The Nunes memo shows the opposite of what Trump hoped it would prove - WaPo Editorial Board
By Editorial Board February 2 at 5:55 PM
-snip-
First, the memo states that separate information on a different Trump adviser, George Papadopoulos, triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence operation. In other words, it was not the Democratic-funded dossier or the warrant against Mr. Page that led to the Russia probe. Instead, the memo reveals that there were preexisting grounds to investigate, based on information about a different Trump associate. So the president cannot construe this memo as offering evidence that the Russia probe began corruptly.
Second, the memo indicates that the Justice Department sought its warrant against Mr. Page in October 2016 after Mr. Page had left the Trump campaign. So the presidents campaign was not the intended target.
Third, the memo notes that the FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA renewals, and that each renewal requires a separate finding of probable cause. The court would not have made those separate findings or granted renewals without evidence that the surveillance was producing valuable information that Mr. Page may have been acting as an agent of a foreign power.
Fourth, the memo states that among those who signed renewal applications were Dana Boente, whom Mr. Trump tapped to temporarily lead the Justice Department after firing acting attorney general Sally Yates, and Rod J. Rosenstein, whom Mr. Trump chose to be the deputy attorney general. For the conspiracy narrative to hold any water, one would have to believe that officials appointed by a Republican president, including one confirmed by a Republican Senate, were part of a plot to bring down that same Republican president, and that they successfully hoodwinked FISA judges selected by the Republican-appointed chief justice of the United States. This hoodwinking would have continued after the nature of the dossier had been widely publicized and Mr. Pages Russian connections publicly scrutinized. This is beyond improbable.
The memo offers no evidence that the dossiers allegations about Mr. Page were wrong. In fact, Mr. Page himself confirmed a great deal of the dossiers material about himself in testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, admitting to extensive contact with Russian officials during a July 2016 trip to Moscow.
The memo also omits a great deal of the other information that bolstered the case against Mr. Page. He has been on the governments radar screen since at least 2013, when investigators scrutinized a Russian spys apparent attempt to recruit him.
-snip-
Full editorial:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-nunes-memo-is-a-giant-damaging-distraction/2018/02/02/380be4be-084f-11e8-8777-2a059f168dd2_story.html
dalton99a
(81,516 posts)procon
(15,805 posts)"For the conspiracy narrative to hold any water, one would have to believe that officials appointed by a Republican president, including one confirmed by a Republican Senate, were part of a plot to bring down that same Republican president..."