Did Justice Department FISA Fraud Create U.S. District Court Judge Recusal?…

On the night of Thursday December 7th, 2017 it was announced that U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras was recused from the case against General Mike Flynn.  This recusal came five days after Judge Contreras accepted the initial pleading from Flynn.  Almost two months have passed, and there’s no explanation why?

(Reuters) The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia judge presiding over the criminal case for President Donald Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has been recused from handling the case, a court spokeswoman said on Thursday. (read more)

If sufficient judicial conflict existed on December 7th, why wasn’t that conflict present on December 1st, when Judge Contreras presided over Flynn’s initial pleading?

 

The story behind why U.S. District Court Judge would be recused, is transparently missing from any follow-up by media.  With all the current sunlight over possible manipulation of a FISA court application by the FBI, no-one seems curious if Judge Rudolph Contreras was the FBI’s FISA approval judge, and the U.S. DC Judge in the Flynn pleading.

The story has disappeared into the swamp; but the story is important.

There is a very strong possibility that U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras was forcibly recused by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, because Contreras is also the FISA Court Judge who signed-off on the 2016 FISA application (warrant) that led to the wiretapping and surveillance of General Flynn.  That FISA application is now being questioned.

(link)

The initial media report stated Judge Contreras “was recused” implying the decision was ultimately put upon him.  However, I repeat, if there was a conflict on December 7th, 2017 wouldn’t that same conflict have existed on December 1st (Flynn pleading).?

If the conflict did exist on December 1st, 2017, why did Contreras even allow himself to preside over the first hearing of General Mike Flynn’s rather odd guilty plea?

.

As more details surface, it is increasingly likely the DOJ/FBI  FISA application in 2016 was based on sketchy, perhaps fraudulent, information.  It is becoming increasingly clear that the DOJ/FBI, under the guise of a counterintelligence investigation, used the ‘Clinton Dossier’, political opposition research, to apply for FISA court approval to conduct surveillance on the campaign of Donald Trump .

According to mounting evidence, the DOJ National Security Division, headed by John P Carlin, was working with the FBI Counterintelligence Division, headed by H.W. “Bill” Priestap, to spy on the Trump campaign.

What are the rules of FISA (approval/warrant) cases where the warrant leads to a prosecution?  Is the FISA approving Judge allowed to preside over a federal case that is a direct outcome from the judge’s granting authority?

The only two significant things that happened between the initial Mike Flynn plea hearing (Dec 1st) and the recusal of Judge Contreras (Dec 7th) was:

#1) The stories about anti-Trump FBI Agent Peter Strzok and his involvement with Fusion-GPS and Christopher Steele hit the headlines; and

#2) FBI Director Chris Wray appeared before the House Judicial Committee and Representative Jim Jordan demanded the FBI show their 2016 FISA application material. (Hearing Dec. 7th)

In fact, Judge Contreras recused himself only a few hours after that House Judicial Committee hearing. These are all just general questions that stem from Judge Contreras appearing to concede to a conflict, but doing so only AFTER the first administrative hearing on the case.

Apparently no-one else is in the least bit curious; and absent of anyone seeking such clarity; it leads CTH to wonder if U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras wasn’t possibly the same judge that denied the initial FISA application in June/July of 2016.  According to what information is available the standard process for the rare instances where FISA-702 approvals are denied, is for any subsequent follow-up application to go to the same judge.

It’s very rare that a FISA application from the DOJ/FBI is denied. Considering the possibility the earlier denial was based, in part, on the target (candidate Donald Trump) of the FISA warrant; and considering the massive ramifications within the U.S. government applying to monitor, wiretap and use surveillance upon a presidential candidate; it would not be a stretch to think Judge Contreras might even establish a ‘higher threshold’ for granting such surveillance authority.

Given what we know now, that we did not know before, namely that FBI Agent Peter Strzok and DOJ Deputy Bruce Ohr were part of the counterintelligence operation that began in June/July 2016…. and understanding that Nellie Ohr, Bruce’s wife, was working for Fusion GPS the contractor for Christopher Steele and the Clinton Dossier; [Ultimately hired by Hillary Clinton]  And accepting that the information within the dossier (whole or part) was within underlying 2016 FISA application, the legal construct of the FISA application is suspect.

