Home Opinion Letter to the Editor Response to ‘Republicans release dull Nunes memo’

Response to ‘Republicans release dull Nunes memo’

0
164

Let me start by saying I completely agree with the general underlying view of the article, that partisan news, Democrat or Republican, only hurts Americans; however, there are some assertions made about the Nunes memo that are simply incorrect.

“This memo alleges that the Obama-era FBI abused surveillance laws to spy on Trump officials, creating the ‘witch hunt’ of Russian interference in the 2016 election,” the Printz article on Feb. 16 said.
None of this is true; the memo explicitly states that the dossier created by Christopher Steele was a part of the FISA application used against Carter Page, which it was. It also states that this dossier isn’t responsible for starting the FISA application and attributes the starting of the investigation to the activities of George Papadopoulos in July 2016. Also, the HPSCI voted this week to release the Democratic Party’s response memo, so it wasn’t “largely ignored.” It is currently being reviewed by the justice department.

The memo, in my opinion, raises a few questions.
First, it directly calls into question Andrew McCabe’s testimony in December 2017. In the memo, McCabe is said to have testified that the FISA application against Carter Page was largely based on the information in the Steele dossier.

Second, the memo claims that “senior DOJ and FBI officials” knew about the political motivation of the Steele Dossier. This, in turn, raises more questions. If it’s true that officials knew, did they sign off on the FISA application knowing that the Dossier had politically motivated origins and if they did, why did they?

These questions and many others could be answered by releasing the underlying FISA application, McCabe’s testimony and other testimonies. My opinion is that as Americans we should continually call for the release of public information whether it be from Democrats, Republicans, or any side because we live in a country of checks and balances and not one of blind acceptance.