Best of Right Opinion

• David Harsanyi: Be Cautious, but Take the Devin Nunes Memo Seriously
• Erick Erickson: The Practical Side of a Reasonable Compromise
• Jonah Goldberg: Policy Earthquakes Have Ground Shifting Beneath Our Feet
• David Limbaugh: Democratic Leaders, Why Do You Find Patriotism Divisive?
• Tony Perkins: HHS Targeted for Anti-Faith Purge

For more of today’s columns, visit Right Opinion.

Opinion in Brief

David Harsanyi: “The idea that intelligence agencies should be immune from oversight is a dangerous one. Even if texts between FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page regarding the special counsel investigation were innocent venting that did absolutely nothing to corrode the rigid professionalism of the duo, we’re talking about an investigation that Democrats hope will lead to the impeachment and removal of the president. Logically speaking, you can’t argue that this is another Watergate and then argue that texts pertaining to the investigation of this new Watergate don’t deserve scrutiny. Are Republicans overplaying the potential impact of the memo in the same way Democrats have overplayed the ‘collusion’ card? It’s entirely possible. Nunes might be a hopeless Trump partisan, and the thousands of Trump supporters retweeting #ReleaseTheMemo might have irrational ideas about its importance. None of this makes the memo wholly irrelevant or a distraction. … Even if President Donald Trump is guilty of colluding with the Russians, or whatever crime special counsel Robert Mueller has settled on pursuing, it doesn’t mean the Obama administration was above abusing its power to spy on opponents. It’s highly plausible, in fact, that an administration that had little compunction about spying on journalists and others and then lying about it would feel comfortable dropping standards to snoop on its political adversaries.”