The DOJ, Sidney Powell and the Sullivan appointed amicus John Gleeson will hold a hearing today in the courtroom of Judge Emmet Sullivan to argue the unopposed motion to dismiss the case against Michael Flynn. The hearing begins at 11:00am ET and you can call-in to hear the audio of the live courtroom events. (details below)
UPDATE 2: Technical issues at the court. Recess called until 12:35pm ET to work on issues. I’m Dropping another link (YouTube) below that was not compromised during the “technical issues”.
UPDATE 3: Some more technical glitches and a 15 min bio break until 2:45pm ET
UPDATE 4: Hearing ended abruptly.
.
If the true administration of justice was to prevail in this case, the judge should simply accept the unopposed motion and this would be the end of the malicious prosecution. However, this case has so many precedents anything is possible.
If you are listening-in to the hearing, feel free to drop your thoughts and opinions into the comment section to share.
[Minneapolis – Sept 29, 2020] In part two of an explosive exposé, a Minnesota-based source tells Project Veritas that the mastermind behind the rampant voter fraud scheme is Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) herself and her extensive political machine.
“Nobody would say that Ilhan Omar isn’t part of this,” said Omar Jamal, a Somali community Insider and the Chairman of the Somali Watchdog group. “Unless you’re from a different planet, but if you live in this universe, I think everybody knows it.”
Jamal said Ali Isse Gainey, a senior Ilhan Omar staffer, is at the center of the vote-buying scheme. (more)
UPDATE: The Minneapolis Police Department is investigating claims by right-wing activist group Project Veritas that individuals tied to Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., engaged in illegal ballot harvesting before the election.
“We are in the process of looking into the validity of those statements,” a department statement read on Monday. “No further information is available at this time on this.” (link)
This is the arc of the investigative inquiry that should have been started well over a year ago. This is likely the “expanded” justification now being explained by the Durham/Aldenberg probe. As if…. they didn’t know this prior to having the evidence slapped upside their head like a cold wet fish.
The Special Counsel was the insurance policy. The Special Counsel ran Main Justice for two years. The function of the Special Counsel was to conceal gross abuses by government agencies. Now those agency leaders are coming under scrutiny for continuing to hide documents and evidence. This stall tactic is frustrating in the extreme.
Former Acting DNI Richard “Ric” Grenell fires a warning shot across the bow of those within the intelligence community who are refusing to release documents. During an interview with Liz Mac, Grenell shared:
“I’m getting really impatient with those individual agencies that know exactly what I’m talking about, that know exactly what documents they need to release… they’re playing games.”
A very interesting release from the Office of Inspector General (OIG), Michael Horowitz, [SEE HERE] outlines some very interesting information especially for those who have followed the arc of the NSA database exploitation for several years.
On its face the OIG release outlines a review and finding, actually a warning, by Horowitz’s office about FBI contractor access to “a certain national security database.” The release is titled: “Management Advisory: Notification of Concerns Identified in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Contract Administration of a Certain Classified National Security Program”, and the advisory part is particularly interesting when absorbed through the prism of prior information.
Notice the date of the first notification from the OIG to the FBI, January 22nd 2020, this is a detail within the report that will be missed by most. It was little discussed on January 29, 2019, when the OIG revealed “Misconduct by Two Current Senior FBI Officials and One Retired FBI Official While Providing Oversight on an FBI Contract” [LINK] Indeed we know the OIG was reviewing FBI contractor access to the NSA database as a result of both FISA judge Rosemary Collyer and FISA judge James Boasberg reports.
On the surface of the current release the OIG is noting concerns and a warning shared with the FBI about ongoing contractor access to the NSA database; thus, a “classified national security program” becomes defined. However, in the background of this current release it appears the OIG is using this public notification as a CYA of sorts. Meaning the OIG is saying publicly they have advised the FBI of “concerns” with this database being abused.
As specifically, and in my opinion intentionally, noted by the OIG the FBI used their intelligence authority to “classify” their response to IG Horowitz warning; and now Horowitz is informing the public of that opaque FBI approach.
Essentially, this can be looked at as Horowitz calling out the FBI for hiding information, yet the IG is using carefully worded public information to do so.
Read this next paragraph carefully…. EMPHASIS MINE:
[…] The classification marking of the working draft report, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictions on official government travel, and the unavailability to the OIG of secure video conferencing capability have contributed to the delays in finalizing this review.
