Perp walks as screen savers for everyone!

.

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

This needs to be clarified a little. Gowdy, Ratcliffe, Schiff and Jim Himes saw a heavily redacted version of the FISA application. They made two trips to the SCIF after that and were never granted a look at an unredacted version. And I think this has also to do with the unprecedented position they are taking. ALso if I'm reading the letter correctly, this time it's going to be made available to ALL the members of the HISC, that includes Nunes who was unable to see the original redacted version at the time.

---

My gut feeling is that these redactions weren't covering up the sensitive things they presented to the Judge, it's covering up what they didn't tell the judge, which in this case could be worse. The redactions will show they mislead the FISA courts by incomplete information rather than maybe flat out false information. Chaffetz was just talking about this on Fox, that the DOJ is redacting information from the oversight committee, as well as members that are also Gof8 members that have the highest clearances, and should be able to see everything period.

---

Comey began the FBI investigation into Trump Russia on July 2016. No specific date has been specified, but the Wikileaks dump of the DNC e-mails occurred on July 22, 2016, and in these latest S&P texts, they are talking about the 'new case' on July 29. Also Australian Ambassador Hockey informed the FBI following the Wikileaks dump (no date specified) that Downer had sent a cable to the Australian home office in May, telling about Papadopoulos' revelation that the Russians had thousands of HRC's e-mails. So the latter provides groundwork that Papadopoulos's name likely appeared in the 'originating document' for the Trump Russian investigation. Also, there was the info Brennan had been receiving from GCHQ & other European SIGINT sources about suspicious Trump Campaign - Russia contacts, that likely was included in the 'originating document'. Did the dossier info make an appearance in the 'originating document'? We don't know for certain, but at least 3 dossier reports had been issued by late July, including one on July 19 that described Carter Page's secret July 7-8 meetings in Moscow.

So regarding the redactions, I think there is something else too. In the latest S&P text messages, Strzok met with at least several people in London -- used the word 'interviews' -- from the text below and the comment about the embassy, one had to be Downer. Then the comment about 'national security' and 'they' implies a group. I suspect the 'group' would be individuals from the GCHQ (think GCHQ Chief Robert Hannigan's unexpected resignation following the Trump inauguration).

I suspect that the FISA warrant application includes info to back up dossier besides the Isikoff article, that being info from Downer & GCHQ, both of which would be redacted to prevent embarrassing Australian & UK officials.

Quote:

---

Also, there was the info Brennan had been receiving from GCHQ & other European SIGINT sources about suspicious Trump Campaign - Russia contacts, that likely was included in the 'originating document'. Did the dossier info make an appearance in the 'originating document'? We don't know for certain, but at least 3 dossier reports had been issued by late July, including one on July 19 that described Carter Page's secret July 7-8 meetings in Moscow.

---

Which raise the questions, why did GCHQ even begin investigating Trump related persons in the first place? And when?

Ancillary to that: How many other political opponents of Obama and Hillary were similarly targeted?


We are now in Orwellian territory where counter-intel is being used for criminal investigations and charges. Using the Brits as a way to get around United States' laws and Constitution.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Also, there was the info Brennan had been receiving from GCHQ & other European SIGINT sources about suspicious Trump Campaign - Russia contacts, that likely was included in the 'originating document'. Did the dossier info make an appearance in the 'originating document'? We don't know for certain, but at least 3 dossier reports had been issued by late July, including one on July 19 that described Carter Page's secret July 7-8 meetings in Moscow.

---

Which raise the questions, why did GCHQ even begin investigating Trump related persons in the first place? And when?

Ancillary to that: How many other political opponents of Obama and Hillary were similarly targeted?


We are now in Orwellian territory where counter-intel is being used for criminal investigations and charges. Using the Brits as a way to get around United States' laws and Constitution.

---

We were a bad actor in the world under the past admin. Have much to hide. Seems the most likely explanation.

If this was a movie, most people would get so confused they'd walk out in the middle of it and they'd be saying "what a ridiculous film plot, would never happen in real life!"

