Another TSA theory down
The Nunes memo said the FISC was never told the Steele dossier was funded by the DNC/Clinton campaign and it wasn't. There was no lie in the memo.
The Nunes memo revealed a damning omissionAnother TSA theory down
Having reviewed hundreds and hundreds of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant applications as the final stop between the FBI and the desks of Attorneys General William French Smith and Edwin Meese III, I read the Nunes memo as revealing one major fact that stands out above all other revelations: The FISA warrant for surveillance on Carter Page (and the three subsequent renewals of the warrant) omitted a material fact. While the FBI admitted that the information came from a politically motivated source, the bureau did not disclose that the source had been financed by Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. That is a damning omission.
My job reviewing those warrants existed because prior to the establishment of a National Security Division at the Justice Department, a special assistant to the attorney general with the appropriate clearances had the job of making sure the attorney general did not sign off on a warrant application that got bounced back from the FISA court. Such a rejection had never happened before I got there, didn’t happen while it was my job and has happened only a handful of times since. That record is in large part because of trust developed between the FISA courts and the FBI and Justice Department over decades, especially the respect accorded the counterintelligence professionals at the bureau. That trust has now been injured.
Upon publication of the Nunes memo, a retired federal judge emailed me: “There is not an officer of the court in the land who in the context of this particular application to the FISA court should not have identified the source of the information as having been the [Democratic National Committee] and the Clinton Campaign. If I had granted the application and then subsequently learned that the information was sourced to the DNC and the Campaign, I would have rescinded the authorization and issued a show-cause order to the Government to explain who and why this sourcing was not made known to the court. The fact (if it be that) that the Government told the court that it was a political source, but did not identify who, in this particular instance, is highly probative that the Government purposely misled the court.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.ae4cbc7a18cf
https://www.google.com/amp/s/hotair....isa-court/amp/
He did not deny the footnote was there
But in an appearance on "Fox & Friends," Nunes was asked about reports over the weekend that the FBI application did refer to a political en y connected to the dossier. It is unclear precisely what language the application might have used.
Nunes conceded that a "footnote" to that effect was included in the application, while faulting the bureau for failing to provide more specifics.
Bam. Boom Disclosed. You lost again PeeSA.
Holy , rightwingnutjob assholes are pathetic and hilarious
Gowdy read the footnote. Lordy!
The Nunes memo said the FISC was never told the Steele dossier was funded by the DNC/Clinton campaign and it wasn't. The footnote did not disclose who funded the dossier either.But in an appearance on "Fox & Friends," Nunes was asked about reports over the weekend that the FBI application did refer to a political en y connected to the dossier. It is unclear precisely what language the application might have used.
Nunes conceded that a "footnote" to that effect was included in the application, while faulting the bureau for failing to provide more specifics.
Bam. Boom Disclosed. You lost again PeeSA.
“There is not an officer of the court in the land who in the context of this particular application to the FISA court should not have identified the source of the information as having been the [Democratic National Committee] and the Clinton Campaign. If I had granted the application and then subsequently learned that the information was sourced to the DNC and the Campaign, I would have rescinded the authorization and issued a show-cause order to the Government to explain who and why this sourcing was not made known to the court. The fact (if it be that) that the Government told the court that it was a political source, but did not identify who, in this particular instance, is highly probative that the Government purposely misled the court.”
Tsa not giving up, digging in
Sorry TSA. The court was notified the dossier had a political backing. And was STILL approved. You lose.
There's nothing to give up on, Clinton/DNC/FBI/DOJ are all ed. It's amusing watching the left claim victory after a 4 page memo was released while forgetting that the OIG investigation has been going on for over a year and Horowitz has been working directly with Grassley and Nunes. Where do you think the source do ents Nunes used came from? Where did the Strzok/Page texts come from? Who recovered the Strzok/Page texts the FBI said were missing?
Pisser is triggered.
Yeah I haven't really kept up much but I'm thinking lol no.
Trump's own appointees at the DOJ who approved the applications are all ed.
Well, I'm really waiting the Horowitz report due out sometime this Spring.
Should be good.
McCabe - Republican
Comey - Republican
Rosenstein - Republican
Wray - Republican
FISA judges selected by John Roberts, another republican.
Somehow all a Hillary conspiracy
Is it a FISA requirement that the funding source must be completely disclosed?
Yes or no.
Four Republican appointed federal judges did know it was oppo research.
It was good enough for them.
And this is Carter Page we're talking about.
Schiff disputed the GOP memo's assertion as "not accurate," saying the court was aware that there was a "likely political motivation" behind the Steele dossier. The California Democrat also said it is normal in FISA applications not to name individuals who may be sources of information.
The Washington Post, New York Times and Wall Street Journal reported after the memo's release that the FISA court was aware of political motivations behind the dossier.
According to an official cited in the Post on Friday, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the matter's sensitivity, the Justice Department presented "ample disclosure of relevant, material facts," to the FISA court, including that "the research was being paid for by a political en y."
Why didn't Nunes read the source do ents, TSA?
I'll answer. His TSCI was stripped months ago.
Those four Republican FISA judges are ed!
Yeah!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote