Bruce Ohr Docs Raise Serious Questions


Intro to ‘BREAKING: Bruce Ohr Docs Raise Serious Questions

Intro by John R. Houk, Editor

By Sarah Carter

Posted on August 9, 2018

John Solomon, Sara Carter & Sean Hannity 8/8/18

 

I watched Sara Carter report on Hannity last night on issue that Bruce Ohr was more involved in the Steele Dossier frame-up of President Trump than previously thought. How does she know? Newly discovered documents of Ohr notes indicating earlier dates on Steele Dossier collaboration between Bruce Ohr (DOJ), Strzok and other FBI cadres as well as the fired Christopher Steele. Ohr was acting as a go-between betwixt Steele and the FBI, even though Steele had been fired.

 

VIDEO: Bruce Ohr fed Russian dirt on Trump to Mueller!

 

Posted by Bud Meyers

Published on Aug 8, 2018

 

Long after being fired from the FBI’s Russia probe, UK spy Christopher Steele emailed with Bruce Ohr in August 2017 about being reinstated to help Mueller. Steele was paid by Fusion GPS to work for Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the DNC to dig up Russian dirt on Trump. In November 2016, Steele was deemed “not suitable” to serve as an FBI informer after being caught leaking information to the pro-Clinton media.

 

Story at The Hill by John Solomon and Sarah Carter.

 

8/8/18 – – Top DOJ official discussed getting Steele back into FBI and Mueller probe: http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/401007-opinion-top-doj-official-discussed-getting-steele-back-into-fbi-mueller-probe

 

8/8/18 – – Bruce Ohr Docs Raise Serious Questions: https://saraacarter.com/breaking-bruce-ohr-docs-raise-serious-questions/

 

8/7/18 – – How a senior DOJ official helped Democrat researchers on Trump-Russia case: http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/400810-opinion-how-a-senior-justice-official-helped-dems-on-trump-russia-cas [Blog Editor: Page not found notice on this link.]

 

Long after being fired from the #FBI’s #Russia probe, UK spy #ChristopherSteele emailed with #BruceOhr in August 2017 about being reinstated to help #Mueller. Steele was paid by #FusionGPS to work for #HillaryClinton’s campaign and the #DNC to dig up #Russian dirt on #Trump.

 

JRH 8/9/18

Please Support NCCR

********************

BREAKING: Bruce Ohr Docs Raise Serious Questions

 

By Sara Carter

August 08, 2018 7:51 PM EDT

SaraCarter.com

 

  • New docs were written by Ohr roughly 2 weeks after the 2016 presidential election

 

  • Notes mention Strzok & Page and have many lawmakers and investigators concerned

 

  • Separate docs show FBI had backchannel investigation which they never disclosed to FISC

 

Strzok & Ohr

 

A law enforcement sensitive document written by senior Justice Department official, Bruce Ohr, is raising serious concerns amongst congressional investigators regarding testimony provided to Congress on the involvement of FBI special agents in the probe into the Trump campaign and its alleged Russian ties.

 

Nov. 21, 2016, the handwritten document lists former FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok, his paramour FBI Attorney Lisa Page and Special Agent Joe Pientka (who along with Strzok interviewed former National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn).

 

Strzok, who was the lead investigator in the FBI’s investigation into Trump, was removed last August from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation after the DOJ’s Inspector General discovered a barrage of anti-Trump text messages between him and Page. Page, who was working as the general counsel for now fired Deputy Attorney General Andrew McCabe, is no longer with the FBI.

 

Page’s name on Ohr’s notes raises a number of questions, particularly since she would not have normally been involved in national security investigations, a congressional investigator said. It also raises a number of questions regarding McCabe’s possible involvement and whether was he authorizing any meetings or communications with Ohr in regard to the Trump investigation, the investigators noted.

 

Ohr was demoted twice by the Justice Department for his failure to disclose that his wife, Nellie Ohr, worked for the now-embattled research firm Fusion GPS, which produced the infamous anti-Trump dossier. The new document is only one in a series of notes commemorating his communications with dossier author, Christopher Steele, which have been obtained by the congressional oversight committees investigating the FBI’s handling of the Trump Russia investigation.

