featuring best-selling fiction writers. join us live on sunday at noon eastern. his other novels include "so no one." our special series, in-depth fiction addition, live at noon to 3 p.m.. >> we are now joined by michael allen. he is a former majority staff director for the house permanent committee on intelligence. director, he is zero to discuss the release of the intelligence committee memo and the potential impact on the mueller investigation.

tell us a little bit about your background. you worked on the intel committee for a long time. tell us about your background in congress and the white house. >> thank you so much for having me. i am a lawyer. when i graduated law school at the university of alabama, i moved up to her and began working for the bush-cheney transition. that led to working for eight years for president bush. a thinkat i went to tank, wrote a book, and became majority staff director of the house are minute select committee on intelligence. that is the entity charged with overseeing the 17 intelligence agencies across the government, doing its budget, and reviewing all of its operation and collection activities around the world. reaction to the release of the memo yesterday.

do you think it should have been released? useful partt is a of the story. useful part of the story. their central charge is that an essential part of their fisa application wasn't based on a politically motivated information collected from russia. from a the four corners of the document, if you read it, i think myself, if that is true, it bothers me. here is the big butts. -- the big but. that the fbi and department of justice used information from a variety of sources to make the probable cause determination that they should, as we would say, go up on carter page. to surveillance him

electronically. i think there is more to the story. if the memo is true, it bothers me. i think they're being -- there may be information that we are not seeing. >> you can find the text of the memo on our website. you can find the information surrounding our discussion today. talk a little bit about the process. release of a memo that comes from inside the committee. they are voting to release the republican document, not yet. talk about the reason that that passage is in place. i should say, in the past, has done a terrific job in investigating 9/11 or investigating what went wrong in the intelligence analysis about , wmd.

when they put out a report, they send it to the executive branch for declassification purposes. that part of it is normal. ist is extreme and we hear that this is a memorandum written by just the republicans. they rode it out on a partyline vote. it seems to have been orchestrated with the white house. they might reject one or two things but we are otherwise going to clear it for release. that has not happened before. especially when it is not paired with the democratic views. as a political matter, it has opened the republican majority to charges that they are being unduly political. they just put out a one-sided memo. the democratic matter was going to be released in coming weeks. all signs point to that. we're happy to get into that.

host: we are joined again by michael allen. he is a former majority staff director on the house intelligence committee. he is now managing director at bt global stat -- strategies. discussioninuing our about the release of that memo and the mueller investigation. ryan is calling from indiana on our democratic line. >> good morning. thank you for having me. thank you for your service. with the rico act, the fbi can theyally see and watch -- let out what snowden did. that, to letdo

public, and the ticket, it is so misleading. upis throwing a shiny ball in the air so that everybody looks at that. collusion,see the all of the things that trump has been doing. on tuesday, his state of the union address did not mention russia once. now it is all about the fbi. i think he is doing anything to take the eye off of the real problem. he has not released his tax returns. we are talking about this , which is basically a done. -- dud. first, i am glad that mean

yes with forward and put out into the debates the question of , was the fbi and the department of justice, where they unduly relying on a document that was prepared as an opposition research document as a part of the presidential campaign? we have to see what else is out there to determine whether there was a good reason for putting carter page under surveillance. in the spirit of transparency, carter page was already on the fbi's radar screen. in 2015, the fbi announced indictments of two russian spies in new york city and they were listening to the conversations between these two russians. they mentioned that they had met carter page. name poppedpage's up again as an advisor for the trump presidential campaign,

they get some information about him perhaps continuing to meet with russia, i think that helped animate their feeling of, wow, is there collusion going on? , althoughhese people iosely affiliated with trump, do not believe that carter page .as truly an advisor we have to consider that background when we asked ourselves the question, was the judgment diluted by politics? host: i want to get your reaction to a reaction to the release of the memo from james comey. he treated yesterday, that is it? it destroyed trust within the intelligence community.

i have to tell you, that sentiment was sent to me by many intelligence department folks. it has been damaged by this. what do you think? intelligence committee is not your average congressional committee. at least not in the way it was created. remember, there were legitimate fbi of uses in the 70's and 60's. that led to a huge investigation in the late 1970's that is commonly referred to as the church commission. in one of the recommendations coming out of this voluminous , the doj experienced legitimate abuses. we need permanent oversight of '17 intelligence communities

they said, let us have a select committee, a special handttee of people, selected for their expertise by the speaker and by the house -- the senate majority leader. it is supposed to be special. the committee spaces are in the basement of the capital to get we have a hearing -- capital. it is soundproof. when you come in there, you are with, thisenveloped is a special place and this is supposed to be above politics. that politics has not intruded on the house intelligence committee. it has.

