A Political Battle Over Dossiers, FISA Warrants and Surveillance, Clouds A Much Bigger Story…

There is a lot of news amid national headlines but there is only one story. Unfortunately, that story is a complex multidimensional matrix of politics, law enforcement corruption, the DC swamp, and vested interests attempting to hide and manipulate facts, ie. The Russian Election/Collusion Story.

What I am going to introduce today is how the 2016 FISA-702(16)(17) data and surveillance activity issues; and the 2016 FISA Court applications for surveillance and search warrants; and the Christopher Steele (Fusion GPS) Russian Dossier; and the individual actions by DOJ, FBI and IC officials; all connect within the targeted political weaponization of government.

As many of you are aware we have been chasing and researching the fact-trail of this story for over a year. In my opinion this is the biggest story in our lifetime as it relates to government officials, specifically DOJ and FBI leadership, weaponizing their offices to retain political power for their ideological allies. Taken in totality it is a very troubling story. Nonetheless THAT STORY exists regardless of our discomfort.

Additionally, in the downstream aftermath, there are two political forces facing off amid the aggregate “Russian Election/Collusion Story”. One side is trying to find out the details behind the origin therein; the other side is trying to hide the origin therein. When we look at the reason for hiding the origin of the Russian narrative, we enter the rabbit hole of previous intelligence community activity and their weaponization of government.

Yesterday President Trump signed an executive memorandum for the Director of National Intelligence that forces the DNI to develop a responsive plan for any inquiry from a non-public entity about their information being swept up in intelligence gathering operations. Also yesterday, Representative Ron DeSantis wrote a letter to House Speaker Paul Ryan requesting Ryan declassify all documents surrounding the Steele Dossier and its use therein.

Both of yesterdays actions appear connected to the larger battle within the back-story.

If you have not followed the prior research about how NSA Director Admiral Rogers responded to his discoveries in 2016 you might be lost in this discussion. –SEE HERE

This outline builds on that prior research and exposes specific individuals who participated in the scheme.

IMPORTANT – We are no longer taking it for granted a FISA warrant was ever given to the DOJ because NO-ONE can prove a FISA warrant exists. Heck, no-one can even point to anything that directly claims a FISA warrant was even requested.  There are inferences, suspicions, media reports based on anonymous leaks, but no direct or reasonable evidence beyond innuendo.  We are eighteen months past the reported origination dates, and there’s not a single official who will state a 2016 FISA warrant was applied for or granted.  Therefore we must begin to question that basic assumption.

That said, the inability to prove the existence of a FISA warrant does not prove a FISA warrant doesn’t exist. Additionally, the cloud-of-uncertainty conveniently, perhaps purposely, makes it challenging to outline the liars within the intelligence community.

When it comes to questions around the 2016 DOJ/FBI FISA warrant – A key approach to finding the truth is to apply the scientific method during the research; question our underlying assumptions and reverse the hypothesis.

Example: Can we prove the non-existence of the FISA warrant?

  • Well, there is direct and attributable, evidence no FISA warrant existed.
  • And there is no direct, and attributable, evidence a FISA warrant did exist.

However, the absence of evidence is not evidence of its absence. Just because we cannot prove a FISA Warrant exists doesn’t prove the non-existence of the FISA Warrant; which, as you will see, is a critical piece of this puzzle.

It is important, heck, critical, to underscore that all of the currently available evidence indicates that TWO intelligence units participated in the majority of the illegal activity surrounding the 2016 Trump Operation: ♦The Department of Justice National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), and the ♦FBI Counterintelligence Division.

If you have read the prior explanation about compartmented intelligence, and how the process was used to hide illegal intelligence activity, you will more easily connect-the-dots on who/how this was strategically used.

On March 20th 2017 FBI Director James Comey testified to congress. During that congressional testimony James Comey was asked why the FBI Director did not inform congressional oversight, senior leadership, about the counterintelligence operation that began in July 2016.

FBI Director Comey said he did not tell congressional oversight he was investigating presidential candidate Donald Trump because the Director of Counterintelligence, W.H. “Bill” Priestap suggested he not do so. *Very important detail.*

FBI Director James Comey is stating on the record that the FBI Counterintelligence Operation was happening without oversight, and that lack of oversight was intentional.  *Important Detail*

However, for the sake of this review pay attention to his remarks about the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, or DNI.

WATCH the first three minutes:

.

Notice how Director Comey avoids mentioning the 2016 DNI James Clapper.  Clapper was DNI throughout President Obama’s tenure and was DNI during the 2016 counterintelligence operation that James Comey and Bill Priestap intentionally kept hidden from congress.

The obfuscation about James Clapper might not seem like a big deal, and almost everyone missed it at the time, however in hindsight it is another critical part of the evidence against James Comey.

IF THERE WAS a FISA Warrant issued against the Trump Campaign, or Trump Officials, by the FBI (Counterintelligence Unit), or DOJ (National Security Division), James Clapper would have to be notified of it.

Now, let’s look at what happens when James Clapper is questioned about the FISA Warrant, as he explains on NBC March 5th 2017.  This is TWO WEEKS BEFORE the James Comey testimony to congress on March 20th.

Pay close attention to the exact wording Clapper uses, and the thought he puts into explaining himself.

.

Watch it Again. Closely.

There’s no ambiguity in James Clapper in that March 5th 2017 interview.  He can specifically deny any FISA Warrant for Trump Tower, Campaign Officials, or Trump Campaign HQ.

That interview is so critical to Clapper personally – when questioned about FISA Warrants and Wiretaps six months later, September 24th 2017, he refers the questioning back to his NBC answer on March 5th, 2017.

Again, Watch Closely:

.

Do ya think that earlier answer and conversation was parsed carefully between March 5th and September 24th?

Title III requires Federal, state and, other government officials to obtain judicial authorization for intercepting “wire, oral, and electronic” communications such as telephone conversations and e-mails. It also regulates the use and disclosure of information obtained through authorized wiretapping. 18 U.S.C. §§ 2516-18.