 

Bruce Ohr

 

Another congressional investigator told SaraACarter.com that the notes written by Ohr raise “concerns of previously undisclosed communications with the FBI and Ohr and how extensive these communications were. It also raises concerns about testimony given by Lisa Page, who downplayed her interactions with Ohr in her (July 13) testimony to Congress.”

 

The notes at the bottom of the memo state, in sloppy writing, “no prosecution yet, pushing ahead on M case,” in reference to Paul Manafort, who is now facing years old charges on financial crimes and money laundering, according to congressional investigators.

 

Ohr also stated, “may go back to Chris,” in reference to Christopher Steele.

 

“The more we learn about this, the more it seems like Bruce Ohr was a really key figure in this circle comprising those both outside and inside the government who were colluding with each other to manufacture the Trump-Russia investigation,” said a third congressional staffer involved in the Russia investigations.

 

Separate Documents Reveal FBI’s Backchannel Investigation Conducted by Ohr

 

In a separate, but related matter, a slew of documents and emails obtained by congressional investigators also shows that the FBI failed to disclose to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) that it had a backchannel investigation with senior Obama Justice Department officials that continued to use and obtain information from Steele.

 

Steele was a central figure in the separate investigation being conducted by Ohr and Fusion GPS. According to the documents, Ohr and his wife were working closely with Steele and channeling information to the FBI.

 

The new onslaught of documents obtained by the oversight committees seems to show a pattern, considering the FBI also failed to disclose important information in its FISC warrant application to spy on short-term Trump campaign volunteer, Carter Page.

 

On Monday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes revealed that Obama’s FBI failed to include “exculpatory evidence” in its FISA application against Page. If proven true, this violation has enormous implications, according to a congressional source with knowledge of the investigation.

“Ohr was basically allowing himself to be run as a source so the FBI could communicate with Steele even after they fired him,” said another congressional source who maintains that the exculpatory evidence should have been included in the application and the court should have been aware.

___________________

Intro to ‘BREAKING: Bruce Ohr Docs Raise Serious Questions’

Intro by John R. Houk, Editor

Posted on August 9, 2018

___________________

Bruce Ohr Docs Raise Serious Questions

 

© 2018 Sara A. Carter | All Rights Reserved.

 

About [Sarah Carter] National Security Correspondent

 

Sara A. Carter is a national and international award-winning investigative reporter whose stories have ranged from national security, terrorism, immigration and front line coverage of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

Sara A. Carter is currently an investigative reporter and Fox News Contributor. Her stories can be found at saraacarter.com. She formerly worked as a senior national security correspondent for Circa News.

 

She was formerly with the Los Angeles News Group, The Washington Times, The Washington Examiner and wrote numerous exclusives for USA Today, US News World Report, and Arutz Sheva in Israel.

 

Her work along the U.S. Mexico border paved a new path in national security related stories in the region. Her investigations uncovered secret tunnel systems, narcotics-trafficking routes and the involvement of Mexican federal officials in the drug trade.

 

Sara has made appearances on hundreds of national news and radio shows to discuss her work. She has also made guest appearances on Fox, CNN, BBC International and C-Span. She has interviewed numerous heads of State and foreign officials.

 

She grew up in Saudi Arabia and has traveled extensively throughout the Middle East, Africa, Europe and Mexico.

 

She has spent more than seven months in Afghanistan and Pakistan since 2008. Her work on Afghan women and children addicted to Opium garnered first place in Washington D.C. AP award. She embedded with troops on Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan and READ THE REST

 

How House Democrats’ FISA Memo Confirms Republicans’ Charges Of Abuse


If you only watch or read Lame Stream Media (aka Mainstream Media – MSM), you’d think Shifty Schiff’s Dem Party Minority Memo upstaged and refuted the Nunes GOP Majority Memo. Shifty’s Memo only obfuscates the actual facts found in the Nunes Memo. A close comparison of the two Memos shows that Shifty’s Memo corroborates Nunes but with a classic display look-here-instead-of-here language.

