We live in interesting times. It’s long been a habit of various government agencies to dump bad or unfavorable news on the last working day of the week. They just one upped that by releasing a stupidly heavily redacted copy of all four FISA Title 1 Applications against United States Person Carter Page. How stupid? They partially redacted transmission and docketing dates… How unusual? Up to this point FIS Court pleadings have never been subject to FOIA release due to the National Security implications. Which, in this case, may indicate that the courts have decided that National Security is being invoked improperly and the larger National Interest must be served.
By sundance, the Conservative Treehouse
The U.S. Department of Justice and FBI have released the 412 page FISA application used to gain a Title I surveillance warrant against U.S. Person Carter Page in 2016 while he was working as a low-level unpaid adviser for the campaign of Donald Trump. [The full pdf is available here – and embedded below]
The October 2016 application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to wiretap Mr. Page, along with several renewal applications — was released to The New York Times and several other news organizations that had filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits to obtain them. [Link to source pdf here]
The application is heavily redacted, but there’s enough information available to seriously impact the prior narratives as written by the media. As we review the content carefully, CTH will have much more on this in the coming hours/days. However, here’s the FISA application – please add your comments on the content therein:
The good news is that so much is redacted that it’s a relatively short read. The dextrosphere has been reading it and comparing notes. The back and forth in the comments of the above post are a useful, if disjointed, primer on the significance of this document and the issues
By sundance, the Conservative Treehouse
Having read, re-read and re-re-read, the recent FISA application release, here’s my take at both the 30,000 ft and granular level.
First, the elevated review is actually more interesting than the granular, which is remarkably odd considering how far we have traveled with this story.
Why publicly release the FISA application? After all, even with the voluminous redactions, it is very unusual and it would have been exceptionally easy to deny any FOIA request under the auspices of national security. To highlight this question, consider how stunnedFran Townsend was at the release: “Having run The Justice Dept office responsible for
#FISA The release of these documents is irresponsible & will irreversibly weaken counterintelligence & Counterterrorism investigations going forward.”
Here is where a similar, I would say parallel, release will be overlooked. Remember, it was April 2017 when ODNI Dan Coats released the 99-page FISA Court ruling/opinion on the historic 2015/2016 FISA abuse by the FBI and DOJ-NSD. That release, like this one, while also heavily redacted, seemed out-of-custom for the intelligence apparatus. Coincidentally FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer is a central figure in both releases.
In matters such as this, I don’t believe in coincidences. It also should not come as a surprise to anyone that this release fully corroborates Chairman Nunes and his HPSCI Report on FISA Abuse, while also fully falsifying Congressman Schiff’s rebuttal.
As to the details…
♦ OK, for the next part I’m going to quote Ristvan (and expand):
Read thru the key parts quickly. Several notable facts.
•P. 2 Nunes is correct, the initiating ‘info’ came from State.
•P. 5 The ‘instigator’ was Clapper.
•P. 8. Timing onset suspicions confirmed. The ‘surveillance’ started 3/16, NOT with the official opening of ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ on 7/31/16.
•P. 53 ‘verified in accordance with FBI 4/5/2001 policy.’ NOT. Both Comey and McCabe testified under oath to congress otherwise.
•Pp. 63 and 65. Attested to by Comey and Yates. Both in violation of 18USC1018, felonious false attestation by federal officials.
The heavy redactions do NOT obscure the basic illegality of this FISA application. A BIG DEAL.
Ristvan did a great job boiling down the crux of the issue, and outlining the most damaging aspects.
It seems that former Director of National Security James Clapper was un-aware that he was cited in the application as having instigated it. He in turn has his own nominee for who instigated this matter.
Former DNI director says it’s ‘important’ to recognize the former president’s handprints on Russia probe
President Barack Obama should be credited with launching “a whole sequence of events” that led to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russia collusion allegations, according to former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper.
“One point I’d like to make, Anderson, that I don’t think has come up very much before — and I’m alluding now to [President Donald Trump’s] criticism of President Obama for all that he did or didn’t do before he left office with respect to the Russian meddling,” Clapper said Thursday on CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360.”
Clapper added that “if it weren’t for President Obama, we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set off a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today — notably, special counsel Mueller’s investigation.
“President Obama is responsible for that, and it was he who tasked us to do that intelligence community assessment in the first place. I think that’s an important point when it comes to critiquing President Obama.”
A cynic might view this as Clapper getting out ahead of this issue and staking out a “just following orders” defense. In point of fact he seems to have resisted the Russian Collusion bandwagon as mentioned in DCI Brennan’s Domestic “Compromat” Operation until rather late in the game.
FBI officials contend Carter Page allegedly influenced Trump and the Republican Party to go easy on Russia in Ukraine
By Marc Tapscott | LifeZette
Page 21 cites a news article published in July 2016 that reported, “Candidate #1’s campaign worked behind the scenes to make sure that Political Party #1’s platform would not call for giving weapons to Ukraine to fight Russian and rebel forces, contradicting the views of almost all of Political Party #1’s foreign policy leaders in Washington.”The page continues: “The article stated that Candidate #1’s campaign ‘sought to make sure that [Political Party #1] would not pledge to give Ukraine the weapons it has been asking for from the United States.’”
The page then cites an August 2016 news story from another publication reporting that Candidate #1 “might recognize Crimea as Russian territory and lift punitive U.S. sanctions against Russia. The article opined that while the reason for Candidate #1’s shift was not clear, Candidate #1’s more conciliatory words, which contradict Political Party #1’s official platform, follow Candidate #1’s recent association with several people sympathetic to Russian influence in Ukraine, including foreign policy advisor Carter Page.”
Time and long past time to investigate the investigators and prosecute the prosecutors.
By Scott Johnson, Power Line
Andrew McCarthy commented this morning on FOX News: “I’m really embarrassed because I told people for months that this could never, ever happen….It’s astonishing. It’s as if they took the dossier and slapped a caption on it to give it to the judge. They ought to be looking at the judges who signed this stuff.”