So that we can begin the process of resolving issues that we identified during the review in a timely manner, we have determined that it would be in the OIG’s and the FBI’s interests to conclude our review by treating the OIG’s working draft report and its 11 recommendations as a management advisory.
Further, based on the oral and written feedback previously provided by the FBI on the working draft report, we consider the 11 recommendations contained within the working draft report to be final and their status “resolved.”
Consistent with the ordinary recommendation resolution process, we ask that the FBI please provide us within 90 days your response concerning specific actions completed or alternative corrective actions proposed or taken to address the recommendations.
So the FBI hid their response to the IG warning behind the cloud of “classification”, leaving the IG with no alternative except to say the classified response has to be accepted as the final FBI response to the IG warning. The IG is then saying to the FBI you have 90 days to tell us what you did to address the contractor access abuses.
The OIG is covering his ass, and telling us why.
Keep in mind this contractor access to the bulk NSA metadata is a big deal. All of the FISA audits in the past six years have pointed out how FBI contractors abuse their access to the database and unlawfully extract information without minimization efforts required by fourth amendment protections. The scale of the abuse is actually stunning; and now the OIG has reviewed the same process and found the same issues uncorrected.
The FBI is attempting to retain an unlawful process. Former NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers said: the system itself is too easy to exploit and too difficult to manage, as he tried to shut down part of the search function (“about queries”) within the database itself.
To understand what specifically is being addressed within this IG review, it is worthwhile revisiting an interview by Flynn’s defense counsel Sidney Powell as she shares information that CTH readers are very knowledgeable about; as well as a reminder of the backstory.
Michael Flynn’s defense attorney Sidney Powell hits it out of the park as she connects the dots within the surveillance state and the use of FBI contractors to mine the NSA database.
Must Watch:
.
A DEEP DIVE – How Did It Work?
Start by reviewing the established record from the 99-page FISC opinion rendered by Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer on April 26, 2017. Review the details within the FISC opinion.
I would strongly urge everyone to read the FISC report (full pdf below) because Judge Collyer outlines how the DOJ, which includes the FBI, had an “institutional lack of candor” in responses to the FISA court. In essence, the Obama administration was continually lying to the FISA court about their activity, and the rate of fourth amendment violations for illegal searches and seizures of U.S. persons’ private information for multiple years.
Unfortunately, due to intelligence terminology Judge Collyer’s brief and ruling is not an easy read for anyone unfamiliar with the FISA processes. That complexity also helps the media avoid discussing it; and as a result most Americans have no idea of the scale and scope of the Obama-era surveillance issues. So we’ll try to break down the language.
For the sake of brevity and common understanding CTH will highlight the most pertinent segments showing just how systemic and troublesome the unlawful electronic surveillance was.
Early in 2016 NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers was alerted of a significant uptick in FISA-702(17) “About” queries using the FBI/NSA database that holds all metadata records on every form of electronic communication.
The NSA compliance officer alerted Admiral Mike Rogers who then initiated a full compliance audit on/around March 9th, 2016, for the period of November 1st, 2015, through May 1st, 2016.
While the audit was ongoing, due to the severity of the results that were identified, Admiral Mike Rogers stopped anyone from using the 702(17) “about query” option, and went to the extraordinary step of blocking all FBI contractor access to the database on April 18, 2016 (keep these dates in mind).
Here are some significant segments:
The key takeaway from these first paragraphs is how the search query results were exported from the NSA database to users who were not authorized to see the material. The FBI contractors were conducting searches and then removing, or ‘exporting’, the results. Later on, the FBI said all of the exported material was deleted.
Searching the highly classified NSA database is essentially a function of filling out search boxes to identify the user-initiated search parameter and get a return on the search result.
♦ FISA-702(16) is a search of the system returning a U.S. person (“702”); and the “16” is a check box to initiate a search based on “To and From“. Example, if you put in a date and a phone number and check “16” as the search parameter the user will get the returns on everything “To and From” that identified phone number for the specific date. Calls, texts, contacts etc. Including results for the inbound and outbound contacts.
♦ FISA-702(17) is a search of the system returning a U.S. person (702); and the “17” is a check box to initiate a search based on everything “About” the search qualifier. Example, if you put a date and a phone number and check “17” as the search parameter the user will get the returns of everything about that phone. Calls, texts, contacts, geolocation (or gps results), account information, user, service provider etc. As a result, 702(17) can actually be used to locate where the phone (and user) was located on a specific date or sequentially over a specific period of time which is simply a matter of changing the date parameters.
