DOJ Admits Two FISA Applications Lacked Cause – FISA Court Requests Information on Consequences: What Other Prosecutions Relied on the Invalid Warrants?…

An interesting ruling, brief and order from the FISA Court (Judge Boasberg) released today [pdf here] reflects an admission by the DOJ the 2nd and 3rd FISA renewal against U.S. person Carter Page were invalid.

The “DOJ assesses that with respect to the applications in [April and June 2017] “if not earlier, there was insufficient predication to establish probable cause to believe that [Carter]Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.””

The original FISA application was October 21st, 2016.  The first FISA renewal was January 12, 2017 (84 days from origination).  The second renewal was April 7, 2017 (85 days from prior renewal).  The third renewal was on June 29th, 2017 (83 days from prior renewal).

The DOJ has now attested to the FISC the FISA application on April 7, 2017, and the FISA application of June 29th were invalid.  However, the DOJ has not taken a position on the validity of the original application, Oct 21, 2016, or the first renewal of January 12, 2017.

As with almost everything in the world of FISA there is a great deal of interesting language surrounding how the FISC brief & order by James Boasberg is written.  Each paragraph and sentence should be reviewed carefully to avoid making cursory mistakes in analysis.

The FBI has agreed to “sequester” all information and evidence received as an outcome of all the FISA warrants issued against Carter Page.  Meaning, all material, in any court proceeding or subsequent secondary warrant on another target, application, filing, motion, prosecution or downstream use of the information gathered and obtained; the FBI will now assemble all materials, from any location, that stemmed from the Carter Page FISA warrants.

In essence, the FBI will now look and retrieve any evidence that stemmed as an outcome of the Carter Page FISA warrant.  Some of this material *may* (perhaps likely) will be in the Special Counsel Mueller investigation.

[ie. a proverbial search for the fruit of a poisonous tree.  Where is it?]

Once the sequestration has taken place, the DOJ will then be able to determine to the court what collateral impacts they have identified.

The DOJ has yet to inform the court how exactly they plan to do this, or when they anticipate to have completed the task.  However, the FBI has agreed to undertake this sequestration for ALL of the FISA applications, not just the two renewals they now admit are invalid. READ:

The issue of the validity for the October 21st, 2016, originating FISA application; and/or the issue of the validity for the first renewal January 12th, 2017, is not yet determined.

The FISC brief outlines the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), who is currently doing a review of all FISA applications, will be the one assist the DOJ in reaching that conclusion.

Worth noting in the second paragraph (above): “pending further review of the OIG report and the outcome of any investigations or litigation.”   This was a statement made by the DOJ in response to the FISC.  It is possible the ongoing investigation by U.S. Attorney John Durham is part of this encompassing statement.

The second page of the order by Judge Boasberg is essentially him relaying the law surrounding FISA applications; warning the DOJ that false material submissions -which the DOJ has just admitted- are illegal; and Boasberg wanting to know answers to the same questions many of us have.

Essentially, Judge Boasberg is asking: what did the FBI do with the Title-1 surveillance warrant they received from the court?   What material did they collect?  Was that material then used in other proceedings and: “disseminated to DOJ prosecutors and other persons outside the FBI”?

The presiding fisa judge also wants to know what the DOJ is doing.  Explain what “further review of the OIG report” means?  Inform the court what “related investigations and litigation” pertains to, etc:

[Link to Court]

A note of caution.  It seems incredulous the DOJ cannot apply the same determination of invalid construct to the original FISA application and first renewal.  However, the key issue is with the Steele Dossier – the essential evidence underpinning the FISA itself; and the key question is when did the FBI and/or DOJ know with certainty the Steele Dossier was unfounded and did not merit legal inclusion for the warrant?

By their current admissions, as outlined by Judge Boasberg, the DOJ is admitting that between January 12th and April 7th current investigators are certain there was sufficient information debunking the Steele Dossier, known to the former FBI and DOJ officials, such that no further application (renewal) should have taken place.

Interestingly this timeline and DOJ admission would include the Mueller investigation use of any FISA derived material or evidence when it began May 17, 2017; that is, if the Mueller probe used the Carter Page FISA evidence for any derivative warrant therein.

It seems likely the Mueller probe did use the Page warrant, as former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and former DOJ Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein authorized the June 29, 2017, final renewal AFTER the special counsel was in place.  That renewal has been admitted as invalid.  There could be considerable consequences.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cold Anger, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, Election 2020, FBI, IG Report Comey, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

404 Responses to DOJ Admits Two FISA Applications Lacked Cause – FISA Court Requests Information on Consequences: What Other Prosecutions Relied on the Invalid Warrants?…

  1. L4grasshopper says:

    Sorry to ask an obvious question:

    But if #2 and #3 were not valid, what was different in #1 and #4 that makes them valid?

    Liked by 7 people

    • cboldt says:

      The improperly predicated ones are 2nd renewal (3rd warrant) and 3rd renewal (4th warrant).

      Liked by 3 people

      • L4grasshopper says:

        Ah….thanks!

        So modify the question: what was OK in #1 and #2 that was not in #3 and #4?

        Liked by 2 people

        • justlizzyp says:

          Remember the outrage trap? This is it. There is sufficient evidence to prove that the 2nd and 3rd renewals were NOT based on any belief that Page was a foreign agent. That is proven by the Clinesmith action. However, there is still not enough to prove that they KNEW it was all BS before that. In other words, questioning the predicate prior to Clinesmith’s actions. In order to prove that the original and first renewal warrants were based on known lies. The schemers are still trying to say that they were acting properly based on what they knew and ah, gee, sorry it was wrong but they were doing their best.

          Liked by 15 people

          • L4grasshopper says:

            Shouldn’t the standard be that they needed evidence to prove Page was a foreign agent?

            Liked by 2 people

            • justlizzyp says:

              It should, and I’ve been irked by that part of the application all along. They said he WAS acting as a foreign agent, then later in the same document said they suspected or something like that. Not the same thing.
              But as long as they can cling to the pretense that they were proceeding ‘by the book’ they have a semblance of a defense and I guess the burden of proof is on those accusing them of misconduct to prove otherwise.

              Liked by 1 person

              • iwasthere says:

                Well that and obviously the standard is so low to get an initial FISA warrant. But, in this case the FBI was caught in a redhanded lie concerning Carter Page and the Agency email communication tampered with by Kleinsmith. So the EC from Brennen to Comey, might still get Comey and the FBI off the hook even though Comey was a willing dupe. FBI is trying to toss the hot potato into the CIA’s lap.

                Like

              • Cam Heck says:

                I wonder if Clinesmith will roll and provide that missing information in exchange for leniency.

                Liked by 1 person

            • Bill Durham says:

              Grasshopper,

              If 3 and 4 were invalid/illegal it would mean that 1and 2 were not verified/correct. I do not see much wiggle room for the bad guys. 1and 2 were either illegal or not vetted. Now that does not mean the bad guys go to gitmo. The higher ups will blame poor work product. The lower people will claim that their work was supposed to be reviewed. Mistakes, aggressiveness, and sloppiness. Clinesmith is the key. They need someone to claim they were ordered or directed. The clinesmith “my name is on everything” is interesting. Is that an admission that he and the other person knew he forged the application. He knew he forged it. Did he confide in anyone else during that time. The text indicates he did. So does Durham have them. That seems a pretty easy pressure point. Dominoes may fall. Pretty easy to check emails and texts on that.

