RUTHFULLY YOURS

The increasingly embattled Federal Bureau of Investigation launched a preemptive strike yesterday against the hotly anticipated foreign surveillance abuse memo in hopes of discrediting the document before it is released in coming days.

The public relations effort came as more evidence became available about the questionable behind-the-scenes conduct of fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who allegedly tried to use his authority to undermine President Trump’s campaign.

The classified four-page memo, compiled by House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), was based on classified information supplied by the FBI and its parent agency, the U.S. Department of Justice. The two organizations “fought tooth and nail” to avoid handing over the relevant records to Congress, according to Fox News, citing an inside source. They produced the documents only after Nunes “threatened to move forward with contempt of Congress citations.”

The memo is said to provide evidence proving allegations that top officials in President Obama’s national security community abused their authority to obtain surveillance warrants against members of President Trump’s election campaign from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Its release could set in motion a process whereby bad actors in the government could go to prison. It may indicate that government officials relied on the tainted Fusion GPS dossier by former British spy Christopher Steele that is loaded with Kremlin-supplied misinformation to obtain the warrants. The dossier, as we now know, was paid for by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, and was part of her bag of dirty tricks.

Donald Trump’s State of the Union address was perfectly pitched for the political moment. He spoke to and for the American people – for all Americans of whatever race, color or creed. He spoke for the poorest and most vulnerable among us, who are the chief victims of the Democrats’ determination to welcome millions upon millions of illegal aliens, who are mainly low wage laborers and who include predatory criminals, to pour into our country; to defy federal law with their “sanctuary” states and cities, and to effectively declare our border and immigration policies null and void. Trump did not use the word “sedition” to describe the law-breaking and Constitution-negating actions of his Democratic predecessor or the Democrats assembled in the chamber of the House. He provided instead an opening to them to abandon their “resistance” – resistance to the expressed will of the American voting public which has led to a relentless sabotage of the democratic process. In sum, he offered a hand to his Democratic haters, and they slapped it away.

When Trump summarized the successes of his first year in office, he emphasized how the prosperity of his first twelve months impacted the lives and hopes of ordinary Americans, wage laborers and others whom the eight years of the Obama presidency had left behind. In doing so he exposed the Democrats in the most dramatic way imaginable. Under his policies, he boasted, black and Hispanic unemployment are record lows. As he said this and the Republican side of the house rose to its feet in applause the TV camera panned to the morose members of the Democrats’ Black Caucus, sitting on their hands and showing America that the last thing they care about is their black constituents. What they care about is their hatred for Trump, and about not disturbing the biggest lie of the political season: that the White House is the headquarters of a “white supremacy” movement intent on keeping black Americans down and making them suffer.

Let’s give them the award straight up: Worst Performance by a Minority Party at a State of the Union Address.

(Hey, it’s awards season, right?)

They broke the record. They get the prize with no runner-up for years to come.

Steny Hoyer and Nancy Pelosi watching Trump’s speech looked like a pair of sullen six-year olds on a sugar crash the day after Halloween. Bernie Sanders looked mummified. Schumer was slumped so deeply in his chair he was almost falling through the crack.

Other Democrats, even ones who should have known better or secretly felt otherwise, sat on their hands. You could see them glancing at each other, wondering whether they were allowed to applaud or stand up. What a bunch of cowards.

It was a disgraceful display of bad manners, but even more it was incredibly stupid because “the whole world was watching.” The camera was getting them all in close-up.

Who are these ungrateful corpses, middle America must have been asking. Good question. (Can you imagine how much money Pelosi has made in the stock market since Trump was elected? What does she have to be so upset about?)

More jobs? No applause. Higher wages? No applause. Lowest black unemployment in history? Crickets. ISIS disappearing? Zzzz…

What’s wrong with these people? Don’t they know nobody loves a sorehead? You think Colin Kaepernick could be elected president?

And why were they so depressed, you may ask? Easy. Here’s what they knew and what we all know. Trump is here to stay — for the next seven years. And they’re going to have to live with it.

