On releasing the Schiff memo

White House chief of staff John Kelly told reporters Tuesday that the administration would have a recommendation on the memo ready for the President on Thursday, but he said that Schiff's memo was "a lot less clean" than the Republican document.

"Where the first one was very clean relative to sources and methods, my initial cut is this one is a lot less clean," Kelly said. "We'll brief the President on it and he'll have a decision to make as to what he wants to do with it: Should he do the same thing he did on the first memo and essentially declassify it or should he declassify it with some redactions."

House Speaker Paul Ryan, who called for the Nunes memo release to spotlight potential "abuse" under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, sidestepped questions Tuesday on whether Trump should release the memo.

  CNN

Of course, The Most Notable Loser gave the go ahead to release the Nunes memo, to which the Schiff memo is a rebuttal, without redactions.

Does it strike you as being at all odd that the man who is the target of the investigation is the one deciding what memos shall and shall not be released? Honestly, I don't get that.

The House panel voted to release the Schiff memo Monday, giving Trump five days to object to or approve of its release. If he objects to the release or redacts portions of it, the House Intelligence Committee could vote to override his objections. If it were to take that unprecedented step, the full GOP-House would have to override the White House as well to give the public access to the Schiff memo.

[...]

[Rep. Mike Conaway, R-TX] said that Schiff has acknowledged things are included in his memo that would need to be redacted because they are classified, which was why he wanted the Justice Department and FBI to review it.

[...]

But [some] Republicans  [...]  say Schiff wrote the memo in a way that was intended to later accuse the White House of making political redactions.

"They set this up for that argument," said Rep. Chris Stewart, a Utah Republican who sits on the House Intelligence Committee. "As soon as I read it, I thought it's very clear what they're doing. They're setting this up to make the argument there's political redactions."

Whether that's true or not, we won't know unless we see the unredacted memo for ourselves, but there's a bigger problem here.

I don't see a way back from this constitutional override where each party does everything they can to stymie the other party. That's been building for several presidents. It was obvious and even publicly acknowledged during Obama's terms that Republican motto was "just say no" to everything the Democrats and the president proposed. Now, it seems the tables are turned, but the Democrats aren't as brassy as to say so publicly, and they're not quite as good at it as the Republicans.

The two party system is well and truly broken. Maybe we can find our way out by doing away with that system, but I don't believe it can simply be repaired. Of course, it's no secret that I've never liked that system in the first place.  Where could it have possibly led to but here?  But, it used to work toward some good for the country from time to time. That's gone.  It's not coming back.

 ...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE:  The Conaway suggestion must be the GOP's talking point on the Schiff memo.

During a Fox News interview that aired Tuesday night, [Rep Trey] Gowdy floated his own theory about why the Democrats’ memo requires redactions: They’re trying to trap President Trump. “I think the Democrats are politically smart enough to put things in the memo that require either the [FBI] or the Department of Justice to say it needs to be redacted. Therefore, it creates this belief that there’s something being hidden from the American people,” Gowdy said.

[...]

Later in the interview, Gowdy reiterated that he’s not ready to say there was an anti-Trump conspiracy within the DOJ because, “I never allege a conspiracy when simple incompetence will suffice as an explanation.”

  NY Magazine

Right, Mr. Benghazi.