quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
am not sure where to post this

but here is the transcript of Carter Page to the House Intel Comm

Big warning: very long, very frustrating to read

https://intelligence.house.gov...cript_nov_2_2017.pdf

Hard to summarize this

Carter Page is a Naval Academy grad. He is a PhD
and he sounds like a babbling idiot

I’ve been reading the transcript. Hoo boy, it’s tough.

Page sounds like a real piece of work all right. I’ve had people like that at depositions. He seems to have a mild case of what Dave Barry called “Blitherers Disease, which occurs when there is no filter attached to the brain, so that every thought the victim has, no matter how minor, comes blurting right out.” Moreover, he is fearful of lawyers and very self conscious of contradicting himself. It takes real tenacity and devotion to purpose to get anything useful or helpful out of someone like that. Gowdy and Schiff had to earn their money that day!

Who knows if any of it is actually true.

I'm not so sure the Hillary team, the Democrats and various Federal people conspired or if they just had a common cause and therefore acted toward the same goal.
The Russians must be sitting back laughing at all this and very satisfied with themselves.

Breitbart has a good summary that "there is no question that it was the Clinton campaign, Democrats, Steele, the FBI, and DOJ who colluded with the Russians to rig a presidential election."

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...media-not-want-know/

They hold the congressional Memo to a much higher standard than the original Dossier.

quote:

Soon... we will find out if Mueller has an ounce of integrity.

I already know the answer to that question!

NO! He does not have even a smidgen of integrity, just like virtually every democraP now part of gubbermint, or working with those who do have part.

I am always a little leery of Conservative Treehouse because they are so far out there like long range patrol for the rest of us.

But this might be true

https://theconservativetreehou...tle-vii/#more-145380

In the HPSCI outline it specifically notes the targeting of U.S. individual Carter Page was NOT a FISA Title VII search request. Title VII is FISA(702), the incidental collection of U.S. person information as it relates to National Security or Counterintelligence operations targeting foreign individuals.

The FISA ‘warrant’ request, against Carter Page, was made October 21st, 2016, under Title I of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Meaning the surveillance application was specifically stating, to the court, the U.S. individual was likely an actual agent of a foreign government, ie. “a spy.”

The DOJ (National Security Division) and the FBI (Counterintelligence Division) were not asking to review ancillary data collected on U.S. Person Carter Page as an outcome of surveillance on a foreign person, or foreign agent; that would be Title 7 (FISA-702).

I remember Nunes kept saying this is not 702 related

In action outlined within the HPSCI memo, the DOJ and FBI were specifically telling the FISA court they had evidence that U.S. Person Carter Page was working as an agent of a foreign government. He was their target, and therefore requesting direct FISA Title 1 surveillance of that target on October 21st, 2016.

The FBI were not targeting Page incidentally as an outcome of foreign intelligence collection; the FBI was targeting Carter Page directly. AND as such they carried full surveillance authority upon all of this activities, interactions, communications and contacts therein.

Because of this direct approach, any group, organization or entity who came in contact with U.S. Person Carter Page was then open for ancillary review and FBI investigation. Those who engaged in contact with Carter Page became subject to surveillance and searches in the same manner as if Page was an actual foreign agent.

lots more at link

quote:

Originally posted by Elk Hunter:

quote:

Soon... we will find out if Mueller has an ounce of integrity.

I already know the answer to that question!

NO! He does not have even a smidgen of integrity, just like virtually every democraP now part of gubbermint, or working with those who do have part.

Mueller answers that question everyday that he continues the Trump investigation.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
I am always a little leery of Conservative Treehouse because they are so far out there like long range patrol for the rest of us.

But this might be true

https://theconservativetreehou...tle-vii/#more-145380

Isn’t it the case that only non US persons known to be outside the US can be surveilled to that extent, and US persons, or non US persons in the US, require the FISA warrant approval?

JALLEN, I don't know the answer to your question, but there is this:

Here is a point by point charge and response about the memo and FISA issues.

