Visit ArabTopics.com

The Washington Post’s Shoddy Defense of the Russiagate Investigation

Submitted by Author via Strategic Culture

An editorial in the February 2nd Washington Post headlines “The Nunes memo shows the opposite of what Trump hoped it would prove”, and its first argument is that “the memo reveals that there were preexisting [i.e., prior to the FBI’s investigation into the DNC’s infamous Steele dossier, which even Steele himself acknowledged was probably 10% to 30% false] 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.”

However, the Nunes Memo isn’t alleging “that the Russia probe began corruptly.” It is instead arguing that when the FBI’s follow-on investigation reached the point where they would need permission from the FISA (or “FISC”) court in order to obtain evidence that might possibly implicate US President Trump in impeachable offenses, the FBI resorted to an illegal tactic to win the court’s okay: hiding crucial material information from the FISA court. That’s the case the Nunes Memo is actually summarizing.

The FBI began its investigation into the Steele dossier after it had already begun its investigation — based upon then-credible grounds to investigate — regarding George Papadopoulos (a supporter of Trump and aspirant for a position in his Administration if Trump would win).

There is no question that the initial FBI investigation began in July 2016 and had nothing to do with the Steele dossier; this is acknowledged even by National Review, a Republican publication that seeks Trump’s impeachment and replacement by Mike PenceNR notes that, “The investigation isn’t the fruit of the poisonous dossier (though the dossier did play a role); it existed before the dossier.” But the Nunes Memo doesn’t deny this, either.

However, unlike the Washington Post, even NR had the journalistic integrity to make clear that “if the evidence upon which the investigation was opened is sound, then the investigation is appropriate.” The Washington Post, obviously, did not. The Post simply started with the false assumption that the Nunes Memo argues “that the Russia probe began corruptly.”

Then, NR says, “Ironically enough, the memo in fact confirms the necessity of the Special Counsel Robert Mueller,” and NR then ignores the legal conditions under which a Special Counsel may be appointed to remove a given investigation from the domain of the US Justice Department. These legal reuirements are extremely vague, but they do include “•(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.”

President Trump’s Attorney General Jeff Sessions yielded to political pressures — both from Democrats and from far-right Republicans (reminiscent of the close bonds that existed in the 1950s between the far-right Republican Joe McCarthy and his strong Democratic supporters Henry ’Scoop’ Jackson and Bobby Kennedy) — to start that anti-Russia and anti-Trump process; and there would likely have been considerable flak from those same political quarters if Sessions had not yielded to them on this matter, but there was no requirement for Sessions to do so.

If he had not done so, then their attempt to replace Trump by Pence would have proceeded more slowly. The Nunes Memo alleges that even the possibility of the appointment of a Special Counsel wouldn’t have existed if the FISA court had not (unknowingly) allowed US national-security and intelligence-gathering laws to be broken.

On 21 October 2016, the Obama Justice Department and its FBI sought from the FISA court a probable-cause to get its approval to obtaining all information that the Obama Administration (including its CIA, NSA, etc.) had acquired regarding contacts between Russia on the one hand and Trump and his team on the other — the court’s permission for the sitting President to gather this information against the man who was then running against that sitting President’s chosen heir-apparent.

It was at this time that the Steele dossier became ‘evidence’ for the court — and the court was blocked from seeing the evidence that should have excluded the court from accepting Steele’s document as being evidence in this matter. After all, if even the Steele dossier’s author admitted publicly that his document was somewhere between 10% and 30% false, then to accept it as constituting ‘evidence’, is to accept what even the document’s author admits contains that much falsehood; and, to impeach a President on grounds like that would be an atrocity.

This is what the Nunes Memo is actually about. It’s about legal and illegal process.

Then, the Washington Post says, “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 president’s campaign was not the intended target.” That’s a non-sequitor; the possibility exists that both “Mr. Page had left the Trump campaign” and “the president’s campaign was … the intended target.” In order to explore whether or not that was actually so would require the type of investigation that the Nunes Memo purports to be summarizing.

The Post’s third argument is that the FISA court wouldn’t have renewed the approval three times if its initial grant of Obama’s spying against Trump hadn’t been legally and soundly based — including all the information that the Nunes Memo summarizes, and which had been hidden from that court.

The Post’s fourth and final argument (but followed by lots of subordinate and un-numbered points) is:

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. Page’s Russian connections publicly scrutinized. This is beyond improbable.

“Beyond Improbable” though the people who hire and fire at the Washington Post are obviously claiming it to be, the Nunes Memo cites and alleges powerful evidence that much of that did, in fact, happen. The Memo’s allegations and evidence will be seriously considered by all of America’s journalistic institutions, even if (as at the Washington Post) ignored by a great many of America’s propaganda institutions (the ones that prefer a President Pence to President Trump, which include all Democratic Party outlets, and many Republican Party ones as well).

