Do you want to know why the FBI continued to insist that the Nunes' memo not be declassified and released to the public? The answer is right there on page 2, (see 1b) in the discussion about what was excluded from the application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court:
The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of-and paid by-the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.
I believe that the part in bold is what the FBI wanted out of the memo because it exposes the uncomfortable fact that Christopher Steele was (and had been for some time) a paid asset of the FBI. That is huge news. In other words, Steele was not a mere consultant or sub-contractor for the FBI. He was being paid to provide information/intelligence to the FBI. There are two classes of FBI "informants." One is serving as a "criminal informant" and the other is as an "intelligence asset." Information from "criminal informants" can be used in a U.S. judicial proceeding and the informant called as a witness. Getting money under that circumstance can be problematic because the source's credibility can be impeached by defense counsel, who can argue that the testimony is purloined.
You do not have to worry about that with an "intelligence asset." In that case the priority is protecting the identity of the source. The fact that Steele had been on the FBI payroll for a while sheds new light on Glen Simpson's testimony (which was leaked by Senator Feinstein) to the U.S. Senate. Simpson testified that Steele told him in late September 2016 that the FBI wanted to meet him in Rome to discuss the dossier. That struck me initially as quite odd. If Steele was just acting as an average "foreign" citizen who was trying to help the FBI then he could easily have met with the Bureau in London. That city hosts the largest number of FBI agents in the world outside of the U.S. But Steele was asked to go meet in Rome. That's what you do when you are meeting an intelligence asset that the Brits do not know about.
That is the problem.
The real irony here is that the Schiff memo is likely to compound the problem for Steele because it is likely to highlight Steele's prior activities on behalf of the Bureau that predate the 2016 election cycle (remember, Steele was hired by Fusion GPS in June 2016). This is the issue that had FBI Director Wray's panties in a knot. When you sign up a foreign source you vow to protect them. When you expose such a source you make it more difficult to recruit new sources.
There may be another twist to this. Was Steele actually operating as an FBI intel asset with the secret knowledge of the Brits? In other words, was he a double agent or an agent of influence? One way to tell will be watching the reaction of the U.K. authorities now that they know that Steele was a paid FBI informant. Imagine the outrage here if one of the former CIA or FBI talking heads that are appearing on punditry circuit was exposed as someone getting paid by the Russian version of the FBI or CIA. It would be ugly.
The media (and the trolls on this blog) are working feverishly to ignored the uncomfortable truths exposed by the so-called Nunes memo. But facts are stubborn things and more facts will be exposed.
UPDATE--Based on some confused comments by our friend The Twisted Genius aka TTG, I need to provide more of the Nunes memo to establish that Steele in fact was a source. According to that memo:
. . .Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations-an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jones article by David Corn.
If this was a simple matter of Steele, having no official relationship with the FBI, simply reaching out to an old friend to pass on information, then TTG would be right to assert that Steele was not a source. But that is clearly not the case. The FBI can only suspend and terminate a source relationship if that person is a source. Very simple.
Let's take a quick look at the article by Corn that got Steele terminated. The Corn piece was part of an orchestrated media campaign (we know that from Simpson's testimony that was leaked by Diane Feinstein) in order to put pressure on the FBI and James Comey, who had just announced that new Clinton emails had been found on Anthony Weiner's laptop. Corn wrote:
- On Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid upped the ante. He sent Comey a fiery letter saying the FBI chief may have broken the law and pointed to a potentially greater controversy: “In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors, and the Russian government…The public has a right to know this information.”. . .
- But Reid’s recent note hinted at more than the Page or Manafort affairs. And a former senior intelligence officer for a Western country who specialized in Russian counterintelligence tells Mother Jones that in recent months he provided the bureau with memos, based on his recent interactions with Russian sources, contending the Russian government has for years tried to co-opt and assist Trump—and that the FBI requested more information from him. . . .