And that’s just from a phone number.
Search an ip address “about” and read all data into that server; put in an email address and gain everything about that account. Or use the electronic address of a GPS enabled vehicle (about) and you can withdraw more electronic data and monitor in real time. Search a credit card number and get everything about the account including what was purchased, where, when, etc. Search a bank account number, get everything about transactions and electronic records etc. Just about anything and everything can be electronically searched; everything has an electronic ‘identifier’.
The search parameter is only limited by the originating field filled out. Names, places, numbers, addresses, etc. By using the “About” parameter there may be thousands or millions of returns. Imagine if you put “@realdonaldtrump” into the search parameter? You could extract all following accounts who interacted on Twitter, or Facebook etc. You are only limited by your imagination and the scale of the electronic connectivity.
As you can see below, on March 9th, 2016, internal auditors noted the FBI was sharing “raw FISA information, including but not limited to Section 702-acquired information”.
In plain English the raw search returns were being shared with unknown entities without any attempt to “minimize” or redact the results. The person(s) attached to the results were named and obvious. There was no effort to hide their identity or protect their 4th amendment rights of privacy; and database access was from the FBI network:
But what’s the scale here? This is where the story really lies.
Read this next excerpt carefully.
The operators were searching “U.S Persons”. The review of November 1, 2015, to May 1, 2016, showed “eighty-five percent of those queries” were unlawful or “non compliant”.
85% !! “representing [redacted number]”.
We can tell from the space of the redaction the number of searches were between 10,000 and 99,999 [six digits]. If we take the middle number of 50,000 – a non compliant rate of 85 percent means 42,500 unlawful searches out of 50,000.
The [six digit] amount (more than 10,000, less than 99,999), and 85% error rate, was captured in a six month period, November 2015 to April 2016.
Also notice this very important quote: “many of these non-compliant queries involved the use of the same identifiers over different date ranges.” This tells us the system users were searching the same phone number, email address, electronic identifier, repeatedly over different dates.
Specific person(s) were being tracked/monitored.
Additionally, notice the last quote: “while the government reports it is unable to provide a reliable estimate of” these non lawful searches “since 2012, there is no apparent reason to believe the November 2015 [to] April 2016 coincided with an unusually high error rate”.
That means the 85% unlawful FISA-702(16)(17) database abuse has likely been happening since 2012.
2012 is an important date in this database abuse because a network of specific interests is assembled that also shows up in 2016/2017:
Who was 2012 FBI Director? Robert Mueller, who was selected by the FBI group to become special prosecutor in 2017.
Who was Mueller’ chief-of-staff? Aaron Zebley, who became one of the lead lawyers on the Mueller special counsel.
Who was 2012 CIA Director? John Brennan (remember the ouster of Gen Petraeus)
Who was ODNI? James Clapper.
Remember, the NSA is inside the Pentagon (Defense Dept) command structure. Who was Defense Secretary? Ash Carter
Who wanted NSA Director Mike Rogers fired in 2016? Brennan, Clapper and Carter.
And finally, who wrote and signed-off-on the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment and then lied about the use of the Steele Dossier? The same John Brennan, and James Clapper along with James Comey.
Tens of thousands of searches over four years (since 2012), and 85% of them are illegal. The results were extracted for?…. (I believe this is all political opposition use; and I’ll explain why momentarily.)
OK, that’s the stunning scale; but who was involved?
Private contractors with access to “raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to FBI’s requests“:
And as noted, the contractor access was finally halted on April 18th, 2016.
[Coincidentally (or likely not), the wife of Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson, Mary Jacoby, goes to the White House the very next day on April 19th, 2016.]
None of this is conspiracy theory.
All of this is laid out inside this 99-page opinion from FISC Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer who also noted that none of this FISA abuse was accidental in a footnote on page 87: “deliberate decisionmaking“:
This specific footnote, if declassified, could be a key. Note the phrase: “([redacted] access to FBI systems was the subject of an interagency memorandum of understanding entered into [redacted])”, this sentence has the potential to expose an internal decision; withheld from congress and the FISA court by the Obama administration; that outlines a process for access and distribution of surveillance data.
Note: “no notice of this practice was given to the FISC until 2016“, that is important.