 

Jason Beale writing for The Federalist demonstrates just how shifty Adam Schiff is.

 

JRH 3/2/18

Please Support NCCR

**********************

How House Democrats’ FISA Memo Confirms Republicans’ Charges Of Abuse

 

By Jason Beale

MARCH 1, 2018

The Federalist

 

The Democrats on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) finally dropped their Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse rebuttal memo Saturday afternoon, and the reaction is murky.

 

If you had your money on a comprehensive, point-by-point refutation of the “scurrilous allegations” of evidentiary malfeasance laid out in the majority (Nunes) memo, you’re going to need to cut a check. If your bet was on the construction and destruction of straw-men unassociated with the proceedings, and confirmation the use of raw, unevaluated intelligence to argue probable cause that an American citizen “knowingly acted as an agent of a foreign power,” you can proceed to the cashier window to redeem your ticket.

 

Some background. The HPSCI majority memo (the Nunes memo), which was released to the public on February 2, contained a number of specific allegations of inappropriate conduct by Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Justice officials seeking the approval of the FISA court (FISC) to monitor the communications of former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page. These allegations included the introduction into evidence of unconfirmed, uncorroborated sections of the infamous Christopher Steele dossier; the omission of material context in vouching for the reliability of their source (Steele); and the deliberate obfuscation of the fact that the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee paid for the dossier.

 

The Democrat HPSCI minority, led by Rep. Adam Schiff, fought the release of the Nunes memo on the grounds that it would recklessly expose sources and methods and, according to Schiff, erode public confidence in the FBI’s ability to protect sources to the extent that releasing the memo might enable another Oklahoma City bombing. Schiff and his colleagues composed a rebuttal, and assured us that it would effectively “correct the record” on the Nunes memo—particularly on the reliability of the evidence presented to the FISC, and the Nunes contention that the judge wasn’t fully apprised of the “partisan, political” provenance of the funding behind the dossier.

 

None of this came to pass with the release of the Schiff memo.

 

What Actually Happened Inside That Counter-Memo

 

A close read of the Schiff memo reveals the incredulity of the Nunes memo claim that the Steele dossier initiated the FBI investigation into Trump associates’ engagement with Russians. A close read of the Nunes memo reveals that it makes no such claim. In fact, the Nunes memo clearly states the investigation was initiated after the FBI received information concerning suspicious interactions between Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos and a sketchy professor with alleged ties to Russian officials.

 

It’s written very clearly in the memo, in plain English. Yet the Schiff memo works hard to undermine that strawman, and effectively confirms the Nunes memo description of the event that triggered the investigation.

 

Schiff then addresses the issue of source and evidence credibility. This is key to the Nunes memo allegations and to confidence in the FBI and DOJ officials charged with protecting every citizen’s Fourth Amendment rights, even in the course of seeking legal access to citizens’ most private communications.

 

In lieu of providing a single word of confirmation that any of the Page-related dossier information had been corroborated or validated prior to providing it to the court, the Schiff memo constructs a Page avatar whose past associations and contact with Russian spies, Kremlin officials, shady businessmen, and FBI agents represent an insurmountable trail of suspicion that can only be assumed to be criminally conspiratorial, and likely treasonous.

 

They do this by noting Page’s 2013-2014 recruitment attempt by Russian spies in New York City, whose approaches inspired the FBI to alert Page and warn him away. Those spies were eventually arrested and convicted of espionage offenses after an investigation aided by information Page willingly provided. They further highlight Page’s three-year residency working for Merrill Lynch in Moscow, separate trips to Russia in July and December of 2016, and numerous interviews with the FBI regarding, presumably, his interactions with Russians suspected of nefarious intentions.

