I’m not getting it, but just to be sure why don’t they subpoena the FISA judges at the time and go ask the people who would have to provide it. I’ve been following this story closely on CTH and see the same basic article day after day with a sentence or two changed or the material facts presented in a different manner.
CTH has to stop playing this cat and mouse with what it is saying. There are only four options, the FISA warrant is there or it is not, the Fisa warrant has not been provided or it has not. It’s not like the Schrödinger’s cat problem.
It’s better to be clear and concise and declaratory. Is there or is there not a Fisa warrant? Then present multiple conclusions instead of a vague tautology with a wink and a nod implying they figured it out and we ought to ourselves.
I think that he is doing a great job of aggregating vast amounts of complex data....and creating a story board that we can both reference and follow.
The depth of corruption is so mind blowing that I am appreciative of the amount of detail that he provides so that I can connect the dots in my own way.
So far, I think that CTH is the best and most reliable clearinghouse of information while we watch all of this unfold
He won’t make knee jerk conclusions because this whole thing is so fluid.
IMPORTANT – We are no longer taking it for granted a FISA warrant was ever given to the DOJ because NO-ONE can prove a FISA warrant exists. Heck, no-one can even point to anything that directly claims a FISA warrant was even requested. There are inferences, suspicions, media reports based on anonymous leaks, but no direct or reasonable evidence beyond innuendo. We are eighteen months past the reported origination dates, and there’s not a single official who will state a 2016 FISA warrant was applied for or granted. Therefore we must begin to question that basic assumption.
That said, the inability to prove the existence of a FISA warrant does not prove a FISA warrant doesn’t exist. Additionally, the cloud-of-uncertainty conveniently, perhaps purposely, makes it challenging to outline the liars within the intelligence community.
________
These criminals have some tight lips. No one wants to swing from a rope in the future.
What sundance is hinting at ...What if there was no warrant ... but they spied on Trump without one..
Read the work, there was no warrant. They were doing it behind the shield of that super secret unit of the DOJ that Sally Yates protected. Clapper didn’t lie because there was no warrant, but there was surveillance, he just “was not aware of it” wink wink.
Last Refuge argues that there was no FISA because none was needed: DOJ under Zero spied by simply taking what was ALREADY COLLECTED by NSA and going through that illegally.
Key being, “illegally.”
It's like this...
There was a Fisa warrant used to spy on Trump. Had to be or otherwise the spying was illegal.
Since the Fisa Warrant was gained illegally, there is no Fisa Warrant because getting one illegally would be 'illegal'.
Ergo... the DEMS did nothing wrong and Trump is a crook.
See how simple things are ?
As I’ve mentioned in a few prior posts over the course of the past 10 months or so, I had a conversation with Devin Nunes about this several months ago, just prior to his trip to the EEOB. To (hopefully) put a fine point on it:
Lacking a FISA warrant/authorization (a sound assumption, given that the supporting affidavit would expose the FBI’s and DOJ’s intent):
1) The FBI, with the complicity of the DOJ National Security Division (NSD), was engaged in illegal (warrantless) electronic surveillance of the Trump campaign, of which it is entirely capable within the US, or;
2) The FBI and DOJ NSD were making illegal (warrantless) queries (”about queries”) of NSA data to expose conversations of Donald Trump and members of his campaign and transition team.
Option 2 is clearly the most likely and I suspect that the conspirators and participants thought their about queries and unmasking requests would “fly under the radar” at NSA and pose less risk of exposure than an independent FBI surveillance operation or the submission of a FISA affidavit/request for authorization. I would add that, in the aftermath of receiving information via “about queries”, other senior members of the Obama administration - many of whom had little or nothing to do with national security - obtained the results of those about queries and requested the unmasking of the parties involved in those conversations.
This tells us three things: 1) The existence of this illegal intercept “program” was widely known at the highest levels of the Obama administration; 2) Its existence explains why Obama issued an Executive Order authorizing broad access to compartmented information; and 3) The unusual number of “about queries” and requests for unmasking was the subject of ADM Rogers’ visit to President-Elect Trump on Nov. 17th and the reason why Trump transition headquarters was moved the following day.
In my opinion, this is no longer a conspiracy “theory”, but is now a conspiracy CASE in the offing. To coin a phrase we used to use, “Time to crawl up their ass with a flashlight!”
I have read that people who have access about information related to FISA warrants are not allowed to publicly discuss what they know, or even address the subject.
The issue about Clapper saying he had no knowledge of any FISA warrants is an interesting twist. Unfortunately, he already has a track record of being dishonest under oath.
I have read that people who have access about information related to FISA warrants are not allowed to publicly discuss what they know, or even address the subject.
The issue about Clapper saying he had no knowledge of any FISA warrants is an interesting twist. Unfortunately, he already has a track record of being dishonest under oath.