An exception to the requirement that government obtain a warrant before intercepting covered communications is provided where:

  • “any investigative or law enforcement officer, specially designated by the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or by the principal prosecuting attorney of any State or subdivision thereof acting pursuant to a statute of that State…
  • reasonably determines that an emergency situation exists that involves
    1. immediate danger of death or serious physical injury to any person,
    2. conspiratorial activities threatening the national security interest, or
    3. conspiratorial activities characteristic of organized crime

    that requires a wire, oral, or electronic communication to be intercepted before an order authorizing such interception can, with due diligence, be obtained, and

  • there are grounds upon which an order could be entered under this chapter to authorize such interception.”

In such an emergency situation, the Federal government may begin intercepting communications, provided “an application for an order approving the interception is made in accordance with this section within forty-eight hours after the interception has occurred, or begins to occur.” In this situation, if the warrant is ultimately denied, the intercepted communications are treated as having been obtained in violation of Title III. 18 U.S.C. § 2518(7).  (LINK)

Within this entire enterprise of spying on the Trump Campaign there is no “wiretapping” per se’ because EVERYTHING is being collected by NSA.  The issue is: can you legally “look at” what is already being collected?

That’s where Admiral Mike Rogers comes in because he discovered political operatives were LOOKING AT IT.  Hence, his report to the FISC about FISA-702(17) violations.

Again, all research indicates the DOJ National Security Division (John P Carlin) and FBI Counterintelligence Division (W.H. “Bill” Priestap) were the two DOJ organizations operating in concert with Fusion-GPS and Christopher Steele while simultaneously carrying out the prior known surveillance activity.  Any FISA Warrant stemming from these two entities would have to pass the desk of ODNI James Clapper.

If a FISA Wiretap warrant is factually discovered, against the backdrop of James Clapper stating EMPHATICALLY no Title III FISA Wiretap warrant existed, how would that conflict be resolved?

Additionally, the internal issues with FISA-702(16)(17) unauthorized “About Query” searches being conducted and discovered in 2016 by NSA Director Admiral Rogers, would lend even greater weight to the DOJ-NSD and FBI CoIntel as the origin.  SEE HERE.

We know the FBI Counterintelligence Operation against the Trump Campaign was operating without congressional notification or oversight.

We also know the DOJ-NSD Operation was also operating without oversight:

In 2015 Asst. Attorney General Sally Yates blocked any inspector general oversight of the DOJ National Security Division (SEE Pdf HERE). The Office of Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, requested oversight over the DOJ National Security Division and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58-page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.

It is important to note here that President-elect Trump nominated Senator Dan Coats as ODNI on January 5th, 2017 – however, Democrats held up that nomination until March 16th, 2017.  It is not coincidental that immediately following DNI Dan Coat’s ability to provide information, Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes first reported his concerns.

After Devin Nunes review the Eisenhower SCIF information March 22nd 2017, two days after James Comey’s testimony, Chairman Nunes stated the intelligence product he reviewed was: “not related to Russia, or the FBI Russian counter-intelligence investigation”.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Devin Nunes, then held a brief press conference and stated he has been provided intelligence reports brought to him by unnamed sources that include ‘significant information’ about President-Elect Trump and his transition team.

WATCH:

1.) …”On numerous occasions the [Obama] intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.”

2.) “Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration; details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.”

3.) “Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition members were unmasked.”

4.) “Fourth and finally, I want to be clear; none of this surveillance was related to Russia, or the investigation of Russian activities.

“The House Intelligence Committee will thoroughly investigate surveillance and its subsequent dissemination, to determine a few things here that I want to read off:”

•“Who was aware of it?”

•“Why it was not disclosed to congress?”

•“Who requested and authorized the additional unmasking?”

•“Whether anyone directed the intelligence community to focus on Trump associates?”

•“And whether any laws, regulations or procedures were violated?”

“I have asked the Directors of the FBI, NSA and CIA to expeditiously comply with my March 15th (2017) letter -that you all received a couple of weeks ago- and to provide a full account of these surveillance activities.”

When you add up the absence of a FISA warrant with the discoveries by NSA Director Mike Rogers, and overlay Devin Nunes concerns, this is the picture:

President Obama’s political operatives within the DOJ-NSD were using FISA 702(17) surveillance “about inquiries” that would deliver electronic mail and phone communication for U.S. people (Trump campaign). The NSD unit (John Carlin) was working in coordination with the FBI Counterintelligence Unit (Bill Priestap, Peter Strzok etc.) to look at this campaign activity. DOJ Attorney Lisa Page was the intermediary between the DOJ National Security Division and he FBI Counterintelligence Division.

In an effort to stop the FISA 702(17) activity NSA Director Mike Rogers initiated a full 702 compliance review. However, before the review was complete the DOJ-NSD had enough information for their Russian narrative; which was built upon FISA-702(17) that began in July ’16 per James Comey.  Mike Rogers stopped the FISA702(17) process on October 26th 2016. As a result of his identifying the activity, Rogers became a risk; DNI James Clapper demanded he be fired.

♦Ten days after the presidential election, November 17th 2016, Admiral Rogers travels to Trump Tower without telling ODNI James Clapper. Rogers likely informs President-elect Trump of the prior activity by the FBI and DOJ, including the probability that all of Trump Tower’s email and phone communication was being collected and reviewed by political operatives within the DOJ-NSD and FBI.

On November 17th, 2016, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers went to see President-Elect Donald Trump in Trump Tower, New York. –SEE HERE– Director Rogers never told his boss DNI, James Clapper.

On November 18th, 2016, the Trump Transition Team announced they were moving all transition activity to Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. –SEE HERE– Where they interviewed and discussed the most sensitive positions to fill. Defense, State, CIA, ODNI.

The transition team was set up in Trump Tower. The very next day, November 18th 2016, Trump moves the entire transition team to Bedminister New Jersey?