I consider myself fairly bright and informed, but gotta say that in reading this thread every day, this is now my head..

aggiehawg said:

---

Andrew McCarthy's latest:

---

McCarthy rarely disappoints. Precisely 7 months until the 2018 mid-terms ... after which, we'll know if there's an impeachable-friendly House. Can a Trump/Mueller interview be delayed that long?

VaultingChemist said:

---

I just came over to post that thread.

He believes that the FISA investigation by the OIG is already completed since the Congress critters will be allowed to see the FISA application as produced by the DOJ/FBI. However, there is a possibility of two different FISA applications, one that the court received and one that the OIG received.

He also believes Priestap has already testified (only senior FBI official still standing).

---

Well, a lot of the grunt work on FISA abuse had already been done, by Rogers at the NSA and a previous IG probe. Adding the Page (and maybe Manafort?) matters to that wouldn't take very long.

That's why the Manafort search warrant stuff could be a bombshell. Gaining access to a storage unit under FISA warrant and then going back to get a court approved search warrant on the basis of what they already found is extremely problematical. And the timing indicates Mueller moved very fast after his appointment, practically before he was even completely moved into his offices and was still building his team.

But who was right there at the very start? Strzok. THE counter-intel guy who handled FISA warrants for the National Security Division of the FBI. He has neither been fired nor perp walked yet. Neither has Priestap, his boss, as previously pointed out.

benchmark said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Andrew McCarthy's latest:

---

McCarthy rarely disappoints. Precisely 7 months until the 2018 mid-terms ... after which, we'll know if there's an impeachable-friendly House. Can a Trump/Mueller interview be delayed that long?

---

Sure. Hold Mueller's feet to the fire and force him to get a grand jury subpoena and then fight it out in the courts.

How about we sell framed pictures of the Clintons in handcuffs and donate the proceeds to Haiti? Or just seize their assets, that works too.

They didn't enter the storage container under a FISA. They entered because an employee of Davis Manafort Partners, Inc. let them in.

MOTION TO SUPRESS EVIDENCE

The Stephen McIntyre thread about the new S&P texts posted earlier on threadreader is continuing. The threadreader stopped at #42. There are now 10 more tweets including the above, and it looks like more to come.

Anyway, as you can see, Strzok is communicating with the 'Brits' on August 18. Because it's plural, my guess is he means GCHQ.

Fido04 said:

---

They didn't enter the storage container under a FISA. They entered because an employee of Davis Manafort Partners, Inc. let them in.

MOTION TO SUPRESS EVIDENCE

---

Thanks for the link. The actual search warrant applications were redacted. But I had seen references to the "plain sight" exception, like a cop sees a gun lying in the back seat of a car during a traffic stop.

The effort here was to use the "plain sight" exception for items that were in a locked storage unit without the owner's consent nor knowledge.

What the FBI did here is akin to serving a subpoena on the night janitor of a company and then claim it was a valid service of process. No bueno.

The FBI doesn't get to take such short cuts, particularly with a cooperating person with known legal counsel.

ETA: Although Rehnquist might have allowed it. He was horrible on upholding the 4th.

drcrinum said:

---

Anyway, as you can see, Strzok is communicating with the 'Brits' on August 18. Because it's plural, my guess is he means GCHQ.

---

US intel agencies soliciting info from Brit surveillance of US citizens? Just imagine where that rabbit hole would lead. Remember Fox's Napolitano making this claim and being suspended by Fox in March '17 after the UK's "nonsense" denial.

benchmark said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

Anyway, as you can see, Strzok is communicating with the 'Brits' on August 18. Because it's plural, my guess is he means GCHQ.

---

US intel agencies soliciting info from Brit surveillance of US citizens? Just imagine where that rabbit hole would lead. Remember Fox's Napolitano making this claim and being suspended by Fox in March '17 after the UK's "nonsense" denial.

---

Not exactly. The NSA has everything. We allow the Brits and others to access that database. Even if we cannot legally do so.

UNLESS, there is a Title I FISA warrant, then under the two hop rule, our intel agencies can unmask on U.S. citizens in contact with the "agent of a foreign country" named in the warrant.

