Answering Common Questions About the DOJ and FBI 2016 “Trump Operation”…

This outline is intended to clear up some confusion and answer common questions about the 2016 DOJ and FBI Counterintelligence Operation against candidate Trump.  ie. “The Trump Operation”.

Deep Background #1 HERE – Deep Background #2 HERE

Today Byron York attempts to clear up some details about what congressional intelligence committee members have seen regarding the DOJ/FBI FISA-702 surveillance of Donald Trump.  However, the FISA information is commonly, and inaccurately, conflated with “Wiretap Warrants”.

As we have explained there were no Title III wiretap warrants against the Trump campaign. Title III warrants are the historic reference to the DOJ or FBI wiretapping a suspect to gather information.  Former DNI James Clapper has denied there were any Title III wiretap warrants issued.  James Clapper is correct.

♦Here’s where the verbiage used by media doesn’t match with what was occurring. The DOJ and FBI didn’t use Title III wiretaps, because the current system of NSA intercepting and collecting all electronic data is already one big global wiretap.

The DOJ National Security Division and FBI Counterintelligence Division worked around the need for Title III wiretap warrants by using FISA-702 “Queries” to identify their targeted intercepts.  FISA-702(16)(17) “Queries” work around the need for domestic Title III wiretap warrants by looking at the intersection of “foreign” contacts with U.S. individuals.   Some refer to this approach as “reverse targeting”.

When the investigator at DOJ or FBI, the system ‘user’, interfaces with the NSA data-hub, they use the process of FISA “Queries” to identify their target.  If they are picking up a U.S. citizen the 702 part comes in.  FISA-702 is ‘incidental collection’ of U.S. individuals.

FISA Example: Where is foreign person “Natalia Veselnitskya‘s” cell phone? (input phone number)…

Oh, she’s in Trump Tower,… OK, great.

FISA-702 Query “all ip addresses and cell phone communication within Trump Tower”.

Review data, fill out FISA query authorization form explaining the reason for the FISA second query.  Easy peasy, legal.  That query then becomes a valid “FISA warrant”, but “Warrant” is really a misnomer based on traditional lingo.

The second search is actually a legally approved FISA-702 “query”, not really a “warrant”; the FISA-702 (U.S. individual or entity) search query (form required) is a result of a valid search query upon a foreign actor (no form required).  The 702 authorization form is what people mistakenly refer to as the “warrant”.

See how that works?

[Also remember all FISA-702 approvals can be given retroactively.  The operator doesn’t necessarily need to request approval in advance to search; only to make the search results legal, and then proceed to “unmasking”.]

The DATA already exists.  The DOJ/FBI user is only seeking to find legal ways to explore the existing data using foreign entities to locate what they really want; which is domestic surveillance of a U.S. individual or group, perhaps only loosely connected to the foreign subject or entity.

In the example above, Trump Tower ip addresses are now authorized for further and future exploration by the existence of the legally authorized FISA-702 search “Query”.  Ms. Veselnitskya leaves the building, but the FISA search query remains upon the U.S. ip addresses and U.S. cell phone numbers present while she was there.  Now the DOJ and FBI investigator is just reviewing any additional and ongoing uses of the technology attached to the ip and phone communications.  The surveillance has begun.

That’s an example of using FISA-702 to conduct surveillance upon Trump transition officials via their computers and cell phones.  That’s appears to be what was happening.

♦SECOND QUESTION.  Why would the Trump Transition Team leaving Trump Tower to Bedminister New Jersey stop the FISA-702 surveillance?

Now that you understand how the FISA-702 was conducted, you can see you only need to break the chain of contact.  The Bedminister NJ ip addresses and cell towers are not authorized under the previous FISA-702 “Query”.   That’s why moving everything to NJ creates new ip addresses, new cell towers, etc.  Moving breaks the surveillance chain.

♦THIRD QUESTION.  Why was judge Contreras recused from the Flynn case?

Two reasons – each likely.  First, U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras is a FISA judge.  He might have approved one of the FISA-702 search “Queries”, not wiretaps, the results of which might later have been used as evidence against Mike Flynn.