The FISA issues get even more convoluted when you consider within this entire series of event you also have the NSA Director (Mike Rogers) and DOJ-NSD (John P Carlin) informing the FISA court in mid-October, 2016, that for multiple years FISA-702 searches had been occurring without court authorization; and the entire FISA-702 system had been abused.

The full FISA Court Ruling (declassified and released in April 2017 by DNI Dan Coaats) containing the 2016 admissions from the NSA and DOJ is below.  There’s a growing likelihood the admissions to the full FISA Court panel happened only a few days after Judge Rudolph Contreras approved the fraudulent FISA application to monitor Trump.

I pulled out a few sections [page 83, pdf] CRITICAL to understanding the scale of FISA abuse that was taking place:

Pg 83, 86. “FBI gave raw Section 702–acquired information to a private entity that was not a federal agency and whose personnel were not sufficiently supervised by a federal agency for compliance minimization procedures.”

.

Please pay close attention to this section, pg 84, [Note the date April 18th, 2016]:

Which takes us back to U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras.

Was Contreras forcibly recused by Chief Justice John Roberts (who controls the FISA court) as an outcome of concerns from the DOJ and FBI abuse of the “FISA System”, and because Judge Ruben Contreras was the presiding judge over all of the FBI applications therein throughout this counterintelligence operation?

Was Contreras ultimately seeing in Flynn’s appearance before him in court, evidence of what happened specifically because of DOJ fraud in the FISA process.

FUBAR

So many questions, and yet a transparent lack of overall curiosity around the recusal.

FBI SIDE: FBI Agent Peter Strzok’s former boss was Bill Priestap, FBI Asst. Director in charge of Counterintelligence. [The same Bill Priestap James Comey stated was the person who decided not to tell congressional oversight of the investigation] Bill Priestap’s boss was FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. Directly above McCabe in the chain-of-command was FBI Director James Comey.

Inside the DOJ: Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce G Ohr’s former boss was Asst. AG John P Carlin (National Security Division).  Carlin’s boss was Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates. Sally Yates boss was Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, 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, Spying, Susan Rice, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

318 Responses to Did Justice Department FISA Fraud Create U.S. District Court Judge Recusal?…

  1. Judicial branch conflict-checking is a process, not a one-time event.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. InquisitorLost says:

    Not seeing how Roberts could force a recusal unless an actual motion for recusal appeal by a lower court party reached the supreme court.

    My few years old copy of Oconner’s Rules for Civil Procedure (I’m not an Attorney) states that recusal occurs under provisions stated in 28 USC 144 and 28 USC 455. 28 USC 144 involves motions for recusal from a party and 28 USC 455 involves mainly self-recusals.

    It looks like 455(b)(3) applies here: (3) Where he has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy.

    Like

    • sundance says:

      FISA Court. Roberts holds authority over FISA Court.

      Liked by 8 people

      • ForGodandCountry says:

        That’s not very reassuring, given that Roberts could be compromised.

        Like

      • InquisitorLost says:

        The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia judge presiding over the criminal case for President Donald Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is not a FISA court. It is a regular District Court. Roberts could have ‘advised’ Contreras on the matter but there is no formal way for a SC Chief Justice to force a district court judge to be recused by order that I can find. And these OConner’s Rule books are 1600 pages w small print.

        Liked by 1 person

        • InquisitorLost says:

          Sorry, first sentence should read:The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia holding the criminal case for President Donald Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is not a FISA court.

          Like

        • GB Bari says:

          Roberts, having authority over the FISA court can force recusal of a FISA court judge which Contreras is. The FISA Court judges wear two hats : their regular court positions plus the FISA Court as needed during their appointment. Sundance spelled this out clearly; see the chart of FISA Court judges way up the page.

          Like

    • Twodees Partain says:

      As I understood it, the recusal was voluntary, not directed. Am I remembering it incorrectly?

      Like

  3. Stormyeyes says:

    ??

