Tag Archives: House Intelligence Committee

Intelligence Committee Democrats hell bent on destroying Trump presidency

The House Intelligence Committee is supposed to be more bipartisan than other House committees and a place where members conduct serious oversight of America’s intelligence agencies. Its members are expected to put politics aside to oversee sensitive intelligence programs that are crucial to protecting our nation’s national security.
 
That’s not what we saw in Monday’s rare open Intelligence Committee hearing.  Democratic members spent every minute of the hearing to smear the president before the cameras. By doing so, they made a mockery of bipartisan intelligence oversight.
 
Republican Intelligence Committee members were taken off guard by hyper-partisan behavior of their Democratic colleagues. At the hearing there were some useful exchanges between Republican members and Comey on the seriousness of recent leaks of intelligence as well as the unmasking and illegal disclosure of General Michael Flynn’s name from NSA reports.  Unfortunately, these discussions were overshadowed by the Democrats who were much more aggressive in pushing their Trump-Russia conspiracy theories.
 
Congressional Republicans must learn from this episode that the Democratic Party is so obsessed with destroying President Trump that their Democratic colleagues cannot be trusted to engage in good faith deliberations or hearings on anything that they can use to hurt Trump.  Sadly, this includes national security.
 
This means there should be no more open hearings on issues like Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Additional open hearings that the Senate and House Intelligence Committees have scheduled on this issue should be made closed hearings.
 
Republicans seemed to have gotten the message on this. Friday, an open House Intelligence Committee hearing scheduled for next week on the Russia/election hearing scheduled was cancelled. It will be replaced with a closed hearing.
 
If open congressional hearings on the Russia/election or similar issues are held, Republican members must be much more aggressive in pursuing leaks of classified information and the abuse of U.S intelligence by the Obama administration to spy on the Trump campaign. Committee chairmen should run such hearings with iron gavels and give Democratic members zero leeway to turn them into political circuses.
 
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes proved that he knows what he’s up against in the aftermath of Monday’s intelligence committee hearing by the way he handled new information suggesting that the Obama administration did surveil the Trump campaign.
 
Nunes was given intelligence, apparently under the table from U.S. intelligence officers, which indicates the names of Trump campaign aides were “demasked” in intelligence reports that had nothing to do with Russia or any alleged wrongdoing by the Trump campaign.
 
This is a big deal because the names of American citizens incidentally collected by U.S. intelligence agencies are blacked out and are not supposed to be revealed unless there is a compelling national security reason.
 
Nunes has been condemned by Intelligence Committee Democrats and the news media by the way he disclosed this information since he presented it to the press without informing his Democratic colleagues in advance. Nunes also informed the White House about this information before he briefed the committee and is refusing to tell Democratic committee members the name or names of his sources.
 
Maybe Nunes should not have brought this information to the White House before he briefed committee members.  (He apologized to them for this.)
 
My view is that Nunes took the right approach. He knows it is pointless to work with committee Democrats on this issue and if he had brought this intelligence to them before his press conference, they would have quickly leaked this information to the press to discredit it.
 
Nunes also is absolutely right in not revealing the name or names of his sources since there is a good chance committee Democrats would try to out these sources or get their managers to retaliate against them. I saw this happen when I worked for the CIA.
 
This story looks like it will soon get even more interesting. Fox News’ James Rosen reported Thursday that the committee may soon receive – possibly today — intelligence that “is said to leave no doubt the Obama administration, in its closing days, was using the cover of legitimate surveillance on foreign targets to spy on President-elect Trump.”
 
Nunes was smart to double down on his effort to fight back against Democratic politicization of intelligence oversight when he said at a press conference Friday that he was cancelling an open hearing next week on the Russia election hearing and had turned it into a closed hearing.
 
In addition, Nunes said he has recalled FBI Director Comey and NSA Director Rogers to testify to this hearing.
 
I assume Nunes’ new information, the FBI’s refusal to fully cooperate with the committee’s investigation and Comey’s failure to fully answer questions about intelligence leaks are why Nunes is recalling Comey and Rogers.
 
Predictably, Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee complained bitterly in a follow-up press conference Friday that Nunes cancelled the open hearing and questioned why Comey and Rogers were being recalled.
 