It doesn't say anything about a subpoena of the employee. It looks like they just asked.
The employee had a key and even had the lease showing ownership of the container.

Fido04 said:

---

It doesn't say anything about a subpoena of the employee. It looks like they just asked.
The employee had a key and even had the lease showing ownership of the container.

---

You misunderstood. I was using an analogy. Never claimed the underling who they used to gain access was subpoenaed. I said he had as much authority to grant consent to the search as a night janitor who has keys to the office.

So we just ask the Brits (or contractors before that) to look at what we can't 2 hop for us with our information exchange treaty.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

So we just ask the Brits (or contractors before that) to look at what we can't 2 hop for us with our information exchange treaty.

---

That was part of the Snowden stuff, wasn't it?

We know the janitor doesn't own the building he works in even if he has keys to the building. We know this employee owns the container, because his name is on the lease.

WTH is THIS?

Quote:

---

A Donald Trump foreign policy adviser pushed government agencies to review materials from the dark web in the summer of 2016 that he thought were Hillary Clinton's deleted emails, multiple sources with direct knowledge tell CNN.

Joseph Schmitz approached the FBI and other government agencies about material a client of his had discovered that Schmitz believed might have been Clinton's missing 30,000 emails from her private e-mail server, sources say. The material was never verified, and sources say they ultimately believed it was fake.

---

Quote:

---

Schmitz's connection to the multi-faceted effort to expose damaging information about Clinton has not been previously reported. His status as a former Pentagon inspector general afforded him access to the agencies and a sophisticated understanding of the government bureaucracy. He was relentless, sources say, and truly believed his client had found important, sensitive material. He did not hesitate in his pursuit even though the material on the dark web -- a part of the Internet not easily accessible or traceable -- was questionable and many experts already believed the Russians had stolen Clinton's emails.

Schmitz met with officials at the FBI, the State Department and the Intelligence Community Inspector General -- the watchdog tasked with investigating Clinton's alleged mishandling of classified information. He claimed a source he called "PATRIOT," an unidentified contractor he was representing, had discovered what he believed was likely material stolen from Clinton that could contain classified information.

---

Aaahhh, here it is:

Quote:

---

Schmitz, a former Pentagon inspector general in George W. Bush's administration as well as a co-worker and confidant of Blackwater USA founder Erik Prince, told the Chicago Tribune he had been working for the Trump campaign for about a month prior to the announcement, communicating closely with top Trump adviser Sam Clovis.

---

Fido04 said:

---

We know the janitor doesn't own the building he works in even if he has keys to the building. We know this employee owns the container, because his name is on the lease.

---

This incorrect as far authority to consent to the search.

Quote:

---

Here, the former employee was named as an occupant on the lease agreement simply for administrative convenience and only because he happened to be the DMP employee tasked with setting up the storage lease on DMP's behalf and moving DMP's business records into the unit. This is bolstered by the fact that the former employee's DMP email address was listed on the lease agreement and the fact that Mr. Manafort appears on the agreement as the only person with authorized access to the storage unit

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Aaahhh, here it is:

Quote:

---

Schmitz, a former Pentagon inspector general in George W. Bush's administration as well as a co-worker and confidant of Blackwater USA founder Erik Prince, told the Chicago Tribune he had been working for the Trump campaign for about a month prior to the announcement, communicating closely with top Trump adviser Sam Clovis.

---

---

Co-authored by Carl Bernstein of Watergate fame?

benchmark said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Aaahhh, here it is:

Quote:

---

Schmitz, a former Pentagon inspector general in George W. Bush's administration as well as a co-worker and confidant of Blackwater USA founder Erik Prince, told the Chicago Tribune he had been working for the Trump campaign for about a month prior to the announcement, communicating closely with top Trump adviser Sam Clovis.

---

---

Co-authored by Carl Bernstein of Watergate fame?

---

Back to the Seychelles crap with Nader and Erik Prince. I really don't understand what Mueller hopes to prove with that meeting but he sure seems to have a hard-on about it.

It occurred post-election.

