US The FISA Report

OIG_Spreader.png

The FISA Report
Archive
Much like with the FBI's report on the handling of the Clinton Email investigation, I don't care what the mainstream outlets will have to say about the FISA Report. This report is over 400 pages long and not a word of it leaked to the press ahead of time, and on top of that they're all window-licking idiots so I couldn't give half of a rat's ass what they have to say about it. I'm sure that at some point one of them will manage to push out a good article about it, but I want this thread to be a repository and a page-by-page examination of the report and its contents independent from journalistic vomit.

If you need a primer on what exactly FISA surveillance even means, there's an excellent primer for it over here, and the same author also wrote a long article concerning the oddities in Carter Page's FISA warrant over here. In the event that you're just curious about how we got to this point or want an overall history of the entire debacle, there's a summary for all of that over here.

The gist of it is that FISA Title I and Title III surveillance require there be probable cause to believe the proposed target is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power. They're explicitly designed for foreign spies. These warrants are not supposed to be used against U.S. citizens without a goddamned good reason, and yet that's exactly what happened, and it happened multiple times. It also conveniently just happened to be people in Trump's campaign that were campaign managers who got hit with these FISA warrants, meaning that because of the Three-Hop Rule, the Obama administration was essentially given free reign to spy on literally everyone in Trump's campaign, including Trump himself.

If you were wondering why Horowitz' investigation had to dip so far back to the point where it completely predated all of the Russiagate crap then congratulations, you're asking yourself a smart question. It all had to be rewound to the very beginning because at the very start of this, the entire Trump-Russia collusion narrative was predicated on a hoax, and then everything that came after that hoax just piled onto the lies. Every breathless second the media screamed about Russian collusion, every politician screaming about impeaching "Trump, the Russian Asset", all of it was built on top of this one, original lie, and without it the entire house of cards just falls to pieces.

The reason that Horowitz dug all the way back into the FISA warrants is because one man proved beyond any shadow of any doubt that these warrants could not have been obtained legally. Mueller's Special Counsel proved beyond a doubt that the entire Trump-Russia collusion story was nothing more than a wild conspiracy theory. There has never been evidence put forward to prove that a word of it was real, and because of that, there clearly was not probable cause to allow for FISA warrants to be obtained against Trump campaign members. Despite what so many people were expecting Mueller to do, the only thing that Mueller's S.C. succeeded at doing was stripping away the cover story for the spying on the Trump campaign.

Whether or not that was intentional is anyone's guess and you're likely never going to be able to prove the Mueller "White hat/Black hat" theory one way or the other anyways, so it's a bit of a moot point. The fact remains that at the very end of his investigation, it was proven that there was no definitive evidence or probable cause to assume that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia. Now you know why it was Rod Rosenstein's job to give these frantic, desperate bloodhounds the wider and ever-widening scope they kept asking of him. At the end of this, when Mueller himself was going to be forced to admit he couldn't find any evidence, it was game over for the Collusion Narrative.

Thank you, Robert Mueller.

The only real questions left are as to how the Steele Dossier (Remember that one? It's been awhile.) wound up being shoved ass-first into these FISA warrants even though the Steele Dossier was a remarkably flawed piece of opposition research, and how the FISA warrants were renewed four times in the absence of any legitimate evidence. I'm expecting to hear quite a bit about Rudolph Contreras and the FISC court somewhere in this report, because there were a lot of questions surrounding that whole mess that are in desperate need of an answer.

Either way, I don't want to write a preamble longer than the fucking report itself, so let's see how idiotic our government was with the FISA warrants.
 
I am so ready for when a one post full summary comes out, because I love you 2 for helping out but it would really be nice to collect all the thoughts together. Keep going strong on this, it gets better and better.

The FBI, aided by members of the OGC and Senator McCain, committed treason during the 2016 Presidential Election. They attempted to penetrate the Trump campaign prior to receiving FISA warrants, then subsequently lied in order to first obtain and then renew the FISA warrants that allowed for surveillance of Trump and his team.

