Barr’s “Outside Prosecutors” and the FISC Sequestration Agreement…

When the FISA Court responded to the DOJ Inspector General report in December and January 2020 they requested an action plan from the DOJ and FBI to respond to the issues raised about misrepresentations to the court.

The DOJ/FBI replied to the FISA Court admitting the last two FISA renewals (April, June ’17) used against Carter Page were insufficiency predicated while withholding opinion on the original application (Oct ’16) and first renewal (Jan ’17).

To address the consequences of fraudulently obtained FISA warrants the DOJ and FBI informed the court they would begin a process to “sequester” all collected evidence from all four FISA warrants. [FISA COURT LINK]

Sequestering the evidence is essentially a search for what investigative material the FISA warrants were used to obtain; ie. the search for the fruit of the poisoned tree; and then a review of all DOJ/FBI cases that may have utilized that investigative material.

In late January the DOJ contacted the FISA court and asked for an extension to the deadline.  The FISA court granted an extension until February 5th [LINK]  The response from the DOJ has not yet been declassified or released by the FISC for public review.

However, with recent media reporting of AG Barr using “outside prosecutors” to review current, former and ongoing cases, it simply makes sense this ‘outsider’ effort is part of the DOJ/FBI sequestration review.

If you consider that several DOJ offices may be involved with the material under review, including the Southern District of New York; The Eastern District of New York; The Eastern District of Virginia; The Washington DC District, and even Main Justice itself; it makes sense that outside DOJ personnel would be needed for this review.

Additionally, all of the various FBI field offices who may have used the FISA authorizations as the underpinning evidence to gain separate Title-1 and/or Title-3 warrants, wiretaps or National Security Letters, in their various investigative cases would also need to be reviewed.   This is an aspect the media is not discussing while they write opinions about AG Bill Barr bringing in outside DOJ attorneys.

The media are framing the use of outside attorneys as Bill Barr working on behalf of President Trump to undermine current and former prosecutions.  However, understanding the FISC order requiring the sequestration effort, the use of outsiders is absolutely necessary.

The same U.S. Attorneys, prosecutors and FBI agents who used evidence gathered from the FISA warrants cannot be the same attorneys, agents and prosecutors making decisions about what parts of the warrants were used to gather evidence and how each part of any case was assembled by the use therein.  It is a simple matter of a conflict of interest.

Additionally, the Robert Mueller team of FBI investigators and special counsel prosecutors certainly used the fraudulently obtained FISA warrants as part of their investigative evidence collection.   Common sense would tell us this had to be the case or the FBI and Mueller team would not have requested renewals of the FISA warrant.

If the FBI & Special Counsel were not using the FISA warrant(s) to capture information, they would not have needed them renewed.  Despite media spin to the contrary, the simple truth of renewals holding investigative value is evident in the renewal itself (ie. common sense).

Under this rather extensive effort to find exactly which investigations -over the course of three years- were touched directly, or indirectly, by the four FISA warrants; and/or which investigative paths may have been influenced downstream or enhanced -by varying degrees of importance- by evidence stemming from the FISA warrants; a reasonable person could see how AG Bill Barr would need to put a team together to retrace the investigative steps and make the sequestration determinations.

Obviously, for reasons of biased intent, corporate left-wing media would like to ignore why outside prosecutors are needed under this framework.  Ignored in part because honest reporting would require an admission the FISA warrants were fraudulently obtained; and in part because the left-wing media have never informed the public of the DOJ/FBI sequestration effort in the first place.  Likely more than half the country has no idea the DOJ and FBI have been told to go find the material.

There have been numerous articles, thousands of words, and endless hours of pundit protestations about Bill Barr using outside DC lawyers to review all of the previous DOJ Attorney activities; yet not a single time have they ever acknowledged the originating order from the FISA court requiring the DOJ/FBI to conduct the review.   Imagine that?

New York Times – Mr. Barr has also installed a handful of outside prosecutors to broadly review the handling of other politically sensitive national-security cases in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, the people said. The team includes at least one prosecutor from the office of the United States attorney in St. Louis, Jeff Jensen, who is handling the Flynn matter, as well as prosecutors from the office of the deputy attorney general, Jeffrey A. Rosen. (more)

Lastly, perhaps within this process we can finally get an answer as to what legal justification Robert Mueller and the Special Counsel team used in order to gain access to all of the Trump transition team communications; which included attorney-client privileged material.

This issue from late 2017 was ignored by the mainstream media at the height of their willful blindness toward any corruption within the Mueller team:

FULL letter outlining the issues:

.

Resources:

FISA Court Order – Requiring DOJ Response

FISA Court Order – Granting extension until Feb 5, 2020.

LINK to FISA Court Public Records

This entry was posted in AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, CIA, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, Election 2020, FBI, IG Report Comey, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Spygate, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

383 Responses to Barr’s “Outside Prosecutors” and the FISC Sequestration Agreement…

  1. Republicanvet91 says:

    Three things:

    1. Why would Barr think corruption might be involved in the FISA process or targeting POTUS, but not in prosecuting and sentencing Stone?
    2. 2000 judges throw a tantrum? Seems the Turtle should have done a better job vetting of nominees.
    3. If Barr is having several outside US Attorney’s looking into this mess, wouldn’t it be harder to sweep under the rug? The more people know of the details, the harder it will be to ignore.

    Like

    • As a man thinkth says:

      Point 3: Depends on the sanctity of the investigator reviewing the process…Horowitz has proven that issues can be reviewed, crimes revealed and summarized as ” no intent, no bias and simply lack of condor”

      Yes you caught him with his hand in the cookie jar, but he was hungry and someone left them setting on the shelf…bless his heart it wasn’t his fault.

      Like

  2. cali says:

    When all is said and done we’ll find that George Soros ordered SpyGate via his puppet Hussein.

    All of it is connected after Soros’ selection and candidate HRC lost the election.

    Alan Dershowitz clearly stated that he has proof that it all started with George Soros demanding Hussein do what he did. It started with Hussein all the way down to the rest of the deep state puppets happily obliging ‘Viva Le Resistance”!

    Like

  3. dimbulbz says:

    The problem I see is that we now have a very large segment of our society that believes that Politics is superior to everything. The constitution, the Bill of Rights, The rule of law, Family, God, human decency… The supreme power in the universe is Politics. How do you live in such a civilization? My guess is when they lose (badly) in November, they will do everything to burn the nation to the ground. They may even do a preemptive strike. There’s a bad moon rising.

    Like

  4. As a man thinkth says:

    Point 3: Depends on the sanctity of the investigator reviewing the process…Horowitz has proven that issues can be reviewed, crimes revealed and summarized as ” no intent, no bias and simply lack of condor”

    Yes you caught him with his hand in the cookie jar, but he was hungry and someone left them setting on the shelf…bless his heart it wasn’t his fault.

    Like

  5. mugzey302 says:

    If SCOTUS is the direct supervisor of this court, why isn’t Chief Justice involved in reviewing the process?

    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