Second, simply because he is a FISC judge Contreras was on the court when NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers informed the full FISA Court of the unlawful 2016 FISA-702(16)(17) queries; and by extension Contreras has no way of knowing if the person in his court is there as an outcome of one of those unlawful queries.

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

611 Responses to Answering Common Questions About the DOJ and FBI 2016 “Trump Operation”…

  1. hardworkingsob says:

    So on to the penalties for these shenanigans…
    “Criminal sanctions follows violations of electronic surveillance by intentionally engaging in electronic surveillance under the color of law or through disclosing information known to have been obtained through unauthorized surveillance. The penalties for either act are fines up to US$10,000, up to five years in jail, or both” [src: Wikipedia]

    “To carry out monitoring under Section 702, the government chooses targets, which cannot be people or entities the agencies know to be US persons. While the government is legally prohibited from selecting these targets with the real goal of conducting surveillance of a specific US person, we know little about how the government complies with this prohibition.” [src:https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/09/14/q-us-warrantless-surveillance-under-section-702-foreign-intelligence-surveillance%5D

    Liked by 3 people

    • Justah says:

      Link is to “page not found”.

      Like

    • DanO64 says:

      for each count, which could be numerous.

      Like

    • Lunagirl says:

      Slightly off topic but I’m new to this site and don’t know how to post a “new” comment. But why isn’t there more curiosity about Mueller’s delivery of Uranium samples to Rosatom in the fall of 2009? It happened per Wikileaks – and no one disputes that it did – at the request of HRC. But Mueller didn’t work for the State Department so she wouldn’t have been in the chain of command for him. The explanation was supposedly that he was delivering a sample of Uranium from a 2006 sting operation conducted by CIA and Georgia, and that the sample was being delivered as shared intelligence, etc. But the September 2009 delivery of a sample makes no sense when you consider an AP article from January 2007 that indicates Russia had already taken samples from that sting. I always figured he was put in charge of this operation because of his vulnerability and that’s why the deep state couldn’t stop slobbering over him and his supposed integrity, notwithstanding that TAKING the assignment in light of the known conflicts even at the time, belied the very claim. Links to the AP article and Snopes BS explanation here.

      HOLY CRAP. I just re-read WAPO/AP article I was linking and I am almost positive a new sentence has been added “The Rosatom official was quoted as saying that Georgian authorities had given Russia too small a sample to determine its origin, and had refused to provide other information.” I swear this wasn’t in the original article I read. Is that possible? I had sent the question Circa and others, hopefully with a pdf and not a link. I am going to double back and see if I can get the original article.

      https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-robert-mueller-uranium/

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/25/AR2007012500169_pf.html

      Like

  2. covfefe999 says:

    If the queries were prohibited, then I presume they can’t be used against Trump or any of the others whose data was collected in this manner (Manafort, Page, Papadfsd).

    Liked by 1 person

  3. H&HC 2nd-16th says:

    Build the gallows.

    Liked by 6 people

  4. The Rand Paul neighbor fiasco makes me wonder if Rand Paul was not being ‘wiretapped’ too. Can’t pinpoint why, but I just think something fishy was going on.

    Liked by 6 people

  5. Publius2016 says:

    One Congressional Committee can end this in 5 minutes by holding DOJ/FBI in contempt for violating the Presidential Transition Law. Get to work Fools!

    Liked by 5 people

  6. G. Combs says:

    A couple of notes:

    If I recall correctly Admiral Rogers noticed and increase in the “Queries” early in the year and started an investigation in mid year (June?) The investigation was completed in October, he stopped the“Queries” and notified the court.

    Early in the year there was Computer Scientist Professor L. Jean Camp pointing at the Russian bank (Alpha) connecting to a computer in Trump Tower.
    I can not get an accurate date but found this:
    “[…]The early part of last year, a group of computer researchers hatched the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory and, later, used social media to expose their findings….
    on March 1, Camp wrote “The data are there and worth investigation. Why did FBI, #NYTimes kill this story before election.[…]”
    https://www.libertynation.com/clinton-russian-connection/

    Liked by 1 person

  7. hardworkingsob says:

    BREAKING: Hannity/Sara Carter reporting Steele dossier used to secure FISA warrant.

