jan. 20. Trump is inaugurated as president.
Jan. 24. National security adviser Michael Flynn is interviewed by the FBI about his conversations with the Russian ambassador the previous month.
Jan. 25. The House Intelligence Committee, chaired by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), announces its intent to investigate Russian meddling and any connections to political campaigns.
Jan. 26. The Trump White House learns that Flynn provided information to the FBI that conflicts with what Vice President Pence was saying publicly.
Jan. 27. Trump invites Comey to dinner at the White House. Comey later testifies under oath that Trump asked him for his loyalty during that meeting.
Feb. 8. Jeff Sessions is confirmed as attorney general.
Feb. 14. At another meeting in the White House, Trump indirectly asks Comey to drop the investigation into Flynn, who had resigned the previous day.
March 2. After it is revealed that he had provided inaccurate information about his contacts with Russian officials during his confirmation hearing, Sessions recuses himself from anything involving the Russia investigation.
March 4. Trump, spurred by a Breitbart report, alleges on Twitter that the administration of Barack Obama had wiretapped Trump Tower prior to the election.
March 20. The House Intelligence Committee holds a hearing in which it takes testimony from Comey and the head of the National Security Agency. It is at this hearing that Comey publicly reveals the existence of the investigation into meddling and Trump's campaign. During the hearing, Comey also denies that Trump was the focus of wiretapping.
March 21. Nunes is invited to the White House complex to view information about surveillance of people associated with Trump's campaign. At least some of the intelligence was collected by surveilling foreign agents, which would normally mean that Americans whose communications were "incidentally" collected - meaning they were not the targets of the surveillance - would not be identified. (There are restrictions on surveillance of American citizens that do not apply to foreign individuals.) Nunes is shown "unmasked" intelligence - meaning that this anonymity has been removed. Some of the intelligence appears to involve Flynn's conversations with the Russian ambassador. *** Nunes's visit is not revealed until several days later.
March 22. Nunes holds a news conference accusing the Obama administration of unmasking the names of Trump transition team members even though the intelligence is not related to the Russia investigation. He does not indicate how he learned about this unmasking - a term that becomes central to Trump's defense of his tweets about having been wiretapped.
April 6. Nunes recuses himself from the Intelligence Committee's Russia investigation after the House Ethics Committee announces that it is investigating whether he made an unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
April 25. Rod J. Rosenstein, the U.S. attorney for Maryland since his appointment under George W. Bush, is confirmed as deputy attorney general following a nomination from Trump. With Sessions' recusal, this effectively puts Rosenstein in charge of the FBI's Russia investigation.
May 9. Trump fires Comey, citing as his rationale a report from Rosenstein criticizing Comey's handling of the investigation into Clinton's email server. (Trump later tells NBC's Lester Holt that he was thinking about "this Russia thing" as he contemplated axing Comey.) With Comey out, McCabe becomes the acting director of the FBI.
May 10. Trump reportedly calls McCabe to chastise him for allowing Comey to return to D.C. on an FBI-owned plane after being fired.
May 12. Apparently responding to a Times story detailing Trump's request for loyalty from Comey, Trump tweets out a threat. This inspires Comey to ask a friend to leak information to the Times about Trump's request to let the Flynn investigation go. That story, implying an attempt to obstruct the investigation, runs on May 16. (Trump later accuses Comey of leaking classified information, an allegation that is not supported by the available evidence.)
May 17. Rosenstein, as acting lead on Russia following Sessions' recusal, appoints Mueller as special counsel to investigate Russian meddling and any links to the Trump campaign. Strzok and Lisa Page are both included on Mueller's team.
July. Mueller learns about the Strzok-Page texts. Page has already left his team; Strzok is reassigned.
Aug. 1. Christopher A. Wray is confirmed as director of the FBI.
Aug. 22. Fusion GPS's Simpson testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Sep. 1. Nunes, despite his recusal, sends a letter on behalf of the House Intelligence Committee to Sessions claiming that the Department of Justice has been slow to respond to subpoena requests.
Oct. 24. The Post reports that the Steele dossier was funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign.
Oct. 30. Mueller's team charges Trump's former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, with conspiracy and money laundering. The team also reveals that Papadopoulos has admitted lying to the FBI and has apparently been cooperating with the investigation.
Dec. 1. In documents released by Mueller's team, Flynn admits lying to the FBI.
Dec. 2. The Strzok-Page texts are reported by The Post.
Dec. 7. Nunes is cleared of wrongdoing by the Ethics Committee on charges that he revealed classified information. This was the predicate for his recusal from the Intelligence Committee's Russia investigation.
2018
Jan. 4. In a letter to Rosenstein, Nunes suggests that his committee is expanding its investigation to include the Department of Justice's handling of the Russia investigation itself.
Jan. 9. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) releases the transcript of Simpson's Senate testimony.
Mid-January. Staffers for Nunes compile a four-page document summarizing classified information to argue that the FBI abused its power in its investigation of Trump's campaign. While the document is not public, it appears to argue that the FISA warrant issued for Page relied on information compiled by Steele, implying that the warrant should not have been issued and, apparently, that the process for requesting it was tainted by politics.
Jan. 18. Republicans and their allies - particularly in the media - rally around the memo, arguing that it should be released to the public.
Jan. 23. Axios reports that Sessions, at Trump's behest, had been pressuring FBI Director Wray to fire McCabe. In response, Wray reportedly threatened to quit.
Jan. 24. The Justice Department, which was not allowed to view the memo, warns the House Intelligence Committee that releasing it without allowing the FBI and Justice to review its contents would be "extraordinarily reckless," risking the sources and methods used to collect the information underlying the information it contains.
Jan. 28. Wray is allowed to review the memo. Politico reports that Wray was told he could flag any concerns. Intelligence Committee ranking member Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) tells the outlet that Wray informed him that his concerns about the release of the memo were not entirely addressed.
Jan. 29. McCabe leaves his position as deputy director of the FBI effective immediately. Wray suggests that McCabe's early departure (he was scheduled to retire later this year) was in part a function of an upcoming inspector general's report about the Clinton email investigation. The Times reports that Trump's interest in the memo may stem in part from his belief that it casts Rosenstein in a negative light, since Rosenstein approved a request to renew the Page warrant after taking office last year. Rosenstein, as lead on the Russia investigation, is the only person directly authorized to fire Mueller.
Jan. 29, evening. The House Intelligence Committee votes, along party lines, to release the memo.
References:
Andrew C. McCarthy, "The Clamor Over the Nunes' FISA-Abuse Memo," Washington Review, January 25, 2018. Referenced at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/455757/release-the-memo-lets-see-in-it
Zack Beauchamp, "The Real Reason the Nunes Memo Matters," VOX, January 30. 2018. Referenced at: https://www.vox.com/world/2018/1/30/16950782/numes-memo-release
Tucker Carlson, FOX News, January 29, 2018. Referenced at YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBpZ2wLcOfw
Philip Bump, "A Complete Timeline of the Events Behind the Memo That Threatens to rip D.C. in Two," The Washington Post, January 30, 2018. Referenced at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/01/30/a-complete-timeline-of-the-events-behind-the-memo-that-threatens-to-rip-d-c-in-two/?utm_term=.05c6da3df6e6
| Democrat Media's Weird Week, it's Weirdest Moments Exposed | For Love of God and Country, Editorials and Opinions | Congressional Democrats Exposed, their True Nature Revealed |
CLARION CALL
with Stan Deatherage
with Stan Deatherage
Commissioner Hood Richardson
Discussion of the 45th President
Discussion of the 45th President