Does this make more sense now?

All research indicates the information the DOJ and FBI collected via their FISA-702(16)(17) queries, and the stuff Fusion GPS was creating via Christopher Steele (The “Russian Dossier), was used to create the Russian Narrative, “The Insurance Policy“.

♦Ultimately, the people within all of these unlawful intercepts of information is what Devin Nunes discovered when he looked at the “unmasking requests” which were a result of those FISA 702(17) collections on Team Trump. That’s why Devin Nunes was so stunned at what he saw in February and March 2017.

The ENTIRE SYSTEM of surveillance and data collection was weaponized against a political campaign.  There were no authorizing or accompanying FISA warrants.

RESOURCES:  – The BIG UGLY

IG Stimulated Releases of Information:

♦Release #1 was the FBI Agent Strzok and Attorney Lisa Page story; and the repercussions from discovering their politically motivated bias in the 2015/2016 Clinton email investigation and 2016/2017 Russian Election investigation.

♦Release #2 outlined the depth of FBI Agent Strzok and FBI Attorney Page’s specific history in the 2016 investigation into Hillary Clinton to include the changing of the wording [“grossly negligent” to “extremely careless”] of the probe outcome delivered by FBI Director James Comey.

♦Release #3 was the information about DOJ Deputy Bruce Ohr being in contact with Fusion GPS at the same time as the FISA application was submitted and granted by the FISA court; which authorized surveillance and wiretapping of candidate Donald Trump; that release also attached Bruce Ohr and Agent Strzok directly to the Steele Dossier.

♦Release #4 was information that Deputy Bruce Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, was an actual contract employee of Fusion GPS, and was hired by F-GPS specifically to work on opposition research against candidate Donald Trump. Both Bruce Ohr and Nellie Ohr are attached to the origin of the Christopher Steele Russian Dossier.

♦Release #5 was the specific communication between FBI Agent Strzok and FBI Attorney Page. The 10,000 text messages that included evidence of them both meeting with Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to discuss the “insurance policy” against candidate Donald Trump in August of 2016.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, CIA, Clinton(s), Cold Anger, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, Jeff Sessions, media bias, Notorious Liars, NSA, President Trump, Russia, Spying, Susan Rice, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1,146 Responses to A Political Battle Over Dossiers, FISA Warrants and Surveillance, Clouds A Much Bigger Story…

  1. The Boss says:

    There seems to be a new meaning to the phrase “Calm before the storm”.

    I look at all these updated analyses and essays based upon newly disclosed information, remembering that there are still trillions of dollars at stake, and I get a sense of purposeful preparation for The Big Ugly.

    There is (for me at least) a great comfort in knowing I’ve done all I could to ready myself mentally to defend the Trump administration’s upcoming actions. It’s what I signed up for when I volunteered in June 2015 to support Trump’s primary run. I just didn’t know what it would look like.

    It’s going to be Ugly. But necessary.

    Liked by 13 people

  2. phoenixRising says:

    the following is from a site Sundance linked to in his twitter thread I posted above: (I tell you, Sundance has the nose of a bloodhound… they can run, but they can’t hide from our Sundance)

    “… After considerable evaluation of the program and available technology, NSA has decided that its Section 702 foreign intelligence surveillance activities will no longer include any upstream internet communications that are solely “about” a foreign intelligence target. Instead, this surveillance will now be limited to only those communications that are directly “to” or “from” a foreign intelligence target. These changes are designed to retain the upstream collection that provides the greatest value to national security while reducing the likelihood that NSA will acquire communications of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with one of the Agency’s foreign intelligence targets.

    In addition, as part of this curtailment, NSA will delete the vast majority of previously acquired upstream internet communications as soon as practicable.”

    https://www.nsa.gov/news-features/press-room/statements/2017-04-28-702-statement.shtml

    Liked by 6 people

    • Streak 264 says:

      Sure, they do that now while Trump is in office, but what about the next monster that takes over? If people are not thrown in prison within the next few months we will not see another election cycle. The deep state was not expecting Trump to win. The will make sure he doesn’t win again and if we lose the house and senate you can expect to never get another chance. The deep state will declare we don’t understand what they do so they will void future elections (for our safety). The idea was already floated by an anti Trump repub. I think it was Niki Hailey that floated it and suffered a lot of backlash for it. Bottom line is, we are running out of time! Tic Toc!

      Liked by 7 people

    • I truly struggle with the trust issue on this one.

      Liked by 1 person

    • rokshox says:

      Those previous searches should be preserved for forensic purposes. At lease the queries themselves.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Tony says:

      The Obama administration secretly won permission from a surveillance court in 2011 to reverse restrictions on the National Security Agency’s use of intercepted phone calls and e-mails, permitting the agency to search deliberately for Americans’ communications in its massive databases, according to interviews with government officials and recently declassified material. Source Washington post

      Liked by 2 people

      • All American Snowflake says:

        Lends new meaning to the Ed Snowden concerns about big ass rubber stamped FISA warrants, doesn’t it?

        Liked by 1 person

      • DrNo76 says:

        Link? I may have to reread some SD entries. I thought the assertion or theory was that the DOJ/fbi obtained a fisa warrant based on the dossier and collected data on trump. Now, it appears SD is suggesting there was no fisa warrant at all. Just that communications, all communications of Americans everywhere, are collected and the only issue is queries that retrieve data already available.

        Like

    • All American Snowflake says:

      I bet they will “delete the vast majority of previously acquired upstream internet communications as soon as practicable.”

      Like

    • CountryDoc says:

      Yes, the black hats want it all destroyed now, because it contains further evidence to convict them.

      Like

  3. zimbalistjunior says:

    pardon me if i am missing some discussion here or elsewhere, but:
    How much do we know about the so-called ‘chance meeting’ between Sir Andrew Wood, McCain and Kramer in this post-election security conference in Halifax? (p 219 simpson testimony and forward) Are Kramer and Wood (even McCain) going to be questioned?