- [A] senior US government official not involved in this case but familiar with the former spy tells Mother Jones that he has been a credible source with a proven record of providing reliable, sensitive, and important information to the US government.
- In June, the former Western intelligence officer—who spent almost two decades on Russian intelligence matters and who now works with a US firm that gathers information on Russia for corporate clients—was assigned the task of researching Trump’s dealings in Russia and elsewhere, according to the former spy and his associates in this American firm. . . .
- “It started off as a fairly general inquiry,” says the former spook, who asks not to be identified. But when he dug into Trump, he notes, he came across troubling information indicating connections between Trump and the Russian government. According to his sources, he says, “there was an established exchange of information between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin of mutual benefit.” . . .
- This was, the former spy remarks, “an extraordinary situation.” He regularly consults with US government agencies on Russian matters, and near the start of July on his own initiative—without the permission of the US company that hired him—he sent a report he had written for that firm to a contact at the FBI, according to the former intelligence officer and his American associates, who asked not to be identified. . . .
- The former intelligence officer says the response from the FBI was “shock and horror.” The FBI, after receiving the first memo, did not immediately request additional material, according to the former intelligence officer and his American associates. Yet in August, they say, the FBI asked him for all information in his possession and for him to explain how the material had been gathered and to identify his sources. The former spy forwarded to the bureau several memos—some of which referred to members of Trump’s inner circle. After that point, he continued to share information with the FBI.
There you have it. The story was right in front of us. What is reported in the Nunes memo is consistent with David Corn's article and with what Glen Simpson testified under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The Conservative Treehouse had a revelation today about another FBI undercover agent.
Turns out the Carter Page, who the FBI certified as a Russian Spy to the FISA court in October 2016, was an undercover FBI agent used to trap and act as state witness in a trial against a real spy between 2013 and May 2016.
You better believe the FISA court was not told that Carter Page was a trusted FBI undercover operative -- until he became a VEHICLE to spy on the whole Trump Campaign, in October 2016 and three subsequent times at 90-day intervals.
Posted by: RC | 05 February 2018 at 11:16 PM
TTG
I really appreciate all of your writing on these topics. I must admit that I am emotionally tilted to believe that the memo is a "smoking gun", but reading you helps to keep me from slipping to far into confirmation bias.
Posted by: JamesT | 05 February 2018 at 11:23 PM
I'm really stuck.
Here's the deal: Comey and Co used the dossier to gat the FISA judge to approve a warrant for spying on Page.
Check.
But why Page?
Page was just a small fish who had already left the campaign.
Besides, even if they got dirt on Page, it probably wouldn't be sufficient to nail Trump (which is what they really wanted)
My guess is that Page just provides the first clue in a much bigger criminal investigation that will uncover massive surveillance on people closer to Trump.
That, at least, would make sense.
If they were just spying on page, it doesn't make any sense.
Were Samantha power and susan rice using their connections with the NSA (and "unmasking") to get secret electronic info on other Trump campaign members without even getting a FISA warrant?
How big is this thing and how widespread?
Clapper MUST have a hand in this, and maybe Brennan too.
your thoughts?
Posted by: plantman | 05 February 2018 at 11:40 PM
Steele memo # 2016/94 titled "RUSSIA: SECRET KREMLIN MEETINGS ATTENDED BY TRUMP ADVISOR, CARTER PAGE IN MOSCOW (JULY 2016)
Summary has 3 points.
PAGE has secret meetings in Moscow
SECHIN raises lifting of Western Sanctions
DIVEYKIN discusses release of kompromat of Hillary Clinton.
Not sure why this memo is deemed salacious. How much supporting evidence would the FBI need for the FSIA court to issue the warrant on just this memo?
Posted by: wisedupearly Ceo | 05 February 2018 at 11:41 PM
Gowdy has said in a tweet about the warrant that he was "deeply disturbed" that is it.