              Liked by 2 people

              • ILOT says:

                I see some parachutes being handed out about now. Rulings on the 1st and 2nd Warrant have not been determined but still under review. Renewal #2 was easy as I think that was the Clinesmith debacle which in my understanding made it automatic. This news will generate some news and anxiety and i think they are slow walking this news. I don’t like it personally. I would think by now they would know whether or not there was a proper predicate on warrant #1 and the first renewal. It troubles me because I thought for sure Mr. Barr was going to start with the “origin” of this fiasco.

                Like

          • NJF says:

            This also blows up the often repeated, “renewals would NEVER be granted without new evidence garnered from the expiring warrant”

            Liked by 6 people

          • zozz1 says:

            They can say whatever they want, but while the Wheel of Justice may grind slow, it grinds fine. This article raises my hopes that Barr/Durham are the honest men we hoped would appear. It raises my hopes that Justice will, eventually, be done…with the whole lot of conspirators and criminals receiving their just deserts!

            Liked by 4 people

          • Dutchman says:

            So, #’s 1 and 2 were just as illegal as,3 and 4, its just that they didn’t KNOW, at the time, that they were illegal.
            Correction; You can’t PROVE they knew at the time, that they were illegal.

            WHAT effect does this have, on any/all prosecutions stemming from Mueller?

            Flynn, Manafort, Cohen, Stone,….can parallel construction be PROVEN to have occured?

            “Oh, what a tangled web!” It could take decades to sort all this out.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

            That is proven by the Clinesmith action.

            This is very curious…..
            Seems it must be more than just the Clinesmith action that delineates between 1/2 and 3/4
            Clinesmith’s action is solely about Page’s status as an operational contact for another agency.

            the Crossfire Hurricane team received a memorandum (August 17 2016 Memorandum) from another U.S. government agency relating to Page’s prior relationship with that agency, including that Page had been approved for operational contact from 2008 to 2013 (pp247)

            SSA 2, who had been the affiant for the first two renewals and would be the affiant for FISA Renewal Application No. 3, told the OIG that in June 2017 he wanted a definitive answer as to whether Page had a prior relationship with the USIC before SSA 2 signed the last renewal application (pp 248)

            On June 15, 2017, the OGC Attorney (Clinesmith) emailed the liaison for the other U.S.
            government agency (Liaison) about Carter Page’s past,(pp249)

            The Liaison responded that same day by providing the OGC Attorney (Clinesmith) with a
            list of documents previously provided by the other agency to the FBI mentioning
            Page’s name, including the August 17 Memorandum
            (pp250)

            So Clinesmith is told by “the other agency” FBI ALREADY HAS the answer to the Carter Page question:
            “We told you he was our agent LAST AUGUST.”

            Clinesmith is not only fabricating for the 3rd renewal but covering up that FBI has KNOWN ALL ALONG that Carter Page was an operational contact.

            Seems like there is some other unknown data point at work that is keeping DOJ from making a definitive claim about 1/2.

            Liked by 3 people

            • WhiteBoard says:

              COULD THIS —- Be to COVER for ROSENSTEIN?
              as in, HE was lied to by Clinesmith and that is why he signed it… … as in BAR fulfilling his end of the agreement to protect Rosenstein for the cooperating status.

              ???
              Did Rosenstein sign the 3rd renewal?

              Liked by 1 person

              • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                Clinesmith made the mod on 4th…the one RR signed.
                Not sure how invalidating 3/4 necessarily helps RR or for that matter anyone.
                There’s a good case to be made that RR is cooperating though…..specifically since Devin Nunes says he is.

                Like

            • justlizzyp says:

              Thank you for posting that- I was going to ask if anyone else remembered that. I think it is also a ‘problem’ for the FBI that Preet and someone else wrote something somewhere thanking Page for his assistance with the case that wrapped up earlier that same year. (If I’m remembering correctly)

              Liked by 1 person

              • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                There appears to be no mention of a Preet letter in the FISA Report.

                There is a passing mention of Carter Page submitting a letter to Comey:
                “reiterated that denial in a September 25 letter to the FBI Director”(pp145)
                https://www.washingtonpost.com/r/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/09/26/Editorial-Opinion/Graphics/2016.09.25_FBI_letter.pdf
                In which Page states:
                “Having interacted with members of the U.S. intelligence community including the FBI and CIA for many decades”

                The FISA report gives little detail about the extent and importance of Page’s ASSISTANCE in the Buryakov case. (No surprise about this…unlikely the FBI is going to tell this to Horowitz)
                Instead focusing on Page revealing to the Russians that he was “MALE-1”, which was the basis of an “ongoing” case against Page in NYFO

                “He (Priestep) told us that the FFG information was provided by a trusted source-the FFG and he therefore felt it “wise to open an investigation to look into” whether someone associated with the Trump campaign may have accepted the reported offer from the Russians” (pp53)

                “identified three individuals-Carter
                Page, Paul Manafort, and Michael Flynn-associated with the Trump campaign with either ties to Russia or a history of travel to Russia” (pp59)

                So based on a “suggestion” of a “suggestion” from Mifsud of help to Trump campaign, FBI claims their approach was to see WHO would be the likely recipient of that help.
                With Steele’s dossier….they settled on CARTER PAGE.

                “An FBI counterintelligence agent in NYFO (NYFO CI Agent) with extensive experience in Russian matters told the OIG that Carter Page had been on NYFO’s radar since 2009….

                According to the EC documenting NYFO’s June 2009……..
                Page “immediately advised [the agents] that due to his work and overseas experiences, he has been questioned by and provides information to representatives of [another U.S.government agency] on an ongoing basis.The EC also noted that agents did not ask Page any questions about his dealings with the other U.S. government agency during the interviews.”(pp61)

                Page had been on FBI’s radar SINCE 2009….and they NEVER VERIFIED TO SEE IF HE WAS WORKING FOR ANOTHER AGENCY.
                EVEN THOUGH THEIR OWN DOCUMENTATION (EC from 2009) SAYS CARTER PAGE TOLD THEM HE DID.

                “On SEP 29 2016 the OI Attorney asked the Crossfire-Hurricane team “do we know if there is any truth to Page’s claim that he has provided information to [another U.S. government agency]-was he considered a source/asset/whatever?”…According to the 01
                Attorney, it would have been a significant fact to disclose to 01 if Page had interactions with the other U.S. government agency that overlapped in time with his interactions with known Russian intelligence officers described in the FISA applications because it would raise the issue of whether Page interacted with the Russian intelligence officers at the behest of the other U.S. government agency or
                with the intent to assist the U.S. government.” (pp131)

                As late as SEP 29 before the first FISA…Carter Page’s status as a IC contact was STILL a concern.