On February 3rd, the brilliant intelligence analyst W. Patrick Lang boldly attempted an analysis of what very possibly might explain all of this, though he presented it under the unfortunately obscure heading of “Habakkuk on ‘longtime’ sources:” and I consider it stunning.

In any case: anyone who believes ‘news’media only because they’re famous (and despite the considerable evidence that they’re not to be trusted) is going to be a happy gull of either Democratic Party billionaires or Republican Party billionaires; and a country with a majority like that won’t be any democracy at all.

To boil this all down: the Nunes Memo summarizes a case that the campaign to replace Trump by Pence has used tactics which are illegal in the United States, and which should be illegal in any democracy.

The best summary that I have seen of the Nunes Memo is this (which also happens to be from Pat Lang), which also links directly to the best online source for the document itself (so, if after seeing that summary, you wish to see the document that’s being summarized, both are right there).

The post The Washington Post’s Shoddy Defense of the Russiagate Investigation appeared first on The Duran.

Source: 
The Duran

Support this site

News Sources

Source Items
The Real News 292
Scrutinised Minds 16
Need To Know News 957
FEE 2065
Marine Le Pen 133
Francois Asselineau 25
Opassande 50
HAX on 5July 220
Henrik Alexandersson 348
Mohamed Omar 182
Professors Blog 10
Arg Blatte Talar 36
Angry Foreigner 14
Fritte Fritzson 11
Teologiska rummet 28
Filosofiska rummet 52
Vetenskapsradion Historia 70
Snedtänkt (Kalle Lind) 150
Les Crises 1163
Richard Falk 69
Ian Sinclair 57
SpinWatch 33
Counter Currents 3822
Kafila 273
Gail Malone 24
Transnational Foundation 221
Rick Falkvinge 78
The Duran 4937
Vanessa Beeley 75
Nina Kouprianova 9
MintPress 3189
Paul Craig Roberts 780
News Junkie Post 40
Nomi Prins 17
Kurt Nimmo 191
Strategic Culture 2239
Sir Ken Robinson 13
Stephan Kinsella 48
Liberty Blitzkrieg 719
Sami Bedouin 60
Consortium News 1780
21 Century Wire 2424
Burning Blogger 245
Stephen Gowans 47
David D. Friedman 115
Anarchist Standard 16
The BRICS Post 1336
Tom Dispatch 316
Levant Report 17
The Saker 2645
The Barnes Review 428
John Friend 309
Psyche Truth 146
Jonathan Cook 122
New Eastern Outlook 2604
School Sucks Project 1080
Giza Death Star 1262
Andrew Gavin Marshall 15
Red Ice Radio 535
GMWatch 1436
Robert Faurisson 115
Espionage History Archive 33
Jay's Analysis 559
Le 4ème singe 68
Jacob Cohen 178
Agora Vox 7194
Cercle Des Volontaires 385
Panamza 1268
Fairewinds 102
Project Censored 524
Spy Culture 290
Conspiracy Archive 56
Crystal Clark 11
Timothy Kelly 324
PINAC 1470
The Conscious Resistance 437
Independent Science News 62
The Anti Media 4113
Positive News 820
Brandon Martinez 30
Steven Chovanec 50
Lionel 228
The Mind renewed 193
Natural Society 2391
Yanis Varoufakis 672
Tragedy & Hope 106
Dr. Tim Ball 52
Web of Debt 114
Porkins Policy Review 282
Conspiracy Watch 174
Eva Bartlett 506
Libyan War Truth 258
DeadLine Live 1886
Kevin Ryan 59
BSNEWS 1840
Aaron Franz 157
Traces of Reality 166
Revelations Radio News 106
Dr. Bruce Levine 93
Peter B Collins 1159
Faux Capitalism 203
Dissident Voice 8500
Climate Audit 208
Donna Laframboise 256
Judith Curry 998
Geneva Business Insider 40
Media Monarchy 1693
Newsbud 2303
Syria Report 70
Human Rights Investigation 85
Intifada (Voice of Palestine) 1685
Down With Tyranny 8670
Laura Wells Solutions 15
Video Rebel's Blog 398
Revisionist Review 483
Aletho News 15527
ضد العولمة 27
Penny for your thoughts 2351
Northerntruthseeker 1800
كساريات 37
Color Revolutions and Geopolitics 27
Stop Nato 4491
AntiWar.com Blog 2327
AntiWar.com Original Content 5380
Corbett Report 1888
Stop Imperialism 491
Land Destroyer 1028
Webster Tarpley Website 766

Compiled Feeds

Public Lists

Title Visibility
Funny Public