That “explosive” House intel committee document — an update

We wrote here, via Sara Carter, about a possibly explosive classified document, prepared by House Intelligence Committee staff, that apparently relates to abuses by the FBI in connection with the 2016 presidential campaign. According to Carter’s sources, information in the document could lead to the removal of senior officials in the FBI and Department of Justice, and perhaps even to the criminal prosecution of some.

The intelligence committee voted along straight party lines to share the document with members of the House. Key Republicans members would like, in addition, to have the document declassified and shared with the American public.

Now, Debra Heine at PJ Media reports that House Republicans, led by Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, are “in the process of moving forward on releasing the explosive classified memo on alleged surveillance abuses.” Heine cites Byron York who tweeted:

Today: Reps. Nunes, Gowdy, and Goodlatte met to discuss memo, are said to be ‘charting a path forward.’ What does that mean? Obvious goal is to make memo public; steps between now and then unclear; could take 2-3 weeks.

Heine also cites this tweet from Rep. David Joyce:

Great news! Our efforts to #ReleaseTheMemo have been effective and the [House Intelligence Committee] plans to begin the process to release the FBI/FISA/Russia memo. This may take up to 19+ Congressional work days but Americans deserve to know the truth.

What about the declassification procedures, though? CNN has reported that Republicans on the Intelligence Committee are “considering using an obscure committee rule” to bypass executive branch declassification hurdles in order to publicly release the memo. Reportedly, under this procedure the memo could be made public if the committee votes in favor of doing so and President Trump agrees.

We’ll see.

What, though, is in this “explosive” memo? Only its authors and those who have read it know for sure.

However, CNN reports that the memo concludes the judge who signed off on FISA surveillance warrants for members of Trump’s team during the campaign was not given full information about the dossier used in at least one application. A source “familiar with the document” said the judge was not told that the document was paid for by the Democratic sources.

Speaking of deceiving the FISA court, Joseph diGenova, in an interview with Ginni Thomas for the Daily Caller, discusses a FISA court opinion of April 27, 2017 that accused the Obama administration of lying to court and of abusive use of material obtained through authorized surveillance. The opinion found that the FBI distributed such material to “contractors.” The names of the contractors are redacted, but diGenova believes they include Fusion GPS and Crowd Strike. Crowd Strike was the DNC’s private security firm.

DiGenova goes on to argue that, without a justifiable law enforcement or national security reason, the FBI “created false facts so that they could get surveillance warrants.” In the process, he says, the FBI committed crimes.

Whether, and to what extent, these claims are present in and supported by the Intelligence Committee document, I do not know. However, Carter’s sources did tell her that information contained in the document could lead to jail sentences.

Moreover, Rep. Scott Perry, who has read the document, compares what the authors describe therein to “KGB activity in Russia.” This may well be hyperbole — for one thing, the KGB didn’t need to deceive a court before it could spy on people. However, if DiGenova’s assertions are contained in and supported by the document, it’s not hyperbole to call the memo “explosive.”

The diGenova interview, which lasts about half an hour, is well worth viewing.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.