                So if we’re keeping score:
                1) EC 2009 states Page told them he worked for another IC agency
                2) AUG 2016 Memo confirms he worked for another agency
                3) SEP 2016 Page letter to Comey states he works IC
                4) Preet letter???
                5) AUG-SEP CHS activities were Page denies working with Russians

                Like

                • justlizzyp says:

                  I don’t think it wad a letter. I have a vague recollection of NY Fed Prosecutors citing Page’s assistance with that prosecution- the trial ended in Feb or March of 2016 and I think it was Preet but may have been someone else.

                  Liked by 1 person

            • justlizzyp says:

              Hey Krashman – I’m wondering if you can help me out with something, since you obviously have some SERIOUS research and retention skills!

              Regarding the transcript of the Trump Zelinsky phone call, there is a passage from Z that reads:”…On top of that, I would kindly ask you if you have any additional information that you can provide to us, it would be very helpful for the investigation to make sure that we administer justice in our country with regard to the Ambassador to the United States from Ukraine as far as I recall her name was Ivanovich. It was great that you were the first one who told me that she was a bad ambassador because I agree with you 100%. Her attitude towards me was far from the best as she admired the previous President and she was on his side. She would not accept me as a new President well enough.”

              According to my (subpar compared to yours) research skills, there was never an ambassador to the US from Ukraine named Ivanovich. It sounds like he is referring to Marie, but the transcript clearly states ‘Ambassador to the US from Ukraine’
              I can’t figure out if this is about Marie, and if so, why has nobody corrected the transcript? Is this possibly a deliberate error by Vindman or like minded individual to protect Marie? It seems to me that if a foreign leader expresses dissatisfaction with an ambassador to his country that might be considered a reasonable basis for removal.

              Liked by 1 person

              • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                Looks to me too like it’s Marie Yovanovitch.

                Trump first mentions her earlier but not by name:
                “The former ambassador from the United $tates,· the woman., was bad
                news and the people she was dealing with in .the Ukraine .were bad
                news ”

                Z is trying to remember her name from memory and gets it wrong.
                Therefore the transcript accurately depicts what Z said.
                If there is any correction to be made perhaps “Ivanovich (sic)” with the correction in a footnote.

                I don’t think this is to protect Marie.

                There is a Tale of Two Ukraines i.e. “Who are the corrupt ones”
                Schiff/Nadler are selling one version.
                Guliani is investigating the other.

                In fact what’s been most facinating about the crooks’ entire “Ukraine Strategy” has been:
                The best defense is a good offense.
                Instead of scattering and hiding they went on attack to first get the narrative out that: “We are the good guys”

                Vindman, Yovanovitch, Kent, Hill, Hale have foisted themselves in the public eye
                (led by Ciaramella) to accomplish this.

                “Who are the corrupt ones” is the whole basis of the Trump Trial.
                Because if Guliani is right…..then Trump could not have corrupt intent at all.

                Liked by 1 person

          • I strongly believe we’re going to learn “the schemers” knew all along the Steele Dossier was BS because our own CIA Director, John Brennan, and his fellow spooks, both domestic and foreign, commissioned the dossier, in the first damn place! They’re now trying to blame “Russian disinformation”… and they may have been involved…. but it was at the behest of our own government. Which means this house charade is about to come crashing down. I expect to see everyone caught up in this mess having their convictions overturned, being freed from prison and paid massive sums of money for the harm caused to them.

            Liked by 1 person

        • JMC says:

          From from I read above, apparently the same people who examined and found #3 and #4 wanting are currently looking into #1 and #2 . So we may just find out the answer to your question.

          Liked by 1 person

        • strateshooter says:

          I think from prior listening to Bill Barr..
          it would seem the FBI knew with absolute certainty by mid Jan 17 that the Steele Dossier was a total shit show after interviewing Steeles prime source(Millian).
          Warrants 3&4 were requested after that time and so are judged as illegal.
          We all know that Warrants 1 & 2 are also based on bogus crap…and the FBI management team almost certainly knew this.
          My hope is that Durham will determine such (but am not holding my breath)
          Barrs questions in an interview I saw were simple
          1. Why did the FBI continue Trump surveillance after mid Jan 17 when they KNEW he was in the clear.
          2. Why were Warrants 3&4 issued and why was the Mueller Enquiry set up in May 2107.

          We all know why…the FBI were engaged in political persecution of Donald J Trump and anyone in his orbit.

          Liked by 4 people

          • iwasthere says:

            Yep, there is still enough illegal stuff by FBI/DOJ even if the EC was ok for warrant #1 to prosecute. And prosecute they must!, because no amount of new double secret, double check FISA procedures are going to stop it happening again – without ramification for the clear rule violations in the first place (and with bad motive to boot). Nothing accidental about any of this.

            Liked by 2 people

          • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

            Nice analysis.
            Barr was very definitive in his interview with Pete Williams (NBC)
            4 times used the word “collapsed’ when describing Crossfire Hurricane post election.
            Highlighting that despite that collapse….the FBI kept getting FISA’s fraudulently.
            Adding to his previous direction to look at the period prior to Crossfire Hurricane)
            Barr specifically has “directed” Durham to look at FBI’s actions from that post election period…..which ended in May because….

            “On May 17, 2017, the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was transferred from the FBI to
            the Office of Special Counsel upon the appointment of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III to investigate Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election and related matters.” (pp 248 et al, FISA Report)

            If Barr and Durham are the real deal, they don’t need to investigate everything…..they just need to find the linchpin.
            Pull that….. and gravity takes care of the rest.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Raptors2020 says:

            January 5, 2017 was Obama’s “by the book” meeting.
            January 6, 2017 Comey told President-elect Trump about the golden showers story in the Steele Dossier.
            Comey then gave Clapper the go-sign. Clapper leaked to CNN that Trump had been briefed on the Dossier. Buzzfeed released the Steele Dossier they’d been sitting on.

            That 24-hour period may be their Rubicon. They want to place all wrongdoing after those key dates. Protecting all the Obama IC big shots (including the great man himself) may hinge on that distinction. Clinesmith? Feed him to the wolves.

            Like

          • I don’t think politics ever were or remain the primary motive in all of this. Rather it was survival. Clinton was the original insurance policy to ensure that the crimes committed by and during the Obama Administration would never see the light of day with her in office.

            She and Obama hated each other but had their own pact of MAD (mutually assured destruction). For his part Obama had to support Mrs. CLINTON for President over his loyal VP in 2016.

            In order to buy off a Biden, he was given free reign to work out deals in Iraq, Ukraine and China as illustrated in Schweitzer’s new book. He also had to “surprise” Biden with a participation/departure trophy (Medal of Freedom) equivalent to what Obama received upon entering the White House (Nobel).

            That all worked fine until Trump won. Trump was a real and present danger to their very existence, and required an absolute scorched earth offense that the Republicans even to this day refuse to recognize let alone replicate—to the Country’s peril. Everything that has happened and us happening since that time is to keep a Trump on reactive defense until he can be destroyed. The other side is content to allow people to believe that it is being done out of TDS, or hurt feelings and embarrassment at losing, illegitimacy due to a Russian interference, etc. etc….as long as people don’t discover the real reason: covering up their crimes.

