John R. Houk
© February 2, 2018
Donald on releasing the FISA Memo (though updated to make
the FBI happy) for public consumption:
“[A] lot of people
should be ashamed of themselves.” (quote from BPR)
Posted by james hoft
Published on Feb 2, 2018
TRUMP REACTS TO FISA MEMO: "I
Think It's Terrible. I Think It's a Disgrace What's Happening in Our
Country"
When you read the FISA Memo you must realize it was
sanitized to allegedly protect sources and methods of investigation. Even so,
it is not a difficult stretch to understand the nefarious nature that Donald
Trump was targeted before and after the November 2016 election by Obama
Administration leadership (probably including Obama himself). The
weaponized police state of Obama, the Dems AND Crooked Hillary tried to feloniously
steal the election and failing that, STILL use false and/or fake data to
impeach a duly elected President.
AND the American free press (aka the Leftist MSM) have been
full participants in disseminating the falsified/fake data to an American
public of which many believe the Mainstream Media is still a credible source of
news.
So, this is what I’m going to do for my blog readers. First,
I am posting a Fox News’ Catherine Herridge report. Second, the FISA Memo
sourced from the Western Journal. WJ leaves out the intro on the original Memo
so I am extracting from a pdf downloaded from SCRIBD courtesy of the fake
news channel CNBC.com. Last but not least – third, BPR review article
entitled, “7
biggest takeaways from the FISA memo that was just released”.
***********************
Posted by wikileaks tv
Published on Feb 2, 2018
TS FINALLY HAPPENING!! 4 PAGE FISA MEMO DECLASSIFIED #TRUMP RELEASES 4 PAGE FISA
MEMO
SHOCKING revelations
Credits: fox news
+++++
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 2, 2018
February 2, 2018
The Honorable Devin Nunes
Chairman, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
United States Capitol
United States Capitol
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
On January 29, 2018, the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence (hereinafter “the Committee”) voted to disclose publicly a
memorandum containing classified information provided to the Committee in
connection with its oversight activities (the “Memorandum,” which is attached
to this letter). As provided by clause 11(g) of Rule of the House of
Representatives, the Committee has forwarded this Memorandum to the President
based on its determination that the release of the Memorandum would serve the
public interest.
The Constitution vests the President with the authority to
protect national security secrets from it disclosure. As the Supreme Court has
recognized, it is the President’s responsibility to classify, declassify, and
control access to information bearing on our intelligence sources and methods
and national defense. See, e.g., Dep’t of Navy v. Egan, 484 US. 518, 527
(1988). In order to facilitate appropriate congressional oversight, the
Executive Branch may entrust classified information to the appropriate
committees of Congress, as it has done in connection with the Committee’s
oversight activities here. The Executive Branch does so on the assumption that
the Committee will responsibly protect such classified information, consistent
with the laws of the United States.
The Committee has now determined that the release of the
Memorandum would be appropriate. The Executive Branch, across Administrations
of both parties, has worked to accommodate congressional requests to declassify
specific materials in the public interest.1 However, public release of classified
information by unilateral action of the Legislative Branch is extremely rare
and raises significant separation of powers concerns. Accordingly, the
Committee’s request to release the Memorandum is interpreted as a request for
declassification pursuant to the President’s authority.
The President understands that the protection of our
national security represents his highest obligation. Accordingly, he has
directed lawyers and national security staff to assess the
_________________________________
1 See, e.g. S. Rept. 114-8 at 12 (Administration of Barack Obama)
(“On April 3, 2014 . . . the Committee agreed to send the revised Findings and
Conclusions, and the updated Executive Summary of the Committee Study, to the
President for declassification and public release”); H. Rept. 107-792
(Administration of George W. Bush) (similar); E.O. 12812 (Administration of
George H.W. Bush) (noting Senate resolution requesting that President provide
for declassification of certain information Via Executive Order).
_________________________________
declassification request, consistent with established
standards governing the handling of classified information, including those
under Section 3.1(d) of Executive Order 13526. Those standards permit declassification
when the public interest in disclosure outweighs any need to protect the
information. The White House review process also included input from the Office
of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Justice.
Consistent with this review and these standards, the President has determined
that declassification of the Memorandum is appropriate.
Based on this assessment and in light of the significant
public interest in the memorandum, the President has authorized the declassification
of the Memorandum. To be clear, the Memorandum reflects the judgments of its
congressional authors. The President understands that oversight concerning
matters related to the Memorandum may be continuing. Though the circumstances
leading to the declassification through this process are extraordinary, the
Executive Branch stands ready to work with Congress to accommodate oversight
requests consistent with applicable standards and processes, including the need
to protect intelligence sources and methods.