    Like

  8. H&HC 2nd-16th says:

    This may be premature but I’m curious. With what Sundance and the Treepers have come up with so far, who can be charged with what crime today? Those that can be charged with an obvious crime regardless of the severity that will have a good chance of being convicted. I’m not looking for a RICO type catch-em all at once grand conspiracy. Just looking for the good guys to get a couple scores in the win column.

    Like

  9. GW says:

    Looks like Hannity & Co are a little behind the curve.
    They’re still reporting that the dossier was used for a FISA warrant(s), which Sundance is quite sure does not exist.

    Liked by 3 people

    • D. Manny says:

      That’s not what Sundance is saying. We know for a fact they got a 702. Sundance is saying they just used the 702 as the excuse for the spying they were already doing.

      Like

      • GW says:

        Sundance is saying there’re no FISA warrants. He’s making a distinction that 702’s are “about queries.” They’re not taking 702’s to the FISA Court to ask for a court order (warrant) to legitimize their surveillance.

        Liked by 1 person

        • D. Manny says:

          He’s saying at the time Clapper made that statement there was no FISA warrant. It was only after that date that the FISA warrant was requested. Before that, however, there was a lot of information gathering.

          Liked by 2 people

      • Charlotte says:

        Yes They got the FISA 3 weeks before the election in October. But they were spying before that and has applied for 2 FISAS which were rejected.

        Like

    • hardworkingsob says:

      Generally, the FISA statute permits electronic surveillance in two different forms. With or without a court order. I think the scoundrels abused both forms. I’m guessing here because all this is supposed be secret – the court type: Carter Page, Trump servers, Steele Dossier. Some approved? – some denied?

      Liked by 1 person

  10. nikkichico7 says:

    Remember this movie from 1998? …. 😮😤

    Liked by 1 person

  11. lawton says:

    It sounds like it is confirmed they used that dossier to justify surveillance to the FISA Court and really abused the system bad. Its about to get real I think.

    Like

  12. Jim in TN says:

    Great job answering our questions and helping to make sense of this mess.

    Thanks Sundance

    Liked by 2 people

  13. MrACC says:

    just could it be, first FISA denied on basis of first “draft” of dossier; send in Russian to start spying – and retroactively spying, in the meantime work some more fabricated info into the dossier and get it passed with second FISA. Hmm.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. recoverydotgod says:

    Good supplemental article from the Brennan Center (Justice Brennan) to what Sundance is writing about: Understanding 702 queries on warrantlessly obtained data. The whole article is worth the read.

    The FBI’s Warrantless Surveillance Back Door Just Opened a Little Wider
    A loophole gives the FBI routine, warrantless access to Americans’ communications collected under Section 702.

    Elizabeth (Liza) Goitein
    April 21, 2016
    https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/fbis-warrantless-surveillance-back-door-just-opened-little-wider

    -snip-

    The New FBI Procedures

    …As of November 2015, it appears that limitation no longer exists. Displaying the intelligence community’s penchant for defining well-understood terms to mean something entirely different, the FBI’s most recent minimization procedures, in the FISC’s words, “clarify that a search of an FBI storage system containing raw-FISA acquired information does not constitute a ‘query’ within the meaning of the procedures if the user conducting the search does not receive access to unminimized Section 702-acquired information in response to the search.” This includes instances in which the search does return unminimized Section 702-acquired information, and the agent is notified of that fact but is not authorized to access the data. Because such searches are deemed not to constitute “queries,” they presumably are not subject to the requirement that “queries” must be reasonably designed to return foreign intelligence or evidence of a crime…

    -snip-

    Like

  15. G. Combs says:

    I still think Natalia Veselnitskaya was a dual purpose tool.
    She was with two other Russians with Fussion GPS connections when she met with Donald Jr. Donald Jr had Manafort and Jared with him.