    Why the heck does Rinat A., the ubiquitous Russian show up at that conference too? Has he been questioned? Has he been found suicided in his car by the banks of the Volga yet?

    Liked by 1 person

    • TwoLaine says:

      Kramer was subpoened. McKane is feigning sick/recovery/boot on wrong foot/something.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Good Job! says:

      The McCain story is completely a waste of time unless he did something to cause the December 2016 “Steele” memo. Then he’ll be sued by the Oligarchs claiming libel.

      Like

      • zimbalistjunior says:

        The presence of the same Russian from the Trump Tower June 9 meeting at this conference is a tad suspicious, no.
        And the seeming happenstance meeting between a Brit spook (Sir Wood, which is also his porn name) and Kramer (a Simpson confrere) and McCain is also a tad suspicious.
        There seems to be a little too much of a Brit flavor, sorry, flavour, to these shenanigans. Did Obama spy on Farage and other Brexiters for the Brits and then receive a returned favor/favour some time later?

        Liked by 3 people

        • Tejas Rob says:

          I’ve been saying for awhile now, when are we going to become concerned that the British government colluded with the Democratic Party to effect our election?

          Liked by 7 people

  4. Pam says:

    Liked by 4 people

  5. JimmBobbCooter says:

    Just gotta remind myself: Play the long game and keep the pressure on.

    Because some of this short-game stuff is maddening/ depressing.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. Pam says:

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Bob Thoms says:

    This can’t end with no one being held accountable. It just can’t. Otherwise our “great American experiment” is a disgrace.

    Like

    • Alligator Gar says:

      Exactly, Bob. And how can we hold out our government as a great example to emerging republics around the world? Why would they model themselves after Nero’s Rome? (or is that Caligula’s) Although, I agree with Nero on one thing. His horse would indeed have more sense than a senator!

      Liked by 3 people

      • Newt Love says:

        Our Constitutional Republic is more important than the “reputations” of the top dozen people at DoJ and the FBI.
        With the Trump appointees, Sessions, Wray and Rosenstein (read their bios! They are loyal Law Enforcement folks!) in charge of this fisasco, they will strip everyone from Loretta Lynch down to Peter Strzok be tried and convicted, because the US Government rules by the will of the people, and our trust in the DoJ and the FBI MUST BE RESTORED!

        Sessions, Wray, and Rosenstein will see to it.

        Like

        • Newt Love says:

          Sessions, Wray, and Rosenstein can set up the Grand Jury and get the Indictments, but the trials will have juries, and we will have to take our chances on the honesty of the juries in which “court” the trials are set: DC or VA.

          DC, fahgeddaboutit. VA, a crap shoot.

          Like

  8. StarryNights says:

    Given Huma has now apparently withdrew her divorce with hubby, is this a setup so that Anthony can’t be forced to testify against his wife? https://pagesix.com/2018/01/10/huma-abedin-and-anthony-weiner-call-off-divorce/

    Liked by 7 people

  9. cdnintx says:

    I wonder if anyone over at Judicial Watch might have some information they could share about the FISA’s?

    Like

  10. Pam says:

    Liked by 18 people

  11. Good Job! says:

    Trump clearly tweets there was one turn down by a court “earlier.”

    That fits with the story of being turned down in “July.” Simpson’s statements show the only “dossier” part of that application could be memo no. 080, the June “pee” memo. Maybe it also had a rehash of prior Manafort surveillance.

    If there was a second application, maybe it was NOT approved. Maybe the rumor that it was approved was to satisfy intelligence personnel asking questions. The surveillance must involve many people who are top dolts in the FBI and DOJ bureaucracy. These people could be good people, the types that don’t text their FBI mistresses on FBI issued devices about their conspiracies. Maybe the fake news warrant approval story was to appease these non-conspirators. Warrant could be real but very limited also.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Good Job! says:

      ….who are NOT top dolts in the FBI and DOJ…

      Sorry. I’m getting sloppy like Lisa Page’s texting.

      Like

    • doofusdawg says:

      perhaps there is another memo making the case for surveillance without FISA approval due to national security concerns… and maybe that’s the insurance policy that was discussed in McCabe’s office. I wonder if the memo/insurance policy can be retroactive like a warrant.

      Like

      • doofusdawg says:

        or maybe not retroactive as it wasnt until after the election that o changed the rules allowing for all 17 intelligence agencies access to the raw data. if there was an explosion of queries post election during the transition then this could give credence to my theory.

        Like

  12. Summer says:

    I wonder why nobody here mentions Gen. Flynn who WAS working for a foreign government (Turkey) and who WAS a professional spy fired by Obama and who WAS taken down by the Deep State at the first opportunity and even indicted, albeit for a process crime.

    I would like to know if he really was “just” an incidental victim of routine wiretapping of the Russian Ambassador, as they claimed he was. His background could be used as a justification for FISA, no?

    Like

    • Patreut says:

      Since Gen. Flynn was turned down on testifying on his knowledge of crimes committed during his tenure of Military Intel chief. This being the case I believe a plan was devised that he would fall on his sword, tell a small lie so as to be indited. Once he was charged he would plead and then offer cooperation (testify to all known criminal activity, its right there in his charging documents) so ultimately he gets to testify and then down the road when appropriate, Pres Trump will pardon him.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Good Job! says:

      They don’t care about real conflicts with foreign countries. All they care about is saving the “RussiaGate” story.

      Liked by 2 people

    • BebeTarget says:

      Summer, I heard that Gen. Flynn agreed to the perjury charge in exchange for not charging his son with any crime. I heard it once and never again. Did anyone else hear that? I have a sinking feeling that we will never see any evidence of any wrong doing and will continue to hear about all the laws they broke and there will never be one item to prove any of it. Too many people in cover-up mode and way too many covering for them. We will know the truth, but never be able to prove it. Everyone will remain on the payrolls, retire with full benefits and with the MSM’s help, will eventually elect another Swamp creature. If people do not pay for their crimes, then we will know the real truth.