Summary: The FISA court identified and quantified tens-of-thousands of search queries of the NSA/FBI database using the FISA-702(16)(17) system. The database was repeatedly used by persons with contractor access who unlawfully searched and extracted the raw results without redacting the information and shared it with an unknown number of entities.
The outlined process certainly points toward a political spying and surveillance operation; and we are not the only one to think that’s what this system is being used for.
Back in 2017 when House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes was working to reauthorize the FISA legislation, Nunes wrote a letter to ODNI Dan Coats about this specific issue:
SIDEBAR: To solve the issue, well, actually attempt to ensure it never happened again, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers eventually took away the “About” query option permanently in 2017. NSA Director Rogers said the abuse was so inherent there was no way to stop it except to remove the process completely. [SEE HERE] Additionally, the NSA database operates as a function of the Pentagon, so the Trump administration went one step further. On his last day as NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers -together with ODNI Dan Coats- put U.S. cyber-command, the database steward, fully into the U.S. military as a full combatant command. [SEE HERE] Unfortunately it didn’t work as shown by the 2018 FISC opinion rendered by FISC Judge James Boasberg [SEE HERE]
There is little doubt the FISA-702(16)(17) database system was used by Obama-era officials, from 2012 through April 2016, as a way to spy on their political opposition.
Quite simply there is no other intellectually honest explanation for the scale and volume of database abuse that was taking place; and keep in mind these searches were all ruled to be unlawful. Searches for repeated persons over a period time that were not authorized.
When we reconcile what was taking place and who was involved, then the actions of the exact same principle participants take on a jaw-dropping amount of clarity.
All of the action taken by CIA Director Brennan, FBI Director Comey, ODNI Clapper and Defense Secretary Ashton Carter make sense. Including their effort to get NSA Director Mike Rogers fired.
Everything after March 9th, 2016, had a dual purpose: (1) done to cover up the weaponization of the FISA database. [Explained Here] Spygate, Russia-Gate, the Steele Dossier, and even the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (drawn from the dossier and signed by the above) were needed to create a cover-story and protect themselves from discovery of this four year weaponization, political surveillance and unlawful spying. Even the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel makes sense; he was FBI Director when this began. And (2) they needed to keep the surveillance going.
The beginning decision to use FISA(702) as a domestic surveillance and political spy mechanism appears to have started in/around 2012. Perhaps sometime shortly before the 2012 presidential election and before John Brennan left the White House and moved to CIA. However, there was an earlier version of data assembly that preceded this effort.
Political spying 1.0 was actually the weaponization of the IRS. This is where the term “Secret Research Project” originated as a description from the Obama team. It involved the U.S. Department of Justice under Eric Holder and the FBI under Robert Mueller. It never made sense why Eric Holder requested over 1 million tax records via CD ROM, until overlaying the timeline of the FISA abuse:
The IRS sent the FBI “21 disks constituting a 1.1 million page database of information from 501(c)(4) tax exempt organizations, to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” The transaction occurred in October 2010 (link)
Why disks? Why send a stack of DISKS to the DOJ and FBI when there’s a pre-existing financial crimes unit within the IRS. All of the evidence within this sketchy operation came directly to the surface in early spring 2012.
The IRS scandal was never really about the IRS, it was always about the DOJ asking the IRS for the database of information. That is why it was transparently a conflict when the same DOJ was tasked with investigating the DOJ/IRS scandal. Additionally, Obama sent his chief-of-staff Jack Lew to become Treasury Secretary; effectively placing an ally to oversee/cover-up any issues. As Treasury Secretary Lew did just that.
Lesson Learned – It would appear the Obama administration learned a lesson from attempting to gather a large opposition research database operation inside a functioning organization large enough to have some good people that might blow the whistle.
The timeline reflects a few months after realizing the “Secret Research Project” was now worthless (June 2012), they focused more deliberately on a smaller network within the intelligence apparatus and began weaponizing the FBI/NSA database. If our hunch is correct, that is what will be visible in footnote #69:
How this all comes together in 2019/2020
Fusion GPS was not hired in April 2016 just to research Donald Trump. As shown in the evidence provided by the FISC, the intelligence community was already doing surveillance and spy operations. The Obama administration already knew everything about the Trump campaign, and were monitoring everything by exploiting the FISA database.
However, after the NSA alerts in/around March 9th, 2016, and particularly after the April 18th shutdown of contractor access, the Obama intelligence community needed Fusion GPS to create a legal albeit ex post facto justification for the pre-existing surveillance and spy operations. Fusion GPS gave them that justification in the Steele Dossier.