    1. Natalia spoke of about Russian Adoptions and the Magnitsky Act.. (Which completely puzzled him.) Here’s the Memo the Kremlin-Linked Lawyer Took to the Meeting With Donald Trump Jr. — No dirt on Clinton, a passing mention of adoptions, and a lot on Bill Browder and the Magnitsky Act. “… armed with a set of talking points arguing American officials were hoodwinked into slapping human rights sanctions on Russia in 2012 and that efforts to expand those measures would hurt relations between Washington and Moscow….” (Interesting article worth reading)

    2. Wikileaks releases the DNC emails a month later. (Russians are accused of the hack)

    3/ The DemonRats favorite buddy, Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak then speaks to General Flynn about ‘Sanctions’ and the Yellow Stream Media goes bats–t crazy. However they were a bit premature because General Flynn was too smart to make any promises to Kislyak.

    This Washington Compost article EXPLAINS WHY the YSM went crazy:
    “[…]Other legal minds agree. “It’s a shocking admission of a criminal conspiracy,” said Jens David Ohlin, associate dean of Cornell Law School, in a statement shared with The Post. “The conversation will now turn to whether President Trump was personally involved or not. But the question of the campaign’s involvement appears settled now. The answer is yes.”

    Jacobovitz said Mueller and his team will certainly be investigating whether there was some kind of quid pro quo between the Trump campaign and Russia on sanctions vs. damaging emails to Clinton.[…]”
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/07/11/donald-trump-jr-may-have-just-crossed-the-legal-line-on-collusion/?utm_term=.ef0594b9b985

    Note that the two witnesses UNRELATED to President Trump, Manafort and Flynn have been charged with crimes and made plea bargains.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Guy Bee says:

      Occams razor. They sent Natalia, a known Russian, to justify the queries. There was no other reason. It was simple and a ruse.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Donna in Oregon says:

      Respectfully disagree. The government sub-contracted this whole deal, and it is entrapment.

      Entrapment means the crime originated in the minds of the government.

      The DNC campaign paid for the Steele dossier, reportedly Obama’s paid for it. The POTUS at the time. Campaigns are not separate from the individual, if the Trump campaign can be held liable then the Clinton, Obama or DNC campaigns can be held liable too.

      Donald Trump Jr. and the Trump campaign was set-up. The manufactured “Russian Collusion” is a case of ENTRAPMENT:

      Fusion GPS. Designed to this to look like a coincidence. But it isn’t. Like was stated in previous post…

      “By an amazing coincidence, Fusion was working on behalf of this strange group of Russians at exactly the same time its founder, Glenn Simpson, was deciding to hire Steele to produce the most famous anti-Russian dossier of all time.

      I originally thought that coincidence was too odd to ignore. But after looking into it and talking to some of the people involved, I came away believing that Fusion had not been employed by “the Russians,” but rather by “some Russians,” and not very sophisticated ones at that.”

      Russiagate and the Magnitsky Affair, Linked Again
      Natalia Veselnitskaya being at the center of this week’s explosive revelations is the latest indication that Russiagate didn’t begin last year – but almost a decade ago

      https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/trump-russia-russiagate-magnitsky-affair-linked-again-w492290

      And that’s where Matt Taibbi’s article is mistaken. By playing dumb, like Obama used to. Remember, “I heard it from the press”. “We don’t know, we need to investigate”, blah blah blah. And we would wonder about how stoopid the Obama admin was….so simplistic, so stoopid. This diversionary tactic of lies and being sneaky worked well for Obama. Sneaky and stoopid is Obama’s MO.

      So was it the DNC, Hillary Clinton’s campaign, or Obama who paid for Fusion GPS? Again, there is an effort to make this confusing, convoluted, and manipulated.

      Obama’s Campaign Paid $972,000 To Law Firm That Secretly Paid Fusion GPS In 2016
      http://thefederalist.com/2017/10/29/obamas-campaign-gave-972000-law-firm-funneled-money-fusion-gps/

      Was it Obama, HIllary or the DNC? The burden of proof is on the FBI and the DOJ. The same people that have been taken over by the Swamp…..

      This is why Mueller isn’t gunning quite so hot for Donald Trump Jr. Mueller knows the Dems did not perfect their defense for the entrapment claim.