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Comrade Mope says:

    I recommend footnote #68 on the bottom of page 85 for a discussion on whether the contractors were to be considered a part of another federal agency. The FISC decided they didn’t need to reach that question.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Arkindole says:

    Well, we’ll probably see what is playing out real soon.

    “Judge Emmet Sullivan was randomly assigned to take over the case after Judge Rudolph Contreras recused himself.”
    //
    “No sentencing date has been set for Flynn, who has agreed to cooperate with Mueller’s team.”
    “Contreras had told both sides to report on the status of the case by Feb. 1. It will now be up to Sullivan to decide whether to stick with that schedule or set a new one.”

    If the House IC votes to release tomorrow I wonder how that will affect the dynamics will be.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/07/michael-flynn-judge-sentencing-287001

    Like

  6. missilemom says:

    FISA appointed judges must have experience with intelligence community unlike what I would think most federal judges have. So this judges relationships would be a good place to start. Relationships and mentors. Judges don’t live in a vacuum and we have seen bias run rampant over the travel ban and other issues.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. dayallaxeded says:

    Has anyone seen the actual guilty plea document? Was it an “Alford plea?” Under “Alford” it’s possible for a guy like Flynn to plead guilty, “because it’s in his best interest to do so” (basically acknowledging that he can’t beat the charges for whatever reason), but without actually admitting to the factual allegations of the indictment/bill of information. That should be an easier plea to get thrown out than a full admission, though the kind of prosecutorial misconduct that appears to have occurred along with the conflicted judge might require avoidance/vacating of almost any plea. I’m surprised we haven’t seen a motion to vacate the plea or a habeas petition seeking the same relief.

    Like

  8. fleporeblog says:

    All I can say is that they are screwed and there is absolutely nothing that the Left, Democrats, Hollywood, MSM can do to stop it!

    From the article linked above:

    Now, if these “un-redactions” are accurate, the Hillary Clinton campaign, the Democrat National Committee, President Obama’s “Organizing for America” all seem to have conspired with the FBI to first fix the result of the presidential election and — when that failed — to invent a way to remove Trump from office.

    There was no way in hell did any of these POS think that our President was going to win. The fact that Barry utilized his own organization, “Organizing for “America”, puts him squarely in the crossfire. They were providing unmasked information on our President and his team to Barry’s organization.

    The fun is just a matter of days (release of the memo), weeks (release of information that pertains to the info in the memo) and months away (the finalized IG Report).

    Winter ❄ is truly here!

    Liked by 8 people

  9. G. Combs says:

    It is possible there were actually two, entirely separate attempts to get FISA Court approval.
    One the pee pee dossier

    The other may have been the L. Jean Camp – Alfa bank pinging computer in Trump towers. This may actually have been the ‘successful’ one given the Hillary Clinton Tweet on 10/31/2016.

    The DATE late spring is important to the timeline.
    “We’re the Union of Concerned Nerds,” in the wry formulation of the Indiana University computer scientist L. Jean Camp. In late spring, this community of malware hunters placed itself in a high state of alarm. Word arrived that Russian hackers had infiltrated the servers of the Democratic National Committee.. Some of the most trusted DNS specialists—an elite group of malware hunters, who work for private contractors—have access to nearly comprehensive logs of communication between servers.. They are entrusted with something close to a complete record of all the servers of the world connecting with one another.“ https://thevotingnews.com/2016/11/page/39/

    “The Slate story itself was based…[on] speculation by a small group of computer scientists about whether a list of internet pings between servers in the U.S. and Russia might have signified the existence of a backchannel between the Trump Organization and the Russian finance sector. …some appeared to represent a rare and powerful (though not impossible or unheard of) ability to monitor the functioning of the internet. But all of the work done by these researchers, apparently led by a pseudonymous luminary in the internet infrastructure world named “Tea Leaves,”Alfa Bank vehemently denied the conclusions of the computer scientists (and Slate), claiming the suspicious internet traffic was caused by errant spam emails from Trump hotels” https://theintercept.com/2017/10/26/russian-bank-accused-of-trump-connection-tries-to-clear-name-by-pressuring-u-s-computer-researcher/

