The political news cycle is fast, and keeping up can be overwhelming. Trying to find differing perspectives worth your time is even harder. That’s why we have scoured the internet for political writing from the right and left that you might not have seen.
Has this series exposed you to new ideas? Tell us how. Email us at ourpicks@nytimes.com.
For an archive of all the Partisan Writing Roundups, check out Our Picks.
From the Right
James S. Robbins in USA Today:
“Arguments about protecting sources and methods are irrelevant when we are talking about a potential crisis of this degree.”
Mr. Robbins, a former member of George W. Bush’s Defense Department, lays out the concerns of many on the right — particularly those who believe the Republican memo made public last week revealed serious impropriety by the F.B.I. and the Justice Department. Beyond summarizing many of the main points of the memo itself, including that “top Obama administration officials knowingly and willfully used unverified information paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign” to obtain a surveillance warrant for Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser, Mr. Robbins also presses for further transparency. “Can the memo not be understood without seeing the classified background material?” His answer: “Declassify it.” Read more »
_____
Mollie Hemingway in The Federalist:
“Is it possible to criticize a law enforcement agency without warring against the very existence of a law enforcement agency? Obviously it is.”
Ms. Hemingway believes that some of the news media’s characterization of the Trump administration as being “at war” with the F.B.I. and federal law enforcement is disingenuous and damaging. She cites, as an example, the reporting that The New York Times did over the weekend on the F.B.I.’s slow action in the Larry Nassar molestation investigation. “No reasonable person would think that highlighting problems at the F.B.I. as it relates to inquiries into the abuse of children means that The New York Times is at war with the F.B.I.,” she writes. This is precisely what Representative Devin Nunes of California, who spearheaded the memo, and President Trump are doing in releasing it, she maintains. Read more »
_____
From the Left
“It’s unprecedented for any president to attack the F.B.I. so brazenly, but it’s especially unusual for a Republican president to accuse the F.B.I., one of the most conservative of federal agencies, of being anti-Republican.”
Mr. Heer contends that, historically, the F.B.I. has been a conservative, if not “reactionary,” institution. Which, he writes, makes the attacks on the agency by Mr. Trump and congressional Republicans all the more strange and alarming. He points out that during the presidential campaign, news of the investigation into Hillary Clinton leaked to the news media while the Trump investigation was kept quiet. “This hardly suggests an F.B.I. bias.” Read more »
_____
“The speaker’s embrace of Nunes and his memo has dishonored the chamber that he, above all others, is duty bound to defend.”
Mr. Nichols takes aim at Speaker Paul D. Ryan, writing that the Republican congressional leader abandoned his duty to steer the legislative branch as a check on the “lawless” executive branch of the Trump administration. “Paul Ryan is not supporting the Constitution,” Mr. Nichols writes. “He is shredding it.” Read more »
Continue reading the main story_____
Finally, From the Center
John Sipher in Politico Magazine:
“Why would anyone be willing to put themselves into harm’s way to work with the U.S. government again?”
Mr. Sipher, a former C.I.A. agent, argues that the Nunes memo, and its treatment of Christopher Steele, the author of the Trump dossier and a former MI-6 agent, may scare off other foreign tipsters willing to share vital information with American agencies. Moreover, he argues that even if Mr. Steele had a personal bias against Mr. Trump, it should not disqualify his information as unreliable. “Being biased is hardly a disqualifier,” Mr. Sipher writes. “If it were, we would have a tough time finding sources in most countries around the world.” Read more »
_____
Douglas M. Charles in The Conversation:
“Trump’s involvement reminds me of Nixon.”
Mr. Charles is a history professor at Pennsylvania State University, specializing in the history of the F.B.I. He writes that the actions congressional Republicans have taken to discredit the F.B.I.’s investigation of the Trump campaign is “startling” and “unprecedented.” Read more »
_____
Want the Partisan Writing Roundup in your inbox? Sign up for the Morning Briefing Newsletter or the What We’re Reading Newsletter.
Have thoughts about this collection? Email feedback to ourpicks@nytimes.com.
Continue reading the main story