That’s why the FBI small group, which later transitioned into the Mueller team, were so strongly committed to and defending the formation of the Steele Dossier and its dubious content.
The Steele Dossier, an outcome of the Fusion contract, contains three insurance policy purposes: (1) the cover-story and justification for the pre-existing surveillance operation (protect Obama); and (2) facilitate the FBI counterintelligence operation against the Trump campaign (assist Clinton); and (3) continue the operation with a special counsel (protect both).
An insurance policy would be needed. The Steele Dossier becomes the investigative virus the FBI wanted inside the system. To get the virus into official status, they used the FISA application as the delivery method and injected it into Carter Page. The FBI already knew Carter Page; essentially Carter Page was irrelevant, what they needed was the FISA warrant and the Dossier in the system {Go Deep}.
The Obama intelligence community needed Fusion GPS to give them a plausible justification for already existing surveillance and spy operations. Fusion-GPS gave them that justification and evidence for a FISA warrant with the Steele Dossier.
Ultimately that’s why the Steele Dossier was so important; without it, the FBI would not have a tool that Mueller needed to continue the investigation of President Trump. In essence by renewing the FISA application, despite them knowing the underlying dossier was junk, the FBI was keeping the surveillance gateway open for Team Mueller to exploit later on.
The bottom line is this…. The NSA database has been exploited to: (1) gain opposition research on political entities; AND (2) the NSA database is being exploited to retrieve information useful for financial gains (insider information). The contractors inside the network are in the business of selling information which they obtain from their access.
Michael Flynn attorney Sidney Powell talks with Liz Mac about the latest revelations and documents showing the intentional abusive motives by the DOJ, FBI and Special Counsel against her client; and by extension against a sitting United States President.
The time for diplomatic niceties is over… The time for complimentary judicial decorum has ended…. The time has come to dispatch delicate sensibilities…. The time has come to lock the door… from the inside. The time has come for full frontal WOLVERINE level confrontation…. The time has come for #COLD ANGER to turn the tables!
Well, this MUST READ INTERVIEW should bring all efforts against Flynn to a halt.
U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri, Jeff Jensen, has been conducting an ongoing review of the FBI investigation that led to charges in the case against Michael Flynn. As part of that review an interview was recently conducted (September 17, 2020) with the former Flynn supervisory case agent, William Barnett – who also was assigned to the Special Counsel’s Office investigating Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.
What Special Agent Barnett says under oath about the DOJ and FBI investigations is devastating to the institutions. Here is his 302 report:
Quite a bit of attention today to a release of information by Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham [LINK HERE]. However, missed in most reviews is a duplicitous motive for Graham to claim “the primary source for the Steele dossier was likely a Russian agent.”
In essence, Graham is promoting a defense previously explored by James Comey that investigative elements of the FBI were duped by a Russian disinformation campaign; and as a consequence their investigative efforts were done under the most honorable of motives, but they were just tricked by Russians. Ergo, see the Russians did interfere in the election.
That’s the justification narrative, and now Lindsey Graham has positioned everyone to support it; because the alternative is the DOJ and FBI knew it was Russia-centric and were coordinating to achieve a goal provided by the use of that disinformation campaign as purposefully fed by Chris Steele.
Just to drive home the point: the FBI wasn’t duped. The FBI knew all along the Steele Dossier was a bunch of junk nonsense from political opposition research; but they needed it, to underscore the Carter Page FISA…. which they needed to justify the surveillance.
Former FBI Director James Comey and Lindsey Graham are both promoting the same “FBI duped” justification narrative. Now, is it a surprise the only witness agreeing to appear before Graham’s committee prior to the election is… wait for it…. yep, James Comey.
Imagine that.
What a coincidence.
Also, notice this from the recently released series of text messages?
Why didn’t OIG Michael Horowitz write about these controversial text messages in his IG report on FBI conduct during the 2016 election? The report where he couldn’t find any “evidence of investigative bias”….
The Government provided copies of the production with all necessary redactions for public dissemination. These documents evidence stunning government misconduct that mandates the immediate dismissal of this wrongful prosecution. The Government’s redacted production of last evening, September 23, 2020
Did the Weissmann special counsel hide those text messages as part of their control effort over any release from the DOJ and FBI throughout their tenure?