      Liked by 3 people

      • DanO64 says:

        The first installment supposedly provided was within five days of his “employment”, allegedly, perhaps, they say, what ever. It was the dueling pissing prostitutes. The most salacious part of the document. As soon as I read it, I said self, Ben Rhodes and Bob Creamer wrote that. Had to have a hook to get the “proper” people interested. What idiot would consider the first installment creditable? I sure would not have paid for a second and I’d be asking for my money back.

        Like

        • Nunya Bidness says:

          Recall that Creamer scripts and stages both sides of an event, and its coverage. During the Trump campaign he directed both sides of a “scuffle” -.the “Trump protestors”. and the “violent Trump supporters” AND the placement and direction of the “spontaneous” tv coverage. In short, he writes, produces, and directs miniature political dramas for television. The Trump Tower Meeting may be a larger version of the same thing. All smoke and mirrors.

          Liked by 1 person

        • gainny says:

          They outsmarted themselves. The “pissing prostitutes” was an immediate red flag.

          Like

  16. LibertyONE says:

    Thanks Sundance for explaining the FISA process. Basically, it’s a process for the FBI/DOJ to CIRCUMVENT obtaining a Title 3 Wiretap warrant where the probable cause would be held to a higher standard and more rigorious investigation would be necessitated. .

    Liked by 1 person

    • hardworkingsob says:

      Exactly. Once the government has gathered data under Section 702 for “foreign intelligence,” the FBI can search it for evidence of any criminal offense. If you’re Hillary/Obama trying to destroy someone, it’s nice to have friends in the DOJ/FBI.

      Liked by 3 people

  17. D. Manny says:

    Now, what’s the most important thing to understand about the FISA court is, it doesn’t have the same stringent safeguards that a criminal warrant would have.

    The FISA = the doorway to criminal charges. That’s the doorway they would use to convert illegal wiretapping into a Flynn conviction……

    Like

    • D. Manny says:

      But eight 702 certs…
      Manafort (gone before the 702 cert acquired)
      Papadopoulos (gone before the 702 cert acquired)
      Gates (gone before the 702 cert acquired)
      Flynn…..

      Who else?
      Bannon? Did Wolfe blackmail Bannon into letting him onto the WH grounds?
      Ivanka?
      Jared?
      Lewandowsky?

      Like

  18. Steve says:

    What if, I repeat, what if Julian Assange comes out and says, Sure, I leaked all this info, and I got it from Seth Rich???

    Like

  19. ray76 says:

    the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk – regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order

    Liked by 1 person

  20. ray76 says:

    surveillance programs rely on two key statutes, Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act (FAA) and Section 215 of the Patriot Act. The former authorizes the collection of communications content under PRISM and other programs, while the latter authorizes the collection of metadata from phone companies such as Verizon and AT&T. However, multiple reports and leaked documents indicate the statutes have been interpreted in secret by the FISA intelligence courts to grant much broader authority than they were originally written to allow. They also indicate that the FISA courts only approve the NSA’s collection procedures, and individual warrants for specific targets are not required.

    https://www.theverge.com/2013/7/17/4517480/nsa-spying-prism-surveillance-cheat-sheet

    Liked by 2 people

    • Dixie says:

      Wonder how much this is costing taxpayers? Other than the fact that we are paying them to track our every move plus the space to store that information.

      Their dragnet must surely be picking up on gazillions of robo calls. Why don’t they make themselves useful by doing something FOR us for a CHANGE and stop all that crap. SPIT!

      Liked by 1 person

  21. Thank you for clarifying FISA 702 for me. Now Trump’s transition move makes more sense.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ray76 says:

      “I, sitting at my desk,” said Snowden, could “wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email”.

      US officials vehemently denied this specific claim. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House intelligence committee, said of Snowden’s assertion: “He’s lying. It’s impossible for him to do what he was saying he could do.”

      But training materials for XKeyscore detail how analysts can use it and other systems to mine enormous agency databases by filling in a simple on-screen form giving only a broad justification for the search. The request is not reviewed by a court or any NSA personnel before it is processed.