here it is again. betheory, it is supposed to as apolitical as possible. >host: greg is calling in. >> good morning. i am a 39 year watcher of c-span. i appreciate all of the objectivity that each one of the hosts, like yourself, brings to the program. about thedulous number of calls that comes in from the republican supporters of mr. trump. they see no correlation between

david nuñez and him being a former campaign worker for mr. trump. they see no partiality that he may have with distorting information. the way that they accuse supporters of hillary clinton. nobody ever mentions that he is a former campaign worker. now he sits in a position of where he can redirect and question the integrity of the people at the fbi. i question the motives of the fbi with dr. king and other issues. no one has made that particular problem with david nuñez. host: now you have. i want to give michael a chance to respond to that. think that your callers know this because they watch the show a lot. , it isital, the congress

an inherently political institution. we try, in different forms and different committees, to remove or otherwise reduce the politics. at the end of the day, there are two parties, and weber has the majority is going to be the chairman of a committee. person is going to have a political affiliation. that member, in this case david nuñez, is a legitimate voice on national security issues. he speaks to this. he is also a republican. he speaks his mind on issues to the public. committees ishe that you are supposed to rise above partisanship when it comes to matters of national security. there is a debate going on now. not?his unduly partisan or time will tell. we have a lot of interesting things coming out. we will see the democratic memo, i predict.

doje is the dlg -- inspector general report that is going to come out. there are a lot of shoes left to drop. lot more stuff to examine before we come to some final decision on whether the overstepped its bounds. host: i want to talk about david nuñez. he recused himself from the russian investigation for a. of time. time.eriod of what you think about his ability to lead this investigation? >> i'm worried about the committee in general. i do not think the democrats on they are not --

immune from partisanship or political motivations. they are politically active. the democratic party is very upset about tom -- donald trump. there is a sentiment there of everything that trump does being rejected. i get it. there are politics on both sides. they're supposed to rise above politics. the senate intelligence committee has done a commendable theof trying to stick to investigatory facts and not be as active on the airwaves as the house intelligence committee. i guess i would say that. host: michael is calling from st. petersburg, florida. yes. i am a democrat. theve been watching

investigation with a mueller. i know about the memo. the politics has got to stop. we are all americans first. we have to let this investigation follow through. keep the republicans, democrats, out of it. let him do his job. tothere are people that need be brought in front of the courts, let them testify under oath. let it finish. do not disturb it. keep up politics away from him. if they stop this investigation, there will be a price to be paid by the american voters of this country. host: what is your reaction? >> i am with you. the russians interfered in our electoral process. it needs to be investigated. in these be looked at. we need to take it fiercely. it should not be used as a partisan bludgeon against president trump anymore

than president trump should try to discreditssue one of the great institutions in bureauntry, the federal of investigation. right now, here in the city, they are investigating potential, looking at spies from russia or china. their mission is absolutely vital to our democracy. the institution of the congress to oversee these institutions that have such an incredible risk is such important as well. there is a time for politics. in this area, i would agree with the caller. we need to try to rise above it. host: paula is calling in from pennsylvania on our republican line. >> good morning. say, as far as the politics is concerned, i agree.

the politics should stay out of it. on the other hand. nuñezid mean yes -- exposing corruption, it should be exposed. it should be exposed on both sides, not just one side. to the mediaion trying to make this something that it is not. i do not think that we should look at it in a political light. we should look at it with a bias in parts of our government. bias should not be directing people. jobsshould be doing their with integrity. if that is not happening, we need to know about it. we need to fix it. host: i want to give michael a

chance to respond to that. >> i agree. about say a little bit this bias. it is not that the fbi is perfect. i am sure there are people who lean left or right. is very difficult to pull off a conspiracy. we would have a politically ourvated investigation -- system is very carefully overseen. there are internal checks and balances in the department of justice. we just talked about the instructor -- inspector general. the congress does oversee these institutions. i worry as an american that our institutions, like the national account ofency, on snowden at releasing secrets, i worry about weeks.

i think it has a corrosive effect on our ability, in a world that is quite tumultuous, we need these institutions to be able to perform and not be distracted and a political football. host: i want to talk about the row within the fbi. there is an op ed written by josh campbell, a former fbi official. after more than a decade of including rescuing idnapping victims overseas, reluctantly am turning in my baggage. -- batch. the growing people believe that the relentless attacks on the bureau undermine america's law enforcement agency and the nation's security. my resignation is painful. the alternative of remaining quiet is impossible. fbiassumption amongst

employees is that the attacks are meant to soften the blow of the investigation of mr. mueller. these types of attacks by powerful people could destroy the institution. what is your reaction? >> he makes a lot of serious, heartfelt points. i am glad he explained it. your viewers know this because they are quite current on all of the news. it is good to take a step back for a moment. president trump is new to washington. spent his career studying the in's and out's of the relationships between the justice department and the fbi and the white house. he was elected because he was authorized.on -- on he thinks there is a which had