Mercouris should talk to Nunes. Nunes has said that Gowdy "summarized" source material and that he, Nunes, had the memo written by his aides.
NYT claims that the key aide is Kashyap Patel, been an aid for less than 1 year. No prior intel experience.
Contempt of court applies only to to participants in proceedings before a sitting judge? Not sure of your mention here. So await your reply.
Posted by: wisedupearly Ceo | 06 February 2018 at 12:03 AM
The FBI obtained a warrant omitting the fact the Steele Dossier had a paid political origin. This omission was pertinent in assessing the creditably of the source of information used to establish 'probable cause' to issue the search warrant(FISA warrant). Is this omission 'contempt of court'?
Please read the GOP memo and Mercouris's analysis of the memo for other omissions and misrepresentations before the FISA court. I do not know if Mercouris's assertion that Trey Gowdy is the primary author is correct, but he make's the case the GOP memo is a legal document and not a political document. Trey Gowdy is a trial lawyer who likely authored the legal document attacking the FISA warrant.
Hopefully we will soon see the FISA warrant application!
Posted by: jpb | 06 February 2018 at 12:38 AM
W.U.E. #28
Maybe b/c it was known that the meeting never happened b/c they were watching him (and via others methods and sources)? Maybe something as simple as Sechin was somewhere else at the time. Also, the part about Sechin offering Page something like $19 billion to help close the deal was kind of over the top wasn't it? Would you believe that? And there's the problem that Page wasn't really a Trump advisor. He never met Trump and never communicated with him by other means. He was a very fringe volunteer on the campaign in a group that met a couple of times hoping to get an in and build a resume.
How would a nobody like Page help get sanctions lifted?
Steele's work is pretty poor, IMO. You'd think he would have assembled better, more believable, stories. The golden showers thing is another example.
The story is silly on its face.
Posted by: Eric Newhill | 06 February 2018 at 12:42 AM
wisedupearly Ceo,
The only salacious stuff in the Steele dossier (actually a series of raw reports, as you know), is the pee pee tape report. I happened to be watching Twitter the night the report came out and that was the only thing talked about for 24 hours. Everything else was lost in the snickering. Given the Stormy Daniels story and the ensuing payoff and cover up, even the pee pee tape doesn't sound as crazy as it first did.
A number of the individual reports by Steele were corroborated in full or part over time like the report you pointed out. If you accept the DNI ICA on Russian interference in the election a lot Steele's stuff has panned out. Of course if you deny the concept of Russian interference, those reports of Steele are just part of the vast left wing conspiracy.
An interesting item that was recently revealed concerned Natalia Veselnitskaya, the "adoption lawyer" who met Trump jr, Manafort and others at Trump Tower in June 2016. She was identified in Swiss court as an SVR officer who recruited a high level Swiss law enforcement officer. I'd love to hear the tapes of that Trump Tower meeting in light of this.
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 06 February 2018 at 12:45 AM
Apologies to PT for drifting off topic.....
"The FISA Court Memorandum and Order was released prior to the House Intelligence Committee report and has been completely ignored by the utterly corrupt press prostitutes. The FISA Court Memorandum and Order, relying on the confessions of the FBI and DOJ, verifies the House Intelligence Committee report that the FBI and DOJ illegally obtained spy warrants for partisan politial purposes."
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/02/05/will-conspiracy-trump-american-democracy-go-unpunished/
Posted by: jpb | 06 February 2018 at 01:01 AM
TTG
I understand what you're saying and would agree that would normally be how its done. Wearing a wire. But...I am speculating that Carter Page was used to get a FISA warrant specifically to gain retroactive authorization of earlier surveillance on some members of the Trump team. My speculation is that surveillance on Team Trump began earlier without any warrants leading to FISA violations that Admiral Rogers discovered in April 2016. Carter Page was the perfect accomplice to cover their surveillance tracks by getting the FISA Title I warrant in October 2016 on him and consequently every one he was in contact with.