      XKeyscore provides the technological capability, if not the legal authority, to target even US persons for extensive electronic surveillance without a warrant

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data

      Liked by 2 people

      • CirclingTheDrain says:

        Yep. So you wonder: was Rogers misinformed/clueless about the technology he was in charge of, or deliberately lying ?

        Like

  22. Nessie509 says:

    It was odd how President Trump said at the meeting of his staff, “ You never know what will happen in the next few days.”
    Wonder if he already knows? The Big Ugly?

    Liked by 5 people

  23. Charlotte says:

    Thomas Paine @Thomas1774Paine

    Cash, prizes for Trump saboteurs. #FBI
    5:14 PM – Dec 11, 2017

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

    https://truepundit.com/bounty-inspector-general-probes-large-cash-prizes-handed-anti-trump-fbi-agents/

    Liked by 2 people

    • Dixie says:

      Get ’em for tax evasion. Since they wish to remain anonymous, there is no doubt they never paid taxes on these so-called cash prizes.

      Like

    • Charlotte says:

      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.
      &
      Some agents believe the awards have been used as political payoffs inside the Buerau, sources said. Other agents said rewards like extra time off, extended off-the-book vacation time and other rewards may have been employed to reward agents for Democratic-linked favors. And job promotions too within FBI ranks, sources stressed.

      Did the same FBI personnel linked to ongoing scandals and recent investigations receive cash from their supervisors?

      Peter Strzok
      Bill Priestap
      James Baker
      Lisa Page
      Andrew McCabe
      And the list goes on …

      Ex-FBI Director James Comey and McCabe both had the ability to submit personnel for such awards, sources said. The IG wants to know if such awards were linked to any nefarious political operations inside the Bureau, FBI sources said.

      Absent investigation by the IG or Congress, the program allows the recipients to remain under the radar:

      According to the guidelines of the reward programs:

      Employees “can opt not to have their names publicly released as recipients because of personal privacy exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act. While most winners agree to public recognition, some are reluctant to do so because it is easy to figure out the amount of their Presidential Rank Award since it is based on publicly-available federal salaries. And there has been a perception among some senior executives and other observers that the administration in recent years has pressured federal agencies to avoid drawing attention to the annual winners of the nation’s highest award for civil service — and the hefty bonuses they receive — because of the sensitive fiscal and political climate.”

      Convenient.

      Liked by 1 person

  24. jstanley01 says:

    “…because the current system of NSA intercepting and collecting all electronic data is already one big global wiretap…”

    What a world…

    Liked by 1 person

  25. tunis says:

    When Klein and other first showed that the federal government was conducting mass surveillance by collecting all domestic communications. The government lied by saying they didn’t. Clapper even lied under oath to Congress. It was only after Snowden laid it all out that people truly knew what the government was doing all those years.

    Here’s the irony. It was the Republicans and the Republican Dubya administration that put this mass surveillance together under the guise of “fighting” the War on Terror. Only guys like Ron Paul and the few civil libertarians opposed it. They were dismissed as fringe. The Democrats then used the surveillance infrastructure pushed hard by Republicans to screw them over.

    Further irony. Nunes, Jordan, Grassley, etc are on one side making a lot of effort to uncover a conspiracy at the FBI & DOJ to use this infrastructure for partisan reasons. On the other side they are working to lump the new FISA bill that will grant the FBI & DOJ & NSA even more powers and more loopholes with a must pass spending bill or else the government shuts down. Only Rand Paul is fighting a lone fight by threatening to filibuster. And guess what he is being accused of shutting the government down. This is how DC works. They don’t care about the Constitution!

    Liked by 2 people

  26. jstefano1 says:

    [Also remember all FISA-702 approvals can be given retroactively. The operator doesn’t necessarily need to request approval in advance to search; only to make the search results legal, and then proceed to “unmasking”.]

    The DATA already exists. The DOJ/FBI user is only seeking to find legal ways to explore the existing data using foreign entities to locate what they really want; which is domestic surveillance of a U.S. individual or group, perhaps only loosely connected to the foreign subject or entity.

    Once you’ve got the “DATA,” isn’t the information then available to be leaked to the media, to the opposing campaign, or anyone who can gain an advantage, financially, or politically?

