it goes to the origins of the russia collusion investigation and it s the merger between what was going on behind the scenes in the intelligence community and winded that information passover to the fbi? there has always been a divide and a well-recognized one between the intelligence community s mission which is to keep us safe and the law enforcement mission through the fbi to prosecute those who have engaged in criminal misconduct. the danger is when the two overlap and the fbi s mission has changed a bit post-9/11 to include an intelligence function as well. the problem is that s subject to potential mischief, and the mischief i think senator graham is referring to relates to what did the intelligence community actually know about the steele dossier, its origins, the potential political bias behind it, and also what were they
domain. once the president allowed some of that information to leak, it mean that is this back end, in the democratic memo will do less damage, there may be compelling public reasoning for letting the public know what is going on here. it is an unfortunate day we live in, when the president of the united states doesn t tamp down on the intelligence function of the justice department. as we look at it being politicized, the rebuttable, and the nunez memo, four pages here. when we look at it, bobby, you remember when the original memo was alleging, the fbi am abused fiza, and intelligence in the investigation. what is your response to the democratic response? more data to rebut what was claimed? it is impossible to tell.
some questions. why would the u.n. ambassador who was not traditionally having an intelligence function be seeking to so-called unmask over 260 people? what was the purpose? what was the goal? and why was this done? these are all questions we have to get answers to, bill. bill: what was she looking for, right? molly, do you have an answer for that, by the way? what could have been so highly important to put in this number of requests? i think it s important to remember that u.s. citizens aren t supposed to be spied on by intelligence agencies. they can be caught up in the surveillance we re legally allowed to do of foreign entities. under rare circumstances and extreme situations you can request that the identity of the american be unmasked to help you with your intelligence analysis. what is so interesting about samantha power doing it is the rate. the rate it s happening is mind-boggling. one a day for each workday.
i served in it, they are not going to give it to you unless they feel you have a reason. dana: dana: it s hard to understand why someone would need to unmask and get information about the trump campaign when you are at the nations. that is the part to me that i don t think is understandable. speak out right. this goes back to, let s raise the questions and have a thorough investigation. why these individuals were unmasking. i made it clear, one of the evidence is shown, the fact that you have one government official, with no intelligence function basically asking for hundreds of unmasking requests. it is something that we need to look into. and i think that when you are looking at the facts, i think that it is one of those other questions of dealing with the leaks and how these leaks got out. dana: all right, thanks for being here tonight. we will be right back.
you know, as a tight team. he ran a very tight ship. it was not loosely run. he held people accountable. he put in a lot of the metrics systems that are there, he reform the the entire intelligence function. if you remember after 9/11, they wanted to take counterterrorism and intel basically away from the fbi and it s because of mueller are s success that that actually stayed. and he started just a couple days before 9/11.are s success actually stayed. and he started just a couple days before 9/11. tara, the one criticism that some have are is that ultimately he can can still be fired by the president. well, i think that is perhaps a legitimate criticism as can sort of many officials in government. but this is a good choice for three main reasons. what this individual needs is bipartisansh bipartisanship. he has people on both sides of the aisle praising him without even orchestrating talking points. you know you made a good decision when both parties are supporting it.