My contention that "setting a precedent" is a red herring is because the IC routinely disclose sources and methods when it serves their interest. For example I believe recalling Col. Lang writing that the IC disclosed we had decrypted secure communications of the Russian ambassador, apparently to nail Gen. Flynn. So, hiding behind precedence is precisely to prevent disclosure of malfeasance. It is like Clapper denying under oath that there is no mass surveillance. IMO, disclosing the FISA application may implicate Comey, Yates, Rosenstein, et al. and that's the only reason why they are stalling. Just like the hysteria from Comey and Brennan prior to the release of the Nunes memo. And why they redact so much from the Grassley memo. There are no sources and methods in any of these memos.
IMO, they better insure IG Horowitz's report be like the Owens investigation in the UK that David Habakkuk has written about. Or else, if it turns out to be a doozy, the pressure from the Republicans in Congress will become very intense for the appointment of a second special counsel.
Posted by: blue peacock | 06 February 2018 at 01:17 AM
TTG #24
The Nunes memo was never a source document and if you listen to the many interviews of Reps. Jordan, Gaetz & Meadows they never claim that it was a source doc. They have characterized it as a summary of the evidence around the specific topic of FISA abuse. This was their way around the classification and obstruction by the DOJ/FBI. Yes, it is political because it is going to be political pressure that takes it to the next step of either disclosure of the source documents or the appointment of another special counsel. Wray, Rosenstein, McCabe have already testified several times. Peter Strzok, Bill Priestap, Bruce Ohr, et al are all on deck. It has taken Nunes, Grassley and Goodlatte over a year in the face of all the obstruction to get this far. The Nunes memo was designed to play a very specific role. Bring forth allegations into the public square of malfeasance and a potential conspiracy. Schiff's memo will counter that by stating the Republicans are attacking our law enforcement & IC. This type of response, IMO, is exactly what the Republicans want. This then leads to the next step. This is just the beginning of discovery.
It can become one, if in the process of discovery they find sufficient evidence of a conspiracy, or if the IG report notes that there was a concerted effort to undermine Trump. The DOJ & FBI are doing their darndest to prevent discovery.
Posted by: blue peacock | 06 February 2018 at 01:51 AM
@TTG and Publius Tacitus Thanks to both of you. You are doing a great service to the public. I tend to go with Tacitus though. The reason being that nobody who has any knowledge of Russia could but come to the conclusion that the Steele dossier is utter nonsense. Therefore any use of the dossier could only have been taken in bad faith. Or else the Borg is really totally stupid.
Posted by: Tom | 06 February 2018 at 02:08 AM
In other words, the FBI guys were well aware that Steele was no real "asset", just wanted it to look that way.
And you go make a law in good faith, believing that people will do the right thing and obey said law... but instead they go to extraordinary lengths to find a way to get around it, then you need a new law to fix that problem. Tsk tsk.
Posted by: Tel | 06 February 2018 at 04:12 AM
You are thinking in terms of a legitimate investigation, which this was never intended to be.
Posted by: Tel | 06 February 2018 at 04:19 AM
Is there any evidence that Mr Steele actually exists, other than the word of some who are sure they've seen him, and an empty but still warm coffee cup, etc ? If his existence is questionable, then so too would be the provenance of his 'dossier'.
Posted by: JW | 06 February 2018 at 06:53 AM
So the FISA application has been released and people have read it? Have you read it? Your trust in our politicians is interesting, but I think that trust and verify is better. I don't really trust the Democrats either as they have already claimed that most of what is in the memo is false, but they don't have the application either, and they also have not released the McCabe testimony.
Steve
Posted by: steve | 06 February 2018 at 08:30 AM
wisedup,
I posted a comment a little past my "good until" hour last night. I erroneously stated how much Page was allegedly offered, Sechin, to end sanctions. Still, it was an eye raising amount of $. I think it strained credibility.