    “The resumption of the computer pings started last month, and Alfa’s cybersecurity experts traced evidence that the activity was actually being spoofed — or hacked –through a third party from a masked computer address inside the United States, the source said. “ http://www.truthandaction.org/report-hacker-set-russian-bank-trump-organization-create-illusion-inappropriate-communications/2/

    More on L. Jean Camp
    Before teaching she was at Sandia National Laboratories. AND She served as the Legislative Assistant in military, telecommunications, and intellectual property in North Carolina’s 2nd congressional district. — WIKI

    The fabricated DNS logs – April Lorenzen aka Tea Leaves setup also has Fusion GPS connection. Reportedly they pushed the fake story to the media. Slate published 10-31-16, but Hillary tweeted one hour before Slate published. https://weaponizedautism.wordpress.com/2017/04/09/trump-dns-logs-fabricated/

    Intercept 1 Nov 2016 sheds more light on it:
    “The Intercept (and other outlets) were presented with three documents: an academia-style white paper about the server, an analysis of that white paper, and a sprawling dossier on Alfa Bank. The author of the analysis paper refused to comment on the record or allow his name to be published. Both Tea Leaves and the analysis author said they did not know who wrote the other documents, and would not say how they obtained them. Professor L. Jean Camp, an esteemed computer scientist quoted at length in the Slate piece and also interviewed by The Intercept, said she knew the author of the Alfa Bank document — compiled with the exhaustive detail of a political oppo team, not a university researcher — but would not reveal who it was. Tea Leaves himself [sic] told The Intercept that he [sic] had to keep his identity and methods secret because “I run a cybersecurity company and I do not want DDOS and never have we been DDOS, nor do I want other attention.” ”

    Liked by 2 people

  10. freddy says:

    With all this evidence and research clearly available thanks to SD how can guys go on Sunday shows and deny all this is so real..They will eat their words soon. Why are anchors at all the media saying only a couple rogue FBI guys. Can they not read. I’m a guy at home and 1000K times more informed than any fool on FOX……..Come on guys it’s all here take a good read before the rain comes down……

    Liked by 2 people

    • G. Combs says:

      Freddy,
      The Urinal-ists at the Yellow Stream Media are NOT interested in reporting the truth, they are only interested in shaping our perceptions and telling us what to think.

      Liked by 1 person

      • mutantbeast says:

        Not media. Proagandists. The “media” died when they found out they could bring down Joe McCarthy for telling the truth about communists in the US insitutions, then when they blew Watergate far out of proportion, because all the old Kennedyites always hated Nixon because he was always associated with McCarthy.

        Like

    • fabrabbit says:

      I cannot watch any tv news anymore, not even FOX. There is absolutely no depth of reporting or analysis. I do watch WSJ Editorial Report (FOX) because they get pretty deep into the issues.

      Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      You have your perfect evidence that what is printed in the Leftist Propaganda Newspapers and stated by Leftist Propaganda Networks show hosts and panels is usually tortured spin or total fabrication, *occasionally“ salted with a piece of truth in order to claim credibility. I don’t waste my time watching or reading any of their garbage anymore. You can usually get all sides of every current issue on good conservative sites.

      Like

  11. freddy says:

    Is there any way all these FISA documents could be altered or destroyed………..

    Like

  12. Contreras’s visits/dates at the White House http://white-house-logs.insidegov.com/

    Liked by 3 people

  13. Blue Moon says:

    Did I understand that Flynn will go before a judge to see how he has aided the SC since his plea of guilty and if he has worked with them (ratted out the President) they might go easy on him. So his punishment will be based on what dirt he gives the SC on PT. Remember-they will get PT one way or another and there is nothing we can do to stop it. JMO

    Like

    • Cow wow says:

      Do you have a link?

      Like

      • Blue Moon says:

        Here is Flynn’s statement. He agrees to work with the SC: “I recognize that the actions I acknowledged in court today were wrong, and, through my faith in God, I am working to set things right,” Mr. Flynn said. “My guilty plea and agreement to cooperate with the special counsel’s office reflect a decision I made in the best interests of my family and of our country. I accept full responsibility for my actions.”