      Like

  13. John K Evans says:

    I would like to broach the “then what” question. Sundance has cogently laid out the case for criminality within the FBI/DOJ that warrants indictment, prosecution and, upon conviction, imprisonment. Then what? I am no fan of President Obama and his collection of miscreants, but I fear that focusing exclusively on individuals risks masking the institutional failings that have brought the Republic to this point. IMHO the surveillance state is the true legacy of 9/11, and to dismantle it will involve nothing less than the systematic elimination of all of the post 9/11 statutes that underwrite this assault on our constitutionally protected rights. Jefferson was right– security is too of ten purchased at the cost of liberty. I am reminded that the explicit goal of the Red Army Faction in West Germany (aka Baader-Meinhof) was, through acts of terror, to get the government legally to overreach, and in the process destroy the state from within. What else needs to be done to restore the integrity of our federal institutions?

    Liked by 7 people

    • Now your starting to ask the right questions.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Sylvia Avery says:

      While I totally understand your larger point, we have to focus on the individuals first. I keep thinking in terms of a RICO case that would tie together and tie in all the elements and threads of the overall seditious conspiracy/coup. If that could be done, it would set a real example to others and show that accountability and the rule of law aren’t dead.

      But there will have to be some long hard looks at what you call the institutional failings that allowed this. The Patriot Act and this 702/FISA court surveillance thing are poison for a free and open society.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Patreut says:

        You are catching on now. RICO will be used as well as many other statutes to charge,Try,Convict not only US citizens (Barry doesn’t count because he wasn’t a legal sitting President) but Actors in this conspiracy worldwide (ref: December EO from President Trump. POTUS has been informing leaders throughout the world on his overseas trips and phone conversations of whats coming. They are either with us or against us. Think back to the Primary’s Pres Trump told everyone. You do not broadcast your plan to the enemy before you strike. I believe AG Sessions has been a very busy man behind the scenes 🙂

        Liked by 5 people

      • John K Evans says:

        In this instance more so than in any that i have ever seen, blind justice must be served. If we fail to do so, then one of the foundation stones of our civil society– that all of us are equal in the eyes of the law– will become meaningless, If justice is not served, then we shall have become the feudal society that is the end goal of the elite. Even more so than freedom, equality before the law is a historical aberration, and it will not endure if we go on importing millions of people from cultures that are conditioned to seek justice from their feudal masters, and who exhibit no interest in assimilating into our culture. It will not endure if public education continues, with malice aforethought, to indoctrinate our children rather than equip them with the critical thinking skills required to function as autonomous human beings. Study the history of Mexico, with its rigid class divides between criollos, mestizos and indios, and you will see where the identity politics of the Left leads. The end game is feudalism, not socialism, and what has been taking place in DC for the past 9 years is an index of just how far down the feudal path we have already come.

        Liked by 8 people

    • Alligator Gar says:

      Wasn’t Red Army Faction/Bader-Meinhof part of Operation Gladio?

      Like

    • joninmd22 says:

      “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

      It was a quote of Benjamin Franklin

      your larger point is important though and needs to be seriously discussed. In an age of international terrorism and nationwide far left violence espousing rebels what is the proper level of government surveillance?

      Liked by 3 people

      • Alligator Gar says:

        What if the government(s) are doing the terror for their own nefarious purposes? Operation Gladio, etc., etc.

        Liked by 1 person

        • joninmd22 says:

          There’s another old Jefferson quote about that. something about watering the Tree of Liberty.

          We are at the focal point of 100 years of socialist insurgency in America and a totalitarian impulse has grown alongside that horrid ideology. The window for a peaceful resolution of these issues is decreasing quickly.

          I’m hoping that violence can be avoided but not optimistic.

          Liked by 3 people

    • mimbler says:

      Punishing the guilty is the only thing that will prevent this in the future. Creating more laws for law breakers doesn’t help.

      Making a concrete risk of going to prison for the rest of your life, tends to encourage people to follow the rules.

      Like

  14. phoenixRising says:

    more from Sundance’s twitter account

    Like

  15. TwoLaine says:

    You know, now that we know that Huma sent all the important stuff to yahoo along with their most sensitive government passwords… And if she did it how many other yahoos did to? Not to mention the Huma Weiner backup laptop.

    There is an interesting passage in Ms. Stafanik’s questioning (4:10) of Comey, where she mentions that the DOJ has charged hackers with ties to the FSB with the 2014 yahoo hacking. She asks if yahoo was hacked for intelligence purposes. She then asked if the reports were true that if they targeted journalists, dissidents and government officials, does he know what they did with the information they obtained?

    He said that he could not answer either of these questions in this forum. And that’s the guy who let all of them off the hook.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Margaret Berger says:

    Thanks Gail, for cleaning up the loose thread of the FISA court judge getting recused. Just couldn’t understand that bit.

    Like

  17. phoenixRising says:

    Liked by 3 people

  18. Caius Lowell says:

    In my opinion this is the biggest story in our lifetime as it relates to higher education, specifically college and university communists, weaponizing their classrooms to retain political power for their ideological allies.