-- which hunt. he is lashing out at institutions that he think it might be complicit or might have been misused. i do not think they have been. i do not think they are inherently partisan. we need to step up and say that. that is where he is coming from. again, to attack all of these vital institutions, be it edward snowden or democrats in congress essential agencies, it has a corrosive effect. we do need to have these issues out in the public sphere. we ought not make them overtly political. political at all. host: i would ask you a little bit of about -- a little bit about the release of the memo.

we talked a little bit about cap tells background. he has found himself in the middle of a controversy, according to congressional sources. he is the primary author of the memo released friday. how common is this? what is the process by which memos are together? ? is it mostly staff members who put it together? is the congressman that into the intelligence? >> it varies from member to member. the chairman of the committee is there he involved.

his or her show. staff play a huge role in the institution of the memos. majority of the meetings and work with the csi and fbi and nsa. the members to hearings. oft is very important part the oversight function. members cannot spend all their time in one particular area. they have so many different duties. they've a duty to their constituents, a need to campaign, raising money. the chairmanz and from michigan were incredibly involved. both of them are quite involved with the committee. it is not out of the ordinary for the staff to do the hard-core writing. the members call the tune. host: good morning. >> interesting program this morning.

the thing that keeps coming to , a house divided cannot stand. your guest is talking about snowden. power,s an adversary of if somebody like putin, i wanted to check my opponent, the united states, how would i go about doing that? trump use somebody like a to weasel his way into the system? what i get the type of destabilization that we are disabling -- experiencing today? say the investment of billions of dollars that our military would put into effect get to the united

states, i am looking at how to overthrow this place. is that listening to the fall of america. have rt, they cannot come in and propaganda the american public. if you can co-opt another station, such as fox, and get the same types of results, you have a narrative and intelligence that have been cultivated through propaganda, what would you get? host: i want to give michael a chance to respond. >> i am not as pessimistic as you are as, the united states is close to collapse. he is onto something. it is the aim of the russian federation to destabilize

democracies in general and especially the united states. russia does not have that right of a future under putin. their economy is terrible. of theirraphics population are in decline for what you need for a vibrant economy in the future. they are a serious power. we need to be able to deal with them. they want to be dealt with on the same level as the united states area they see us as their prime adversary. putin was an intelligence officer during the cold war in the kgb. loves the intelligence, the tools of the game. the russians are as active as they were in the cold war here in washington and the united states. one of his campaigns was to

manipulate social media and otherwise try to penetrate and just a place the united states. we are too strong for that. we have these resilient institutions. we will survive. he is onto something. it is not helpful. it distracts us from the real issues. time, we can get through this. host: you mentioned snowden. he tweeted --

>> he took hundreds of thousands of incredibly sensitive documents, heap over them, he stole them out of the nsa. he alighted to china and lives in russia. accounts, the russians and the chinese have all of those documents. i'm sure they have been analyzing them for years. it has caused the united states hundreds of millions of dollars in damage to try to repair some of the collection access that we need. if edward snowden wanted to have a debate about privacy and civil liberties here in the united states, there were other days you could have done it. he could have released the two memorandums way back then. they got all of the attention. here 702 and 215.

informationes of and has absconded to russia. whatever. it has to be heavily discounted. host: good morning melvin. >> very interesting conversation. i want to go back and say one thing. i have been a listener. one thing i have noticed for several days, there are people continuing to call in and indicate that they are democrats. nancy pelosi, schumer, maxine waters. people, you are not a democrat, you need to call on the right line. i think you are not doing that all enough. were allowing them to continue to call in and pretend they are democrats. they have sit.

an actualot in -- democrat. they should not have the airtime that they are getting. i have been telling everybody, they are doing the same thing. dictators breakdown. he has what he needs to set up a dictatorship. i want you to start cutting people off. host: i appreciate the suggestion. we are going to go on from report -- the republican line. mr. allen, could we get back to what this program is all about this morning and that is the memo and the mueller investigation? mr. allen: sure. caller: wasn't the memo put out because of the investigation into the fisa court and the steele dossier. mr. allen: absolutely. caller: the investigation into

the dossier caused the fisa court to cause the mueller investigation. is that correct? the question whether there was collusion get -- began before mueller. before this particular episode when the fbi went up on surveillance of carter page. july 2016.in the color is saying that the steel dossier was the essential convincing the judge that we needed to be able to use its extraordinary power,

to eavesdrop on an american citizen. what nuñez is charging is that he does not like trump. he was essentially working for a law firm that was trying to act on behalf of the hillary clinton campaign. that is what nuñez and the other republicans have. i think that is a legitimate concern. we may need to have done the fisa anyway. the subject matter was so serious. are the russians trying to collaborate? we need to check that out. time, did the fbi rely only on this?