        Like

    • A good thread on General Flynn.

      “This was SAVAGE. They LIED about his patriotism & loyalty. They TRASHED his reputation. They RUINED his career. After Trump won, Comey’s FBI & Yates DOJ ENTRAPPED him, in a seditious attempt to bring him & Trump down.”

      https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/955933259594055680.html

      Liked by 2 people

      • georgiafl says:

        Imperator Rex 12/23 thread on topic of Yates/Lynch attempt to destroy Trump:

        Since she was fired, Yates Democrat allies have circled wagons, given her several meaningless awards and honors. “In January 2016, Yates received Emory University School of Law’s Emory Public Interest Committee (EPIC) Inspiration Award.[54] Following Yates’s dismissal as Acting Attorney General, Representative Jackie Speier nominated her for the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award, and Georgia State Senator Elena Parent introduced a resolution commending Yates.[42][43] In April 2017, Yates received the Mary Church Terrell Freedom and Justice Award during the Detroit NAACP’s 62nd Annual Fight for Freedom Fund Dinner.” (wikipedia)

        Will go back to work at King and Spalding (whence came our new FBI director) or teach at Emory or GA Law schools or just serve on some corporate Wall St. boards and rake in millions for her name alone?

        Spit! She’s no patriot and should have her bar license revoked.

        Liked by 1 person

  14. Newt Love says:

    All of the FBI and DoJ are employees of the Executive Branch, of which President Trump heads. Judges, like the complicit Judge Contreras, are employees of the Judicial Branch, of which John Roberts is the head.

    The Judicial Branch folks are experts at sweeping any embarrassment under the rug, instead of actually cleaning it up.

    Like

  15. frank field says:

    Since Flynn is not sitting around on his keister twiddling his thumbs, and presumably his lawyer
    is worth more than minimum wage, they have to be on this for his exoneration. Right? Why has his lawyer not HAMMERED this? Perhaps they’re waiting and watching. C’mon forensic media! Thank you Sundance.

    DRAIN IT

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Q&A says:

    Also forgotten is Mary McCord, assistant DOJ-NSD who slipped into John Carlin’s chair when he bailed for a private law firm position after the FISA warrant ruse was successful. She left within months for a temp visiting prof of law position at Georgetown. A hard-driving workaholic who was lead on the Russia-Trump collusion case, chosen by Sally Yates to go with her to the White House to push false warnings about Mike Flynn, and who worked directly under John Carlin for a couple of years and knew what he knew – she suddenly hangs it all up to hide out in academia in the flimsiest of positions? Curious.

    https://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/mccord-mary.cfm#

    Liked by 3 people

  17. 30yr_Veteran says:

    Just a comment for consideration even though I fully believe Sundance’s assumptions for some of the redacted portions of the FISA court’s finding are valid, logical and I agree with them completely .

    From page 86: “FBI gave raw Section 702–acquired information to a private entity that was not a federal agency and whose personnel were not sufficiently supervised by a federal agency for compliance minimization procedures.”

    It is assumed “private entity” is referring to Fusion GPS running amuck using “about queries” without adult supervision from the FBI. Is it possible the “private entity that was not a federal agency” referred to in the quote may be the Clinton campaign or the DNC since Fusion GPS as a contractor to the FBI could be considered a de facto part of a federal agency and would have had some level of “supervision” all though that level may have been insufficient? Not trying to toss a turd in punch bowl here since I concur with the initial assumption but just trying to look at it from all angles.

    Like

    • cboldt says:

      FBI sharing directly with a political campaign is obviously a no-no.
      In addition to Fusion-GPS (and it’s various related names), decent speculation is Crowdstrike had an inside-the-secret-snooping seat too.

      Liked by 1 person

      • 30yr_Veteran says:

        I concur…but what is becoming increasingly apparent each day is the FBI/DOJ (read “small group”) has a number of no-noes in the mix. what’s one more for sharing with a political campaign?

