From my experience, Courts (especially those in the Federal system tend not to comment/speculate on anything. To do so would/could raise “reversible error” should criminal charges arise from the actions of those who lied to the Court.
The Court would rather have the facts in hand. (Pelosi could take a lesson from this)
I’m going to go out on a limb and say if James Comey and company lied to the Court regarding the FISA warrant application, they best hang on to their a$$.
Most Federal judges I knew didn’t take kindly to affiants lying to the Court. The Court can impose criminal sanctions over and above the contempt charges.
I know the wait is maddening, but I’d rather the Court say nothing than make a statement minimizing the actions of the FBI.
Most Federal judges I knew didn’t take kindly to affiants lying to the Court.
************
I hope most Federal judges are more diligent than the FISA court. This court is supposed to be a fire wall to protect our rights to privacy. The more we learn about it though, the more it seems like a rubber stamp.
Also, I would argue that lying to the FISA court for the purpose of thwarting a national election raises this deceit, and its ramifications, to a whole new level. In other words, the lying in this case (by an FBI director and his lieutenants no less) was of an extraordinary nature that I believe the FISA court has an obligation to address, at least in a perfunctory manner to let a highly cynical public know it is concerned and will review the facts when available.
That said, I appreciate your points and the fact that the court would prefer to have the facts in hand before they publically discusses anything. However, as we all know too well, accountability and consequences are extremely rare in DC.