Explicitly, the safeguards of sovereignty, national security and the integrity of democracy within the Republic supersede all matters. Therefore, all matters that pose threats to the safety as well as to the untainted and independent functioning of the Republic, whether present or pending, demand full scrutiny by the appropriate security agency.
Moreover, in functioning to safeguard the Republic from any influence that could hinder the Republic's independence and integrity, a mere rumor ought to be sufficient to merit an investigation by the charged security agency. An Online Blog, a Facebook post, a Twitter tweet, a dossier or any other source of evidence, are more than sufficient to trigger an investigation by a security agency with a view to protecting the integrity of the Republic.
Hence, with regards to the much talked about "Nunes Memo" that purportedly argues that evidence used by the FBI to launch an investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 Presidential Election, was not corroborated or supported, thus alleging that the investigation is biased, must therefore, be flawed.
It is flawed because the scope of evidence needed to launch an investigation into matters of national security, sovereignty and the integrity of the United States (US), should never be narrow. The scope must be broad. It must be wide because such broadness of scope of evidence continues to allow security agencies to monitor threats and to successfully foul threats. Threats to the national security of the US have been fouled before after investigations were initiated by broad uncorroborated evidence.