Quote:

---

I know the Chief Justice appoints the FISC judges, but do these judges report to the Chief Justice, in this case Roberts?

---

Quote:

---

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review was established in 1978 when Congress enacted The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which is codified, as amended, at 50 U.S.C 1801-1885c. The Court sits in Washington D.C., and is composed of three federal district court or appeals court judges who are designated by the Chief Justice of the United States. ...

---

fasthorse05 said:

---

I'd be willing to bet Joe Biden himself knows most of the players, and how it was supposed to play out.

---

Quote:

---

#1 NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER "I've read kind of all the books on this subject . . . and this is the one you want to read."Rachel Maddow

---

oysterbayAG said:

---

In view of the IG Report, I think one of the big things that Durham is going to discover is a treasure trove of illegal misconduct involving withholding and destroying exculpatory evidence and " Doctored " Documents both during investigations and in the Court System , including the Special Council Investigation and even Mueller himself !

---

The Last Cobra Commander said:

---

"Tolling" means he extended it?

---

Quote:

---

On July 31, 2016, the FBI opened a full counterintelligence investigation under the code name Crossfire Hurricane "to determine whether individual(s) associated with the Trump campaign are witting of and/or coordinating activities with the Government of Russia." As the predicating information did not indicate a specific individual, the opening EC did not include a specific subject or subjects. As described in Chapter Two, the factual predication required to open a Full Investigation under the Attorney General's Guidelines for Domestic Operations (AG Guidelines) and the FBI's Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DIOG) is an "articulable factual basis" that reasonably indicates that one of several circumstances exist:

An activity constituting a federal crime or a threat to the national security has or may have occurred, is or may be occurring, or will or may occur and the investigation may obtain information relating to the activity or the involvement or role of an individual, group, or organization in such activity;

An individual, group, organization, entity, information, property, or activity is or may be a target of attack, victimization, acquisition, infiltration, or recruitment in connection with criminal activity in violation of federal law or a threat to the national security and the investigation may obtain information that would help to protect against such activity or threat; or

The investigation may obtain foreign intelligence that is responsive to a requirement that the FBI collect positive foreign intelligence-i.e., information relating to the capabilities, intentions, or activities of foreign governments or elements thereof, foreign organizations or foreign persons, or international terrorists.
The opening EC describing the predication for Crossfire Hurricane relied exclusively on Papadopoulos's statements to the FFG in the FFG information.

Crossfire Hurricane was opened by CD and was assigned a case number used by the FBI for possible violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), Title 18 U.S.C. 951, which makes it a crime to act as an agent of a foreign government without making periodic public disclosures of the relationship.170 As -described in Chapter Two, the AG Guidelines recognize that activities subject to investigation as "threats to the national security" may also involve violations or potential violations of federal criminal laws, or may serve important purposes outside the ambit of normal criminal investigation and prosecution by informing national security decisions. Given such potential overlap in subject matter, neither the AG Guidelines nor the DIOG require the FBI to differently label its activities as criminal investigations, national security investigations, or foreign intelligence collections. Rather, the AG Guidelines state that, where an authorized purpose exists, all of the FBI's legal authorities are available for deployment in all cases to which they apply .171

---

The Last Cobra Commander said:

---

No law/statute/reg that says a suspect or his/her counsel is supposed to be informed of said tolling? Seems super shady.

---

Quote:

---

So the CD opened a 'counterintelligence investigation' of a possible FARA crime. This is exactly what Techno_Fog has been saying for months: They were conducting counterintelligence investigations by abusing the intent of the FARA Law.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

So the CD opened a 'counterintelligence investigation' of a possible FARA crime. This is exactly what Techno_Fog has been saying for months: They were conducting counterintelligence investigations by abusing the intent of the FARA Law.

---

That is indeed a *******ization of the FARA law. Was Papadopoulus ever a lobbyist? Or engaged in lobbying activities with the U.S. government? Not that I'm aware of.

That's one helluva stretch for a proper predicate for opening an investigation. No wonder Barr and Durham view it quite differently than Horowitz does.

That interpretation of FARA likely has no support in the underlying legislative history for that statute and its amendments.

And the stink of it is they didn't even attempt to interview Papdopoulus nor Mifsud for over six months. And not one FBI agent or DOJ attorney asked, "WTH are we doing here?"

---

Quote:

---

*From:* Google <no-reply@accounts.googlemail.com>
> *Date:* March 19, 2016 at 4:34:30 AM EDT
> *To:* john.podesta@gmail.com
> *Subject:* *Smene has your passwrd*
>
> Smene has your passwrd
> Hi John
>
> Someone just used your password to try to sign in to your Google Account
> john.podesta@gmail.com.
>
> Details:
> Saturday, 19 March, 8:34:30 UTC
> IP Address: 134.249.139.239
> Location: Ukraine

---

fasthorse05 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

So the CD opened a 'counterintelligence investigation' of a possible FARA crime. This is exactly what Techno_Fog has been saying for months: They were conducting counterintelligence investigations by abusing the intent of the FARA Law.

---

That is indeed a *******ization of the FARA law. Was Papadopoulus ever a lobbyist? Or engaged in lobbying activities with the U.S. government? Not that I'm aware of.

That's one helluva stretch for a proper predicate for opening an investigation. No wonder Barr and Durham view it quite differently than Horowitz does.

That interpretation of FARA likely has no support in the underlying legislative history for that statute and its amendments.

And the stink of it is they didn't even attempt to interview Papdopoulus nor Mifsud for over six months. And not one FBI agent or DOJ attorney asked, "WTH are we doing here?"

---

And not one FBI agent or DOJ attorney asked, "WTH are we doing here?"

I'm sure it did, and that would be the EXACT definition of a whistleblower. However, at that time, I do believe the WB woudn't be handled with such reverence. In fact, he might have had quite the dossier written about him, as well.

---

Quote:

---

...
3/ On the basis of the tip as relayed by Horowitz on p. 52, there was enough there to prompt FBI interest. But there is a big problem. The tip relayed by Horowitz does not match what Downer has said that Papadopoulos told him. Let's look at how Downer describes what he heard.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Also, in the Mueller Report they fudged the date of the meeting to hide the possibility of the Napolitano interview spoiling the push-pull operation. Mifsud pushes the story to Papadop, Downer pulls it out of Papadop.

The push-pull op doesn't work if a) Mifsud is not a Russian agent; or b) the information is already publicly available.

---