    Liked by 1 person

  27. ray76 says:

    There should be an audit trail associated with FISA 702 queries. It includes the justification for the query.

    https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/Doc 14 – NSA External Process Document re U.S. Person Queries of Metadata.pdf

    Like

  28. fred5678 says:

    NONE of the NSA’s capabilities about sweeping up all communication should be news to alert folks:

    Dan Brown’s first novel, Digital Fortress, was inspired, he says, from an incident when Secret Service visited his school campus after a student had used the words “kill” and Clinton” in the same sentence in a private email.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/may/29/qanda.janeperrone

    Like

  29. Charlotte says:

    SEAN HANNITY: I’m Hearing it was Either Jim Comey or Andrew McCabe who Paid for the Phony Dossier! (VIDEO)

    http://thegatewaypundit.com/2018/01/sean-hannity-im-hearing-either-jim-comey-andrew-mccabe-paid-dossier/

    Like

  30. Charlotte says:

    Mark Meadows: “Some of the things that will be coming out are so unbelievable that the FBI and DOJ would actually allow it to happen. And I would also say that there are other agencies… We are focusing in, honing in on that target.”

    http://thegatewaypundit.com/2018/01/mark-meadows-im-hearing-things-coming-dossier-fisa-abuse-unbelievable-video/

    Liked by 1 person

  31. ray76 says:

    I think the phony dossier was for pubic consumption only. It was one component among others designed to mold public opinion.

    The NSA surveillance, unmasking, etc were for internal use by the conspirators in the campaign, DNC, FBI, DOJ, NSA, CIA, and the DNI.

    Like

  32. Jeff says:

    “The DOJ National Security Division and FBI Counterintelligence Division worked around the need for Title III wiretap warrants by using FISA-702 “Queries” to identify their targeted intercepts. >>>>>>>FISA-702(16)(17) “Queries” <<<<<work around the need for domestic Title III wiretap warrants by looking at the intersection of “foreign” contacts with U.S. individuals. Some refer to this approach as “reverse targeting”."

    with Queries being the flowery language for violating the 4th amendment right to privacy of US CITIZENS !!

    Some refer to this as SKIRTING the 4th amendment . Then NBC stages an interview with Obama DNI James Clapper and asks him was their a FISA WARRANT .https://youtu.be/mrO7ePSOM6w

    Clapper ..in his best William Jefferson Clinton ' that depends on what 'is' .,….IS " , replies NO there was no FISA WARRANT to my Knowledge . Parsing words for the NBC VIEWERSHIP of fools .

    And thanks to Sundance we know Clapper is correct . However , CNN NEVER ASKED what about any FISA -702(16)(17) " QUERIES " were there any of those active on the Trump campaign ?

    As we know NSA director Admiral Mike Rogers conducted a review of those queries and likely told the president elect about them on November 17th 2016 . As evidenced by Trump moving his transition HQ to his Golf Course in NJ .

    The thing about the commies is they use language to hide their subversion of the US CONSTITUTION …the most recent of FAMOUS WORDSMITHS is Jonathan Gruber's use of " TORTURED LANGUAGE " to pass Obamacare .

    '

    Like

  33. Sorry to be off topic, but has the format of the treehouse changed? I used to see a blog-like format, but now it looks like a website. The font is real small, and there is a side column. If I want to chirp, I have to scroll all the way to the bottom. Before, there was a place to chirp after each comment. Help?

    Like

  34. DanO64 says:

    Working for me. Just added a comment to an older post.

    Like

  35. Plexiflex says:

    This makes no sense. Obama spied on Americans. How did he get away with that when he had no “foreigner threat” excuse to fall back on in those circumstances? Sounds like things are still being covered up.

    Like

  36. D. Manny says:

    “On Thursday [JAN. 12, 2017], the Obama administration finalized new rules that allow the National Security Agency to share information it gleans from its vast international surveillance apparatus with the 16 other agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community.”
    https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/01/obama-expanding-nsa-powers/513041/
    ———————————————————————–
    “Under Executive Order 12333 as it previously existed, NSA analysts had to make an initial determination and apply a set of privacy rules before sharing raw signals-intelligence information with other parts of the intelligence community. After this change, it doesn’t necessarily have to be an NSA analyst that makes that determination—that information can be shared with other parts of the intelligence community.