            Lastly, Biden’s current floundering if not mercurial candidacy and the risk of not defeating a Trump (if he survives), might explain the left’s panic over their candidate, a Obama’s apparent absence from the scene, Obama’s proxy involvement behind the scenes, and maybe even HRC’s strange documentary attacking a Bernie’s likability.

            Like

    • Revelation says:

      I think its original submission then 3 renewals. So renewals 2 & 3 are officially duff.

      Whereas the whole thing is a load of proverbial bollocks.

      Liked by 3 people

    • sundance says:

      Application and three renewals.

      Everyone making this mistake.

      DOJ only saying last two renewals were invalid. No opinion on application and first renewal.

      Liked by 10 people

      • jeans2nd says:

        And doubtful there will be, imo. FISA #1 was to cover the prior illegal searches.
        Mission #1 – Protect The Institution.
        But, would that this could be applied to Gen Flynn.

        Liked by 3 people

        • madeline says:

          se·ques·ter
          /səˈkwestər/
          Learn to pronounce
          verb
          verb: sequester; 3rd person present: sequesters; past tense: sequestered; past participle: sequestered; gerund or present participle: sequestering
          1.
          isolate or hide away.
          “Tiberius was sequestered on an island”
          Similar:
          isolate oneself
          hide oneself away
          shut oneself away
          seclude oneself
          cut/shut oneself off
          set oneself apart
          segregate oneself
          closet oneself
          withdraw oneself
          remove oneself
          retire
          2.
          take legal possession of (assets) until a debt has been paid or other claims have been met.
          “the power of courts to sequester the assets of unions”
          take forcible possession of (something); confiscate.
          “rebel property was sequestered and a military government installed”
          legally place (the property of a bankrupt) in the hands of a trustee for division among the creditors.
          “a trustee in a sequestered estate”
          3.

          hummm…

          Like

      • Zy says:

        Did the last two renewals just fail to build on the prior warrants or is there some other reason they are invalid?

        Like

      • Beigun says:

        ‘Cuz it is the fuse cord of illegal domestic spying running hot towards a keg of political gun powder under the DNC, Guy Fawkes style! This looks like the fuse is lit and Durham has the good for his investigation and prosecution.

        Combine this with impeachment, the connectivity to it all, like a poor CIA novel set in a SE Asian country–how to overthrow a government–like Brando in Brit Malaysia during sedition in whatever that 50’s movie was.

        Connect all the dots and it is a run-aground coup effort.

        “Finally in the open, all can see the work of the seditious party!” Cicero

        Liked by 3 people

      • JMC says:

        Does not the sentence continuing out from the second yellow highlighted passage above concerning renewal #2 and #4 with the words, “but intends to sequester information…” state that the origination application and renewal #1 are being looked at in the same way as the final two? Or have I missed something?

        Liked by 2 people

        • trialbytruth says:

          That is my read as well. Their still is a question and obvious doubt as to predicatebfpr the first fisa. The third and forth came after FIB had interviewed Steeles source and his source said it was junk.

          For the first two to be valid they had to 1 attest to the validity of the info and 2 they did not know that Page was working for CIA And 3 that they had no knowledge of Page working on a Fbi doj prosecution of russian spies performed in other offices under the FBI Counterespionage Section

          First one they will claim Steele was Reliable source, that could be a jump ball

          2nd CIA whos that???

          3 is where i think it may fall down this was Super agent Strokz division and this was a big case. I find it hard to beleive no one was informing him of it. My guess that is how Page came to his attention.

          Like

        • trialbytruth says:

          That is my read as well. Their still is a question and obvious doubt as to predicatebfpr the first fisa. The third and forth came after FIB had interviewed Steeles source and his source said it was junk.

          For the first two to be valid they had to 1 attest to the validity of the info and 2 they did not know that Page was working for CIA And 3 that they had no knowledge of Page working on a Fbi doj prosecution of russian spies performed in other offices under the FBI Counterespionage Section

          First one they will claim Steele was Reliable source, that could be a jump ball

          2nd CIA whos that???

          3 is where i think it may fall down this was Super agent Strokz division and this was a big case. I find it hard to beleive no one was informing him of it. My guess that is how Page came to his attention.

          Like

      • WhiteBoard says:

        Protect Rosenstein. This move covers Rosenstein via Barr due to some action internally we arent aware of.

        My guess Obama – claimed executive priv on the Huma laptop – the Awan – the Hillary Server etc… due to some contents or comms of his Gmail account being on it.

        Like

    • kleen says:

      Brad Heath

      Verified account

      @bradheath

      This is a big deal. The Justice Department is conceding that two of the four FISA applications it used to conduct surveillance of former Trump campaign aide Carter Page were not lawful, and it’s not defending the legality of its other two applications.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Bogeyfree says:

      It’s based on when the FIB knew the Dossier was bogus.

      Right now it is still giving the DOJ a window to say it was all properly predicated IMO

      IMO, it could mean it still provides a sweep narrative.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Reserved55 says:

      The Court *had* to admit 2 and 3 were invalid because Barr told NBC that the Dossier was exposed as garbage in January.

      10 min. mark

      Liked by 8 people

    • WhiteBoard says:

      4 was under and expanded memo maybe

      Like

  2. Jim Comey is a weasel_Doug says:

    God bless you Sundance for bringing us The Real.

    Liked by 9 people

  3. cboldt says:

    The appointment of Mueller was improvident (fatally flawed) for want of a specified crime.
    Now even the specified “counterinelligence investigation” lacks predicate.
    There was no justification to appoint Mueller in the first place, never mind what he did after he was appointed.
    As for the cases, most of them are process crimes so can’t be tainted by evidence obtained via Carter Page warrant.

    Liked by 12 people

    • lewfarge48 says:

      I don’t understand because the people wouldn’t have been subject to investigation in the first place with out the illegal warrants.

      Liked by 2 people

      • cboldt says:

        It’s a tough point for many/most people to accept, but lying to an “improvident/unjustified” investigation can still be a criminal false statement.
        Don’t talk to investigators.
        I don;t foresee any legal effect to cases brought by Mueller, but I do see a possibility of two things:
        Illegal snoopers might lose the statutory defense that comes with obtaining a warrant
        Public perceoption of Mueller investigation becomes it was a DOJ scam against Trump

        Like

    • Muthaucker says:

      That was Manafort’s original argument (special counsel appointment was illegal) in the trial before the Obama judge. Looks like Manafort is getting a get out of jail card soon.

      Like

    • JMC says:

      And the guy who initiated the SC investigation and appointed Mueller was the guy whose FISA renewal was just torpedoed, Ron Rosenstink.

      Like

    • iwasthere says:

      Judge Ellis had a chance to strike down Mueller as outside the authorization statute – so did that DC judge that convicted Stone and Manafort. Not exactly a profile in courage Judge Ellis. The DC judge on the other, in the tank for the bad guys IMHO.

      Like

  4. RJ says:

    I think my funereal plans will take shape long before any conclusions or results will occur on the FISA problems, plus I will most likely be in the ground when an open and clear explanation is made available to the voting citizens of the United States.