        Liked by 1 person

    • 30yr_Veteran says:

      …and another thing. Sorry, I forgot to add…look at the first two words of the quote “FBI gave…” Why would the FBI have to give Fusion GPS anything if they were the ones conducting the about queries. Fusion GPS would already have the info so the quote should start with something like “FBI contractor misused…” or “FBI allowed contractor to retain/use…”

      Liked by 1 person

    • Red Frog says:

      See footnote #68 on the bottom of page 85

      Like

      • 30yr_Veteran says:

        Thanks Red Frog. The footnote you cited does provide some clarification. All this legalese is enough to make a fellas hair hurt.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Red Frog says:

          It looks like a Private/Public partnership with the private side able to use the data without any control on the private side. No Gorelick Wall, if you will. That info would be worth a fortune. I smell Clinton Foundation. The FBI lawyers signed off on this arrangement.

          Like

  18. 8675309 says:

    How about this? Contreras was appointed by “Obama”. He was the fix for this, and other FISA warrants. When questions by the committee revealed that they suspected the odor of rotting fish from that FISA warrant, it was time to bail, and count on a cover up focused establishment to look the other way so that the Judiciary isn’t exposed as corrupt along with the DOJ and FBI.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Tejas Rob says:

      Yeah, I’m thinking Judge Conteras was dirty, he knew he granted the FISA warrant on crap.

      Liked by 2 people

    • mutantbeast says:

      Figures. All these bad actors were given there present positions during the Pigbama admin. McScab and I suck Peter Strzok , niether of whom ever headed a field office, both promoted to there top 6 positions at the FBI under Pigbama. Comey was Muleheads former law partner(andhis brother the CPA for the Clinton foundation) Priestap also was promoted to his top position under Pigbama, same as Strzok and McCabe, no major field command, his primary accomplishment was he was a far leftist lawyer.

      Like

  19. Doppler says:

    I don’t think approving a warrant would by itself disqualify a judge from participating in subsequent proceedings. I think there must have been something else, an impropriety. Consider the fact that the IG, and Robert Mueller were fully aware of all of Peter Strzok’s disqualifying texts since last summer when Strzok was removed, but they sat on that knowledge until after Flynn’s plea. I believe such conduct by Strzok is grounds for Flynn to complain about prosecutorial abuse, and should have been disclosed to him before the plea. I think there is the possibility that, with Mueller’s cooperation, the IG or grand juries initiated by his investigation, have been conducting sting operations to build evidence against participants in this conspiracy to subvert justice.

    Liked by 1 person

    • cboldt says:

      Approving a warrant, even one based on false pretext, does not DQ a judge. In fact, it makes them a BETTER judge of the case – seeing both sides and all.
      The nominal reason for recusal is bias or conflict of interest. Can’t oversee a case where he knows a party, for example.
      I think he was pulled off this case to protect the judiciary, not to protect the case.

      Liked by 1 person

  20. Bulldog84 says:

    I find myself fascinated by the FISA aspect. For years, I worked for a US district judge who also sat on the FISA court. He followed current events constantly, and if he was alive today, he would be sickened.

    I’m firmly convinced that we will never know why Judge Contreras recused himself. There are two possibilities:
    1. It was suggested that he do so. Sundance is correct that the Chief Justice would have that power, but his colleagues on the FISA court could well have suggested it simply based upon knowing that he presided over the Flynn plea.
    2. It dawned upon Judge Contreras, based upon what he read or heard in the media following the plea, that he needed to recuse himself.

    I would like to think that the Judge learned something that made him want to vomit, and that’s why he bailed. Please don’t let it be otherwise.

    I dread to think there is still a FISA Judge out there who would approve spying on a presidential candidate.

    Liked by 1 person

    • It’s a modified No. 2. Most likely Judge Contreras learned something, whatever the source, after taking Flynn’s plea indicating that Contreras should recuse himself. That’s why I said judicial branch recusals are a process, not an event. Checks are run every time a new party appears in a case. Judges have been known to discover conflicts when an unexpected witness appears at trial. Sometimes judges explain why they recuse themselves and sometimes they don’t.