 

Building a Tower of Suspicion Around Carter Page

 

All of this builds a tower of suspicion around Page, the idiosyncratic Naval Academy graduate whose quirky and paranoid behavior on nationally televised interviews has inspired the derisive head-shaking of dozens of talking heads. They chortle at the naiveté of this man’s eagerness to repeatedly throw himself into the lion’s den of “The Situation Room” or “All In with Chris Hayes.” They wonder what could possibly compel this man to subject himself to the open mocking of his declarations of innocence, again and again? The Schiff document describes an FBI/DOJ presentation of evidence that appears to draw from these instincts of suspicion and disbelief yet, significantly, offer no proof.

 

But they must offer proof, as Andrew McCarthy points out in the latest of his series of analytic National Review articles devoted to making sense of the FISA proceedings. McCarthy notes that: “(B)ecause Page was an American citizen, FISA law required that the FBI and the DOJ show not only that he was acting as an agent of a foreign power (Russia), but also that his ‘clandestine’ activities on behalf of Russia were a likely violation of federal criminal law. (See FISA, Section 1801(b)(2)(A) through (E), Title 50, U.S. Code.) It is the Steele dossier that alleges Page was engaged in arguably criminal activity. The Democrats point to nothing else that does.”

 

The Schiff memo offers that proof, the crucial passage of the Steele dossier undeniably used as the crux of their “criminal activity” contention. They present it as follows: “It is in this specific sub-section of the applications that DOJ refers to Steele’s reporting on Page and his alleged coordination with Russian officials. Steele’s information about Page was consistent with the FBI’s assessment of Russian intelligence efforts to recruit him and his connections to Russian persons of interest.”

 

“In particular, Steele’s sources reported that Page met separately while in Russia with Igor Sechin, a close associate of Vladimir Putin and executive chairman of Rosneft, Russia’s state-owned oil company, and Igor Divyekin, a senior Kremlin official. Sechin allegedly discussed the prospect of future U.S.-Russia energy cooperation and ‘an associated move to lift Ukraine-related western sanctions against Russia.’ Divyekin allegedly disclosed to Page that the Kremlin possessed compromising information on Clinton (‘kompromat’) and noted ‘the possibility of its being released to Candidate #l’s campaign.’ (Note: ‘Candidate #1’ refers to candidate Trump.) This closely tracks what other Russian contacts were informing another Trump foreign policy advisor, George Papadopoulos.”

 

The problem with this crucial passage is that it contains a fatal flaw, in that it is almost-certainly wrong. Page has testified repeatedly, under oath, that he had no such contact, meetings, or conversations with either Sechin or Divyekin. He did so both to the members of the HPSCI committee and during his numerous interviews with the FBI. He has further testified that he has never met Sechin in his life. He even issued a written denial in a letter he sent to former FBI director James Comey in September 2016, wherein he offered to meet with the FBI to resolve the issue.

 

If Democrats Are Right, Page Should Be Arrested

 

The Democrats show little faith in the disputed, yet legally essential, evidence of these “meetings.” In fact, they include in their memo this intriguing passage: “This information contradicts Page’s November 2, 2017 testimony to the Committee, in which he initially denied any such meetings and then was forced to admit speaking with (Arkady) Dvorkovich and meeting with Rosneft’s Sechin-tied investor relations chief Andrey Baranov.”

 

That’s one way of saying it. Another way to say it would be: “Carter Page’s testimony contradicts the unverified, third-hand hearsay information contained in the dossier, as he expressly denied meeting either of those officials. As to contacts with Russians unrelated to information contained in the Steele dossier, Page confirmed that he spoke with Arkady Dvorkovich and met with Andrey Baranov. “

 

But we don’t have to take Page’s word for it, nor should we. If there is evidence to the contrary, Page should quite rightly be arrested and charged with, at a minimum, lying to the HPSCI and to the FBI. Were there evidence or corroboration to confirm illicit engagements with Sechin and Divyekin, as reported in the dossier and declared to be credible by the FBI/DOJ officials testifying to the FISC judge, Page is dead to rights.

 

Yet Page walks free. The absence of evidence sufficient to arrest and charge Page with lying about his alleged treasonous and conspiratorial activities, coupled with the critical role those very allegations played in convincing a judge to approve a FISA warrant targeting his communications, leaves Citizen Page in a rather unique state of judicial and political limbo.