Sincerely,
Donald F. McGahn II
Counsel to the
President
Here’s the Full Text of the FISA Memo Written by Rep.
Devin Nunes
In all cases, any typographical
emphasis — whether bold type, italics or underline — is original to the memo.
Our goal here was to provide as accurate a representation of the original
document as possible while still making it a little easier to read than the
facsimile versions currently available online. — Ed. Note
January 18, 2018
To: HPSCI Majority Members
From: HPSCI Majority Staff
Subject: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses at the
Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation
Purpose
This memorandum provides Members an update on significant
facts relating to the Committee’s ongoing investigation into the Department of
Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and their use of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) during the 2016 presidential
election cycle. Our findings, which are detailed below, 1) raise concerns with
the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions with the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), and 2) represent a troubling
breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from
abuses related to the FISA process.
Investigation Update
On October 21, 2016, DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA
probable cause order (not under Title VII) authorizing electronic surveillance
on Carter Page from the FISC. Page is a U.S. citizen who served as a volunteer
advisor to the Trump presidential campaign. Consistent with requirements under
FISA, the application had to be first certified by the Director or Deputy
Director of the FBI. It then required the approval of the Attorney General,
Deputy Attorney General (DAG), or the Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney
General for the National Security Division.
The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting
Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC. As required by statute (50
U.S.C. §,1805(d)(l)), a FISA order on an American citizen must be renewed by
the FISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a separate finding of probable
cause. Then-Director James Comey signed three FISA applications in question on
behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one. Then-DAG Sally
Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or
more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ
Due to the sensitive nature of foreign intelligence
activity, FISA submissions (including renewals) before the FISC are classified.
As such, the public’s confidence in the integrity of the FISA process depends
on the court’s ability to hold the government to the highest
standard—particularly as it relates to surveillance of American citizens.
However, the FISC’s rigor in protecting the rights of Americans, which is
reinforced by 90-day renewals of surveillance orders, is necessarily dependent
on the government’s production to the court of all material and relevant facts.
This should include information potentially favorable to the target of the FISA
application that is known by the government. In the case of Carter Page, the
government had at least four independent opportunities before the FISC to
accurately provide an accounting of the relevant facts. However, our findings
indicate that, as described below, material and relevant information was
omitted.
1) The “dossier” compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele
dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary
Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application.
Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and
Clinton campaign, via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS,
to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.
a) Neither the initial application
in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the
DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even
though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior
DOJ and FBI officials.
b) The initial FISA application
notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person, but does not name Fusion GPS
and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a U.S. law firm (Perkins Coie)
representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOJ at the time that
political actors were involved with the Steele dossier). The application does
not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of—and paid by—the DNC and
Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele
for the same information.
2) The Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a
September 23, 2016, Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff,
which focuses on Page’s July 2016 trip to Moscow. This article does not
corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by
Steele himself to Yahoo News. The Page FISA application
incorrectly assesses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo
News. Steele has admitted in British court filings that he met with Yahoo
News — and several other outlets — in September 2016 at the direction
of Fusion GPS. Perkins Coie was aware of Steele’s initial media contacts
because they hosted at least one meeting in Washington D.C. in 2016 with Steele
and Fusion GPS where this matter was discussed.
a) Steele was suspended and then
terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of
violations—an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the
FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jones article by David
Corn. Steele should have been terminated for his previous undisclosed contacts
with Yahoo and other outlets in September — before the
Page application was submitted to the FISC in October — but Steele improperly
concealed from and lied to the FBI about those contacts.
b) Steele’s numerous encounters
with the media violated the cardinal rule of source handling — maintaining
confidentiality — and demonstrated that Steele had become a less than reliable
source for the FBI.
3) Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he
maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce
Ohr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General
Yates and later Rosenstein. Shortly after the election, the FBI began
interviewing Ohr, documenting his communications with Steele. For example, in
September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate
Trump when Steele said he “was desperate that Donald Trump not get
elected and was passionate about him not being president.” (Emphasis
Nunes’.) This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time
and subsequently in official FBI files — but not reflected in any of the Page
FISA applications.
a) During this same time period,
Ohr’s wife was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of
opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all of his wife’s
opposition research, paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign via Fusion GPS.
The Ohrs’ relationship with Steele and Fusion GPS was inexplicably concealed
from the FISC.
