SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : A Real American President: Donald Trump -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mrjns who wrote (136227)5/21/2019 10:22:21 AM
From: FJB3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
Mrjns
Woody_Nickels

  Respond to of 457274
 

Obama-Era State Dept. Official Provides More Evidence Of FISA Abuse


Margot Cleveland
thefederalist.com

In October 2016, the Obama administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) obtained the first of four Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court surveillance orders on former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page. More than a year later, and following an intensive investigation into the FISA process by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Rep. Devin Nunes (R–Calif.) released a four-page memorandum detailing FISA abuse related to the Page surveillance order.

Since then, there has been a constant stream of evidence exposing the abuse. The most recent addition came last week when news broke that Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec met with dossier author Christopher Steele on October 11, 2016—two weeks before the DOJ and FBI relied on the Steele dossier to obtain a FISA surveillance order targeting Page.

Notes Kavalec took memorializing her meeting with the former MI6 spy, and reports that Kavalec shared with the FBI details of her confab with Steele, provide more proof that Obama administration officials and career DOJ and FBI employees abused the FISA court process.

Ample Evidence of FISA Abuse Kavalec’s notes provide at least four more pieces of proof to the already conclusive case of FISA abuse. First, as John Solomon highlighted at The Hill, the FISA application stated the FBI had determined Steele to be “reliable” and was “unaware of any derogatory information pertaining” to their source, while Kavalec’s memorandum showed just the opposite—that Steele was not reliable.

In her notes, Kavalec wrote that Steele claimed “the Russians had constructed a ‘technical/human operation run out of Moscow targeting the election’ that recruited emigres in the United States to ‘do hacking and recruiting,’” and that “payments to those recruited are made out of the Russian Consulate in Miami.” But in Kavalec’s log of her meeting with Steele, she corrected his “intel,” writing: “It is important to note that there is no Russian consulate in Miami.”

Second, Kavalec’s meeting notes prove that Steele lied to the FBI and that the FBI, in turn, lied to the FISA court. The FISA application stated that Steele “told the FBI that he/she only provided [the results of his research] to [his] business associate and the FBI.” But in her notes, Kavalec wrote that in “June—reporting started,” and the “NYT and WP have,” indicating both The New York Times and The Washington Post had Steele’s research. Kavalec also added that Steele said he was “managing” four priorities—“Client needs, FBI, WashPo/NYT, source protection.”

Yet, according to the FISA application, Steele maintained he only provided the opposition research to the FBI and his business associates. That assertion conflicts with Kavalec’s notes of her conversation with Steele. The FBI nonetheless attested to the FISA court that Steele was “reliable.”

Third, as Kavalec documents in her notes, Steele stated that his client was “keen” that his anti-Trump research be made public before Election Day. This detail further illustrates the purely political nature of Steele’s supposed intel, yet the DOJ and FBI withheld this detail from the FISA court.

Failure to Conduct Even Rudimentary Screening Fourth, and finally, Kavalec’s notes from her meeting with Steele expose the FBI’s failure to conduct even a rudimentary screening of Steele’s supposed intel before relying on it in the FISA application. In her talk with Steele, her notes say he identified two Russians involved in the hacking scandal: Mikhail Kalugin and Andrey Bondarev. Steele claimed that Kalugin was quickly pulled out of the United States in the summer of 2016 and replaced with Bondarev.


So what did Kavalec do with this information? Did she take Steele at his word? No, she checked “DHS electronic records” to determine when the individuals entered and left the country!

Yet when Steele claimed in his dossier that Trump attorney Michael Cohen had traveled to Prague to discuss “how deniable cash payments were to be made to hackers who had worked in Europe under Kremlin direction against the CLINTON campaign and various contingencies for covering up these operations and Moscow’s secret liaison with the TRUMP team more generally,” the FBI apparently took Steele at his word. At least, we’ve yet to hear of the FBI attempting to corroborate this detail, and we know that Special Counsel Robert Mueller concluded the Prague trip never happened.

That Kavalec knew these facts does not necessarily mean the individuals who drafted, approved, and attested to the FISA application did. But we know that shortly after her meeting with Steele, Kavalec emailed the FBI, and sources confirmed to Solomon that Kavalec forwarded some details about her conversation with Steele to her FBI contact, who in turn “immediately forwarded the information he received about Steele on Oct. 13, 2016, to the FBI team leading the Trump-Russia investigation, headed by then-fellow Special Agent Peter Strzok.”

We may not know for some time exactly what Kavalec told her FBI contact, but frankly, it doesn’t matter. Once the FBI knew Steele had spoken with Kavalec, agents should have reached out to Kavalec to learn the full extent of her conversation with Steele. That conversation would have established that Steele had misled the FBI and that his intel was not reliable and should not be included in the FISA application. In other words, the DOJ and FBI abused the FISA court system.


Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist. Cleveland served nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk to a federal appellate judge and is a former full-time faculty member and current adjunct instructor at the college of business at the University of Notre Dame. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Copyright © 2019 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.



To: Mrjns who wrote (136227)5/21/2019 10:24:42 AM
From: FJB3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
Mrjns
Woody_Nickels

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 457274
 
Joe No! Biden’s China Double Talk

Attempts Hawkish Stance on 5G, AI… But Sez USA Will Lose if Trump Keeps Fighting?



“If we continue this battle going on the last three years for another four … China is going to be in 5G. AI is going to be owned by them,” Biden said.



