- Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence—Devin Nunes (R-Calif.)
- Minority Leader of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence—Adam Schiff (D-Calif.)
- Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence—Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
- Minority Leader of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence—Mark Warner (D-Va.)
- Majority Leader of the Senate—Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
- Minority Leader of the Senate—Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
- Speaker of the House—Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.)
- Minority Leader of the House—Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)
The letter in question came from Pelosi, Schumer, Schiff, and Warner.
- The executive and legislative branches are co-equal branches of government. One isn’t subordinate to the other.
- The DOJ and the FBI are part of the executive branch—under the authority of President Trump.
- The DOJ and the FBI are subordinate to the president.
- The president has issued a presidential order—not a request.
- The president has the constitutional power to declassify documents.
- Trump has plenary (absolute) authority in this matter.
- The Go8 doesn’t represent a “fourth branch” of government.
“Your agencies’ review, and any communication with the White House on the substance of the material, should not proceed further until you have briefed the Gang of Eight in person.”
“Should not proceed further”—the Go8 can’t circumvent a presidential order that has been issued to executive branch officials, who are subordinate to the president.
While congressional members are responsible for various oversight issues, they can’t issue an “order” to officials within the executive branch—especially one that seeks to circumvent a presidential order.
“President Trump has ordered his subordinates to declassify certain information relating to the Russia investigation. He has plenary declassification authority as the president of the United States. The FBI and the DOJ are subordinate to him. Congress does not get to order Executive Branch officials to defy a president—that’s actually a constitutional crisis.”
Who Is ‘You’?
Following the letter’s release, the Conservative Treehouse sent out a tweet, asking a very simple question:“Who is ‘YOU?’”
This is an excellent question and pertains to several odd references made throughout the letter that highlight previously unknown verbal assurances provided by one or more of the parties being addressed.
Keep in mind that the letter has been formally addressed to all three of the previously mentioned individuals—Coats, Rosenstein, and Wray. The first occurrence happens at the end of the first paragraph:
“Any decision by your offices to share this material with the President or his lawyers will violate longstanding Department of Justice policies, as well as assurances you have provided to us.”
What assurances were provided? To whom were they made? And who made them?
The answer to the final question would appear to be simple—all three parties being addressed: Coats, Rosenstein, and Wray.
However, that answer—perhaps applicable for this particular passage—appears to be incorrect for later sections.
At certain points, the focus of those being addressed subtly shifts—seemingly from one person to another:
“On June 5, 2018, we first wrote to Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and Director Wray to express deep concern that the President and his legal team sought to abuse the President’s power to interfere with the Special Counsel’s ongoing investigation and undermine the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation’s lawful and appropriate activities.
“On June 27, 2018, we wrote again to memorialize the verbal assurance you provided us that DOJ and FBI would not provide the White House or any of the President’s attorneys with access to sensitive information briefed to a small group of designated Members.”
“Through the so-called Gang of Eight process, we kept Congress apprised of these issues as we identified them. Again, in consultation with the White House, I personally briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to congressional leadership.
“Specifically, Senators Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, Dianne Feinstein, and Richard Burr, and to Representatives Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes, and Adam Schiff between 11th August and 6th September [2016], I provided the same briefing to each of the Gang of Eight members.”
A question needs to be asked: Why did Brennan brief each Go8 member separately—and over a span of three weeks? Perhaps it was nothing more than scheduling conflicts, but Brennan appears to go out of his way to note that he provided the same briefing to each member.
If this was so, why would there be a particular concern over this information being given to the White House or any of the president’s attorneys. It seems an odd point to be demanding privacy assurances nearly two years later.
As long as all the information transmitted by Brennan was the same for each Go8 member.
Meanwhile, those being addressed by the letter continue to shift:
“On July 12, 2018, we also wrote to Director Coats to express alarm that this information was being made more broadly available within the Congress, in direct contravention of your assurances. In this letter, we noted that during our meetings with all of you on these sensitive matters, we discussed at great length the importance of protecting sources and methods and ongoing investigations. As you recall, all of the meetings’ attendees agreed that the information discussed was among the most sensitive type of information and should be protected accordingly.”
Notice what was actually said, and who was addressed. First, comes an indirect reference to DNI Coats; “We also wrote to Director Coats.” Then, the shift back to a direct address: “in direct contravention of your assurances.”
This could be understood as a shift back to all three individuals.
But then comes the distinction: “during our meetings with all of you.” And then back to “as you recall.” Who is “you?”
My money is on Rosenstein. But Wray appears to be a near-equal candidate. Either is possible.
Friends Read Free