4) According to the head of the FBI’s counterintelligence
division, Assistant Director Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier
was in its “infancy” at the time of the initial Page FISA application. After
Steele was terminated, a source validation report conducted by an independent
unit within FBI assessed Steele’s reporting as only minimally corroborated.
Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a
summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was — according to his June 2017
testimony — “salacious and unverified.” While the FISA application relied on
Steele’s past record of credible reporting on other unrelated matters, it
ignored or concealed his anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations.
Furthermore, Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in December
2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without
the Steele dossier information.
5) The Page FISA application also mentions information
regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no
evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos. The
Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence
investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok. Strzok was reassigned
by the Special Counsel’s Office to FBI Human Resources for improper text
messages with his mistress, FBI Attorney Lisa Page (no known relation to Carter
Page), where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of
Clinton, whom Strzok had also investigated. The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also
reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to
the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an
“insurance” policy against President Trump’s election.
+++
7 biggest takeaways from the FISA memo that was just
released
By Luis Miguel
February 2, 2018
By declassifying the memo, President Trump just blew up
Washington, D.C.
The controversial FISA memo, released by
the House Intelligence Committee to the public on Friday, contains a number of
bombshell revelations related to the FBI’s surveillance on the Trump campaign
during the 2016 election.
At least one Republican, Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona,
concluded that the document shows “clear and convincing evidence of treason.”
Here are the biggest takeaways.
1. Andrew McCabe admitted the dossier was used as the
justification to secure a FISA warrant on Carter Page
Former FBI Deputy Director
Andrew
McCabe. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon).
“Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in
December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC
[Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] without the Steele dossier
information.”
2. The FBI’s probe into the Trump campaign was triggered
by aide George Papadopoulos
Former Trump foreign
policy adviser George
Papadopoulos.
3. The FBI had no evidence of a connection between
Papadopoulos and Page
Former Trump adviser Carter
Page. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite).
“The Page FISA application also mentions information
regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no
evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos.”
4. The FBI knew the DNC and Clinton campaign were behind
the dossier–but didn’t disclose that knowledge to the FISA court
Former FBI Director James
Comey. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, File).
“Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of
the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or.
any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political
origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior and FBI officials.”
“The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a
named US. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who
was paid by a US. law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it
was known by DOI at the, time that political actors were involved with the
Steele dossier).”
5. The FBI paid Christopher Steele to work on the dossier
Christopher
Steele, the former MI6
agent who compiled the Trump dossier. (Photo by Victoria Jones/PA Images via
Getty Images).
“The application does not mention Steele was ultimately
working on behalf of – and paid by – the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the
FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.”
6. Top DOJ official Bruce Ohr met with Steele in 2016 and
told the FBI the British spy had an anti-Trump bias
Glenn
Simpson, co-founder of
Fusion GPS, which paid for the dossier on behalf of the DNC and Clinton
campaign. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais).
“Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he
maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce
Ohr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General
Yates and later Rosenstein.
“Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Ohr,
documenting his communications with Steele. For example, in September 2016,
Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele
said he ‘was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate
about him not being president.’
“This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at
the time and subsequently in official FBI files, but not reflected in any of
the Page FISA applications.”
7. The memo reveals which officials green-lighted
surveillance on Carter
Deputy Attorney General Rod
Rosenstein. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik).
“As required by statute, a FISA order on an American citizen
must be renewed by the FISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a separate
finding of probable cause.
“Then-Director James Comey signed three
FISA applications in question on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew
McCabe signed one. Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana
Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more
FISA applications on behalf of DOJ.”
In response to the memo, President Trump said “it’s a
disgrace what’s happening in our country” and that “a lot of people should
be ashamed of themselves.”
ABC VIDEO VIA TWITTER: A lot of
people should be ashamed of themselves
Pres. Trump says GOP memo has been declassified: "Congress will do whatever they're going to do. But I think it's a disgrace what's happening in our country...A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves." https://t.co/OfR9pu29Wo pic.twitter.com/wJHEptrGrk— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) February 2, 2018
“A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves,” Trump
said over the revelations.
The president couldn’t have put it any better.
____________________
True Election Collusion – THE MEMO:
Dems, FBI Leadership & DOJ Leadership
John R. Houk
© February 2, 2018
_______________
ITS FINALLY HAPPENING!! 4 PAGE FISA MEMO DECLASSIFIED #TRUMP
RELEASES 4 PAGE FISA MEMO
_______________
Here’s the Full Text of the FISA Memo Written by Rep. Devin Nunes
________________
7 biggest takeaways from the FISA memo that was just released
No comments:
Post a Comment