The Nunes memo is a document created by the staff of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) that alleges the FBI abused its surveillance authority, particularly when it sought a secret court order to monitor a former Trump campaign adviser. The FBI and the Justice Department had lobbied strenuously against its release. On Wednesday, the FBI had said it was “gravely concerned” that key facts were missing from the memo. President approves release of GOP memo criticizing FBI surveillance 
 
 THE WHITE HOUSE 
 
 WASHINGTON 
 
 February 2, 2018 
 
 The Honorable Devin Nunes 
 
 Chairman, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence 
 
 United States Capitol 
 
 Washington, DC 20515 
 
 Dear Mr. Chairman: 
 
 On January 29, 2018, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (hereinafter ?the 
 
 Committee?) voted to disclose publicly a memorandum containing classi?ed information 
 
 provided to the Committee in connection with its oversight activities (the ?Memorandum,? 
 
 which is attached to this letter). As provided by clause 11(g) of Rule of the House of 
 
 Representatives, the Committee has forwarded this Memorandum to the President based on its 
 
 determination that the release of the Memorandum would serve the public interest. 
 
 The Constitution vests the President with the authority to protect national security secrets from it 
 
 disclosure. As the Supreme Court has recognized, it is the President?s responsibility to classify, 
 
 declassify, and control access to information bearing on our intelligence sources and methods 
 
 and national defense. See, Dep of Navy v. Egan, 484 US. 518, 527 (1988). In order to 
 
 facilitate appropriate congressional oversight, the Executive Branch may entrust classi?ed 
 
 information to the appropriate committees of Congress, as it has done in connection with the 
 
 Committee?s oversight activities here. The Executive Branch does so on the assumption that the 
 
 Committee will responsibly protect such classi?ed information, consistent with the laws of the 
 
 United States. 
 
 The Committee has now determined that the release of the Memorandum would be appropriate. 
 
 The Executive Branch, across Administrations of both parties, has worked to accommodate 
 
 congressional requests to declassify speci?c materials in the public interest.1 However, public 
 
 release of classi?ed information by unilateral action of the Legislative Branch is extremely rare 
 
 and raises signi?cant separation of powers concerns. Accordingly, the Committee?s request to 
 
 release the Memorandum is interpreted as a request for declassi?cation pursuant to the 
 
 President?s authority. 
 
 The President understands that the protection of our national security represents his highest 
 
 obligation. Accordingly, he has directed lawyers and national security staff to assess the 
 
 1 See, e. S. Rept. 114?8 at 12 (Administration of Barack Obama) (?On April 3, 2014 . . . the Committee agreed to 
 
 send the revised Findings and Conclusions, and the updated Executive Summary of the Committee Study, to the 
 
 President for declassi?cation and public release?); H. Rept. 107-792 (Administration of George W. Bush) (similar); 
 
 E.O. 12812 (Administration of George H.W. Bush) (noting Senate resolution requesting that President provide for 
 
 declassi?cation of certain information Via Executive Order). 
 
 declassi?cation request, consistent with established standards governing the handling of 
 
 classi?ed information, including those under Section 3.1(d) of Executive Order 13526. Those 
 
 standards permit declassi?cation when the public interest in disclosure outweighs any need to 
 
 protect the information. The White House review process also included input from the Of?ce of 
 
 the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Justice. Consistent with this review 
 
 and these standards, the President has determined that declassification of the Memorandum is 
 
 appropriate. 
 
 Based on this assessment and in light of the signi?cant public interest in the memorandum, the 
 
 President has authorized the declassi?cation of the Memorandum. To be clear, the 
 
 Memorandum re?ects the judgments of its congressional authors. The President understands 
 
 that oversight concerning matters related to the Memorandum may be continuing. Though the 
 
 circumstances leading to the declassi?cation through this process are extraordinary, the 
 
 Executive Branch stands ready to work with Congress to accommodate oversight requests 
 
 consistent with applicable standards and processes, including the need to protect intelligence 
 
 sources and methods. 
 
