In wanting to take down the Trump campaign, they concocted a phony dossier with which they could shop around to various government agencies and have the contents leaked to the media to erode support. Once Trump won, then it was to be used to hamper his presidency, leaks would continue and eventually a special council formed to investigate the charges. That’s where we are, a highly salacious document crafted by an opposition party candidate then used as means to spy on a political opponent.
Speaking on the Hugh Hewitt radio program Monday morning, National Review’s Andrew C. McCarthy explained why the Grassley-Graham memo released last week detailing how the Obama administration FBI obtained a FISA court warrant to surveil former Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page, is so “shocking.”
“It shows that they did, the FBI and the Justice Department, did use an unverified, what’s known as the Steele dossier, this set of unverified hearsay claims about Trump that are, you know, completely uncorroborated, and they did not reveal to the FISA Court the fact that this screed that they put in front of the court was actually a Clinton campaign opposition research project,” McCarthy said.
The pressing issue with the Steele dossier, according to McCarthy, is that it contained information supplied from unknown Russian individuals. This information was not verified by the FBI. It was salacious, and the alleged claims made within about things Donald Trump said or did involving the Russians amount to little more than gossip. Yet the Grassley-Graham memo confirms the dossier was used to establish the probable cause factual basis to obtain a FISA court warrant to surveil Carter Page.
“Generally speaking, a court does not care what the credibility of the investigating agent who amasses the informant information is. What they care about is, is there a basis in the warrant application to believe the informants who bring you the factual information? And I simply do not see it in the dossier,” McCarthy said. “And for that reason, then you have to look at, well, why did they bring that and what is the motivation of the people who amassed this information? And if log on top of that the failure to bring to the Court’s attention that this was a campaign product is just, it’s inexplicable to me.”