Reason: Trump is an upper, like Reagan and JFK. All three were cheerleaders for America and made/make us feel good. That’s what wins. And why shouldn’t it? Optimism and pessimism are largely self-fulfilling prophecies. For today’s Democrats, it’s “Unhappy Days Are Here Again!”

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is making a last-ditch effort to block the release of a House Intelligence Committee memo detailing the bureau’s behavior during the 2016 election. This is all the more reason to let Americans see it.

In an unusual public statement Wednesday, the bureau objected that it had only “a limited opportunity to review” the memo the day before the House voted Monday to release it. The statement added that the FBI had “grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy.”

This is really something. The FBI knows what’s in the memo because it has long known what the House committee was seeking to examine. For months it refused to provide access to those documents until director Christopher Wray and the Justice Department faced a contempt of Congress vote. If they now object to the way the House construes the facts, they should have been more cooperative from the start.

Note the FBI’s language about “material omissions” rather than errors of fact. Until this statement the FBI was pleading damage to “national security.” Now that rationale has given way to the claim that the House is omitting key details to reach judgments that the FBI apparently disagrees with. If Mr. Wray wants to fill in those omissions, he can always ask President Trump to declassify more documents to provide a more complete record. We’d love to see them, and Mr. Trump should give that transparency a boost even if Mr. Wray doesn’t request it.

Divided on partisan lines, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence voted yesterday to make public a memo asserting the FBI relied on the discredited Trump-Russia dossier to obtain court-ordered foreign-intelligence wiretaps against U.S. citizens, a breathtaking abuse of power.

The document is already generating shock waves in Washington, even though few on Capitol Hill are said to have read it.

The FBI admits the Left’s electoral collusion conspiracy theory is unsubstantiated but still refuses to distance itself from the discredited Russia propaganda dossier Democrats paid Fusion GPS to create to undermine President Trump’s candidacy. And congressional Democrats, long sympathetic to Russia, have suddenly been transformed into strong defenders of the nation’s national security apparatus, implying that criticism of the long-troubled FBI is somehow treasonous or unpatriotic. It is a vicious smear calculated to redirect Americans’ attention, but par for the course for the Left.

Why anyone is even surprised at FBI corruption is unclear. Although the nation’s premier investigative agency is top-heavy with fine, ethical men and women, the FBI was born in corruption. Its founding director, J. Edgar Hoover, kept blackmail material on the powerful so he could stay in power for 50 years. The FBI needs a good housecleaning at the top.

It was a month ago that FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe reportedly refused to criticize the dossier at a closed-door hearing of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence chaired by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.).

The House Intelligence Committee voted Monday night to release a Republican memo that by most accounts reveals how the FBI handled, or mishandled, federal wiretap requests during the 2016 presidential campaign. The White House should now approve its public disclosure as the first of several to help the country understand what really happened.

Democrats are objecting to the release, claiming partisanship and violations of national security. None of this is persuasive. Republican Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes has followed a long and deliberative process that follows House protocol.

When the FBI finally agreed after months of resisting to answer a committee subpoena for documents, Mr. Nunes deputized former prosecutor and South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy to investigate. The subsequent memo was vetted for security concerns, provided to the entire House committee, then made available to the entire House, then shown to the director of the FBI, and is now undergoing White House review. This is hardly a Chelsea Manning-to-WikiLeaks-to-New York Times leak.

Another false claim is that Republicans are “censoring” a rival Democratic memo. The same Democrats howling about national security wanted the committee on Monday instantly to approve the public disclosure of their counter-memo that hasn’t gone through the equivalent reviews that the majority memo has. Committee Republicans voted to start that process by making the Democratic memo available to the full House, and by all means let’s see that memo too.

Donald Trump is a recent Republican convert and he’s hardly a traditional conservative, so we’ve expected that sooner or later he’d turn to deal-making with Democrats. The question is whether his call to deal in Tuesday’s State of the Union address will produce some bipartisan progress this year in a polarized Congress.

“So tonight I am extending an open hand to work with members of both parties, Democrats and Republicans, to protect our citizens, of every background, color, and creed,” Mr. Trump declared in one of several pitches for cooperation across the aisle.