 Sincerely, 
 
 Donald F. McGahn II 
 
 Counsel to the President 
 
 cc: The Honorable Paul Ryan 
 
 Speaker of the House of Representatives 
 
 The Honorable Adam Schiff 
 
 Ranking Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence 
 
 ssnua 
 
 DeclasSi?ed by order of the President 
 
 February 2, 2018 
 
 January 18, 2018 
 
 To: HPSCI Majority Members 
 
 From: HPSCI Majority Staff 
 
 Subject: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses at the Department of Justice and the 
 
 Federal Bureau of Investigation 
 
 Purpose 
 
 This memorandum provides Members an update on significant facts relating to the 
 
 Committee?s ongoing investigation into the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of 
 
 Investigation (FBI) and their use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (F ISA) during the 
 
 2016 presidential election cycle. Our ?ndings, which are detailed below, 1) raise concerns with 
 
 the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions with the Foreign Intelligence 
 
 Surveillance Court (FISC), and 2) represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established 
 
 to protect the American people from abuses related to the ISA process. 
 
 Investigation Update 
 
 - On October 21, 2016, DOJ and FBI sought and received a ISA probable cause order 
 
 (up; under Title VII) authorizing electronic surveillance on Carter Page from the FISC. Page is a 
 
 US citizen who served as a volunteer advisor to the Trump presidential campaign. Consistent . 
 
 with requirements under FISA, the application had to be ?rst certi?ed by the Director or Deputy 
 
 Director of the FBI. It then required the approval of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney 
 
 General (DAG), or the Senate?con?rmed Assistant Attorney General for the National Security 
 
 Division. 
 
 The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA 
 
 renewals from the FISC. As required by statute (50 U.S.C. a FISA order on an 
 
 American citizen must be renewed by the ISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a 
 
 separate finding of probable cause. Then-Director James Comey signed three FISA applications 
 
 . in question on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one. 
 
 Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more 
 
 FISA applications on behalf of 
 
 Due to the sensitive nature of foreign intelligence activity, FISA submissions (including 
 
 renewals) before the ISC are classified. As such, the public?s con?dence in the integrity of the 
 
 FISA process depends on the court?s ability to hold the government to the highest standard?? 
 
 particularly as it relates to surveillance of American citizens. However, the rigor in 
 
 protecting the rights of Americans, which is reinforced by 90?day renewals of surveillance 
 
 orders, is necessarily dependent on the government?s production to the court of all material and 
 
 relevant facts. This should include information potentially favorable to the target of the FISA 
 
 PROPERTY OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
 
 TGIF-SEW 
 
 application that is known by the government. In the case of Carter Page, the government had at 
 
 least four independent opportunities before the FISC to accurately provide an accounting of the 
 
 relevant facts. However, our ?ndings indicate that, as described below, material and relevant 
 
 information was omitted. 
 
 1) 
 
 2) 
 
 The ?dossier?- compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the 
 
 Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an 
 
 essential part of the Carter Page FISA application. Steele was a longtime FBI source who 
 
 was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign, via the law ?rm Perkins Coie 
 
 and research ?rm Fusion GPS, to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump?s ties 
 
 to Russia. 
 
 a) Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or 
 
 reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or. any party/campaign in funding 
 
 Steele?s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then 
 
 known to senior and FBI of?cials. 
 
 b) The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named US. person, but 
 
 does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a US. law 
 
 ?rm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOI at the, 
 
 time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier). The application does 
 
 not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of?and paid by?wthe DNC and 
 
 Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the 
 
 same information. 
 
 The Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016, Yahoo 
 
 News article by- Michael Isikoff, which focuses on Page?s July 2016 trip to Moscow. 
 
