The backward logic of the Nunes memo
Jonathan Chait
February 2, 2018
2:26 pm
... The newly released memo by Republican staff follows the tracks of this reasoning. Its central contention, leaked in advance, is that the FBI used the work of a biased source (Christopher Steele, a British intelligence agent with expertise in Russia) to justify surveillance of Carter Page, a Trump campaign adviser. The memo highlights Steeles opposition to Trump (he "was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected" , along with the beliefs of FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, both of whom "demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of Clinton."
As a legal matter, as law professor Orin Kerr has explained, there is no merit to the argument that a politically biased source cannot be used to obtain a warrant. Indeed, the FBI used journalism funded by Steve Bannon to investigate Hillary Clinton. In the place of any strong legal claim, the memo substitutes the assumption that intelligence sources who don't want Trump to be president must be up to no good.
But this treats the effect as the cause. Strzok, as the context of his texts reveals, was a moderate Republican who voted for John Kasich in the GOP primary. Steele was a Brit who had not shown any strong passion for American politics. They developed intense preferences in the 2016 election outcome in large part because they had access to intelligence about Trump and Russia. They did not create this intelligence to support their political beliefs.
Indeed, Carter Page the former Trump campaign official, the surveillance of whom occupies most of the memos attention came under FBI scrutiny in 2014, after he had passed documents on to Russian spies. Page is the kind of person who would be brought on as a foreign policy adviser only if (a) the campaign was actively seeking out Russian assets, or (b) it was so slipshod it could easily be penetrated by Russian intelligence ...
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/the-backward-logic-of-the-nunes-memo.html