Puzzle Pieces – Former Asst. Sec of State Robert Charles Discusses the ‘FISA Review Court’ – May Explain Judge Ruben Contreras Recusal…


Former Assistant Secretary of State, Robert Charles, discusses the procedures and processes for gaining a FISA ‘Title-1’ surveillance warrant.   Within the discussion Mr. Charles outlines the FISA review court and a likely path the Carter Page application could have taken after an initial denial.

Additionally, Mr. Charles discusses the downstream ramifications when the U.S. Department of Justice secures a warrant by providing false and/or misleading information to the FISA court: “fruit of the poisonous tree”.

.

The explanation by the former ASoS might very well explain why Robert Mueller asked for a delay in the ongoing Mike Flynn sentencing; and simultaneously explain why Judge Ruben Contreras was recused from the case.

Against a newly discovered likelihood the Robert Mueller investigation began under false pretenses; and against the backdrop that FBI surveillance and wiretaps were obtained through materially (intentionally) false representations to the FISA court; and against the backdrop the original Flynn plea judge (Contrereas) was also the approving FISA judge; and that judge ‘was summarily recused’ from the case; and against increasing evidence that Mike Flynn was set up by a terminal animus, and politically-motivated investigative rogue unit, operating within the FBI; and against surfacing IG Horowitz evidence that FBI investigators manipulated (lied on) their FD-302 interrogation documents; and understanding those falsified 302’s were used in the Mueller/Flynn charging document…

…Special Counsel Robert Mueller asked for postponement of sentencing:

(pdf link)

Both parties did not ‘request‘ a postponement; both parties ‘agreed‘ to a postponement. The motive for the request (Mueller) is entirely divergent from, yet complimentary to, the motive to agree to the request (Flynn).

This is all beginning to go backwards.

It is also not coincidental that Brandon L Van Grack is the signatory to the delay request by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s request to the new Judge, Emmet G Sullivan.

If, as has been reported, Inspector General Michael Horowitz now has evidence the FBI manipulated their FD-302 (interrogation and questioning) documents, as also admitted by FBI agent Peter Strzok in related matters regarding Clinton…

…. and those manipulated or falsified FBI 302’s (containing FBI investigative notes of Michael Flynn’s questioning during the January 2017 interview) were used in the actual Flynn charging documents, then Robert Mueller has a big problem.

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/366062176/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-QHaNTpsHk3My0BRqqECU

.

Secondly, the underlying surveillance application evidence presented to the FISA court (June ’16 – denied, perhaps Ruben Contreras), and later resubmitted to a FISA review court (Oct ’16 – approved), became the basis for wiretap surveillance on Trump campaign officials.

The downstream consequence was the FBI interrogation of Michael Flynn.

As a direct result we end up at the December 1st 2017 plea hearing, again back to Judge Contreras although this time in his role as a U.S. District Court, only now the plea is based on evidence that was an outcome of materially misrepresented claims to Contreras (June ’16) when he was within his capacity as a FISC judge and initially denied the DOJ FISA “Title-1” application.

Due to the classification of FISC roles and responsibilities, Contreras would be incapable of discussing his concerns, or asking FISA related questions in open court, during his role as U.S. District Judge.

Hence, Contreras ‘was recused‘ from the Flynn case as an outcome of that initial FISA  hearing and his later notification to the FISA court of his concerns about the pleading he just judged with Michael Flynn.

With the IG exposing falsified and manipulative investigative practices by the FBI, Mueller would have no alternative but to throw the brakes on. This whole thing is turning into a sh*t-show of epic proportions. EARLIER WE DISCUSSED

Additionally, the Robert Mueller prosecuting lawyer, the Special Counsel attorney that signed General Flynn’s Statement of Offense filed in U.S, District Court 12/01/2017, was “Brandon L Van Grack”. [See page #5]

When Trump transition team lawyer Kory Langhofer (Trump for America transition organization) contacted the special counsels office about the illegal and unethical way they retrieved transition team emails from the GSA. Who was he put in contact with?

It was Brandon L Van Grack who was in communication w/ the Trump for America transition organization; and, according to the documents on this topic (attached), misrepresented (ie. lied about) the Special Counsel access to the GSA emails on 12/12/2017. (Pdf Link)

What reason would Van Grack have for taking the call from the transition attorney in the first place?… and then, what reason would he have for lying about the information that was requested?

It is my belief, based on mounting evidence, a specific cast of characters -within the Mueller “Russia Election Interference” probe- were placed there, specifically by former FBI chief legal counsel James Baker, to protect the people behind the FBI’s 2016/2017 counterintelligence operation against Trump.

I suspected, and ongoing evidence has confirmed, the same FBI and DOJ “small group”, the team who worked diligently to ensure Hillary Clinton was never found culpable in the 2015/2016 email investigation, later worked on the 2016 Trump counterintelligence operation (FISA wiretapping surveillance etc).

That same “small group” within the FBI and DOJ were then given the task in 2017 of covering both prior operations: A) *Clear Hillary Clinton, and B) *Counterintel op on Trump.

To cover, cloud and protect the DOJ and FBI officials engaged in both operations, the “small group” was then reassembled within Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel team as organized by James Baker.

Inside Mueller’s crew, the “small group” essentially works to watch over what information the Trump officials or congress could possibly be discovering…. under the auspices of investigating ‘Muh Russia’ etc.

If the “small group” comes across a risky trail being followed, they work to impede, block, delay or deflect anyone from that trail.  That is their purpose inside the Special Counsel, Robert Mueller probe.

That objective is why the Special Counsel attorney that signed General Flynn’s Statement of Offense filed Dec. 1, 2017, was the same attorney who responded to the Trump transition team inquiry. Brandon L Van Grack.

This “small group” are essentially around 20 career DOJ and FBI staff lawyers behind and beside the visible names we have recently become aware of. Including: Peter Strzok, Bruce Ohr, Lisa Page, Bill Priestap, Andrew McCabe, Sally Yates, James Comey, James Baker, David Laufner, Mike Kortan, Jim Rybicki, Trisha Beth Anderson, John P Carlin, Mary McCord, etc.

One comment on “Puzzle Pieces – Former Asst. Sec of State Robert Charles Discusses the ‘FISA Review Court’ – May Explain Judge Ruben Contreras Recusal…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s