 

Yet for Page to regain his battered reputation and get on with his life, the FBI, DOJ, and HPSCI Democrats will have to admit that the information provided to the court regarding his activities in Russia was wrong. In doing so, they would have to further admit that the rest of the information in the 35-page Steele dossier was tarnished, and inadmissible. That’s not going to happen.

 

We Refuted Something Republicans Never Said

 

The Schiff memo confirmed that the Steele dossier was used to obtain the warrant. It added nothing to suggest that the dossier information had been corroborated. The Democrats aren’t talking about this part of their memo on cable news shows, because they would like you to forget it.

 

What they are talking about—a lot—is their refutation of a phantom Republican claim that the dossier triggered the FBI investigation. The Republicans made no such claim, but Schiff and his colleagues are nonetheless eager to address this straw man at every opportunity. Why? Because their focus isn’t on Page’s civil rights, or even on his possible guilt. They don’t seem to have much of an opinion on these either way.

 

Their focus is on the future, and the Democrats believe their immediate future depends on a positive (for them) outcome of the Robert Mueller investigation into Russian influence on the election. They fear the slightest acquiescence to doubt about the validity of the Steele dossier will somehow impact that investigation, and their future. Page is just some guy in the way.

 

In advance of the release of the Schiff memo, I wrote here that the only question it needed to answer was whether the Steele dossier information used against Page had been corroborated and validated prior to its use in the FISA court. That question was answered, albeit not intentionally. The information was not corroborated or validated. Although Schiff and his colleagues will do everything they can to convince you otherwise, it’s the only thing that matters.

___________________

Jason Beale (a pseudonym) is a retired U.S. Army interrogator and strategic debriefer with 30 years experience in military and intelligence interrogation and human intelligence collection operations. He’s on Twitter @jabeale.

 

Copyright © 2018 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.

 

Liberty’s Worth


Justin Smith writes about how FISA warrants violate the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment:

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

Justin is absolutely correct. On a personal level, I feel during war that security overrides Rights. Friends we have been in a state of war with Islamic terrorists since September 11, 2001.

 

NOW! I have found myself modifying my perspective of the Patriot Act and FISA warrants. Once it has become apparent that Executive Administration of President Barack Hussein Obama weaponized FISA warrants in an effort to maintain a Left-Wing government under Crooked Hillary, I have begun to re-think my concept of the usage of FISA warrants used without probable cause against U.S. citizens. Incidentally, FISA Warrants were not designed for U.S. citizens but rather against non-citizens that might pose a terrorist threat against Americans.

 

In FISA abuses the FBI, Intelligence Agencies, the State Department and probably more from the Executive Branch; used back door unmasking to spy on American citizens as well as potential dangerous foreign entities.

 

These FISA abuses under Obama (who also weaponized the IRS and what else?) have made America a Leftist police state with the full cooperation of the MSM that pro-Leftist in influencing America.

 

Well that is enough of me. Read Justin Smith’s take on how the Fourth Amendment has been unconstitutionally annulled.

 

JRH 2/4/18

Please Support NCCR

***********************

Liberty’s Worth

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 2/3/18 3:34 PM

 

One’s liberty is the most precious thing next to life itself, and Americans must stop standing in silence, while Presidents, past and present, and Congressmen erode and trample our Fourth Amendment Right, no matter their intentions, through Orwellian legislation that directly contravenes it. Everyone must vociferously and fiercely oppose and counter these so-called “leaders” and their illegal violations of the Constitution, by replacing all those, who recently voted for the FISA Reauthorization Act of 2017, because no one, even in the name of national security, has any right or authority to take our liberty.

 

The FISA Reauthorization Act passed in the House, 256 to 164, on January 11th, and it passed by 65 – 34 vote [Blog Editor: Justin’s original text said the FISA reauthorization succeeded by only one vote. I did not find that vote, but that doesn’t mean it didn’t occur. Many votes often occur until a final vote is taken which often appears different than previous votes for constituents who agree with the majority vote.] in the Senate [S. 139], on January 18th; and, through the House vote on Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, the House rejected the USA Rights Act, 233 to 183, and its requirement that officials must obtain warrants before searching and reading Americans’ emails, after they are acquired in any surveillance operation.