      Liked by 2 people

    • fabrabbit says:

      Originally I was suspicious of Contreras but I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe what he was hearing he recused himself. Or, a white hat may have warned him off. He may or may not have signed the FISA request.

      We will likely find out what happened here. This is peripheral to the larger business.

      Like

  21. LibertyONE says:

    While most of the comments left on this specific subject are valid statements of thought, we all could sit around and conjure up the “what if” “could it be” etc etc. It’s like trying to solve one of those muder mysteries.It’s going to be when ( hopefully) they release, even the redacted FISA application(s) that most, if not all, your questions etc WILL be answered. At least on this subject.

    Like

    • MTK says:

      Suggest all to read the article again and then consider…

      As interesting as conflict of interest is as presented in this article to Gen. Flynn’s case…

      Would not said conflict of interest be paramount to the boarder issues of the legality of the FISA warrent issued in the first place.

      My meaning, is have not the Courts just desided and established the need for a legal reveiw of an issue that any prosecutor worth her/his salt would have saught to separate from Mr Flynn’s defence.

      And, thus buried in legal arguments.

      It is the Government that is prosecuting Mr Flynn, Right!!

      Like

      • MTK says:

        Mr Flynn, for reasons only known to him, outside of his guilt or innocenance, has chosen to fall on his own sword by assuming responsibility of his actions.

        How many?, that stand before him can say the same thing!!!!!!!!!

        Liked by 1 person

      • MTK says:

        Just who the hell is, Horowiz going to call when he is done and ready to present his opinion.

        Certainly,
        “Who? Are ya going to call… Ghostbusters”,
        is not in his lexicon.

        He has only two options… Congress or the Courts. And, if it is Congress, well that leads right back to the Courts if Sundance’s is right about ‘patience’ not to ‘jump the gun’.

        Like

        • MTK says:

          What is the ‘Russia Narrative’ now going to have to argue…
          “By Mr. Flynn, not having argued in his defence, the legality of the FISA ruling, in the first place, makes it legal.”

          Or better yet,

          Is the ‘Russian Narrative’ now reduced to having to argue, “It is all a right wing conspiracy, by Mr. Flynn not defending himself to the full extent afforded him. And, has sought to cast light on a case based on evidence that on outside the merits of the evidence presented before him in charging him and convicting him, that was fully and willfull embraced by the ‘Russia Narrative’ to cast a shadow of doubt on PDJT.

          Like

          • MTK says:

            I my post i missed used a word, the word i used is ‘on’ outside’ when i meant to use ‘is’ outside.

            I am not arguing it changes the context, but these days you never know when arguing the intent of ‘is’ is handy.

            Liked by 2 people

            • MTK says:

              I am starting to understand how someone can rack up 50,000 text messages.

              It is all fun n games until someone loses an ‘I’.

              Then again, ‘eye’ am not investigating the ‘Russian Narrative’ am ‘eye’, FB’buy’,
              Or is that bought.

              Like

    • fabrabbit says:

      Agreed. There are so many fact of which we have no knowledge. I certainly hope we get the story. For the most part I am trusting the white hats will get this resolved. What I won’t be able to abide will be the useful idiots trying to explain this and blaming Trump for everything.

      Like

  22. MTK says:

    As interesting as conflict of interest is as present in this article to Gen. Flynn’s case…

    Would not said conflict of interest be paramount to the boarder issues of the legality of the FISA warrent issued in the first place.

    My meaning, have not the Courts just desided and established the need for a legal reveiw of an issue that any prosecutor worth her/his salt would have saught to separate from Mr Flynn’s defence.
    And, thus buried in legal arguments.
    It is the Government that is prosecuting Mr Flynn, Right!!

    Like

  23. WSB says:

    I do not recognize anyone here. Any regulars?

    Liked by 3 people

    • MTK says:

      That is because contrary to what the MSM says, there is a ground swell of broad awariness. And, as such, it is going to attrack all walks, seeking the truth to the Big Ugly.
      # ReleaseTheMemo

      Liked by 1 person

    • georgiafl says:

      CTH (readership and following) has been growing leaps & bounds. As Sundance says, the enemy is also here reading and he has to be cautious, timing how much he writes with POTUS/AG/FBI/CIA actions.