This is a rhetorical turn, and could be productive. Presidents usually do this in the first year, starting in the Inaugural, but Mr. Trump cast that speech as a dirge about “American carnage.” He followed with his ill-prepared travel ban, and he was off to the polarizing races of the Steve Bannon phase of his Presidency.

That start made it easier for Democrats to oppose him at every turn, and Mr. Trump was forced to pass his legislative agenda with Republican votes. His approval rating is low, especially considering the strong economy, and many Democrats can’t wait to impeach him after what they expect will be a takeover of the House and Senate in November.

In that context Mr. Trump’s Tuesday speech played against type by seeking what he called “common ground.” The Twitter attack specialist called for Congress to strike bipartisan deals even on an issue such as immigration that is as polarizing as American politics gets.

Investigative journalist Sara Carter reported on Fox News last night that outgoing FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe may be in serious trouble if the information she had received from FBI sources proves to be true.

“I have been told tonight by a number of sources … that McCabe may have asked FBI agents to actually change their 302s,” Carter told host Sean Hannity.

The 302 form contains information from the notes an FBI agent takes during an interview of a subject. It is used by FBI agents to “report or summarize the interviews that they conduct.”

“So basically every time an FBI agent interviews a witness, they have to go back and file a report,” Carter explained.

Hannity pointed out that, if true, it would constitute a case of obstruction of justice, and Carter agreed. She said the matter was being investigated by FBI Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

“If this is true — not just alleged — if it’s true, McCabe will be fired,” Carter said. “They are considering firing him in the next few days. If this turns out to be true,” she added. CONTINUE AT SITE

WASHINGTON (AP) — Brushing aside opposition from the Justice Department, Republicans on the House intelligence committee voted to release a classified memo that purports to show improper use of surveillance by the FBI and the Justice Department in the Russia investigation.

The four-page memo has become a political flashpoint, with President Donald Trump and many Republicans pushing for its release and suggesting that some in the Justice Department and FBI have conspired against the president.

The memo was written by Republicans on the committee, led by chairman Rep. Devin Nunes of California, a close Trump ally who has become a fierce critic of the FBI and the Justice Department. Special counsel Robert Mueller is investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 election and whether Trump’s campaign was involved.

Republicans have said the memo reveals grave concerns about abuses of the government surveillance powers in the Russia investigation. Democrats have called it a selectively edited group of GOP talking points that attempt to distract from the committee’s own investigation into Russian meddling.

The vote on Monday to release the memo is an unprecedented move by the committee, which typically goes out of its way to protect classified information in the interest of protecting intelligence sources and methods. The memo was delivered by courier to the White House on Monday evening. Trump now has five days to object to its release by the committee.

The White House said late Monday that the president will meet with his national security team and White House counsel to discuss the memo in the coming days.

For more than a year now, Democrats have been driven into hysterics on a weekly basis by highly selective, often partisan leaks fed to them in 900-word increments by the political media. Whether these sensationalist stories were debunked or not, no Democrat demanded that every scrap of information related to their leaks be declassified immediately to ensure that the nation see the appropriate context. It’s a process, we were told.

You’ll notice that many of the same process-oriented folks, now preemptively dismissing the four-page summary memo alleging surveillance abuses by the Justice Department and FBI as a bunch of conspiracy theories, have a different set of standards for Rep. Devin Nunes and Republicans.

“FISA warrants typically are big thick documents, 50-60 pages,” John McLaughlin, a former CIA deputy director, recently wrote. “If the Nunes memo about one is just 4 pages, you can bet it’s a carefully picked bowl of cherries. Made all the more dishonest by holding back the minority rebuttal memo. A real debate needs both. Someone fears that.” Indeed.

McLaughlin is repeating a well-worn talking point. As far as I can tell, none of the critics of the memo have argued that the contentions are untrue, only that the contentions are out of context, misleading, cherry-picked, and so on. But since the memo — which is culled from a year-long investigation — isn’t an indictment or the entire story, there’s no real reason we shouldn’t use it to help ascertain whether there were potential abuses in intelligence-gathering in the Obama administration. Once we have an outline, we can take the issues on one at a time, or disregard all of them.