did they have other information to justify this extraordinary use of surveillance. ity make the assertion that was an essential part of the fisa application. we do not know what else was used. we suspect it was a lot of other stuff. going next.e we are the democrats are going to come out with their document. it is going to say things like, the fbi relied on human intelligence, a source, other intercepts. i think you're caller is onto something. it is about the context of the memo and should that have been a factor in whether the fisa application was rejected or accepted? host: the memo states that the investigation began over the allegations about george papadopoulos. speaking of the document or the warrant, it was renewed several times.

what does that tell us about what went into authorizing it? mr. allen: it tells me that if you are renewing before the court the ability to continue to eavesdrop on carter page, they thought they still had a live lead. the fbi thought it was justifiable to continue to spend those resources. as a political matter, i do not think anyone would be in a position if the fbi said that they need it, i don't think rod rosenstein or anyone would try to second-guess them. you try not to second-guess the guy in the field. a lot of people are sticking that rosenstein should have looked into it, he should have delved deeper into it. he would never admit that. that would not have been salable. you try not to guess the agents

in the field. host: dan is calling from youngstown, ohio on the republican line. just a couple of minutes left. what is your question for michael allen? mr. allen: he is talking about the dossier saying that is not the main reason that they started this whole investigation, but it is. and hillary clinton paid them to create that dossier. they lost that election. they thought they were going to win it. andy said under both that they would not have gotten that order if they did not have the dossier. some of these people better get off the media because they are lying. there all on the democrat side. and you guys are not realizing that the dictator would be

hillary clinton and they want to take this guy out no matter what. host: ok, the memo itself from devin nunes said the investigation started because of papadopoulos. mr. allen: i hear what the caller is trying to say. that there were political overtones, and there are. there is an active campaign to discredit the president. i do believe some of the members of the media are quite aggressive on this. the investigation by all accounts, began before the episode of filing the application -- that is why everyone in the mainstream media and beyond is saying that this is a very narrow issue. did the fbi use the steele dossier to get the ability to listen in on carter page's phone call. the surveillance of an american citizen.

this particular one. i am reading and hearing what he says that it is as an to appear in that bothers me. more information will come out. the investigation into donald trump began in the summer of 2016 when, why the way, no one thought he was going to win but the fbi wanted to look into this. i hear what the caller is saying. this is an incredibly corrosive and political atmosphere. there are democrats using russia as a vehicle to beat up the president and the president doesn't like it and he is lashing out at a lot of different people. sometimes, i do not think we should lash out at some of our national security professionals who i believe are largely apolitical and trying to help the country. but that is the situation we are in. i wish we were talking about the real issues of the country on a foreign policy basis. the rise of china.

a russia that is very aggressive toward us. host: i would like to get to one more caller. the president is tweeting about this. he said this memo totally vindicates trump but the russian witchhunt goes on. there was no collusion and no obstruction. the word now used because after one year of looking endlessly and finding nothing, collusion is dead. this is an american disgrace. nate is calling in from parksville, maryland on our independent line. you have the last word with michael allen. mr. allen: i should be calling in on the democratic line. but moving right along, mr. allen, in so far as democrats trying to discredit trump, he is doing a pretty good job himself. earlier, in talking about the issue of the memo, when you

speak of all of the stuff going on as far as russia being such an adversary of ours and putin being an enemy of us. we have a president who is pulling everything with the levers of power's he has to disprove that notion. i think that is kind of funny. host: i would like to give michael allen at chance to respond. mr. allen: such a fair point. the russians are not our friends. we have sanctions against them for the invasion of ukraine, for stealing crimea from ukraine. they are bad act or is and i wish the president was more active on this situation. in closing, in the national security strategy that the

president released late last year, he basically said that china and russia are the real people that we need to gear our national security apparatus around. and so, i still believe that russia is one of the greatest threats that we face and it is an issue that we will have to deal with. i think the national security community is arrayed against that threat. host: michael allen. managing director at beacon global strategies. you can find the website and michael on twitter. thank you's much for joining us.

>> coming up sunday morning, the latest on the release of the ouse intelligence committee emo and the russia probe with betsy s reporter woodruff. and former white house sebastian affect d how it could robert mueller's investigation. watch us at 7:00 morning.unday join in the discussion. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> senator klobuchar talks about cybersecurity and what she's introduced to create more ransparency in online advertising. at a recent