    Liked by 11 people

  5. T2020 says:

    No fkn way that we accept “apologies”. They have to prove intent and I pray that Durham has that slam/dunk in his arsenal.

    Liked by 5 people

  6. You’d think Bill Barr would have a press conference about this clear abuse, unethical and corrupt behavior and announcing indictments……But no, Bill Barr will sip on his whiskey with his fireplace crackling in the background of his rural Alaskan cabin as he tunes his ‘Bagpipes’….

    Liked by 7 people

    • freepetta says:

      I would think Barr having a press conference would be the least he could do.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Dutchman says:

        Yes, both he and Durham felt it necesary to comment, when the IG report on FISA was released, but on this,…bupkas.

        You don’t suppose its because the,IG relort had big kleig lights shining on it, and this doesn’t,…do you?

        Cause that would be like, the kind of thing a cleaner would do.

        And Fred flies free,…

        Liked by 5 people

        • Robert Smith says:

          Look for Trump to retweet someone on these invalid FISA warrants.

          Liked by 1 person

        • freepetta says:

          I would say a good chance. Maybe they will comment tomorrow. Afterall seems like all the heavy stuff comes down usually on Friday.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Dutchman says:

            Funny, prior to PDJT, administrations used to save up all the stories they didn’t really want much attention to be paid to, and then dump them all on Friday.

            Another ‘tradition’ PDJT has upended, lol.

            Liked by 1 person

        • gda53 says:

          Wait, the DOJ just admitted that two renewals were bogus and the original and first renewal are still under study, and people are whining because Barr hasn’t held a press conference?

          Are you listening to yourself? The DOJ just gave you a bunch of beautiful sweet tasting lemonade and you’re complaining that they should have given you cookies as well?

          Anything to throw shade on Barr it would seem.

          I see things the opposite. This is just another clear indication that Barr/Durham are for real.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Dutchman says:

            Oh, this IS a great story to see in the news, no argument.
            But, the DOJ didn’t “GIVE” me anything. Anymore than the head of the,WTO gave me, or PDJT anything.
            ANOTHER great story. He fell all over himself, in his press conference with PDJT, at,Davos to say how he recognised the WTO needs to be totally restructured, etc.

            Because, it is obvious PDJT said fix the disparity between ‘developed’and ‘developing ‘nations, or U.S. will pull out, in which case WTO ceases to exist.
            Similarly, DOJ HAD to admit this, they had NO choice, and this had NOTHING to do with Barr/Durham.

            Like

  7. Joyce M says:

    Could this ultimately lead to Weissman and his henchmen having their law licenses revoked and firings at the FBI? Mueller knew and covered for them anyway. Any potential penalties?

    Liked by 11 people

    • Grassleysgirl/Breitbartista says:

      Yes disbarrment for all involved would be a great start! Just read Sidney Powell’s book,” License to Lie” for a look into one of the Andys involved’ NotsoWiseman’.
      It will sicken you.

      Liked by 9 people

  8. kleen says:

    George Papadopoulos

    Verified account

    @GeorgePapa19
    36m36 minutes ago

    With the news on the illegality behind the FISA warrants dropping the same day as the impeachment hearing, I guarantee you there will be a swift acquittal, and shortly there after, indictments are coming, and the foreign governments who spied on us will be held accountable.

    Liked by 8 people

  9. TwoLaine says:

    BOMBSHELL. This will look real good in the President’s case against the treasonous DIMs next week.

    This also means their attempts to get their hands on the Mueller stuff are null and void. Case dismissed. Round up everyone’s black market copies.

    Media beware.

    Liked by 14 people

  10. Nigella says:

    I read that to mean they are all invalid

    Liked by 3 people

  11. Bogeyfree says:

    If PT wanted to really throw these coup perpetrators a curve, he would fire Wray within 24 hours and insert somebody even temporarily, like a Rudy type to handle this sequestered portion of the investigation.

    Let’s just say to ensure everything is up and up!

    Do it Mr. President, now is the perfect time to ensure everything is done by the book.

    Liked by 16 people

  12. CNN_sucks says:

    So, Carter Page can sue McCabe and Rosey now? Awesome. Sue them with all the lost wages. Get their fcking pensions and bankrupt them.

    Liked by 15 people

    • Tim Cunningham says:

      And former Director Comey, don’t forget. But that will have to wait until the original warrrant and first renewal are proven equally fraudulent.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Bogeyfree says:

    So since RR signed the 3rd renewal what does that mean for him f anything??

    Liked by 4 people

    • Zorro says:

      RR seems to be in “no man’s land”. Most of the Right and Left hate him now. Almost everyone but the Trusty Planners.

      Liked by 3 people

      • The Demon Slick says:

        I don’t mean to direct my rant at you personally, but I do have a rant….
        Trusty planners. It’s become a pejorative around here. It bothers me because on any issue where I disagree, or caution wait for more info, that’s what I hear, I’m some kind of trusty planner. I’d like to remind everyone, just because someone feels like we shouldn’t jump to conclusions about a specific issue, that doesn’t mean they should be tossed in the bin with the q people or others who express a belief in some hidden master plan. It’s perfectly reasonable for me to believe that Barr is working behind the scenes without believing in some kind of grand conspiracy. Obviously there are many rather large conspiracies that are happening right now, things we never thought to see in America. Believing in one or more of them doesn’t automatically mean that you’re some kind of nutcase. But by the same rights, advocating for caution and waiting for more details doesn’t mean that you’re some kind of obtuse person incapable of seeing truth. I hope you everyone will be a bit more circumspect about slapping the trusty planner label on people. It’s getting a lot more use than it deserves.

        Liked by 6 people

    • JMC says:

      I would assume it means a lot for Rosenstink since he is the one who also initiated the Special Counsel position and then appointed Mueller to it.

      Liked by 2 people

  14. Bucknutguy says:

    Oh Lord pls have Judge Boasberg BBW legit. Let this be the great unraveling.

    Amen

    Liked by 9 people

    • Bucknutguy says:

      *be legit

      Liked by 2 people

    • Jan says:

      Not likely to happen. Both Collyer AND Boasberg ( & probably the rest of the judges) have known what, why, how & where the Ovomit Administration was illegally spying on American journalists, his political enemies & innocent Americans (like former FOX news reporter Jim Rosen’s parents).

      All of the current FISA judges were appointed during the OVomit administration. I’m sure Holder gave Justice Roberts the names. Unless none of these judges can read or don’t watch the news, they had to know what was going on in the DOJ/FBI.

      Consider this: Admiral Rogers started the audit on the databases in March 2016 because of the overwhelming # of “about” queries. He stopped “about” queries & excluded independent contractors from accessing NSA & FBI databases in April 2016.

      On Oct. 31, 2016 the original FISA warrant on Carter Page was issued. And they said he was a spy so they could broaden who they could spy on. Carter Page has never met with or spoken to the President.

      On Oct. 24, 2016, Adm. Rogers went before the FISA court and told one of the judges, I’m assuming Judge Collyer, of the results of his audit–massive abuses. On Oct. 26, he submitted his written report. WHY in the world did the Court not look at recent warrant approvals, especially on the Trump campaign??