 - This article does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information 
 
 leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News. The Page FISA application incorrectly assesses 
 
 that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News. Steele has admitted in 
 
 British court ?lings that he met with Yahoo Newly?and several other. outlets?in 
 
 September 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS. Perkins Coie was aware of Steele?s 
 
 initial media contacts because they hosted at least one meeting in Washington DC. in 
 
 2016 with Steele and Fusion GPS where this matter was discussed." 
 
 a) Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI de?nes 
 
 as the most serious of violations?an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his 
 
 relationship with the FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jones article by David 
 
 Corn Steele should have been terminated for his previous undisclosed contacts with 
 
 Yahoo and other outlets' 1n September?before the Page application was submitted to 
 
 PROPERTY OF THE US. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
 
 3) 
 
 4) 
 
 the FISC in October-but Steele improperly concealed from and lied to the FBI about 
 
 those contacts. 
 
 b) Steele?s numerous encounters with the media violated the cardinal rule of source 
 
 handling?maintaining con?dentiality?and demonstrated that Steele had become a 
 
 less than reliable source for the FBI. 
 
 Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he maintained contact with DOJ via 
 
 then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce 0hr, a senior DOJ of?cial who worked 
 
 closely with Deputy Attorneys General Yates and later Rosenstein. Shortly after the 
 
 election, the FBI began interviewing 0hr, documenting his communications with Steele. 
 
 For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to 0hr his feelings against then- 
 
 candidate Trump when Steele said he ?was desperate that Donald Trump not get 
 
 elected and was passionate about him not, being president.? This clear evidence of . 
 
 Steele? bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in of?cial FBI ?les?but 
 
 not re?ected in any of the Page FISA applications. 
 
 a) During this same time period, Ohr?s wife was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in 
 
 the cultivation of opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all 
 
 of his wife?s opposition research, paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign via 
 
 Fusion GPS. The Ohrs? relationship with Steele and Fusion GPS was inexplicably 
 
 concealed from the FISC. . 
 
 According to the head of the counterintelligence division, Assistant Director Bill 
 
 Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its ?infancy? at the time of the initial 
 
 Page FISA application. After Steele was terminated, a source validation report conducted 
 
 by an independent unit within FBI assessed Steele?s reporting as only minimally 
 
 corroborated. Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump 
 
 on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was??according to his June 2017 
 
 and unveri?ed.? While the FISA application relied on Steele?s 
 
 past record of credible reporting on other unrelated matters, it ignored or concealed his 
 
 anti?Trump ?nancial and ideological motivations. Furthermore, Deputy Director 
 
 McCabe testi?ed before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant 
 
 would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information. 
 
 r; .r 
 
 i. a: 
 
 3:4 ,af- .9.- 
 
 PROPERTY OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
 
 5) The Page FISA application also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign 
 
 advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy 
 
 between Page and Papadopoulos. The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening 
 
 of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok. 
 
 Strzok was reassigned by the Special Counsel?s Office to FBI Human Resources for 
 
 improper text messages with his mistress, FBI Attorney Lisa Page (no known relation to 
 
 Carter Page), where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of 
 
 Clinton, Whom Strzok had also investigated. The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also re?ect 
 
 extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and 
 
 include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an ?insurance? policy against 
 
 President Trump?s election. 
 
 I 
 
 PROPERTY OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ||||| Tweet with a location 
 
 You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
– The White House on Friday declassified a partisan and bitterly disputed memo on the Russia investigation, and a House committee immediately made it public. Media outlets were just beginning to assess it. You can read the document here, via the Washington Post. The White House move came over the fierce objections of the FBI and Justice Department, which have said the document prepared by Republicans on the House intelligence committee is inaccurate and missing critical context, per the AP. The memo alleges that the FBI abused US government surveillance powers in its investigation into Russian election interference. Trump, who has called the investigation a "witch hunt," has supported the release of the memo in the apparent hopes that it could help undermine the probe being led by special counsel Robert Mueller. The president, dogged by the unrelenting investigation into his campaign's ties to Russia, lashed out anew Friday at the FBI and Justice Department as politically biased against Republicans. "The top Leadership and Investigators of the FBI and the Justice Department have politicized the sacred investigative process in favor of Democrats and against Republicans - something which would have been unthinkable just a short time ago. Rank & File are great people!" Trump tweeted.