A very interesting release by ODNI John Ratcliffe [LINK] highlights a June 25, 2020 response from the FISA court to the DOJ. There are five issues queried by the DOJ seeking guidance from the FISC. Each issue points to a specific path being taken by the DOJ in general… and the John Durham probe specifically.
Today, the ODNI, in consultation with the Department of Justice, releases a June 25, 2020, opinion by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) evaluating and approving limited circumstances under which the Government may temporarily retain, use, or disclose information that was unlawfully acquired pursuant to a FISC order. (more)
Important note: We are looking at this in hindsight. The response from the FISC was dated June 25, 2020, so the request for opinion from the court was before June 25th.
The court opinion tells us for the first time, the DOJ is admitting/stating that ALL FOUR of the Carter Page FISA applications were corrupt upon origination. This is a big deal. In previous filing with the court (January 2020) DOJ only refuted the predication for the second and third renewal.
Within the FISC reply we see the DOJ stating all four submissions contained material omissions and violations of “the duty of candor” (ie. lying) by the FBI investigative unit and the DOJ team that assembled the application(s).
As we look closely at the response we see some very specific language that tells a story.
Apparently the DOJ asked the FISA court for guidance on five very specific issues centering around the Carter Page FISA application. The DOJ is asking for legal guidance to assist them in disclosing information in the FISA file & evidence attached to the FISA file.
The five issues all circle around the FBI/DOJ use of the Carter Page FISA application; and, more importantly, the underlying evidence that is attached to the FISA application. The five topics are very interesting:
DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material due to FOIA demands. FISC gives legal opinion.
DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material due to ongoing and anticipated civil litigation. The FISC gives legal opinion and expands to criminal litigation.
DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material to internal investigative units from the FBI inspectors division (INSD). FISC gives opinion and advice.
DOJ requests guidance for distribution of non-minimized information, and/or, minimized information as part of the ongoing Office of Inspector General oversight. FISC gives opinion and guidance.
DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material to John Durham probe, both for criminal prosecution and possible evidence gathering attached to other ongoing investigative needs. FISC gives opinion and guidance.
The opinion from the FISC is only 20 pages long [direct pdf here], and if you skip the citations it’s a pretty straight forward answer from Judge Boasberg to review. I would strongly urge everyone to take a few minutes and read it… carefully…. to see what John Durham was asking.
Pages #6 and #7 talk specifically about the different requirements for retention and distribution and outlines a cautious approach toward distribution. One of the disconcerting parts of this segment seems to be the FISA court subtly guiding the DOJ away from using non-minimized raw FISA material in prosecution of intentional malfeasance. On this issue the court says allowing a target to escape prosecution is part of the penalty upon the DOJ for wrongful assembly.
The court does not consider the DOJ is targeting the “assemblers” for their criminal conduct. Rather the response is general toward criminals who were targets of a FISA application assembled with corrupt intent. A little weird.
Pages #11 and #12 hit the topic of FOIA production. The court says “some” FOIA requests might warrant document distribution, but not all. However, on the topic of Carter Page getting his FOIA fulfilled, the court supports expansive distribution to Mr. Page.
I find the arguments and issues in/around page #14 to be especially noteworthy. In this segment the court is responding to the underlying raw evidence that would normally be used to assemble a “woods file”. The court notes the FBI Sentinel system would contain the minimized outcomes (redacted evidence) and this points to a bigger issue. READ:
Note the woods file would be what is in the Sentinel system. The government (Durham Probe) needs “access to the case file” beyond what is in the Sentinel system. Durham wants to see the raw data, the underlying raw intelligence.
Why?
It looks like Durham investigators were already on the trail of the special counsel creating a Woods file…. and/or wants to see if the Steele Dossier is the original substantive documentation that underpins the Woods file. Notice how INSD previously received “hard copies” of documentation that is presumed to be the Woods file.
Regardless of motive or investigative suspicion, someone wants to compare the raw intel to the intel that made it into the FBI/DOJ Sentinel system.
In response to this inquiry Judge Boasberg notes FBI investigators would have access to the minimized information within the Sentinel system; however, insofar as there was additional inquiry into the raw and non-minimized intelligence, a review and distribution would be permissible so long as there was a strong filter team in place to ensure statutes surrounding FISA security were not violated.
Overall, Boasberg gives permission and approval for all six aspects requested. However, he does so with several legal qualifiers and distinctions which the DOJ must observe.
Here’s the full reply and opinion. Strongly suggest the time to review:
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 