      Judge Collyer wrote a scathing opinion but did nothing. Judge Boasberg wrote another scathing report but did now. They’re both Ovomit appointees. Now they’ve appointed Dave Kris, who was part of the Page FISA warrant fiasco, to evaluate the FBI/DOJ revisions to correct their malfeasance.

      It’s time for Congress to shut FISA down and/or start order.

      Liked by 3 people

  15. Grassleysgirl/Breitbartista says:

    I propose that the Mueller Opo, the DOJ , FIB , FISC , the Wrap -up smear against American Patriot and hero, LtGn Flynn and of course,Impeachment Inc. ,are all theater and it’s time for the curtain to come down. Americans love liberty,our sacred and cultural traditions and quite frankly ….being first.KAG.

    Liked by 9 people

  16. Colin says:

    Do these 2nd and 3rd FISA renewals cover the renewal that was sent to the SCCI and that we believe was leaked? Would this “audit trail” have to include these leaks and bring them out into the open?

    Liked by 5 people

  17. kleen says:

    Sidney Powell supposedly has some major news to drop tomorrow? I read that somewhere… yeah me too, I wish I remember where. I wonder if this news today means Flynn’s case is invalid? I don’t know… maybe not, but whatever she has, sounds promising.

    Liked by 9 people

  18. freepetta says:

    While we have all known this was the case for quite a while due to the diligence of Sundance it’s still shocking and despicable.

    Liked by 11 people

  19. Jederman says:

    Rosenstein’s response to HFC drafting articles of impeachment for his withholding requested documents:

    “In order to get a FISA warrant, you need an affidavit signed by a career law enforcement officer who swears the information is true… And if it is wrong, that person is going to face consequences.”

    Sure, consequences, um hmm, got it.

    Liked by 6 people

  20. Bogeyfree says:

    Isn’t the better question……

    Wasn’t Carter Page a KNOWN CIA agent ALL ALONG and how even with the original FISA or FISA renewal 1 did they not know that simple fact?

    It’s just like Mifsud IMO. They ALWAYS knew he was a western agent and not a Russian agent.

    Why is this simple question and answer such a problem for the DOJ and AG Barr??

    Hmm……..

    Liked by 10 people

  21. Max Power says:

    I find this interesting…

    ‘…if not earlier…’

    Sounds like foreshadowing to me. At minimum, there remains uncertainty as to whether the original and first renewal were well predicated or not.

    Liked by 4 people

  22. cboldt says:

    I wonder if this finding by FISC removes the statutory defense of 50 USC 1809(b).

    A person is guilty of an offense if he intentionally– (1) engages in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by this chapter, chapter 119, 121, or 206 of title 18, or any express statutory authorization that is an additional exclusive means for conducting electronic surveillance under section 1812 of this title …

    Felony snooping.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. Rose says:

    What does it take to get a FBI or DOJ lawyer, spit, disbarred? The deep state seems to think they have the power of life and death over their enemies, and todate they’d be right. Perhaps the path to delousing the corrupt FBI and DOJ is to dis-bar lawyers involved in any aspect of spygate?

    Liked by 3 people

  24. kleen says:

    Sean Davis

    Verified account

    The false FISA applications on Carter Page that were just declared invalid by the FISA court were signed by James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Rod Rosenstein, and Dana Boente.

    Their misconduct may result in Mueller’s entire investigation being nullified.

    Liked by 8 people

    • donna kovacevic says:

      A few weeks ago PDJT while departing the WH said “I caught them all” repeated it a couple of times. Curious if this plus so many other things we don’t know about was what he was referring to. Oh please Lord Jesus let there be justice for all involved. God Bless PDJT.

      Liked by 4 people

    • jebg46 says:

      Don’t forget, a short while after Mueller was appointed, Rosenstein wrote a new scope memo for Mueller completely based on the Steele Dossier which the FBI knew in Jan 2017 was garbage.

      During Mueller’s public appearance before Congress said all the info that the FBI had already compiled was beyond his purview so he just moved ahead with the new scope memos issued by Rosenstein. Does this mean that his entire investigation was illegal?

      Liked by 1 person

  25. Johnny says:

    “DOJ assesses that with respect to the applications in [April and June 2017] “if not earlier, there was insufficient predication to establish probable cause to believe that [Carter]Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.””

    If not earlier???? What the hell, does the court not know the dates of the request to digitally rape an American Citizen?

    What the hell is going on here?

    Help me wrap my head around this please.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. doofusdawg says:

    So the grand jury material that the dems want should also be sequestered as it was all downstream from Mueller.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Bryan Alexander says:

      That is a NASTY detail that cuts the legs off of Pelosi, Nadler and Schiff.
      “You can’t have this information. It was illegally obtained.”

      Liked by 9 people

      • Snellvillebob says:

        Maybe that was why Pelosi was in such a rush to impeach? Dec 20, 2019 is the most recent date on the document which was around the time Pelosi was trying to get the vote done and the court rulings that went against the Demoncrats.7

        Liked by 1 person

  27. hokkoda says:

    The part the DOJ is going to have trouble answering is that ALL investigations after a certain date – let’s roll with 1/12/17 – are invalid.

    Everything. Flynn. Mueller. Papadapolous. Stone. All of these are invalid. Yes, the warrants are bogus. But the issue isn’t “what bogus actions resulted from the bogus warrants?” That just asks what was tainted by the bad warrant, and everything else stands.

    The issue is “what bogus investigations required bogus warrants in the first place?” The bogus warrants are a symptom not a cause.

    We are very close to the DOJ needing to throw the entire Mueller Report in the garbage can…along with any prosecutions which resulted from it. The warrant doesn’t taint the Flynn prosecution. The bogus Mueller investigation, in total, taints the Flynn prosecution. Why was Mueller appointed? Because Trump fired Comey…obstruction of justice. But why did Trump fire Comey? Because he was corrupt. The IG has already found Comey’s firing was justified because Comey was insubordinate. He has already found that Comey is a liar who should be prosecuted. He has already found that Comey signed off on bogus FISA applications. Not all of them. However, all but the last renewal were on his watch, his people.

    The bogus warrants are direct evidence of a bogus investigation. The FBI was running a scam. The bogus warrants were necessary to keep up appearances of a legitimate investigation while covering up the illegal spying that was being done by the Obama-ites against the Trump organization. Mueller’s appointment was just a furtherance if that attempt to cover up what the FBI was doing.

    Liked by 21 people

    • JMC says:

      Excellent synopsis!

      Like

    • Anna Nimity says:

      I apologize if I’m reading you wrong, but It sounds like you’re saying Trump wasn’t justified for firing Comey, and you’re calling it “obstruction of justice”; as in for the reason for the Mueller appointment, and that justified. Please clarify

      In any event, I believe it was justified to fire the corrupt Deep State operative Comey, much the same way withholding money from the corrupt Ukrainians, or Iran, in an attempt to correct their corruption would be justified; or refusing to cooperate with the lying Schiff kangaroo impeachment scam trial would be justified; in a just world. But as we know in Washington nothing is done for the right reason if the Democrats and their mistresses in the MSM say they aren’t.

