Liz Sheld:
“…Over the weekend, the Department of Justice released a very redacted versionof the FISA warrants used to spy on Carter Page and the Trump campaign. The warrant served not only to surveil Page but also those with whom he communicated. The FISA includes not just the communications that occurred following the warrant’s approval, but also past communications of the subject and those with whom he communicated. You can see how this would be very valuable for an opposition campaign in a presidential election.
Here are some key takeaways:
- Carter Page was asserted to be a RUSSIAN spy in the FISA. Not surmised, but asserted. Only months earlier before the FISA, in March 2016, Page was cooperating with the FBI to prosecute real RUSSIAN spies but all of the sudden, we are expected to believe he’s a RUSSIAN spy too? And why is he walking free almost two-years later if he is a RUSSIAN asset?
- The “unverified and salacious” dossier made up a substantial amount of the FISA warrant, contrary to the Democrats promising that it was just one among many pieces of supporting evidence.
- James Comey, Twitter personality and former Director of the FBI, signed one of the FISA warrants comprised largely of the dossier attesting that the information in the FISA application was true, yet testified under oath the dossier was “salacious and unverified.”
- The FBI swore FOUR TIMES that the Steele dossier was not used as the source for Isikoff’s September 23 article which itself was used as evidence in the FISA warrant. The contents of the dossier was in fact used for the Isikoff article and yet the Isikoff article was used to “verify” the dossier in the FISA.
- Harry Reid’s letter to the FBI, that was generated when violent anti-Trumper and former CIA honcho James Brennan approached Reid with “documentation,” was used as evidence in the FISA. Brennan, being CIA, was limited by the agency’s ability to meddle in domestic affairs so he went to Reid to write a letter to urge the FBI to make some moves.
- The FBI did not tell the FISA court that the dossier was paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC, despite identifying Trump as “candidate #1.” Why not say the dossier was funded by candidate #2 and her political party? And, as the Republicans have asserted, the misleading information they did supply was in a footnote. You decide whether FBI obfuscated the source of the dossier, here is the footnote: “”Source #1…was approached by an identified U.S. person [Simpson], who indicated to Source #1 that a U.S.-based law firm had hired the identified U.S. person to conduct research regarding Candidate #1’s ties to Russia…The identified U.S. person hired Source #1 [Steele] to conduct this research. The identified U.S. person never advised Source #1 as to the motivation behind the research into Candidate #1’s ties to Russia. The FBI speculates that the identified U.S. person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate #1’s campaign.””
Fox News has obtained a letter from the House Republicans, asking President Trump to declassify further sections of the FISA…”