Once again, ‘some of the most closely guarded secrets in the world of U.S. law enforcement and intelligence gathering’ are on the front page. The Washington Post reports that the FBI obtained a FISA warrant in the ‘summer’ to monitor Carter Page, a ‘junior member’ of the Trump campaign. This dovetails with previous reports on FISA warrants denied in June and July and sheds new light on the on-going investigation. The article indicates that the warrant was obtained for the ‘counterintelligence’ probe investigating Russian interference. It informs us that ‘Page is the only American to have had his communications directly targeted with a FISA warrant in 2016 as part of the Russia probe,’ a major revelation. The FBI argued to the court that they suspected him of being an agent of a foreign government, but on what basis? The Post hints at some old connections to Russian officials from a decade ago, but the only concrete example is a 2013 investigation which revealed Page was targeted, but never turned, by Russian intelligence. In fact, the Post seems to admit he helped in prosecutors in their eventual case. Seedy connections with hostile foreign powers are no doubt disconcerting, but the article points to no wrongdoing on his part. In fact there was no evidence of criminality ever exposed and the Post confirms this when it states the application for the warrant ‘need not show evidence of a crime.’

This warrant was granted after multiple others were denied, and denials are an anomaly on the FISC. There was no evidence of criminality prior to the warrant, nor has any been revealed since. The warrant is for a counterintelligence probe which rarely ‘results in criminal charges’ and it targeted the opposing political party’s presidential campaign in the midst of an election. Despite all this, the Post strains to argue that ‘the FBI and Justice Department were particularly reluctant’ in pursuing these warrants. That exactly how it sounds... In another light, this is just the latest evidence of a major surveillance effort against the Trump campaign. This effort has been justified by loose connections to Russia from years ago, many of which were widely and publicly declared by the participants themselves. Taken in conjunction with the Susan Rice revelation, it is clear that the Obama administration was monitoring the Trump campaign via a number of channels with a fig leaf legal justification. Rather then expose any wrongdoing, these investigations have been used to smear private individuals through selective leaks of negative political stories. A recent AP story aims to take down Trump’s one time campaign manager, but in doing so, it catalogs a number of leaks from federal investigations launched by the Obama administration.

As usual, the nearly unprovable question remains, was it politically motivated? Here’s a counterfactual to shed some light. If Carter Page had not joined the Trump campaign, would the FBI have sought a FISA warrant to monitor his communications? The entire basis laid out for the warrant focuses on his past history, not some new connection developed with Russia. Outside of his participation in the political process, there is no evidence given of something that might warrant the FBI’s attention. It seems odd that felonious leakers would leave out the best evidence to defend their case, but perhaps there are concerns of revealing intelligence gathering methods. The article tries to imply as much by citing discredited political opposition research and claiming the warrant request cites other contacts not made public. However, barring some revelation, it looks exceedingly clear that he was targeted specifically for his politics. Why is this important? The Post explains, ‘any FISA application has to be approved at the highest levels of the Justice Department and the FBI.’ The aggressive FISA warrant requests were made during an election and overseen and approved by Obama’s Attorney General, Loretta Lynch. The Post tries desperately to justify the use of a FISA warrant, but the extremely weak evidence it puts forth only strengthens arguments that it appears to be an abuse of power. As the baseless Russian conspiracy theory begins to peter out, these leaks look more like a map of the Obama administration’s use of the national security apparatus for political means.