 

Bulk surveillance on all Americans without a warrant, heretofore known to be unConstitutional, is now deemed acceptable by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and the U.S. Congress, but incredulously, they do make one exception. A warrant is required for the emails of the subject in an open criminal investigation, where no national security concerns exist, thus providing criminals more rights than normal, law-abiding everyday U.S. citizens.

 

One must also be shocked by House Joint Resolution 76, which was passed by this Congress and signed by President Trump on August 22, 2017. It allows the searches of homes and businesses without any warrant, in areas adjacent to the Washington [D.C.] Metropolitan Area Transit Authority and extending miles outward in all directions, and far into nearby regions of Maryland and Virginia.

 

All of the aforementioned goes against the Fourth Amendment, which states that Americans’ rights “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.”

 

In a ninety-nine page opinion for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Judge Rosemary Collyer had many harsh terms for the Obama Administration. She noted that the Obama administration had ignored Section 702 procedures designed to ensure Americans’ civil rights were safeguarded, as any administration performs the necessary work to provide for our national security. Collyer charged that Obama’s administration had violated Section 702’s requirements and created a “very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

 

The serious nature of these developments is further highlighted by new evidence exposed by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, who has deep insight through a “top secret” clearance. He charged on January 18th, that seen through the prism of overt pro-Hillary bias and anti-Trump prejudice exhibited by the CIA, FBI and other agencies and their use of National Security Agency secret information for political purposes, they were all untrustworthy with our information and the nation’s intelligence secrets. The many abuses under the Obama Administration exposes the danger of giving too much power to our intelligence agencies, who seem far too willing to use stored metadata for harassment, blackmail and to further their own political agendas.

 

FBI Director Christopher Wray viewed Nunes’s classified House Intelligence Memo on Sunday January 21st. The next day Deputy Director Andrew McCabe announced his “retirement”. McCabe was named in the memo, as the person who used the unverified Steele Dossier to illegally obtain a FISA warrant against President Trump.

 

The House Intelligence Committee Memo released on February 2nd shows that a presidential campaign was spied on. An unverified dossier, that nobody will stand by under oath was used in an illegal manner to obtain a FISA warrant. And yet, with this knowledge in hand seven days before the House vote, Representative Nunes and twenty-one other House committee members kept over five-hundred of their colleagues in the dark, about domestic spying abuses, while the debate on that very issue was ongoing, and they voted to expand the power of those who abused it.

 

Surely the expansion of FISA would never have passed the Senate, if the damning information contained in the House Intelligence Committee Memo had been released seven days earlier. If just one conscientious senator had known of the NSA and FBI abuses concealed by the House Intelligence Committee, and changed his vote, the expansion would have failed.

 

Any American paying attention is now asking, “What is going on with our government?” They know that the Fourth Amendment has been abrogated, gutted, by the very representatives and senators who swore an oath to preserve, protect and defend our U.S. Constitution.

 

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) had vowed to fight reauthorization of Section 702 without reforms. Just prior to the vote on the USA Rights Act, he stated: “Our Founders gave us the Fourth Amendment to prevent a tyrannical government from invading our privacy, and we are fools to relinquish that hard-won right because of fear. The Founders did not include the Fourth Amendment in the Bill of Rights as a suggestion.”

 

Significantly, on January 11th, President Trump noted that Section 702 was used to “badly surveil and abuse the Trump campaign“, as he expressed skepticism regarding FISA. At the very least, this should have withheld his signature, until FISA was reformed. He would have served America better, if he had followed his initial gut instinct.

 

After signing the bill, President Trump falsely told America that it only targeted foreigners. Is this another case of Trump being easily manipulated by his advisors, or is it one more instance of his own lack of knowledge and preparation on an issue?

 

The FISA Reauthorization Act is now in place until 2024. Each day from this point on, all of us must demand it be rescinded, and before we allow its renewal, it must be reformed.