Why Page? I think it's all about perception management; putting a fig leaf on the coup for the public's sake. Goes like this. Trump was getting bashed for allegedly knowing nothing about foreign policy and not having a team. This was especially damaging compared to Clinton, who had been Sec State. Trump has his people quickly look everywhere for people and organize as many "advisors" as possible (more perception management). Then he fires back at critiques that he has all kinds of advisors. Page had a PhD, Naval Academy grad. That looked good. Page Makes the team Trump list. The FBI has been circling, waiting for something to seize upon to damage Trump on Clinton's behalf. Bingo! Calls are made and Steele is directed to include inflammatory "intel" on Page and Page +Trump in his reports. He does. It is possible that FBI did not fully realize at the time that Page and Trump never talk. Poor Page. Everyone uses him and no one takes him seriously.
Posted by: Eric Newhill | 06 February 2018 at 09:06 AM
I am getting really confused here. According to then NYT (via a "former intelligence officer") Carter Page was the FBI Undercover Employee (UCE-1) in the Buryakov case (2013) and that (apparently according to court records) he continued to support the case through March 2016.
So how does this (if accurate and ten description of UCE-1 certainly fits Page) relate to an October 2016 FISA warrant on him??
For details see: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/05/in-march-2016-carter-page-was-an-fbi-employee-in-october-2016-fbi-told-fisa-court-hes-a-spy/#more-145498
Posted by: Joe100 | 06 February 2018 at 10:04 AM
TTG,
In bringing up Stormy Daniels I think you did us all a favor by reminding that it is incorrect to think about this as a legitimate investigation where facts and procedures matter. It isn't. It is, IMO, much more of a perception operation engaged in by Obama/Clinton loyal bureaucrats and partners in the mainstream media.
Examining each tree causes us to forget about the forest. The forest - the legend - is that we have elected a crooked buffoon conman that colluded w/ Russians to win an election for the purpose of making himself wealthier and to sell out America to our most deadly adversary. The proof of this is the Steele dossier and that the impeccable FBI has him under investigation!!!
Maybe the FBI gets to scoop something up w/ their spying, but it's not as important as we think it would be (as in a real investigation).
To keep the fires burning hot, Stormy Daniels and other salacious material is trotted out on a regular schedule. The salacious material, if you notice, self-reinforces. Steele is true b/c Daniels is true and vice versa etc., etc. ad nauseum. Clapper and brennan make regular appearances denouncing Trump as do other Unquestionables.
That's all this is, IMO. Keeping the heat on Trump until he quits or until public opinion is sufficiently aroused that he can be impeached on something...anything.
Posted by: Eric Newhill | 06 February 2018 at 10:06 AM
It is well known that Catherine The Great wrote the second amendment, Thomas Jefferson was an agent of Czarist Russia as the second amendment clearly shows.
Posted by: Charles | 06 February 2018 at 10:06 AM
joe100
One explanation might be that the left hand did not know what the right hand was doing. Another might be that the FBI wanted the warrant and that CP was a convenient vehicle. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 06 February 2018 at 10:30 AM
Why would massive surveillance need to be uncovered?
The Trump administration has its appointees at the top of, and, running the DOJ & IC. What do you suppose happens when the boss asks his employee a straightforward question about prior activities?
Posted by: Dr. Puck | 06 February 2018 at 10:50 AM
thank you TTG for helping with the difference between validated fact and everything else short of that standard.
...bonus appreciation for pithiness, "if you deny the concept of Russian interference, those reports of Steele are just part of the vast left wing conspiracy"
Posted by: Dr. Puck | 06 February 2018 at 10:52 AM
Regardless of any law that he may have violated, Steele will not be charged in the US or the UK as long as he was doing what the Deep State wishes.
Posted by: Sid Finster | 06 February 2018 at 12:02 PM
No better way to suicide a man that law enforcement wants suicided than to put him in protective custody.
Posted by: Sid Finster | 06 February 2018 at 12:05 PM