Free Minds & Free Markets

Another Pair of Dueling Reports Closes Out the House Intelligence Committee's Russia-Trump Investigation

Trump-supporting lawmakers find no collusion. Trump-hating lawmakers disagree.

President Donald TrumpCheriss May/Sipa USA/NewscomToday the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee released its report on Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

As fully expected and essentially predetermined, the 253-page report concludes that there was no "collusion" between members of President Donald Trump's election campaign and the Russian government. But the report does "find poor judgment and ill-considered actions" by both campaigns—Trump's for meeting with Russians and praising WikiLeaks, Clinton's for obscuring their role in the creation of the Steele dossier. The report seems to treat it as a fact that people connected to the Russian government were responsible for hacking into the Democratic National Committee and collecting its internal emails for distribution.

The committee is headed by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), who was part of Trump's transition team and is far from a neutral observer. The committee's Democratic minority put out a 98-page response accusing the Republican majority of rushing to end the investigation, refusing to call important witnesses, and attempting to deflect attention from Trump.

So a good chunk of the dueling reports feel like political business as usual. They can now be used as validation for those who really, really need to feel validated, like President Trump, who has already tweeted about it:

Neither report is likely to change anything about the Justice Department investigation headed by Robert Mueller, though the Republican one will certainly be invoked rather transparently by those who want the probe shut down.

The majority report has a lengthy section of recommendations. Some of them are rather vague statements of the "we should have better cybersecurity and communication about breaches" variety. But one suggestion, seemingly out of nowhere, calls for repealing the federal Logan Act. The Logan Act is a terrible federal law that punishes free speech by making it a crime for American citizens to engage in communications with foreign governments intended to intervene in disputes with the U.S. government. Nobody has ever been convicted of violating the act, and its only real history has consisted of efforts to punish political speech.

There have been rumblings that the law could be invoked against members of Trump's team for talking to Russian officials about reactions to sanctions prior to Trump's election. So this recommendation is no doubt politically motivated to protect Trump. Nonetheless, the Logan Act is genuinely awful and should indeed be eliminated.

As if to show the partisan nature of these recommendations, the Republican report also calls for heavier criminal penalties for leakers, expansion of the surveillance authorities of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (powers used to snoop on Americans too), and expanded use of polygraph tests for political appointees—bad ideas all. The report insists that leaks linked to the Trump-Russia story have "damaged national security and potentially endangered lives," but the section of the report explaining this claim is completely redacted.

If you'd like to wade through the two reports, the majority Republican version is here and the minority Democratic response is here.

Photo Credit: Cheriss May/Sipa USA/Newscom

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Don't forget the next majority report, work on which seems likely to begin during early January.

  • John||

    I doubt the Republicans will change their minds. But you can always dream there Rev.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Republicans and conservatives dream (mostly about good old days that never exited).

    Democrats, liberals, and libertarians achieve. At least, that's how it has gone in America for at least a half-century.

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    Damn right.


  • John||

    They are going to make Hillary President like she deserves to be!!!

  • Don't look at me.||


  • Curt||

    This just in!!!!!!! Republicans choose to support Team Red and democrats choose to support Team Blue. We'll have the full story at 11.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    [gets out Jump To Conclusions mat]

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Don't you remember what happened the last time you took that thing out when Crusty was around?

  • Fuck you, Shikha (Nunya)||

    Where is your flair?

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    I, for one, am shocked! SHOCKED, I tell you!

    The results would have been exactly the opposite had Obama been in office with the exact same evidence.

  • gormadoc||

    I find it amusing and suspicious that they call for a repeal of the Logan Act, though it would certainly be a good thing.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    I suppose they want to do it before Mueller files charges.

  • Rich||

    expanded use of polygraph tests for political appointees

    Wouldn't this essentially *guarantee* these jobs will be given to actual psychopaths?

  • gormadoc||

    The idea is ridiculously stupid. I guess they think of polygraphs as magical instruments that are far more accurate than they really are.

  • MatthewSlyfield||

    "I guess they think of polygraphs as magical instruments that are far more accurate than they really are."

    Many people think of polygraphs that way. LEO's know better, but use them anyway for the intimidation value, because they also understand how few people actually understand just how useless polygraph machines are.

  • Don't look at me.||

    Typical science deniers. /s

  • Jerryskids||

    The report insists that leaks linked to the Trump-Russia story have "damaged national security and potentially endangered lives," but the section of the report explaining this claim is completely redacted.

    And nobody's leaked the unredacted version yet?

  • juris imprudent||

    Joke is on you, that isn't a redaction it's a rorschach test.

  • Fuck you, Shikha (Nunya)||

    I just always see tits.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    Only things that hurt Trump can be leaked; If you try to leak stuff favorable to Trump, (Or even Republicans in general!) the media don't report the leak.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    So, does the minority report give any actual evidence of the sort the majority report denies has been found?


Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online