    Liked by 3 people

  19. phoenixRising says:

    Liked by 2 people

  20. NJF says:

    Another fake news nomination.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. phoenixRising says:

    Liked by 1 person

  22. covfefe999 says:

    I’m still holding out that there were FISA warrants against Manafort, Page, and the server in Trump Tower. Re FISA warrant against Page, there seems to be the most media evidence, some of it quite detailed. Here’s an example from Apr 11 2017 (which is AFTER Clapper claimed there were no FISA warrants):

    The FBI obtained a secret court order last summer to monitor the communications of an adviser to presidential candidate Donald Trump, part of an investigation into possible links between Russia and the campaign, law enforcement and other U.S. officials said.The FBI and the Justice Department obtained the warrant targeting Carter Page’s communications after convincing a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judge that there was probable cause to believe Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power, in this case Russia, according to the officials. […] The government’s application for the surveillance order targeting Page included a lengthy declaration that laid out investigators’ basis for believing that Page was an agent of the Russian government and knowingly engaged in clandestine intelligence activities on behalf of Moscow, officials said. Among other things, the application cited contacts that he had with a Russian intelligence operative in New York City in 2013, officials said. Those contacts had earlier surfaced in a federal espionage case brought by the Justice Department against the intelligence operative and two other Russian agents. In addition, the application said Page had other contacts with Russian operatives that have not been publicly disclosed, officials said. […] The application also showed that the FBI and the Justice Department’s national security division have been seeking since July to determine how broad a network of accomplices Russia enlisted in attempting to influence the 2016 presidential election, the officials said. Since the 90-day warrant was first issued, it has been renewed more than once by the FISA court, the officials said. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-obtained-fisa-warrant-to-monitor-former-trump-adviser-carter-page/2017/04/11/620192ea-1e0e-11e7-ad74-3a742a6e93a7_story.html?utm_term=.d9c8f8fb90de

    This is waaaaaaay too detailed. It doesn’t just mention that there was a FISA warrant, there is detail about the warrant, how and why it was secured, that it was renewed, etc. I’d like to ask Clapper about this.

    Liked by 2 people

    • D. Manny says:

      “Since the 90-day warrant was first issued, it has been renewed more than once by the FISA court, the officials said.”

      The FISA warrant issued 9/26 was on a 30-day extension, not 90 days……

      Liked by 1 person

      • D. Manny says:

        And even if there was another FISA warrant, Page would not have been with the campaign long enough for the warrant to have renewed “more than once.”

        So it’s either a lie that the warrant existed at all or the warrant wasn’t about Page and was on long before Page came along.

        Liked by 1 person

      • All Too Much says:

        I did a word search for warrant and for warrants on the court Order, using the internal search function, and was told those words are not in the document. If that’s true, which I do not know for a certainty, it back’s up SD’s conclusion that we are dealing with “about” queries, not a warrant.

        The Order speaks about “certification”. I think there are some DOJ/FBI folks who now wish they never signed those certifications, assuming they, the certifications, play the role I believe they did.

        Perhaps people are confusing warrant with certifications. That might explain why many, e.g. Sara Carter today, and er sources, refer to warrants. Close but not a cigar.

        Liked by 1 person

      • covfefe999 says:

        I think the article is saying that the first FISA warrant was for 90 days. And I don’t think we know exactly when the warrant was issued. The article said the warrant was secured in the “summer”. Where did you get 9/26?

        Like

    • Mary Morse says:

      This article comes with an interesting graphic of alleged Trump connections. Might be interesting to superimpose the characters and their relationships that have been omitted from the story. Maybe start with Glenn Simpson, etal. Might reveal overlaps, intersections, and who has more connections. Next, it might be productive to add a layer that traces capital flows….

      Like

    • All Too Much says:

      Sara Carter put out a story today citing a source or two, and Hannity, stating there was a warrant, as opposed to Sundance discussion of “about” queries. I think SD hit the nail on the head, digging deep into the FISC.

      A warrant is something the general public, and the clueless MSM, can put their arms around, and have a concept of what is coming out. Most people, I hope, know what a search warrant is. SD’s analysis and conclusion is way over the heads of the general public. I’m still trying to grasp it completely. “About queries” are way over the heads of most, especially those who don’t spent tie here.

      Like

    • covfefe999 says:

      It just stuck out to me just in my latest skimming of that article that is says this:

      Page is the only American to have had his communications directly targeted with a FISA warrant in 2016 as part of the Russia probe, officials said.

      And regarding timing, the article says the FISA warrant was secured in the “summer”. According to all reports I’ve seen, the FBI/DOJ started investigating Muh Russia in July. So I’m guessing the FISA warrant was issued in July or August. Another WaPo article dated Sep 26 2016 said Harry Reid wrote to Comey in July and said Page should be investigated. Page was already on the FBI’s radar from at least one prior investigation so it wouldn’t surprise me at all if he was one of the first targets in the Muh Russia investigation. Now, prior reports I’d seen indicated that Page might have been under surveillance AFTER he resigned from the Trump campaign. But Page didn’t resign until Sep 26, so it’s possible Page was being monitored via FISA warrant while he was still working for the Trump campaign, which of course means that anyone he communicated with also had their data collected. Clapper didn’t know about this? Are these articles just fake news? I don’t think they are. Like I said in my prior post, there’s just way too much detail on this one, and there is really no reason to fabricate any FISA-specific details, they could have just said “warrant” without qualifying it as FISA, or just say “under investigation”.

      And contrary to Sundance and some others, I still think there was a FISA warrant against Manafort and one against the server in Trump Tower. Anyone want to place a small bet with me? 🙂

      Like

  23. freddy says:

    Huma saying she wants to save her marriage is about as funny as Nancy Pelosi telling you it’s all for the children and save DACA if you have a heart. hahahahahahahah Save her marriage or save her a$$….Must be closing in for her to go back with him……..

    Like

    • Fredfiel says:

      Spouses can not be forced to testify against one another can they?

      Liked by 1 person

      • covfefe999 says:

        I thought it had to do with that too. Apparently the official explanation is that they are going to settle out of court. Obviously they’d still need to get the divorce in court but they’re going to divide everything up and make the necessary other arrangements privately. And of course by doing so this buys them time so that if Huma is indicted Weiner doesn’t need to testify against her via prison phone. 🙂

        Like

  24. freddy says:

    The big FOX radio star must have finally come to his senses and started reading here as he’s way behind the curve but he is saying now proven they used the dossier….Watch the rats run……..

    Like

  25. D. Manny says:

    I don’t know if this has been dealt with or not yet, but before I lose my train of thought on the matter, I’m putting it in writing…

    “That interview is so critical to Clapper personally – when questioned about FISA Warrants and Wiretaps six months later, September 24th 2017, he refers the questioning back to his NBC answer on March 5th, 2017.”