 

Liberty is the essence of our natural state, so when Congress acts to limit our liberty in favor of greater security, obtained through a FISA operation with highly questionable results in the war on terrorism, they are philosophically, historically and constitutionally wrong. Our liberty is of infinitely greater worth to us, than the security we have instructed Congress to ensure.

 

Congress’s recent actions are moves to permanently destroy our right to privacy, exalting safety over liberty and providing neither. And in the process, limited government is being undone, right before our eyes.

 

As Ludwig von Mises reminds us, government is essentially the negation of liberty. If anyone truly believes that monitoring everyone in America is the least restrictive way to keep us safe, let that person surrender his own privacy. The rest of us will retain ours and provide for our own safety.

 

I did not consent to the abrogation of my Fourth Amendment Right, and I don’t imagine most of America did either. Our rights are inalienable and cannot be separated from us, not by Congress, not by anyone.

 

By Justin O. Smith

________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text embraced by brackets and all source links are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

Bring FISA Warrants Back to the Constitution


John R. Houk

© June 3, 2017

 

Since September 11, 2001 I have been very supportive of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) siding on the side of Security looking for foreigners with Islamic terrorist sympathies. Which means I was ok with Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) secret warrants to into domestic suspects that were foreign culprits or aiding and abetting Islamic terrorist sympathizers. I was quite ignorant that FISC was created by FISA by an act of Congress in 1978.

 

Even though I am not a great mathematician, it is not hard to figure out 1978 is way before 2001. That means the government was given legal authority to spy on Americans before Islamic terrorism. This is a HUGE Fourth Amendment violation issue.

 

Fourth Amendment:

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

The issue with a FISA secret warrant is that it fails with “probable cause” and/or “particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

 

Much to the Leftists horror, I do not believe foreigners deserve the full scope of the 4th Amendment as do U.S. Citizens. Thus I am good with secret warrants on potential foreign adversaries of the U.S. Government and adversaries American citizens that should benefit from the full protections a citizen is entitled to.

 

But another sketchy issue has arisen largely to the admittance of Muslim immigrants and refugees into the USA. That sketchy issue is that 2nd generation sons and daughters of the original Muslim immigrants and refugees have become U.S. citizens (naturalized and natural born) entitled to the full protections the citizenry deserves.

 

Now that I am convinced that Obama ordered the intel organizations to spy on Americans for political reasons more than to protect Americans from Islamic terrorists or foreign spies, FISA needs to be abolished OR at the very least reformed to conform to the intent of the Fourth Amendment.

Judge Andrew P. Napolitano more eruditely explains the constitutional ramifications of FISA secret warrants and the operation of FISC.

 

JRH 6/3/17

Please Support NCCR

****************

Spying on You, Spying on Me, Spying on the President

 

By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano

June 2, 2017

Jewish World Review

 

“The makers of our Constitution … conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone — the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.” — Justice Louis D. Brandeis, 1928

 

After the Watergate era had ended and Jimmy Carter was in the White House and the Senate’s Church Committee had attempted to grasp the full extent of lawless government surveillance in America during the LBJ and Nixon years, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. FISA declared that it provided the sole source for federal surveillance in America for intelligence purposes.

 

FISA required that all domestic intelligence surveillance be authorized by a newly created court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Since 1978, FISC has met in secret. Its records are unavailable to the public unless it determines otherwise, and it hears only from Department of Justice lawyers and National Security Agency personnel. There are no lawyers or witnesses to challenge the DOJ or the NSA.

 

Notwithstanding this handy constitutional novelty, the NSA quickly grew impatient with its monitors and began crafting novel arguments that were met with no resistance. Those arguments did away with the kind of particularized probable cause about targets of surveillance that the Constitution requires in favor of warrants based on the probability that someone somewhere in a given group could provide intelligence data helpful to national security, and because the FISC bought these arguments, the entire group could be spied upon. The FISC unleashed the NSA to spy on tens of millions of Americans.

