By Sharyl Attkisson
What happens when federal agencies
accused of possible wrongdoing — also control the alleged evidence against
them?
What happens when they’re the ones in charge of who inside their
agencies — or connected to them — ultimately gets investigated and
possibly charged?
Those questions are moving to the forefront as the facts play out in the investigations into our intelligence agencies’ surveillance activities.
Those questions are moving to the forefront as the facts play out in the investigations into our intelligence agencies’ surveillance activities.
There are two overarching issues.
First, there’s the alleged improper
use of politically-funded opposition research to justify secret warrants
to spy on U.S. citizens for political purposes.
Second, if corruption is ultimately
identified at high levels in our intel agencies, it would necessitate a
re-examination of every case and issue the officials touched over the past
decade — or two — under administrations of both parties.
This is why I think the concerns
transcend typical party politics.
It touches everybody. It’s
potentially monumental.
This week, the FBI said it was
unfair for the House Intelligence Committee not to provide its memo
outlining alleged FBI abuses. The committee wrote the summary memo after
reviewing classified government documents in the Trump-Russia probe.
The FBI’s complaint carries a note
of irony considering that the agency has notoriously stonewalled Congress.
Even when finally agreeing
to provide requested documents, the Department of Justice uses
the documents’ classified nature to severely restrict who can see
them — even among members of Congress who possess the appropriate security
clearance.
Members who wish to view the documents must report to special
locations during prescribed hours in the presence of Department of Justice
minders who supervise them as they’re permitted to take handwritten notes
only (you know, like the 1960s).
What most people don’t know is that
the FBI and Department of Justice already know exactly what Congressional
investigators have flagged in the documents they’ve reviewed, because
three weeks ago the Senate Judiciary Committee sent its own
summary memo to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Department of Justice
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
The committee also
referred to the Department of Justice a recommendation for
possible charges against the author of the political opposition research
file, the so-called “Trump dossier”: Christopher Steele.
The head of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, Republican Charles Grassley co-authored the memo with fellow
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham. Grassley says it’s important for the
public to see the unclassified portions of the memo.
But unlike the House,
which can release the memo on its own (and is taking steps to do so),
Senate rules require permission from the Department of Justice — the
possibly offending agency — approve or declassify the memo. And
that’s reached a snag.
According to Grassley, the FBI is
blocking the release of the unclassified sections of the Senate memo by
falsely claiming that they contain classified information.
“It sure looks like a bureaucratic
game of hide the ball, rather than a genuine concern about national
security,” said Grassley in a speech on the Senate floor yesterday.
Grassley also pointed out that
agencies accused of possible improprieties are the ones controlling the
information.
It’s the FBI who may have misused the unverified “dossier”
opposition research, allegedly presenting it to a secret court as if
it were verified intelligence.
“[FBI] Director [James] Comey
testified in 2017 that it was ‘salacious and unverified’,” said Grassley. “So,
it was a collection of unverified opposition research funded by a
political opponent in an election year. Would it be proper for
the Obama administration — or any administration — to use something like
that to authorize further investigation that intrudes on the privacy of
people associated with its political opponents? That should
bother civil libertarians of any political stripe.”
Democrats and many in the media are
taking the side of the intelligence community, calling the Republican
efforts partisan. House Democrats are said to be writing a counter-memo.
“We need to produce our own memo
that lays out the actual facts and shows how the majority memo distorts
the work of the FBI and the Department of Justice,” said Rep. Adam
Schiff, the lead Democrat on the House
Intelligence Committee.
Meantime, the Department of Justice
has officially warned the House Intelligence Committee not to release its
memo. It's like the possible defendant in a criminal trial threatening
prosecutors for having the audacity to reveal alleged evidence to the
judge and jury.
This is the first time I
can recall open government groups and many reporters joining in the
argument to keep the information secret.
They are strangely uncurious about alleged improprieties with
implications of the worst kind: Stasi-like tactics used against
Americans. “Don’t be irresponsible and reveal sources and methods,” they
plead.
As for me? I don’t care what
political stripes the alleged offenders wear or whose side they’re on. If
their sources and methods are inappropriate, they should be fully exposed
and stopped.
Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) is an Emmy-award winning
investigative journalist, author of The New York Times bestsellers “The Smear”
and “Stonewalled,” and host of Sinclair’s Sunday TV program “Full
Measure.”