To: Mrjns who wrote (136227)5/21/2019 10:31:05 AM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
Mrjns

  Respond to of 457274
 
French Rapper Sings ‘I F*** France, I Burn France’ and Murders White Woman in Music Video



To: Mrjns who wrote (136227)5/21/2019 10:33:06 AM
From: FJB3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
Mrjns
Woody_Nickels

  Respond to of 457274
 
Violent Far Left Protester Acquitted After Hitting KATU Cameraman in Head With Wooden Pallet
May 21, 2019, 7:33 am by Brock Simmons

A jury in Portland (of course) has delivered not guilty verdicts in the case of an anti-ICE protester who was up on charges of assault and harassment after hitting a KATU news cameraman with a wooden pallet during last summer’s Occupy ICE protest encampment. ...




To: Mrjns who wrote (136227)5/21/2019 12:45:07 PM
From: FJB5 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
Jack Jackson
Mrjns
Paul Smith
Woody_Nickels

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 457274
 
The McCabe Testimony Is DEVASTATING! – Former FBI Deputy Director Conflicts with Rosenstein – Can’t Answer Questions – Sounds Crazy
May 21, 2019, 11:37 am by Jim Hoft



To: Mrjns who wrote (136227)5/21/2019 1:59:24 PM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
Mrjns

  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 457274
 

Carter Page: Obama’s FBI, DOJ May Have Spied On Trump Admin



Carter Page’s revelation that he remained in touch with Steve Bannon and others during the transition period and following Trump’s inauguration raises a much larger question.

Margot Cleveland
thefederalist.com


Recent statements to The Federalist from former Donald Trump campaign advisor Carter Page suggest the Obama administration, and later career Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation employees, used the Page surveillance orders to spy, not just on the Trump campaign, but also on the Trump transition team and the Trump administration.

Over the weekend, Page told The Federalist that after he left the Trump campaign in late September 2016, he continued to communicate with individuals officially connected to the campaign. “Yes, I stayed in touch with them – including during the transition months and after the start of the new administration,” Page said. While Page refused to identify all of the individuals with whom he maintained a relationship in order to protect their privacy, he confirmed that he remained in contact with Steve Bannon.


Bannon, the former head of Breitbart News, served as the chief executive for the Trump campaign beginning in August 2016. Following Trump’s 2016 victory, the president-elect appointed Bannon to serve as his chief strategist and senior counselor. Bannon continued in that role following Trump’s inauguration, until the president fired him in August 2017.

From October 2016 and then throughout Bannon’s remaining tenure as chief strategist and senior counselor, the FBI had authority to conduct electronic surveillance on Page. The first Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act order went into effect in late October 2016. The FISA court renewed the surveillance order three times, with the fourth and final order authorizing the FBI to intercept Page’s communiques until late September 2017.

Although the publicly released Page FISA orders redact the surveillance methods authorized and the modes of communication the FBI could target, it is safe to assume that any communication device Page used would be tapped, including cell phones, text, and email. Thus, the FBI would have access to any text and emails Page exchanged with Bannon or other members of the campaign, transition team, or administration, as well as the ability to eavesdrop on any telephone calls.

The media has long downplayed the significance of the FISA surveillance orders by stressing that Page was no longer connected to the Trump campaign when the FISA court issued its first order in October 2016. Earlier this month, the Washington Post reupped this narrative in an article entitled, “What’s the evidence for ‘spying on Trump’s campaign? Here’s your guide.”

“There are two main threads to the accusations of spying,” the Post’s self-branded “Fact Checker,” Glenn Kessler, wrote. First, there were the contacts “by FBI-linked operatives with George Papadopoulos,” Kessler noted, and second, there was the “federal court surveillance of Carter Page after he was ousted by the campaign” (emphasis added). Kessler’s article stressed the timing of the FISA surveillance order a second time, noting that “other than the contact with Halper, which Page described as inconsequential, the FBI’s surveillance of Page came after he left the campaign in late September” (emphasis added).

However, as former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew McCarthy explained, once the government obtains a FISA order on a target’s “phone or his communication devices, [such as], emails, text accounts and the like, you not only get the forward-going communications, you get whatever stored communications are on his system.” That means the FISA order allowed the FBI to obtain past communications between Page and Trump campaign officials, including the head of Trump’s campaign, Bannon.

But Page went further, telling The Federalist “that whole ‘he already left the campaign’ facade (the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, and many other usual suspects use it all the time), is entirely incorrect anyway.” He stayed in touch with members of the campaign team through the election, transition, and later during the Trump administration, Page explained. “I can also tell you on the record,” Page said, “that one of the things that the FBI investigators were interested in were my early 2017 text messages with Steve Bannon (irrelevant as they may be).”

Page refused to expand on the content of his early 2017 text messages with Bannon, but suggested that the subject matter of those texts was unimportant—it was the FBI’s interest in, and probing about, his exchanges with Bannon that proved infinitely more significant. That probing came when the FBI interviewed Page multiple times in March 2017, at a time when James Comey, Andrew McCabe, and Peter Strzok remained in charge of the Russia collusion investigation.

The special counsel report reveals that Robert Mueller’s team asked President Trump whether he spoke with Bannon or other individuals with the transition team regarding “establishing an unofficial line of communications with Russia.” Whether that was the FBI’s interest in Page’s exchanges with Bannon is unknown, but the time frame would match.

But Page’s revelation that he remained in touch with Bannon and others during the transition period and following Trump’s inauguration, raises a much larger question: Did the FBI use the FISA surveillance orders to spy on Trump after his election?


Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist. Cleveland served nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk to a federal appellate judge and is a former full-time faculty member and current adjunct instructor at the college of business at the University of Notre Dame. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.



To: Mrjns who wrote (136227)5/21/2019 2:03:08 PM
From: FJB2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
Mrjns

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 457274
 
House Judiciary Democrats Spar With Mueller Over Testimony – Mueller Hesitant on Testifying – Doesn’t Want to ‘Seem Political’
May 21, 2019, 12:23 pm by Cristina Laila