 

 

That was still not enough for the nation’s spies. So beginning in 2005, then-President George W. Bush permitted the NSA to interpret President Ronald Reagan’s executive order 12333 so as to allow all spying on everyone in the U.S., all the time. The NSA and Bush took the position that because the president is constitutionally the commander in chief of the military and because the NSA is in the military, both the president and the NSA are lawfully independent of FISA.

 

The NSA does not acknowledge any of this, but we know from the Edward Snowden revelations and from the testimony of a former high-ranking NSA official who devised many of the NSA programs that this is so.

 

The NSA’s use of FISC-issued warrants is only one of a half-dozen tools that the NSA uses, but it is the only tool that the NSA publicly acknowledges. FISC-issued warrants do not name a person as a suspect; they name a category. For example, it could be customers of Verizon, which includes 115 million people. It could be telephones and computers located at 721-725 Fifth Ave. in New York; that’s Trump Tower. It could be all electronic devices in the 10036 ZIP code; that’s midtown Manhattan.

 

When the NSA obtains a FISA warrant and captures a communication, the participants often mention a third person. The federal “minimization” statute requires the NSA to get a warrant before surveilling that third person. Last week, we learned that last month, the FISC rebuked the NSA for failing to minimize by continuing to surveil third parties to the sixth degree without warrants.

 

Here is an example of warrantless surveillance to the sixth degree. The NSA surveils A and B pursuant to a FISC-issued warrant; A and B discuss C; the NSA, without a warrant, surveils C talking to D; C mentions E, and D mentions F; the NSA surveils E and F without warrants, etc. This continues going out to six stops from the A-and-B conversation, even though this is prohibited by federal law. The final stop, which involves huge numbers of people, has been proved to have no connection whatsoever to the warrant issued for A and B, yet the NSA continues to spy there.

 

But it doesn’t stop there. The Bush interpretation of EO 12333 is still followed by the NSA. Its logic — “I am the commander in chief, and I’ll do what I need to do to keep us safe, and the NSA can do what I permit” — permits universal surveillance in flagrant violation of FISA and the Constitution. It was used to justify the surveillance of Donald Trump before he was inaugurated. It no doubt still is.

 

The availability of the information acquired by this massive spying is a serious threat to democracy. We know from the Susan Rice admissions that folks in the government can acquire intelligence-generated data — emails, text messages, recordings of telephone conversations — and use that data for political purposes. Just ask former Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

 

And we know from recent tragedies in San Bernardino and Orlando, even Manchester, that the NSA is suffering from information overload. It has too much data to sift through because it does not focus on the bad guys until after the tragedies. Before the tragedies, it has no focus.

 

The now public rebuke of the NSA by the FISC is extraordinary, but it is also a farce. The FISC is virtually owned by the NSA. That court has granted 99.9 percent of requests made by the NSA since the court was created. Despite all the public revelations, the FISC looks the other way at non-FISC-authorized NSA spying. The judges of the FISC have become virtual clerks for the NSA. And the FISC has become an unconstitutional joke.

 

Where does all this leave us? It leaves us with a public recognition that we are the most spied-upon people in world history and that the president himself has been a victim. This fall, the NSA will ask Congress to reauthorize certain spying authorities that are due to expire at the end of the year. Congress needs to know just how unconstitutional, intrusive and fruitless all this spying has become.

 

Perhaps then Congress will write laws that are faithful to the Constitution — and if so, maybe the folks empowered by those laws will follow them.

________________

Bring FISA Warrants Back to the Constitution

John R. Houk

© June 3, 2017

_______________

Spying on You, Spying on Me, Spying on the President

 

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written seven books on the U.S. Constitution.

 

© 2017 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

 

About JWR

 

JWR is a free magazine published five days a week on the World Wide Web of interest to people of faith and those interested in learning more about contemporary Judaism from Jews who take their religion seriously.

 

Our inaugural editorial is also our mission statement.

Readers, individuals wishing to submit an article on “spec,” or make a tax deductible donation and those seeking advertising rates may contact JWR by email or by calling (718) 972-9241. Please note that all correspondence with JWR remains our property and may be used accordingly.

 

READ THE REST

 

© 1997- 2017 Jewish World Review