      Liked by 1 person

  24. South Col says:

    Ya gotta remember the judiciary and everyone with a badge in the US has been operationally conditioned by 8 years of Oby and many identical deep values from Bush.
    Only the strong ones with integrity and aggression survived without bowing to their ideological masters.

    Most people are understandably weak and compliant. They fear for their family, job, mortgage, future, opinion of peer group…etc.
    There…. with the collaborators…. but for the grace of god, go we all.

    Like

  25. farrier105 says:

    Since so much of the dossier reads like the way Boris and Natasha talk, I think we should start calling it “The Moose and Squirrel Dossier.”

    Liked by 1 person

  26. bitterlyclinging says:

    The fruits of 8 years under a president who learned his political skills at the feet of the disciples of Johnny Torio, “Bugsy” Moran, and Al Capone, Obama’s ‘Fundamental Transformation’ in action.
    The disloyal opposition held a rally this past Saturday on the Lincoln Memorial to protest President DJT’s immigration plan.
    The top platform might also be a good place to carry out the sentences on these miscreant FBI/DOJ/CIA personnel.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. D. Manny says:

    Here’s a riddle….

    They NEVER release FISA opinions…EVER. Why and who made the decision to release this one?

    Like

  28. D. Manny says:

    2016-03-01 This is the date I believe Operation Russian Collusion begins….

    2016-04-25 James Baker and DOJ’s FISA attorneys visit WH for two back-to-back meetings

    2016-05-19 Judge Rudolph Contreras is appointed to the FISA court

    2016-06-15 FGPS hires Nellie Ohr
    2016-06-15 FGPS hires Christopher Steele

    2016-06-20 First intelligence report of dossier completed

    2016-07-05 FISC denies FISA warrant

    2016-09-15 FISA Warrant issued

    Like

    • D. Manny says:

      Look at Contreras’ background. He offers no expertise of any kind that would warrant him a position on FISC: https://ballotpedia.org/Rudolph_Contreras
      ————-
      I believe that the 4-25 meeting was Baker and FISA attorneys telling Obama that they didn’t have a sympathetic judge on FISA…..

      Like

    • D. Manny says:

      Do you know what the difference is between the first FISA app being rejected and the second one being approved is?

      The involvement of the intelligence communities with the dossier.

      That’s the only difference….the intelligence communities didn’t have the dossier before the first hearing, but Steele got ultra busy after that first hearing to make certain the intelligence communities all had a copy, which they would have received anyway from the first FISA hearing…..

      Like

  29. Carey Catanza says:

    There are only two federal judges on the FISA Court that were appointed by Barack Obama. Rudolph Contreras and James Boasberg. Contreras has been discussed at length in these comments, but Boasberg just reared his head this week when he refused a FOIA request and also a Congressional request for the James Comey memos to be released. Judge Boasberg left the memos with ROBERT MUELLER ONLY. The Judge is obstructing Congressional oversight of these documents, that are public property. It is not coincidence that the ONLY 2 Obama federal judges are both involved in the Mueller case…Out of 11 FISA judges.. This are long odds. I think that lead FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer was involved in the recusal of Judge Contreras. She has the authority of oversight of the FISC. I don’t think it would be Chief Supreme Court Justice John Roberts. Judge Collyer was a Bush appointee to the Federal Bench. I believe she is protecting gate CISA Court with the recusal of Contreras. As FYI, another FISA Court Judge, Dennis Saylor IV worked for Robert Mueller in the past!! There are so many paths to corruption. I think the FISA Court was “shopped” by the FBI and DOJ for sympathetic Jurists. They know the FISC calendar and when what judge will be sitting for their 11-week stint. Also the judges living close to DC can be called fast and at odd hours and weekends. SO the DOJ and FBI can pick and choose their judges on the FISA court.

    Like

  30. Elwap0 says:

    OK The judge is Coconspirator in the coup…

    Like

  31. up4daze says:

    I agree with others that Judge Rudy Contreras was biased and the FBI DOJ judge shopped.

    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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

w

Connecting to %s