    “So it doesn’t change the substantive rules, it doesn’t change the scope of collection, it doesn’t change the types of protection, it doesn’t change the possible uses; it essentially just broadens the group of people who can apply those protections to the raw intelligence.”
    ———————————————————————–

    Like

  37. D. Manny says:

    It needs to be noted that it is not illegal to do the wiretapping of the Trump campaign. The only illegal part is what you do with the information:

    ‘‘(4) USE OF INFORMATION.—……..no information obtained or evidence derived
    from such acquisition, except under circumstances in which
    the target of the acquisition is determined not to be a United
    States person, shall be received in evidence or otherwise disclosed
    in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or before
    any court, grand jury, department, office, agency, regulatory
    body, legislative committee, or other authority of the United
    States, a State, or political subdivision thereof, and no information
    concerning any United States person acquired from such
    acquisition shall subsequently be used or disclosed in any other
    manner by Federal officers or employees without the consent
    of such person, *********except with the approval of the Attorney General********
    if the information indicates a threat of death or serious bodily
    harm to any person.

    https://www.scribd.com/document/349542716/Top-Secret-FISA-Court-Order-President-Obama-Spying-on-Political-Enemies#fullscreen&from_embed
    —————————————-
    Now it makes sense why Fusion GPS was trying to establish that somebody has already died as a result of the dossier……

    Like

    • D. Manny says:

      Remember how Christopher Steele went into hiding after publishing the dossier, saying he was in fear of his life?

      Like

    • Lurker says:

      It’s probably illegal to obtain a FISA warrant with evidence you know is false, or evidence that you have stated has been verified when you know you haven’t verified it.

      Like

  38. D. Manny says:

    A judicial review is what triggers a 30-day review instead of the normal 90-day review:

    JUDICIAL REVIEW OF CERTIFICATIONS AND PROCEDURES.—
    ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—
    ‘‘(A) REVIEW BY THE FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE
    COURT.—The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
    shall have jurisdiction to review a certification [FISA warrant] submitted…”

    ‘‘(B) TIME PERIOD FOR REVIEW.—The Court shall review
    a certification [what we’ve been calling a FISA warrant] submitted
    in accordance with subsection (g)
    and the targeting and minimization procedures adopted
    in accordance with subsections (d) and (e) and shall complete
    such review and issue an order under paragraph
    (3) not later than 30 days after the date on which such
    certification and such procedures are submitted.”
    ———————————-
    Now, the law lays out very clearly exactly what issues would trigger a 30-day review:

    ‘‘(2) REVIEW.—The Court shall review the following:
    ‘‘(A) CERTIFICATION.—A certification submitted in
    accordance with subsection (g) to determine whether the
    certification contains all the required elements.
    ‘‘(B) TARGETING PROCEDURES [The Who].—The targeting procedures
    adopted in accordance with subsection (d) to assess
    whether the procedures are reasonably designed to—
    ‘‘(i) ensure that an acquisition authorized under
    subsection (a) is limited to targeting persons reasonably
    believed to be located outside the United States;
    and
    ‘‘(ii) prevent the intentional acquisition of any
    communication as to which the sender and all intended
    recipients are known at the time of the acquisition
    to be located in the United States.
    ‘‘(C) MINIMIZATION PROCEDURES [Ensuring no 4th Amendment violations].—
    The minimization
    procedures adopted in accordance with subsection (e) to
    assess whether such procedures meet the definition of minimization
    procedures under section 101(h) or section 301(4),
    as appropriate. ”
    https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ261/pdf/PLAW-110publ261.pdf

    Like

  39. sukietawdry says:

    Who sent Natalia to Trump Tower to set up the FISA-702 search query so surveillance could begin?

    How many campaign officials are sufficiently sophisticated or knowledgable about FISA laws/procedures to realize that bringing a foreign national into your campaign headquarters can set you up for domestic surveillance?

    This stinks. And the average American doesn’t have a clue in hell what goes on.

    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