The characters involved in the corruption run all the way to the top of the organization, and also include former CIA head Brennan.
 
The FBI, aided by members of the OGC and Senator McCain, committed treason during the 2016 Presidential Election. They attempted to penetrate the Trump campaign prior to receiving FISA warrants, then subsequently lied in order to first obtain and then renew the FISA warrants that allowed for surveillance of Trump and his team.

The characters involved in the corruption run all the way to the top of the organization, and also include former CIA head Brennan.

This report might have been about the FBI's corruption, but on the question of who got the whole train rolling I'd wager it was 100% spooks throwing a tempter tantrum.

In 2015 the CIA gets put on notice to stop being idiot neocon boomers obsessed with giving money and weapons to the craziest jihadis they can find in the sandbox, and because they can't let go of their gay, never-ending checkers game against the Ruskies they freak the fuck out. More specifically, Trump gets up on the debate stage and tells them to their faces that their foreign policy priorities are retarded, Brennan hears this and his hair lights on fire, he makes some panicked phone calls, Obama says "sure whatever" like the empty suit he is, and several long years later here we are.
 
Last edited:
Pg 391.png


I've seen a bunch of outlets already latching onto this footnote, (Actually it's probably the summary they're latching onto, I doubt CNN bothered reading this entire document) but while it's technically true, it's definitely missing nuance. Originally I thought that they were talking about the Steele Dossier on page 3 as being the sole reason that the investigation was opened, but it's actually way fucking dumber.

That "Information from an FFG concerning Papadopoulos"? That's the fucking "bar room conversation" that some dude said that he overheard in London. It's also the origin point of those "salacious, sexual allegations" because at some point in the conversation someone made a joke about Trump doing gross shit in a Moscow hotel room.

So no, the Crossfire Hurricane investigation didn't open as a result of the Steele Dossier, it opened as a result of one Australian dude in London saying that he overheard Papasmurf saying some crap in bar. That was the "foot in the door" and from there the Steele Dossier was used like a series of crowbars to pry the door open wider, but as we've seen, they had to repeatedly lie to the FISC courts in order to keep those crowbars in place, because as we can see just a little further in:

Pg 395.png

Pg 396.png


That bar talk wasn't nearly enough to get what they wanted. They had to pull in way more evidence in order to obtain FISA warrants, but even the Steele reporting wasn't up to snuff so they just... Tweaked it a little, just enough to make it look like viable, legitimate information.
 
I get what you're saying, but you're conveying it in a way that likely makes it confusing to anyone who is casually following this.

The OIG Report is about (1) whether political bias was the motive behind Crossfire Hurricane (the FBI investigation into the Trump Campaign) and (2) identifying FISA abuse by the FBI agents involved. Crossfire Hurricane began on July 31, 2016 and the FISA warrants were applied for on October 21, 2016. Apparently the FBI applied for FISA warrants in the Summer of '16 as well, but they were rejected as being too broad -- adds some context to why they were so desperate for anything sufficient to base the applications on.

That footnote on pg. 391 is saying the Steele Dossier was not the basis for Crossfire Hurricane, which is undoubtedly true because the Steele Dossier wasn't submitted to the FBI & Intelligence Community until October 2016 -- Steele wasn't hired to compile it until June 2016. Subsequently, the Steele Dossier provided the basis for the FBI's October FISA applications, which were granted and are at the crux of the issue now.
 
So what I'm getting from that tweet is that the FBI aren't dumb, they knew what they were doing.

As mentioned elsewhere, there's 2 options here -

  1. The FBI is staggeringly and inexcusably incompetent
  2. The FBI isn't incompetent, and was very intentionally engaged in seditious interference in the electoral process
I'm honestly not sure is more frightening, but both ARE horrifying.
 
