“According to CNN, the California Republican [Rep. Devin Nunes] who chairs [the House Intelligence Committee now investigating Russian involvement in our presidential election, and to ties by Trump and/or his transition team members to Russian nationals and/or government agents]… traveled from the Capitol to the White House and told the president that communications of Trump transition officials, and perhaps even Trump’s communications, may have been “monitored” [intercepted by our intelligence agencies while in performance of their routine monitoring of Russian officials and agents or during the investigation of their election involvement]… Members of the House Intelligence Committee were furious with Nunes for going around them and straight to the president… Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, even suggested that Nunes might have leaked classified information”.
– newsmax.com, 3.23.17
Congress has a penchant for double-dealing; sometimes the laws they make for us they exempt themselves from (the list is exhaustive and worthy of someone’s blog efforts.) Here’s one example where one congressman’s behavior falls under the double-standard of “Do as I say, not as I do”:
Imagine, for a moment, that during an everyday police or district attorney’s investigation of possible criminal activity by a suspect or his associates, the chief investigator went off on the sly and met with the suspect and revealed to him some evidence that might contain further evidence that could be used against against him or his associates. Then the investigator called a news conference and announced what he had done. I would imagine that the investigator would be either disciplined, fired, and/or could face, himself, criminal penalties including fines or jail time.
Now, consider, Nunes, during a recent committee public hearing carried on C-Span, angerly citing chapter and verse the applicable federal statutes written by Congress, asking both the directors of the FBI and NSA if leaking confidential/classified government information (to anyone, including the news media) constitutes a violation of those laws and could be called treason. The answer, in their opinion, was “Yes.” Yet Nunes subsequently leaked confidential/classified information from (he won’t give his source) to both a subject (the president) of the FBI’s investigation as well as to the news media.
Many have called on him to recluse himself – voluntarily withdraw from participating in the investigation – because of his deed and his close ties to Trump (Nunes was also a member of Trump’s transitional team).
He has refused.
I’m sure Nunes thought he was doing the right thing at the time. That’s what Edward Snowden (etal – every whistle blower) believes, that he’s done the right thing. Except Snowden faces trial on multiple charges, including treason, for leaking classified information to the media.
And my guess is that the House will not punish Nunes or remove him from committee participation in the investigation and, thus, any finding by the committe of no involvement by Trump or his associates in the Russian affair will be tainted and considered a cover-up.
And our politicians wonder why the American people don’t trust them.
One can only wonder how Nunes can rationalize away the comparison to what he, himself, did with his “leak”, considering it was classified information that shouldn’t have been revealed to anyone outside the investigating committee, and whatever any other “leaker” does.
To mimic our “Tweeter-in-Chief”, Trump, “It’s sad, hugely sad.”