House intel votes to release Nunes memo

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) calls the House Intelligence Committee's vote to release the Republican memo alleging FBI abuses a "tragic" day for the committee.

Posted: Jan 30, 2018 10:23 PM
Updated: Jan 30, 2018 10:25 PM

On Monday night, the House Intelligence Committee approved -- on a party line vote -- the public release of a memo alleging a litany of abuses by the FBI and the Justice Department. President Donald Trump now has five days to decide whether or not to allow the memo's release. While no final "OK" has been given, Trump had made little secret of his desire to release the memo.

In expectation of that decision, I reached out to Carrie Cordero, a CNN contributor who has extensive background on the subject having served as Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for National Security; Senior Associate General Counsel at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence; and Attorney Advisor at the U.S. Department of Justice.

Our conversation, conducted via email and lightly edited for flow, is below.

Cillizza: Walk me through the process going forward. The memo is now at the White House. When does Trump need to make a decision? And when might we see the memo publicly released?

Cordero: According to the House Rules, the President has five days to object to the release of the memo on national security grounds. As long as he does not object, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) can release the document. Given that timeline, and the statements from the White House that the President thinks the memo should be released publicly, it is possible that it will be released as early as Saturday, or, perhaps Monday, if business days are used.

There is still a possibility, however, that intelligence community and Department of Justice leadership, or perhaps Trump's national security lawyers who work in the White House, will persuade the President that releasing the memo in its current form will harm national security, and that it should be properly reviewed for declassification purposes. Alternatively, a new memo could be written in an unclassified format that is prepared specifically for public release.

Cillizza: How normal (or not) is a memo like this one — produced by the majority on the House Intelligence Committee that lots of intelligence officials haven't even seen?

Cordero: Highly unusual. Unprecedented, in fact. In my 18 years of professional and academic involvement with the Intelligence Community I have not observed HPSCI release a document using this procedure, and I am not aware of its having been used in the past (although I expect intelligence community historians to be hard at work this week).

The context is that information that is provided to the intelligence oversight committees is information provided by the executive branch of government. And, in circumstances when the intelligence committees write reports based on information provided by the community, they work with the relevant intelligence community agencies to review the reports and declassify information. That's why sometimes the committees produce reports that include both an unclassified report for public consumption, and a separate, classified version.

It is also not unusual for members of the committees to want to discuss publicly information they receive on the committee. This can be for a variety of reasons, including, for example, circumstances where those members are concerned about the use of legal authorities or oppose certain activities being undertaken by an agency or intelligence element as a policy matter.

Normally, what happens in those situations is the member of Congress will send the information he or she wants declassified to the specific agency, and/or to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) for review and approval. This is because the information belongs to the executive branch; not to the committees or the legislative branch. And it is officials in the Executive Branch -- the DNI and ultimately the President -- who have final classification or declassification decision-making authority.

When a member seeks that review, sometimes the intelligence community will approve the declassification, sometimes they will say "no," and sometimes they will declassify portions of the proposed statement or document. This is how members who respect the process and the national security equities at play, work.

Cillizza: What are the national security concerns — if any — to releasing this memo? And how should transparency be balanced with these concerns?

Cordero: I haven't seen the memo, so I can't speak to the precise national security risks that exist if it is released. At a general level, depending on the classification level of the document -- whether SECRET or TOP SECRET -- if released in an unauthorized fashion [it] could cause either "serious damage" or "exceptionally grave damage" to the national security of the United States.

If public reports are correct that the information in the memo is derived from applications that had been presented to and approved by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) then the information could include sensitive investigative information, and information about sources and methods; that is, how the intelligence community obtains its information. Release of such information without proper consideration of the harm that could result from the disclosure can jeopardize ongoing investigations, human sources, technical sources and important relationships with foreign intelligence services, as examples.

As a practical matter, it appears that the White House and the Chairman of the HPSCI have worked together in a way that bypassed the normal process of consultation and deference to the Intelligence Community. Proponents of #releasethememo might bill this as a transparency "win," but I think that scholars and knowledgeable observers of the intelligence community transparency efforts will understand that what is transpiring this week is the exact opposite, because it is "transparency" that will cloud the public's understanding of the actual intelligence information involved. It is hard to see this proposed release as meaningful transparency versus a harmful politicization of intelligence.

Cillizza: Let's say this memo is released. How will it land at the FBI and the broader intelligence community? And what — if any — are the long-term implications of doing something like this?

Cordero: The release of this memo under the process that is unfolding this week may cause serious damage to the relationship between the operational and policy professionals who work in the national security space in the executive branch, and the political leadership at the White House and in the House of Representatives.

There is an entire system of classification that exists to protect national security information. There are laws, policies and procedures. While many involved in the classification system understand that it is far from perfect, and needs to be improved and modernized, it is the system currently in place. There are professionals throughout government who work every day to ensure that national security information is appropriately protected. Those who mishandle classified information -- whether intentionally or deliberately -- are subject to a range of serious consequences, from administrative to criminal prosecution.

Cillizza: Finish this sentence: "Releasing the memo publicly would be a _______ thing for the country." Now, explain.

Cordero: "Releasing the memo publicly would be a sad thing for the country."

Because it means that there is a real reason for Americans to have less faith that the components of their government are functioning in the American people's best interests. The committee vote that already took place last night was a major crack in the credibility of an important American institution: HPSCI. HPSCI is one of two intelligence committees created to provide an important check on intelligence community overreach. The vote last night, and if this document is released by the White House this week, means that an important component of intelligence oversight is broken.