The other thing that strikes me as ridiculous is the nefarious implications about people wanting to find Hillary's missing emails. Was it nefarious when the freakin' FBI was doing the same thing? (Half-heartedly at best.)

Hope Horowitz hits that point hard. Did the FBI/DOJ even try to find the missing emails? Including on the dark web?

aggiehawg said:

---

benchmark said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Aaahhh, here it is:

Quote:

---

Schmitz, a former Pentagon inspector general in George W. Bush's administration as well as a co-worker and confidant of Blackwater USA founder Erik Prince, told the Chicago Tribune he had been working for the Trump campaign for about a month prior to the announcement, communicating closely with top Trump adviser Sam Clovis.

---

---

Co-authored by Carl Bernstein of Watergate fame?

---

Back to the Seychelles crap with Nader and Erik Prince. I really don't understand what Mueller hopes to prove with that meeting but he sure seems to have a hard-on about it.

It occurred post-election.

The other thing that strikes me as ridiculous is the nefarious implications about people wanting to find Hillary's missing emails. Was it nefarious when the freakin' FBI was doing the same thing? (Half-heartedly at best.)

Hope Horowitz hits that point hard. Did the FBI/DOJ even try to find the missing emails? Including on the dark web?

---

It's pure distraction.

Quote:

---

It's pure distraction.

---

Well, it is CNN. Likely leaked by someone on the Mueller team, however. Making that connection to Prince was no accident.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Schmitz's connection to the multi-faceted effort to expose damaging information about Clinton has not been previously reported. His status as a former Pentagon inspector general afforded him access to the agencies and a sophisticated understanding of the government bureaucracy. He was relentless, sources say, and truly believed his client had found important, sensitive material. He did not hesitate in his pursuit even though the material on the dark web -- a part of the Internet not easily accessible or traceable -- was questionable and many experts already believed the Russians had stolen Clinton's emails.

---

---

I guess I am really naive. I always thought references to the 'dark web' were jokes. So I did a search for 'dark web'. It's real...but I am not going to go into that rabbit hole; no thanks.

d said:

---

I guess I am really naive. I always thought references to the 'dark web' were jokes. So I did a search for 'dark web'. It's real...but I am not going to go into that rabbit hole; no thanks.

---

Oh it is very real, and every bad thing available in the world is there. The most famous dark web site was the Silk Road, which the feds shut down in 2013.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road_(marketplace)

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

It's pure distraction.

---

Well, it is CNN. Likely leaked by someone on the Mueller team, however. Making that connection to Prince was no accident.

---

Sure. It's floating the appearance of a "there" there.

And it's coordinated. Same reason Wapo reported the meeting as occurring in 2016, when it was obvious to any honest person with a brain that it occurred in 2017.

Where it was first used. Think they may have kept doing it?

Quote:

---

He did not hesitate in his pursuit even though the material on the dark web -- a part of the Internet not easily accessible or traceable -- was questionable and many experts already believed the Russians had stolen Clinton's emails.

---

They did?? I missed that the first time. Soooo, CNN is claiming the Russians hacked her private server and had the 30,0000+ "deleted" emails??


(Yeah, I know they meant the DNC and DCCC emails but just goes to show how shoddily written it is.)

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Where it was first used. Think they may have kept doing it?

---

Pardon? Not following.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Where it was first used. Think they may have kept doing it?

---

Seems apparent that they kept doing it. I don't think we have any idea when they first did it.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Where it was first used. Think they may have kept doing it?

---

Seems apparent that they kept doing it. I don't think we have any idea when they first did it.

---

You guys have lost me. Who was doing what??

DOJ Using third party (foreign intelligence service) inquisitions of NSA data to fish for information about Americans they could not obtain without sufficient evidence to secure the proper legal authorization for direct access.

As far as I know they haven't been caught doing this widely, but it has been suggested that foreign intelligence services we have information sharing treaties with have the ability to request NSA intelligence information, and it is posssible that there is enough information provided to infer the identity of US citizens from the data, and then that information might be sent back to American agencies without those agencies having to directly request a warrant or go through the unmasking process. It's only a theory that this may have occurred, so far as I know, but if it is established it was done once, it may have been done much more often.