As the Stomach Turns

The spitting contest in Washington continues. The editors of the Wall Street Journal comment on the House Intelligence Committee’s apparent use of NSLs to secure phone call metadata of Rudy Giuliani, Devin Nunes, and others and then disclosing them in their report, an express violation of the law:

The impeachment press is playing this as if the calls are a new part of the scandal, but the real outrage here is Mr. Schiff’s snooping on political opponents. The Democrat’s motive appears to be an attempt to portray Mr. Nunes, a presidential defender and Mr. Schiff’s leading antagonist in Congress, as part of a conspiracy to commit impeachable offenses.

“It is, I think, deeply concerning, that at a time when the President of the United States was using the power of his office to dig up dirt on a political rival, that there may be evidence that there were members of Congress complicit in that activity,” Mr. Schiff told the press on Tuesday. Complicit in what? Doing his job of Congressional oversight? Talking to Mr. Trump’s lawyer to get a complete view of the Ukrainian tale? Apparently Mr. Schiff now wants to impeach Members of Congress too.

This is unprecedented and looks like an abuse of government surveillance authority for partisan gain. Democrats were caught using the Steele dossier to coax the FBI into snooping on the 2016 Trump campaign. Now we have elected members of Congress using secret subpoenas to obtain, and then release to the public, the call records of political opponents.

That’s a felony and, ironically, an impeachable offense for which no one will ever be scolded let alone impeached. Complaining that your political opponents are acting in a dangerous and lawless manner becomes less credible when you’re doing it yourself.

13 comments… add one
  • bob sykes Link

    The idea that we are a constitution representative democracy under the rule of law so utterly and obviously absurd that people who claim so are liars.

  • steve Link

    The WSJ is totally in the tank for Republicans so I will wait for some other opinions about whether or not it was illegal. (Count me dubious.) However, it is the kind of information we should have if we are going to investigate the issue. When Clinton was investigated for land fraud in Arkansas it was important to interview a teenager (at the time) from California, so I think the precedent has been set for casting the net as wide as possible.

    Steve

  • Guarneri Link

    “…. I will wait for some other opinions about whether or not it was illegal.”

    Even if not illegal, it should be first challengeable in a court, and not simply used by Stasi.

  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    The ends justify the means. Schiff is hunting Moby Dick.

  • Andy Link

    Oh the irony of the Patriot Act coming back to bite Congress in the ass.

    As far as I can tell, there is nothing illegal about this. These subpoenas are explicitly allowed thanks to the Patriot Act and the House Intelligence Committee has the authorization to request them.

    But, the obvious partisan motivation for who was and wasn’t subpoenaed, and the likelihood these records were leaked to CNN (who Nunes is suing) is going to hurt the Democrats, especially Schiff.

    Democrats can’t claim to respect norms and legitimate processes and then turn around and do something like this, even if it is technically legal.

  • The metadata appears to have been acquired under an NSL and if the NSL was issued with a non-disclosure statement disclosing that information would be illegal. At least that’s the way the law reads to me. But this

    Democrats can’t claim to respect norms and legitimate processes and then turn around and do something like this, even if it is technically legal.

    is precisely my point.

  • Andy Link

    Looking over the HPSCI report, it does not appear that Nunes was specifically targeted in the NSL – so the committee (probably) didn’t subpoena Nunes’ call records.

  • steve Link

    “Democrats can’t claim to respect norms and legitimate processes and then turn around and do something like this, even if it is technically legal.”

    Agree. If they keep this up for a few months they will have been as bad at leaking as was Ken Starr. I am not sure that is a comparison you want to have.

    Steve

  • jan Link

    The NSL is an Administrative Subpoena that doesn’t need court approval based on some immediate national security concern. What was the national security concern Schiff used to legitimize such a subpoena?

    As a side note, demonstrating the slime surrounding this impeachment exercise, is the crazy back wash being experienced by the only sane constitutional expert @ yesterday’s judicial hearing – Jonathan Turley. Because of the straight forward appraisal given by Turley, repudiating the “paucity of evidence” and standards being applied by the one-sided hearings, he is now being given death threats at his home with calls to fire him from his job.

    It seems that any time the resistance is given negative feedback, thwarting the narrative they want to force on the public, they want to hurt people – beat them up, threaten to kill them, or force them out of a livelihood.

  • TarsTarkas Link

    Just remember, these are the people who will be running this country if they remove Trump. Think about that. If they are willing to go this far to remove Orange Man Bad (and I suspect much worse will come), what do you think they will be willing to do to you and me if we step out of line or are just in the way or if they need an extra contribution unless you really really want to be interviewed by the FBI so they can fabricate a 302 to pin a felony on you?

  • steve Link

    “what do you think they will be willing to do to you and me”

    Exactly the same thing the other side would have been willing to do to me if Clinton had been removed from office. Think about that. Willing to remove someone for lying about sex. Hardly a national security issue. Those people would have been willing to fabricate anything.

    “What was the national security concern Schiff used to legitimize such a subpoena?”

    Guess you had not heard. POTUS was trying to trade arms for dirt on a political opponent. (What is it about Republican presidents and arms deals? Maybe Trump should have gotten Oliver to help with this deal instead of Rudy.)

    Steve

  • Grey Shambler Link

    “POTUS was trying to trade arms for dirt on a political opponent”
    Even if true, a political opponent who bragged about withholding aid to that country as VP for personal gain.
    https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-Lkry-newtab&hsimp=yhs-newtab&hspart=Lkry&p=Biben+brags+about+firing+procecutor#id=3&vid=349cdd75a497ebb0dff2e2139cd84886&action=click

  • steve Link

    Lets impeach Biden too. That clearly was a big help in his 2016 election effort. Of course the entire EU also wanted that guy fired also. Dont quite remember the Eu asking that we hold off sending arms to Ukraine. Maybe you have a link for that too?

    Steve

Leave a Comment