As mentioned elsewhere, there's 2 options here -

  1. The FBI is staggeringly and inexcusably incompetent
  2. The FBI isn't incompetent, and was very intentionally engaged in seditious interference in the electoral process
I'm honestly not sure is more frightening, but both ARE horrifying.
I present a third option: why not both. they were acting in clear prejudice in the electoral process but were so fucking retarded that they completely failed.
 
I present a third option: why not both. they were acting in clear prejudice in the electoral process but were so fucking exceptional that they completely failed.

You realize your talking about govt. employees? They're just incompetent, and also prone to excitement when "orange man bad" is whispered in their ear
 
Michael Horowitz is testifying about his report to the Senate Judiciary Committee today, if anybody is interested.

Edit: Currently in recess until about 1:00 PM EST
Edit edit: Reconvened, and will probably run until 4:00 PM EST

Edit of edit edit: It's concluded.


He just said something in his opening statement that will probably be a running trend through his testimony today:

"I did not find any documented evidence of intent, but also received no satisfactory answers."
 
Last edited:
You realize your talking about govt. employees? They're just incompetent, and also prone to excitement when "orange man bad" is whispered in their ear

Gross incompetence more than seventeen times is quite plausible, but when the "mistakes" worked out in their favor every single one of those times, then basic reasoning would suggest that no, this was not just them staggering through the office drooling on things and randomly smashing their hands on the keyboards.
 
The Mueller report was released to massive fanfare, and the media refused to treat it as anything other than a condemnation, ESPECIALLY when Mueller said "Trump is not exonerated."

This report will get minimum airtime on most networks, and Horowitz's line about "the FBI is not vindicated" will not even be mentioned.

In the end, both parties will do exactly the opposite of what they did with the Mueller report.
 
This report will get minimum airtime on most networks, and Horowitz's line about "the FBI is not vindicated" will not even be mentioned.

I don't think it's gotten even minimum airtime on a lot of networks, even the "No bias found". They seem to be largely pretending this report doesn't exist and never happened... probably trying to avoid drawing attention to it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Ineedahero
Fox just had a headline up saying the FBI is exonerated. Fienstien is also doing exactly what you'd expect. Edit: oh the sztrok/page messages weren't inappropriate dey wuz good boiz
 
I present a third option: why not both. they were acting in clear prejudice in the electoral process but were so fucking exceptional that they completely failed.
There you go. They're incompetent, luckily, because they're also engaged in seditious actions against the us. I mean what a lazy coverup, getting busted altering emails?

Obviously you have to assume the times they got busted we're not the first or only time they did this shit. An investigation was able to identify 17 after the fact, how many were successfully covered up?

CNN is not airing the hearing at all. MSNBC had their people talk over the Republicans and shut up when the Dems talk. Abc is doing the same.
 
Last edited:
I checked Glenn Greenwald Twitter. Best argument they seem to have is "No Bias was found."

Other than that they don't seem to have an argument.
 
But if they can get away with Epstein why wouldn't they get away with trump?
I've seen a bunch of outlets already latching onto this footnote, (Actually it's probably the summary they're latching onto, I doubt CNN bothered reading this entire document) but while it's technically true, it's definitely missing nuance. Originally I thought that they were talking about the Steele Dossier on page 3 as being the sole reason that the investigation was opened, but it's actually way fucking dumber.

That "Information from an FFG concerning Papadopoulos"? That's the fucking "bar room conversation" that some dude said that he overheard in London. It's also the origin point of those "salacious, sexual allegations" because at some point in the conversation someone made a joke about Trump doing gross shit in a Moscow hotel room.
The article says that the conversation was Papadopoulos with the Australian dude, whose government sat on the info for 2 months. Does something in the report say it was actually overheard and then presumably warped into a direct conversation by NYT?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yotsubaaa
The article says that the conversation was with the Australian dude, whose government sat on the info for 2 months. Does something in the report say it was actually overheard and then presumably warped into a direct conversation by NYT?
You know if people were practicing journalism they might ask the Aussie government about those 2 months
 
Back