    Hold on, because my take on his answer is, his statement was true at the time he said it, which is why he sneakily said refer back to it….in other words, he pulled a “meaning of ‘is'” sleight of hand here. He really wasn’t having intercourse with the FISA warrant, but he did later. Two days after making this statement, the FISA warrant was issued.

    Like

    • covfefe999 says:

      Two days after? We think a FISA warrant might have been issued in Oct 2016 to monitor communications to/from server in Trump tower, and I say there were FISA warrants against Paul Manafort and Carter Page also in 2016. But Clapper’s media apperances were in Mar and Sep 2017. Did I misunderstand you?

      Like

        • covfefe999 says:

          That’s not a warrant. That’s the FISC (court) decision about Rogers’ compliance review and other related matters, most notably his temporary shutdown of the “about queries”..

          Liked by 1 person

          • nimrodman says:

            thx, covfefe, your synopsis came in while I was writing D. Manny to request similar

            Like

          • D. Manny says:

            It’s the Court’s findings on the warrant, which is even better than the original 702.

            Like

            • covfefe999 says:

              No, it’s the court’s findings on Roger’s compliance review and the issues he found with the “about queries” and subsequent remedy. I have read this document before, twice actually. Sundance posted it in a prior thread.

              Like

              • D. Manny says:

                It says quite clearly that it’s about the original 702, and then there were some objections raised in October, which I think is where you’re confused on the date, but it was oral arguments, not in reference to a warrant filed on that date, and the Court is having hearings regarding those objections about the original 702.

                Like

                • covfefe999 says:

                  Rogers was doing a compliance review and on Oct 26 2016 he became aware of all of the “about queries” and he notified the FISC (court). That’s what this document is about. Read the Conclusion section starting on page 95. “Section 702” is not a FISA warrant, it’s a collection of rules/authorizations regarding the collection of data. It has to be renewed periodically and I think the compliance review Rogers was doing was part of that process.

                  Like

        • nimrodman says:

          D. Manny – are you able to summarize what that warrant says for us? You’ve obviously read in detail on this topic and would have an advanced ability to do so.

          I started reading it and saw what appear to be references to prior submissions, several different dates, and at that point my eyes glazed over and I simply can’t muster the mental horsepower.

          If you’re able to summarize things like “who was the subject of this warrant?”, “how does it relate to prior submissions?” – basically, “where’s the beef?”, or your quick take on “FISA Warrants for Dummies”, that kind of thing.

          Much appreciated if you’re willing, thx.

          Liked by 1 person

  26. D. Manny says:

    Now, your suspicions would give more weight to these entries….

    2016-09-29 Harry Reid writes letter to James Comey regarding his fear of Russian interference in the election, based on meetings with senior intelligence officials.
    2016-10-31 Harry Reid blasts FBI for failing to investigate Trump Russia collusion.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. Clarence Beeks says:

    One might think that the timing of this latest information (FISA specifically) has to do with related legislation in the House. If so, its nuanced BS and won’t further the cause of moving legislators to force the government to adhere to the Constitution. As long as the IC has their resources looking inward, the Illegal retrieval and subsequent weaponization of data against politicians will continue. The sheer number of organizations involved in the programs almost guarantees it.

    Like

  28. D. Manny says:

    Something else that’s stuck out with me…the Gang of 8…Obama gave the order for the intelligence services to not notify Congress of their investigation, so that means there’s somebody on the Gang of 8 that isn’t a Deep Stater, somebody Obama didn’t trust. It had to be Nunes.

    Like

    • zimbalistjunior says:

      Nunes stands out from the rest of his congressional colleagues:
      1) he has normal hair
      2) his facial expressions generally indicate feelings of disgust, weariness and general disheartened-ness. As in, I can’t believe I am here amongst these jackals.
      He can be trusted. Not by Obama etc but by the people.

      Liked by 2 people

  29. Pam says:

    Like

  30. Charlotte says:

    Jan 10:

    exclusive
    Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner withdraw their divorce

    https://pagesix.com/2018/01/10/huma-abedin-and-anthony-weiner-call-off-divorce/

    Because spouses cannot testify against each other?

    Liked by 2 people

  31. bill says:

    Okay, guys I have been lucky. Read the reply from Julianne Assangee

    Did FBI under James Comey agreed to reimburse the Clinton campaign and DNC for money it spent on the opposition research?

    Julian is saying “YES” and that good enough for me.

    Liked by 1 person

  32. Mary Morse says:

    Sundance,
    I’m glad to see that you were able to find the information you were looking for your organizational chart.
    I went to the source of those diagrams because I was confused about something in the chart above. At the DoJ website there are 2 org charts that are of interest to me: that of the office of the AG, and that of the NSD (shown). Question: the NSD chart shows the Ass AG. Below the Ass AG is the PDAA G&CoS, with a direct communication (some might say reporting) relationship to the Executive. This relationship appears to not be through the AssocAG. Can you explain where the PDAA G&CoS (with its Exec reporting relationship) sits in the overall organizational chart of the Office of the AG? It’s not shown, is it? Shouldn’t there be a line out of the NSD to the Exec, rather than an implied reporting relationship thru the AG as shown? Thanks

    Like

  33. Charlotte says:

    So re the fake facts Wolff book-DID REINCE PRIEBUS SET TRUMP AND THE WH up?

    In Amazing Self-Own, Gorka Admits WH Staff Was Told to Speak to Wolff For Book:
    https://www.mediaite.com/online/in-amazing-self-own-seb-gorka-admits-wh-staff-was-told-to-speak-to-wolff-for-book/

    “As a result, you’d never see Jim Acosta coming out of my office or Maggie Haberman buying me an espresso at Peet’s around the corner from the West Wing. So, when I met Michael Wolff in Reince Priebus’ office, where he was waiting to talk to Steve Bannon, and after I had been told to also speak to him for his book, my attitude was polite but firm: “Thanks but no thanks.” Our brief encounter reinforced my gut feeling that this oleaginous scribe had no interest in being fair and unbiased.”

