DOJ Inspector General Releases Damning Results of FISA Application Review and Missing Woods Procedures, But Don’t Expect Any Accountability – Remember Mary McCord Was Prepositioned

Posted originally on the conservative tree house on September 30, 2021 | Sundance | 13 Comments

The DOJ Office of Inspector General (OIG) has released a review of FISA applications used to gain Title-1 surveillance warrants against U.S. persons. [LINK HERE] The review specifically looks at the earlier issues identified in ‘Woods Files‘ that are legally required to be present in any FISA application and contain the material evidence to support the secret application to the secret court.

The ‘Trusty Plan‘ group; those who continue to push a false hope that corrective action inside the justice system will take place; will likely be very excited about the damning OIG release.  However, nothing is likely to come of the report.

Remember, the original issues with the Woods Files were outlined by CTH 18 months ago {Go Deep} in March of last year, after the interim results were reported.  This current OIG release is the finished product of that earlier investigation; and outlines almost identical issues.

Additionally, it is critical to remember the FISA court is operating in close coordination with the very corrupt DOJ-NSD, and the presiding judge of the FISC, James Boasberg, specifically took action after the Biden inauguration to protect himself and the institution.  Boasberg knew this OIG review was ongoing.  Boasberg worked with the DOJ and FBI to position defenses against any OIG revelations.

Earlier this year the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Presiding Judge James Boasberg, hired former DOJ National Security Division head, Mary McCord, as amici curiae advisor to the court. [LINK] The placement was first noted by an announcement from Georgetown Law ICAP.

Judge Boasberg, is the decision-maker in the appointment of Amici Curiae to the FISA court. There is no way, NO WAY, Judge Boasberg did not know Mary McCord was at the epicenter of the fraudulent FISA application used against Carter Page.  Remember, in addition to being the FISC Presiding Judge, Boasberg was also the trial judge in the case against Kevin Clinesmith, the FBI lawyer who lied about Page working for the CIA on the FISA application. {Go Deep}

Boasberg knows Mary McCord took over from former DOJ-NSD head John Carlin (October 2016); and it was McCord who guided the Carter Page FISA application through the court and across the finish-line (October 2016 and January 2017). That FISA application was built upon fraud and Mary McCord was at the center of it.

Judge Boasberg knows the granular details of the fraudulent FISA application. Boasberg knows the details of the Inspector General Michael Horowitz report about the fraudulent FISA application; and all the DOJ and FBI participants… which included Mary McCord. Boasberg knows exactly who Mary McCord is, and what activity she had taken on behalf of the political resistance inside the DOJ and inside congress. FISC Presiding Judge James Boasberg also knows Mary McCord has broken the law….

…And yet Boasberg appointed Mary McCord as amici curaie?

Let’s be really clear here. The FISA court is a small unit. The judges in/around Washington DC are also a small unit. They know everything that is going on in and around their DC network. A FISA judge inside that DC system knows every granular detail of everything that comes into their purview. All of it. Judge Boasberg even wrote the last two FISA court opinions (2019 and 2020) about the FBI abuses of the FISA-702 process and warrantless, illegal violations of the NSA database.

There was simply no other way to look at the placement of Mary McCord other than to see what it is. The FISA court is compromised; AND, McCord is being installed in order to coordinate any defensive measures that would be needed to cover-up that compromise.

Boasberg knew this damning OIG report was likely, because Boasberg as FISC presiding judge was the customer of the fraudulent documentation within the FISA applications.  Judge Boasberg knew the Woods Files were missing or structurally flawed.   None of this…. NONE of THIS… is a surprise to Presiding FISC Judge James Boasberg.

BACKGROUND – After the DOJ Offfice of Inspector General (OIG), Michael Horowitz, presented his December 2019 findings of the FISA application used against U.S person Carter Page, the gross deficiencies and intentional fraud were so extensive the IG said he was going to review a sample of FISA applications to identify if the fraud and abuse was widespread.

The OIG began reviewing FISA applications from eight field offices (the proverbial “rank and file”).  The OIG selected 29 FISA applications from those field offices over the period of October 2014 to September 2019.  Additionally, every field office and the DOJ-NSD generate internal “Accuracy Reviews”, or self-checks on FISA applications; so the OIG inspected 42 of the accuracy review FISA files to determine if they were compliant.

