[Wash Examiner] The release of a heavily-redacted version of the FBI's application for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to wiretap onetime Trump foreign policy adviser Carter Page has spurred calls to remove the redactions, to un-black out the pages blacked out by the FBI before the document was made public.
The long sections of censored material have made it impossible to reach definitive conclusions about the warrant application. It has also led to the publication of de-contextualized sensational accusations. For example, page 8 of the original warrant application contains a passage which begins with two blacked-out lines, then includes the words "the FBI believes that the Russian Government's efforts are being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with Candidate #1's [Donald Trump's] campaign," and continues with more blacked-out material. Is there a critical prefatory clause in that sentence fragment? The answer is unclear.
Defenders of the FBI have begun to argue that the blacked-out portions contain the truly powerful evidence that supports their position.
"There is clearly information the government provided separate and apart from 'Source #1' (Steele) and open source info ‐ and that fact that all those paragraphs are redacted suggests supporting info from OTHER sensitive methods and sources," tweeted CNN commentator Asha Rangappa, a lawyer and former FBI agent.
It's a point that is impossible to assess as long as the application remains heavily redacted. Which is why House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes ‐ the man most responsible for bringing the application to light in the first place ‐ is asking President Trump to declassify the rest of the warrant application.
"We want the president to take care of the rest of these redactions, so there is full transparency and sunlight for everyone to see," Nunes told Fox News' Laura Ingraham Monday night.
#1
One can only hope Trump is playing this game like a professional card-shark. Perhaps declassifying it will be his "October Surprise".
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/25/2018 9:19 Comments ||
Top||
#2
If Page was under investigation in 2014 by the FBI, why wasn't Trump notified that Page was under investigation and a possible security risk at the time Page was hired as a part of his foreign policy team in 2016? Just asking.
#3
Carter Page was an intelligence asset for spying on Trump.
Somewhere in all of this is a piece of information that outed Page to Trump...hence his resignation.
#4
It seems like it was a set-up by the swamp. It's not clear when it went from an investigation of Carter Page in 2014 based on his relationships with Russia to a "Get Trump" effort to take down a POTUS. A look at the unredacted FISA applications and renewals would be interesting.
#5
Wasn't it Strzok eho said of the Russian collusion investigation: "There's no there there"?
And yet this boondoggle drags on and on. It seems to have ensnared many of the people who created this rather than those for whom it was intended. That's a good thought to hit the hay on tonight.
[The Federalist] The ultra-liberal and frequently overturned U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit just ruled that the Second Amendment protects one’s right to carry a gun openly outside of the home.
"We do not take lightly the problem of gun violence," the majority opinion in Young v. Hawaii reads. Here’s more, emphasis added.
[PJ] WASHINGTON -- Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) today brushed off White House threats to strip security clearances from former top national security officials who have been critical of the president as "trolling."
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Monday that he had visited with President Trump to encourage him to revoke the security clearance of former CIA Director John Brennan.
Last week, Brennan tweeted: "Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of 'high crimes & misdemeanors.' It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump’s comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???"
"John Brennan and others partisans should have their security clearances revoked. Public officials should not use their security clearances to leverage speaking fees or network talking head fees," Paul tweeted after he met with Trump.
#4
No he is not. Get the pattern. He brought it up, people go off the deep end, then the question gets discussed. Should the ex head of the CIS who has decided to become a politician still have access to the highest level of classified documents, more so than the head of the intell committee in congress? A good question to discuss.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
07/25/2018 7:58 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Discussion: No. Why would a former employee need access, except to 'keep tabs' on the current administration? What's the difference between 'keep tabs' and sabotage?
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/25/2018 14:36 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Ok, so there is a standard to it. In the past, the directors maintained their clearances so they could be brought in to advise on strategic issues they were working. It did serve a purpose. Now that the two agency directors have decided to enter politics they have the possibility to gain access to data, or influence their political agenda. In other words they have, in one fell swoop, bastardized a long standing policy and destroyed the integrity of the agency they represented. What I think now needs to happen is the agency develop a policy of restricting their clearances to an event usage. For example: To get them recleared once their clearance is downgraded, it can take months to turn back on. If they restrict their access, at the discretion of the new director, and for a topic specific to the requirement they can be quickly given access to the information. This can restrict dumbasses like we are dealing with now, and preserve the ability to work with past directors who are genuine.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
07/25/2018 17:04 Comments ||
Top||
#7
The question is why the f*ck Trump or his Admin would EVER ask these lying conniving traitorious Dem backstabbers for advice or background without a waterboard involved
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/25/2018 19:59 Comments ||
Top||
I don’t know what Trump said during that two hours when he met privately with Russian President Vladimir Putin, but like so many in the media, I know what I hope he said: Mr. Putin, I need you to publicly admit your complicity in our illegal alien problem.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