Terre Haute
Cloudy
37° wxIcon
Hi: 39° Lo: 33°
Feels Like: 28°
Robinson
Cloudy
36° wxIcon
Hi: 38° Lo: 31°
Feels Like: 27°
Indianapolis/Eagle Creek
Cloudy
40° wxIcon
Hi: 41° Lo: 34°
Feels Like: 33°
Paris
Cloudy
35° wxIcon
Hi: 39° Lo: 33°
Feels Like: 26°
Mattoon/Charleston
Cloudy
35° wxIcon
Hi: 37° Lo: 32°
Feels Like: 26°
Terre Haute
Cloudy
37° wxIcon
Hi: 39° Lo: 33°
Feels Like: 28°
Terre Haute
Cloudy
37° wxIcon
Hi: 38° Lo: 32°
Feels Like: 28°
Snow flurries this afternoon!
WTHI Planner
WTHI Temps
WTHI Radar

Latest Video

Image

New computer repair shop opens in Terre Haute

Image

Terre Haute City Council tables rehab rezoning request in Farringtons Grove

Image

All You Need to Know for Friday

Image

Waiting to die: Corey Johnson

Image

Friday: Snow showers, much colder and windy. High: 36

Image

Vigo County Swim meet

Image

Rose Women vs Franklin

Image

Rose Hulman Men vs Franklin

Image

Loogootee Vin Rivet

Image

Barr-Reeve and Loogootee preview

WTHI Events

 

Illinois Coronavirus Cases

(Widget updates once daily at 7 p.m. CT)

Cases: 1052682

Reported Deaths: 19724
CountyCasesDeaths
Cook4266588889
DuPage676511129
Will57104856
Lake52264874
Kane45073662
Winnebago25854404
Madison23664449
St. Clair21597410
McHenry21132238
Champaign1514891
Peoria14655231
Sangamon14227232
McLean12931152
Rock Island11688301
Tazewell11687238
Kankakee11315175
Kendall945676
LaSalle9212247
Macon8639178
DeKalb728189
Vermilion7265107
Adams7220108
Williamson6056113
Boone547077
Whiteside5172172
Clinton491083
Coles464478
Ogle453570
Knox4507139
Grundy426154
Effingham425867
Jackson406767
Henry395875
Marion3896111
Franklin376266
Macoupin373992
Randolph364464
Livingston352466
Monroe349567
Stephenson346774
Jefferson3329100
Morgan320388
Woodford309464
Logan302856
Lee299672
Bureau296682
Montgomery294338
Christian292371
Fayette286453
Perry259160
Iroquois254554
Fulton251248
Jersey215852
Lawrence213829
McDonough210550
Saline198552
Douglas198233
Union194632
Shelby194334
Crawford172734
Cass172231
Bond171523
Warren157243
Pike152045
Richland150343
Wayne148043
Jo Daviess146724
Hancock145532
Clark143426
Washington142325
Edgar142050
Carroll141532
Ford135849
Moultrie134528
White129929
Clay129838
Greene124242
Johnson120015
Mercer115728
Wabash115714
Piatt115215
Mason115040
De Witt111226
Cumberland105927
Jasper101515
Massac99930
Menard84810
Hamilton70515
Marshall64413
Schuyler60515
Brown59811
Pulaski5953
Stark49020
Edwards4568
Henderson43916
Calhoun4304
Gallatin3784
Alexander3767
Scott3661
Putnam3451
Hardin2988
Pope2372
Unassigned1050
Out of IL340

Indiana Coronavirus Cases

(Widget updates once daily at 8 p.m. ET)

Cases: 578494

Reported Deaths: 9202
CountyCasesDeaths
Marion798821282
Lake43601664
Allen31380537
Hamilton27675303
St. Joseph26409369
Elkhart23873336
Vanderburgh18192211
Tippecanoe16999116
Porter14183158
Johnson14120277
Hendricks13560236
Madison10312209
Vigo10297171
Clark9952128
Monroe8933105
Delaware8638129
LaPorte8589153
Kosciusko777375
Howard7712136
Warrick624990
Hancock621995
Bartholomew616094
Floyd5971105
Wayne5811155
Grant5716108
Dubois533570
Boone523167
Morgan501485
Marshall487084
Henry483262
Cass464959
Noble453956
Dearborn443343
Jackson410145
Shelby394376
Lawrence374172
Clinton359838
Gibson348556
DeKalb333063
Montgomery329150
Knox323339
Harrison317242
Miami305043
Steuben300740
Adams291635
Ripley287145
Wabash286345
Whitley286324
Huntington278757
Putnam278046
Jasper274933
White262038
Daviess255671
Jefferson242738
Fayette239248
Decatur237382
Greene229259
Posey225626
Wells225146
LaGrange222061
Scott212837
Clay212432
Randolph204940
Jennings188635
Sullivan185831
Spencer176917
Fountain175125
Washington170216
Starke169241
Jay160521
Fulton156829
Owen155536
Carroll150115
Orange146333
Rush145618
Vermillion141633
Perry141327
Franklin139333
Parke12718
Tipton126232
Pike111325
Blackford105122
Pulaski93636
Newton87820
Brown84428
Benton83010
Crawford7229
Martin68013
Warren6427
Switzerland6035
Union6033
Ohio4547
Unassigned0372