The results were so bad the IG produced an interim memorandum to the DOJ and FBI [pdf link here].  Within the 17-page-memo the IG notifies Attorney General Bill Barr and FBI Director Chris Wray that all of the claimed FISA processes, in every field office, are grossly deficient, and in most cases there is zero compliance with FISA standards.  The IG memorandum is presented before the IG even looks at the specifics of the non-compliance.

Here is the original OIG report/memorandum.  Additionally I am summarizing the stunning top-lines identified by the IG memo:

  • The IG reviewed 29 FISA applications, surveillance warrants, used against U.S. persons.
  • The 29 FISA applications were from eight different field offices.
  • The FISA applications were from Oct/2014 through Sept/2019.
  • All of the FISA applications reviewed were approved by the FISA court.

The ‘Woods File’ is the mandatory FBI evidence file that contains the documentary proof to verify all statements against U.S. persons that are contained in the FISA application.  Remember, this is a secret court, the FISA applications result in secret surveillance and wiretaps against U.S. persons outside the fourth amendment.

♦ Within the 29 FISA applications reviewed, four were completely missing the Woods File.  Meaning there was zero supportive evidence for any of the FBI claims against U.S. persons underpinning the FISA application.  [ie. The FBI just made stuff up]

♦ Of the remaining 25 FISA applications, 100% of them, all of them, were materially deficient on the woods file requirement; and the average number of deficiencies per file was 20.  Meaning an average of twenty direct statements against the target, supporting the purpose of the FISA application, sworn by the FBI affiant, were unsubstantiated.  [The low was 5, the high was 63, the average per file was 20]

♦ Half of the FISA applications reviewed used Confidential Human Sources (CHS’s).  The memo outlines that “many” of applications containing CHS claims had no supportive documentation attesting to the dependability of the CHS.

♦ Two of the 25 FISA applications reviewed had renewals; meaning the FISA applications were renewed to extended surveillance, wiretaps, etc. beyond the initial 90-days.  None of the renewals had any re-verification.  Both FISAs that used renewals were not compliant.

But wait… it gets worse.

The DOJ and FBI have an internal self-check mechanism.  The DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) chief counsel, and the chief counsel for every FBI field office are required to conduct an “Accuracy Review” of selected FISA applications.  One per field office (25 to 30 field offices),which are also sent to DOJ-NSD (main justice) for general counsel inspection.

Keep in mind, these “accuracy reviews” are known in advance, so the FBI has all the time in the world to select the best FISA file for review.  Additionally, I surmise the OIG wanted to inspect the “accuracy review” FISA’s because they would show the best light on the overall system itself.  The OIG was looking for the best, most compliant, product to report on.

However, when the OIG inspected 42 of these Accuracy Reviews, the IG identified that only three of them had accurately assembled documents (Woods File) supporting the application.  The error rate within the files self-checked was over 93%.

So the best FBI files are selected to undergo the FBI and DOJ-NSD accuracy review.  The accuracy review takes place by FBI legal counsel and DOJ-NSD legal counsel.  However, the IG finds that only three FBI applications in the accuracy reviews were compliant.

The error rate in the files undertaken by the internal accuracy review was over 93% (3 compliant out of 42 reviewed).  These were the FISA files with the greatest possibility of being accurate.  Let that sink in…

All of what you just read preceded the release today by the OIG.  FISA Court Presiding Judge James Boasberg, knew all of that before today.

CTH sees things as they are, not as we would wish them to be.  With that in mind, do you really think the final report issued today is going to change anything?


Last point…  After years of research CTH outlined how the Fourth Branch of Government was created and supported.  When we put the outline together we noted the 4th Branch supersedes all other branches, that includes the Judicial Branch – within which, the FISA Court is a subsidiary.

The FISA Court defers to the national security apparatus 100% of the time.  The FISC never challenges the national security argument presented by the officials who administer the 4th Branch.  The FISC never provides oversight of the Intelligence Community, which underpins the material given to the court.

The only way to reform the corrupt FISC, is to first remove the Fourth Branch of Government.  Until that happens, nothing else is possible.