I think Jim Holt has overstretched on this one. You never know with this intentional mystery, but the appearance is that actual hearings, with oral presentations before the FISA court, and the exception rather than the rule. Papers are filed, the FISA judge “reviews” them on the scales of justice (yep, this one exceeds the 10 ounces minimum — must be ok), and gets out the rubber stamp. And that should be a major scandal on it’s own.
The statute Hilt cites says the Atty General CAN approve a warrant for one year in an emergency. Lynch and Rosenstein would have been prize fools to do that when they could just go the rubberstamp route. Perhaps Holt is trying to force the documents into the open to show that didn’t happen.
“The statute Hilt cites...”
There’s the rub. These people couldn’t possibly care less about “statutes.” Statutes are for the little people. The Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land is a joke. They do whatever they want to do, laws, statutes, and the Constitution be damned.
“I think Jim Holt has overstretched on this one.”
Nothing new for him.
Yet I did not mean to imply that there is nothing to this. Because I think there is. Yet there is no bombshell because nothing has been proven. Yet.
Re: Judges rubber stamp FISA warrants
Hard to believe that’s true.
Until we see some verifiable evidence, it’s just speculation in my opinion.