Some of this we know, or have heard, or suspect, but this is a handy collection organized for reference.

anybody else getting the feeling our guys on the house and senate committees are playing for keeps ? sure feels good

We keep talking about the tip of the Iceberg, which has been a blast no doubt, but I'm itching to see the rest.

I would really like to know the evidence of "espionage, terrorism, or sabotage on behalf of a foreign power that involves a violation of a criminal statute." I'd really like to see the FISA info. If the dossier and yahoo news was the only evidence presented it seems to me this Judge stepped in it. If there was more, then surely there is enough to charge Page no?

doc from JALLEN link above













I like to print the source doc because sometimes the links don't work in the future. Been there too many times.

Important : note the DEM objection that says

"DoJ and FBI had good reason to suspect Carter Page of being a Russian agent"

that reinforces posts above.

quote:

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.

The first FISA warrant was October 21, 2016. The applications were signed by Comey and McCabe, and by DAG Yates at least once, Acting DAG Boente and DAG Rosenstein. There were renewals required at 90 day intervals.

Sally Yates signed the first one in October, 2016. 90 days later would be January 19, 2017, the day before the inauguration. She likely would have signed the renewal, which takes it to April 19, 2017. Yates was dismissed, and Rosenstein was not confirmed until April 25, 2017, so the Acting DAG Boente would have signed that one. Rosenstein would have signed the next one due July 18, 2017.


Could they still be going on?

The additional material presented to the FISA court may have come from Nellie Ohr at Fusion GPS, who, by the way, may have been the subcontractor referred to in the 99 page FISA order we read weeks ago where the FISA court belatedly approved the quarterly status reports from the various intel agencies.

I suppose my real question is about standards of evidence regarding signing of warrants. From my very distant perspective it would appear that this Judge did not apply standards that even remotely approached the level applied by a local magistrate concerning much more trivial matters.

What do you think the chances are that CNN will give the HPSCI Majority response posted above any air time?

quote:

Originally posted by thunderson:
I suppose my real question is about standards of evidence regarding signing of warrants. From my very distant perspective it would appear that this Judge did not apply standards that even remotely approached the level applied by a local magistrate concerning much more trivial matters.

That's because, since it's inception, the FISA court is nothing more than a rubber stamp. It's a sham, just going thru the motions.

quote:

Also rare is for FISA warrant requests to be turned down. During the 25 years from 1979 to 2004, 18,742 warrants were granted, while only four were rejected. Fewer than 200 requests had to be modified before being accepted, almost all of them in 2003 and 2004. The four rejected requests were all from 2003, and all four were partially granted after being submitted for reconsideration by the government. Of the requests that had to be modified, few were before the year 2000. During the next eight years, from 2004 to 2012, there were over 15,100 additional warrants granted, and another seven being rejected. Over the entire 33-year period, the FISA court granted 33,942 warrants, with only 12 denials – a rejection rate of 0.03 percent of the total requests.[5] This does not include the number of warrants that were modified by the FISA court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ce_Court#cite_note-6

Thanks for that info Bama. What a friggin disgrace.

My head is still spinning that perhaps the FBI claimed Carter Page was a Russian agent.

(I still feel uncomfortable w that as a "fact")

Think how important this would be (not that he is, but that the FBI claimed he was)

1. We don't have the slightest indication that the FBI told candidate Donald Trump in Sept/Oct 2016 that Page was a suspected Russian agent

2. We don't have the slightest indication that Comey told President Trump after the election that Carter Page was a suspected Russian agent.

3. An ugly comment for sure, but one of the DC FISC judges was an Obama appointee. I don't have the slightest confidence in an Obama appointee being honest or fair (part of the obama legacy)

Maybe this will turn out to be nothing, but that DEM comment "DoJ and FBI had good reason to suspect Carter Page of being a Russian agent" is adding credibility.

Hard not to wonder about the classification issue of such a DEM comment. Think on that.