    Like

  34. Hey Sundance,

    Amazing Work!!!
    Just a suggestion, for all the links given near the end of the article, would you consider putting a publication date along with the description so if we are inclined to follow the story somewhat chronologically it might be somewhat easier to do…

    Thank you for keeping the Sun(light as disinfectant) Dancing before our eyes! Blessings

    Liked by 1 person

  35. phoenixRising says:

    via truepundit

    BOUNTY: Inspector General Probes Large Cash Prizes Handed Out to Anti-Trump FBI Agents

    Potentially illicit private performance bonuses — or political payoffs — between $30,000 and upwards of $50,000 possibly awarded to high-ranking FBI agents have caught the eye of the Inspector General, according to federal law enforcement sources.

    Your tax dollars at work at the FBI.

    The two levels for cash awards include the Meritorious award and Distinguished rank award, sources said. Recipients receive a cash prize of 20 percent of their base pay for Meritorious and a cash prize of 35 percent of their salary for Distinguished level awards.

    How many cash rewards were handed out among the FBI’s hierarchy? No one truly knows because the laws than govern the award system allow the recipients to remain private. But according to documents obtained by True Pundit, we do know FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was one recipient of the program. McCabe received an approximate $35,000 award from then- FBI Director Robert Mueller prior to his retirement from the Bureau.

    Ironically, Mueller is now allegedly investigating McCabe’s role in the Trump Russia and Trump dossier scandals, as U.S. Special Counsel. Sounds like another conflict of interest.

    “This is a significant amount of money for any FBI employee,” the source said. “We need to know who has been getting these awards and why and how many were under the table.”

    con’t https://truepundit.com/bounty-inspector-general-probes-large-cash-prizes-handed-anti-trump-fbi-agents/

    Like

    • covfefe999 says:

      Is there any evidence to back this up?

      Like

      • phoenixRising says:

        The excerpts I quoted from the article indicate it’s so… first sentence of the post after the headline, then further down “… But according to documents obtained by True Pundit, we do know FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was one recipient of the program.”

        Like

  36. RJones says:

    A couple of questions:
    1/ Why wouldn’t Trump declassify and release some of the “widely distributed” info Nunes reported on that is unrelated to Russia? This would show he was being spied upon and presumably what type of information was ohf interest.
    2/ if, as Rogers found, there was no legal basis for the About Queries prior to Oct 2017, could someone assess the legal impact? How can an investigation predicated on illegal spying not be considered poison fruit of some variety?
    3/ If Mueller is the super-patriot everyone alleges him to be, why would he not be disgusted by the corrupting of his beloved institution for partisan purposes? Why would he want to collaborate with people like Strczk, et al? Why wouldn’t he repoint his investigation at the FBI and DNI to rehabilitate them?
    4/ As Andy McCarthy stated today, “government was weaponized” by the operatives of a party in power in order to main power. “Weaponization” is not a criminal act. What are the criminal acts that the participants conspired to execute?

    Liked by 1 person

    • jameswlee2014 says:

      Using government resources to aid in the political campaign of one candidate and to harm the political campaign of another candidate is against the law. You know that, right?

      Like

  37. jameswlee2014 says:

    I want to make sure I understand this. There are two ways for them to get info on Trump. One is to get permission to spy on him. The other is to have access to the NSA data base. Why? Because, as has been explained many times, the NSA records every single call, text, telegraph; anything that produces an electromagnetic wave is gobbled up by the NSA, they know everything. So, the conspirators were contriving access to NSA files and that’s what the heroic Admiral Rogers put a stop to. This is much worse than them running their own surveillance.

    Like

  38. Jimmy Tets (Questioning) says:

    Where is the FISA judge in all this? Was this info sent to the Hillary Campaign? By whom? To whom?

    Like

  39. Pingback: Dark Clouds Gather – Jack's Newswatch

  40. digleigh says:

    The truth of the matter is the leaders in all branches, and intel are corrupt as heck! They spy on us(NSA) , listen to our conversations, and have dossiers on every American!(per global intercepts, etc..) The Obama admin. had been very active for 6 years! WHEN WE SEE THIS 702 VOTE, WE WILL KNOW WHO IS DEEPSTATE! WE ,THE DEPLORABLES, ARE SICK OF CORRUPT, INCOMPETENT, BRIBEABLE, LYING, CORRUPT LEGISLATORS, INTEL(DNI, CIA, FBI,DOJ, ETC..), LIBERAL JUDGES, LIBERAL MEDIA ,GOPe, marxist left, and all working to thwart a pro-American, pro-Christian, pro-patriotic, pro-national security, pro-American trade and immigration future for our children and grandchildren! You folks are such filth that you would sell your children’s inheritances for a quick, Esau bowl of pottage! You people make us SICK, and we will NEVER believe another election, word out of our legislators mouths, if LAW AND ORDER IS NOT RE-ESTABLISHED,THE PRESIDENT WE ELECTED MINIMALLY SUPPORTED! AND THE CORRUPT ROOTED OUT, AND PUNISHED! …………the whole world groans for the revealing of the sons of God….(scrip.) Heed well your sins, as they will all find you out(scrip.) God is not mocked.. California and the NorthEast elites, better start being kind to his sheep……

    Like

  41. Nada Bojovic says:

    The “fish smell from the head”. None of the directors of CIA,FBI, DOJ etc be able to do this without knowledge of one person?

    Like

  42. Nada Bojovic says:

    I used famous saying in my language, and it looks that someone get it wrong. What that means, if any problem arise and many people are involved in it, there is always main person who mast know about it. I thought it would be strange that all those people were involved in this wire-taping and president Obama did not know anything about it?

    Like

  43. brenda says:

    Excellent report. I wish everyone would read this information.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s