      Like

    • donna kovacevic says:

      Paul Manafort as well. O pray to our Heavenly Father that these evil corrupt banditos will pay for what they have done, and all the innocent ones General Flynn, Manafort, Stone, Page, PapaD all awarded huge sums of “Para” $$ and their names restored. Mueller you corrupt govno and gang, go to hell all of you.

      Liked by 3 people

    • But who has the authority to make that determination and act on it (ie throw it all out)? What is the process and how long does it take?

      Like

  28. kleen says:

    Ya’ll could have just asked about that and I would have told ya’ll, they were illegal.

    I will also save you time and tell you the other 2 were also illegal.

    Ya’ll are welcome!

    Liked by 2 people

  29. Bryan Alexander says:

    My guess is that the DOJ and Team Mueller did not use any information gathered from extensions 2 & 3. They want to keep using it, so right now they “can’t make a determination”.
    Athough they are “sequestering” all of the information from all 4 warrants, who here believes they aren’t using it?

    This is a CYA move by the DOJ to continue and use information in the original warrant and the first extension to prosecute someone.

    Lost in this is the DOJ just admitted, in court filings, that they committed fraud on the FISA court.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Johnny says:

      I wonder if a court ruling can hold up a declassification of the documents for the people to see? Has the judge basically covered it all to keep their criminality from ever seeing daylight?

      Like

      • Beau Geste says:

        Yes, and the crooked FISC may order it all destroyed (together with who got it, and what they did with it), which would further protect the perps.

        Even if the DOJ crookedly “finds” there was “sufficient predicate”, an honest FISC would have immediately withdrawn all the Warrants for failure to follow the Woods procedure, and failure to verify the sworn evidence, failure to verify carter page being a russian agent, the trump dossier, the vienna allegation, etc. It was the DOJ/FBI burden to follow the rules, verify, tell the truth, and meet the due process requirements, AT THE TiME the request(s) were filed. The purpose of the crooked DOJ/FBI warrant application was surely to protect and make available previous completely illegal spying on the GOP candidates, and also likely bernie sanders. By not withdrawing the original false Warrant nunc pro tunc (now as then) the FISC continues to protect the illegal spying, including the 85% illegsl spy
        ing that Admiral Rogers forced collyer to admit. The failure of the FISC to protect civil rights, which is its ONLY duty and only reason for existence, prima facie labels the court as complicit in political spying. The obama/DOJ/FBI political spying on the Republican Party could not continue after Admiral Rogers shut down the NSA database, without FISC assistance. The FISC judges enabled continued spying, by approving deceitful spying on a low-level “target”, to spy on the entire Republican Party and its Presidential Candidate, then elected President, by its intentionally overreaching “2-step” warrant. An honest court would say “name your real target, and prove probable cause”. But not the FISC. An astonishingly deceptive and dishonest authorization against distant unnamed “2-hop” targets under color of law, IMHO. 18 USC 242.

        The FISC still refuses to strongly discipline the deceitful FBI/DOJ participants for misfeasance and malfeasance, or to withdraw all the purloined, tainted FISA warrants.

        Liked by 1 person

  30. Bogeyfree says:

    So when is Wray going to apologize to the Nation?

    Liked by 3 people

  31. NJF says:

    Freaking amazing. Barr should definitely hold a press conference. Seems he won’t though. I hate these mother F’ers.

    Liked by 8 people

  32. Orson says:

    Call me a cynic, as I believe it’s all about who is afforded protection, and who isn’t. In effect, who signed off on #1 and #2 vs. who signed off on #3 and #4.

    Like

  33. free.and.true says:

    Pending investigations or litigation…
    … that makes me think about Carter Page suing the gubmint for what they did to him…

    … also makes me wonder about Gen. Flynn seeking restitution… after all, in October of 2016, he was almost certainly within “two hops” of Page, and then there’s the speculation that a separate FISA warrant was taken out on Flynn himself anyway…

    … and who else knows how deep this rabbit hole goes?

    … funny, I keep hearing bug-eyes Evelyn Farkas cawing about “if the Trump team knew HOW we knew what we knew…”

    Liked by 7 people

    • MelH says:

      Evelyn Farkas wasn’t just some low-level clerk. How could she have been so dumb as to voice her intent against Trump on National TV? And why hasn’t that little clip been played over and over and 0ver again to prove the idiocy of Democrats. Really, they”ve been incredibly stupid, considering what they intended to pull off. Comey is a gazillionaire. I used to think it took genius mentality to aggregate that kind of wealth. Yet he has shot off his own two feet several times in the past 3 years.

      Like

      • Robert Smith says:

        Because Democrats speaking to Media is as comfortable to them as speaking to O’bama in the Whitehouse. They aren’t challenged, they aren’t criticized. They forget where they are and their admission draw wonder and praise for getting it done.

        Liked by 1 person

    • hokkoda says:

      Pretty sure the IG found no evidence of a FISA against Flynn.

      Flynn’s best argument is that by Jan 2017, the FBI knew conclusively that it had no case of “Russia collusion” or “Russia interference”. By the time they SET FLYNN UP they already knew there was nothing to investigate. No predicate. No nothing. The Flynn/Kislyac transcript contains no crimes. They literally had no reason to be talking to Flynn in an investigative capacity whatsoever.

      They knew they had no case, and so they fabricated one with a fraudulent FISA and fabricated allegations of “Russia collusion” against Gen Flynn.

      Liked by 2 people

  34. MACAULAY says:

    I am hopeful about this. Hope is all I have after soooooolong.

    Maybe it clears the way to indict Clinesmith at least, and let him get started singing…and work up the chain from there with him, and at the same time work back in time as more, like Strzok, are caught up in the net.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. TwoLaine says:

    Carter Page is gonna’ have pne h311 of a payday, as are all those downstream who got ripped apart by the FBI & DOJ.

    Liked by 4 people

  36. Bogeyfree says:

    Why does the word sequestered sound like hidden to me??

    Liked by 3 people

  37. Mike says:

    My question is this a way for Muellers grand jury material to be released?

    Like

  38. Splatterbottom says:

    Is any of this useful to those people convicted as a result of Mueller charges?

    Liked by 1 person

  39. Snellvillebob says:

    Was this done to lock up the Durham trials until after the November election?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dutchman says:

      Snellville;
      WHAT “Durham trials”?
      There are, as yet no Durham indictments.
      There is no evidence there are even Durham Grand Juries.
      All we have is TALK. Talk of a Durham report. Generally, prosecutors PROSECUTE.
      Now, they DO write ‘declination decision’ memos, and given the size and scope of this, such a memo would indeed be a ‘report’, and a lengthy one at that.
      Still, Durham hasn’t formally SAID he would write a report, Barr said he would discuss it with Durham,…so even a report is far from certain.

      So, if it can rightfully be said (and it HAS) that I and others are ‘jumping the gun’ by calling Barr/Durham a cleaner,

      Then turn-abouts fair play, and any talk of “Durham trials” is WAAAAYYY premature, IMHO.

      Like

    • G. Alistar says:

      No, rather it was done to lock up the SC Mueller grand jury and other information gathered during the two year long, $35 million, 17 angry democrats and 40 FBI guys, witch hunt investigation. Robert Mueller (when not touched by dementia) and Andrew Weismann are Democrat operatives working with Nancy, Schiff and Nadler. This blocks (locks up) that info, I think!