It was the height of gall for Schiff to complain that Nunes’ actions indicate he is not interested in an independent and objective investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election after Schiff and his Democratic colleagues proved at Monday’s hearing that they are only interested in using this investigation to destroy the Trump presidency.
 
Nunes realizes this and decided to fight back.  Until congressional Democrats start putting the good of the country above their hatred of President Trump, Republican congressional leaders must employ similar tactics to do the work of the American people and safeguard our national security.
 

What Democrats don’t want FBI Director James Comey to talk about

Congressional Democrats and their media allies hope FBI Director James Comey will deliver a body blow to the Trump presidency by telling lawmakers Russia undermined the the 2016 presidential election and that President Trump’s claim that President Obama wiretapped Trump Tower is groundless.

But Democrats also are worried that Comey, who testifies Monday, will make other statements that could severely undermine their efforts to destroy President Trump and possibly turn the tables on them.

Since this will be a public hearing of the House Intelligence Committee, expect an endless series of self-righteous and preening questions by Democratic committee members on the wiretapping of Trump Tower charge. Democrats want this to be the lead story coming out of the hearing and will extract as many sound bites as possible of Comey debunking this charge for CNN, The New York Times and the Washington Post.

Democratic committee members will also press Comey on Russian interference in the 2016 election and contacts between Trump campaign officials and Russians but probably do not expect to learn anything new.

What worries Democrats is what Comey may say about Obama administration surveillance of the Trump campaign.

It seems likely, given former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s statement on March 5 that there is no evidence of any collusion between Trump campaign officials and Russia, that Comey will make a similar statement.  If he does and also confirms the Obama administration sought FISA warrants to surveil Trump campaign staff, the hearing could take a very bad turn for the Democrats.

It has been reported but not officially confirmed that two FISA warrants were requested in 2016 – last spring and in October – to use U.S. intelligence to investigate Trump campaign staff interactions with Russian officials.  The spring ’16 FISA warrant reportedly was denied.

FISA warrants to employ U.S. intelligence agencies to spy on Americans are only issued to address dire national security threats.

The standard to issue such warrants against staff members of a presidential campaign from an opposing political party should have been even higher.

In light of Clapper’s statement that no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russians was found and the rash of anti-Trump intelligence leaks after the election, there are serious questions as to whether these warrants were sought by Obama officials to conduct fishing expeditions to find information to hurt Trump’s presidential bid.

There also is the question of the leaking of NSA reports of Russian communications that “incidentally” mentioned Trump campaign officials, including retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn and possibly then-Sen. Jeff Sessions, now the attorney general. Is the FBI investigating these leaks? Were they part of a broad effort by the Obama administration to cull though NSA reports on Russian officials to find references to Trump campaign staff that they could leak to the news media?

A related question: when NSA intercepts of foreign persons incidentally mention U.S. citizens, the names of the U.S. citizens are “minimized” with anonymous references. However, senior U.S. officials are permitted to ask NSA to reveal the names of Americans minimized in NSA reporting.

On March 15, 2017, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., and ranking member Adam Schiff, D-Calif., requested the names of Obama officials who sought the identities of Americans mentioned in intelligence reporting be “de-minimized” during the last seven months of the Obama administration. Will Comey tell the committee Monday which Obama officials requested that the names of Trump campaign aides mentioned in NSA reports be “de-minimized?”

House Intelligence Committee Democrats will try to use Comey’s appearance before the committee to focus exclusively on the accuracy of President Trump’s charge that President Obama ordered the bugging of Trump Tower.

This issue is a distraction. All members of the committee realize that if Comey states there is no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia and if he confirms that FISA warrants were requested, it’s a whole new ball game.

Such statements by Comey could turn the focus of congressional investigations of possible Russian interference in the 2016 election to whether the Obama administration tried to interfere in the election by spying on the Trump campaign and whether Obama officials tried to hurt the Trump presidency by leaking classified information to the news media after the election.

Democrats thus desperately hope Comey will not repeat Clapper’s statement about no evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign and will not comment on possible FISA warrants – or at least not discuss these issues in an open hearing.