      Like

    • Mr. Morris says:

      I appreciate Evelyn Farkes. She did an enormous service by her statements regarding how they knew what they knew and telling her co-conspirators to gather all info ASAP.
      I believe Evelyn is/was a member of the Atlantic Council and was involved with Ukraine.
      I’ll bet she has a lot of interesting information.

      Like

  40. donnyvee says:

    I am sharpening my pitchfork and ordering some Ronson fuel on Amazon.

    Like

  41. gary says:

    what does ‘if not earlier ‘ mean? i assume the first two. i hope the first two.

    Liked by 1 person

  42. Tha very fact that the other 2 warrants are yet to be determined means lots of crooked corrupt DOJ/FBI employees better be very worried.

    Why did they hold this when they ruled on this January 7?

    Liked by 1 person

  43. Joe P says:

    Somewhere on a military base there is an enlisted guy sitting in jail, losing his rank and facing a bad conduct discharge for bouncing a $50 check. Every day dozens face this punishment. And they may even have a good excuse. It doesn’t matter.

    All these federal law enforcement losers who are skating out of all this lying and fraud can rot in hell. I really hope Barr isn’t another fraudulent actor. He was given a job and responsibility. I hope he does his job.

    Liked by 2 people

  44. HellInAHandbasket says:

    Frankly, every single application/warrant/surveillance swirling around that court is invalid.
    How many of us normal-folk, general Joe Schmo citizen – emails, phone calls, txt msgs, internet searches and posts, FB & TwitTwat pages, and whatever court docs, arrest/ticket info and even work records, were monitored, listened to, gathered, spied-on, and looked-over, because of bogus, altered, ginned-up, fabricated, misconstrued information coming from the FBI/DOJ/CIA/NSA, to the court about someone like me, or you?
    …yeah, confidence level in that court, is zero right now.

    Liked by 3 people

    • CM-TX says:

      ^This. It’s what will actually resonate with the masses– & seriously piss them off.

      There are very few that still care PDJT, Carter Paige, & everybody in his campaign/admin were spied on. Trump lost the shock-factor a long time ago when he chose not to expose the fraud behind it.

      Truth– most are tired of hearing about it. Especially since no one’s ever held accountable. Others consider it politics as usual… it’s all dirty, & they’re all crooks.

      Liked by 1 person

    • CM-TX says:

      I can confirm they have morons interpreting swept-up metadata. They make assumptions based off their own degenerate fantasies to fill in the blanks. So odds are, they’ll get it ALL wrong.

      These people honestly couldn’t find their own [bleeps] with a roadmap!

      Liked by 1 person

  45. Anna Nimity says:

    Brennan; Clapper; Comey; (their useful tool Mueller); Clinton; Obama; McCabe; Strozk; and all the rest of the coup plotters are an example of what the founding fathers and Locke were imagining when they said the people have the “right to dissolve their government” by convention if it is taken over by tyrants and self-dealing rogue scoundrels and return it to a “democratic sovereignty”. And they all knew an armed citizenry would be needed to enforce that restoration.

    If these scoundrels, listed above, were around and doing what they have been caught doing, immediately after the constitution and bill of rights was ratified, the following day there would have been a states uprising, public trials and executions. But we have become so divided that we can’t even all agree what these slimy skunks have done is wrong. What is going to happen to America now?

    Liked by 1 person

  46. kleen says:

    Jeff Carlson Retweeted

    Rudy Giuliani

    Verified account

    @RudyGiuliani
    6m6 minutes ago
    More
    Starting tomorrow we will begin cracking through the Swamp media’s cover-up of TOP level Democrats selling their public office, resulting in multi-millions, in Ukraine and the conspired attempt with foreign officials to “destroy” the Trump candidacy.

    Liked by 11 people

  47. dwpender says:

    (1) The first Page warrant expired on January 19, 2020 at 12 pm! Unless Scheme Team got it renewed, they had no ability to conduct Title I (!) surveillance of the President of the United States and his entire Administration.

    (2) Scheme Team was in BIG trouble as 2016 closed. All their surveillance had unearthed nothing. They were accustomed to rubber-stamp FISA approvals, but they likely knew Judge Mosman (not Collyer) would decide any renewal, and he might start asking tough questions like “You really expect me to allow Title I surveillance of the President of the United States?” He might actually DENY extension.

    (3) Late December/early January, DOJ/FBI file their extension request. Mosman doesn’t rubber-stamp it as soon as is customary. Scheme Team is getting VERY nervous.

    (4) December 29: Obama expels 35 Russian diplomats for “election interference.”

    (5) January 5: “By the book” meeting with Obama.

    (6) January 6: Comey goes to interrogate Trump at Trump Tower. Immediately fires off 302 notes (called a “memo”) to CH team.

    (7) January 7: ICA release. Those Ruskies “interfered” to help Trump, you know. Our “Intelligence” “Community” says so.

    (8) January 10: Buzzfeed reports on the dossier and widespread press coverage follows. The “news hook” is that Comey briefed the President-elect about it.

    (9) Apart from what “new evidence” might have been in the renewal application, Mosman is now hearing a daily deluge of public reporting on how serious the “Trump-Russia” connection is. (Aside — Was the Flynn/Kislyak December 29 transcript part of the secret renewal filing?)

    (10) January 12 — Mosman approves the renewal. Scheme Team breathes a collective sigh of relief, and the coup enters a new phase.

    Liked by 1 person

    • G. Alistar says:

      Excellent, only recommend you add a 1.a., 2.a., 3.a……10.a, which notes that: “fake news” buys into and ad libs multiple stories publishing non stop for two years with thousands of articles proliferating theselies.

      Like

    • G. Alistar says:

      Or…this is directly related to the impeachment offensive that goes into effect by the President’s attorney’s…and there is incontrovertible evidence that dems such as Schiff, Mark Warner, Obama’s dirty cops were ALL knee deep in this FISA abuse scam? Or both?

      Like

    • Beau Geste says:

      I think “by the book” means that it will be OK to tell PDJT that he is not a surveillance target, and to prevent PDJT from knowing about the FISA Warrant that covers him by the deceitful “2-hop” rule. IIRC, comey may have rendered that opinion to obama and others, and later falsely represented to PDJT that he was not a “target”, which could be a violation of 18 USC 1001 unless somehow protected by being able to lie to a FISA Warrant surveillance “target” that he is being spied on.

      The DOJ/FBI use 18 USC 1001 to attack people they can’t otherwise prove committed a crime (martha stewart, scooter libby, General Flynn…) So justice should require that the same law and penalty apply to DOJ/FBI personnel who do lie of “lack candor” to government officials such as the President.

      Liked by 1 person

  48. TwoLaine says:

    It will be fun to watch how the presstitutes handle this.

    Liked by 2 people

  49. kleen says:

    Is it just me or does it feel this is being tucked under the impeachment circus?

    Timing is weird. Very weird. We all knew about this a long time ago.

    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 )

Connecting to %s