Profile picture
Paul Schmehl @PaulSchmehl
, 75 tweets, 13 min read Read on Twitter
I’m starting a thread to document things I find in the FISA warrants that were just released. These will be in the form of observations I make as I work my way through it. First of all, the 412 pages includes all four warrants and the associated documentation.
Secondly, the first thing that stands out to me is that the FBI perjured themselves in the application for the warrant. Why do I say this? Because it includes this.
“(U)(S) Carter W.Page
jknowingly engage in
b3-l
b7A-l
b7E- 1, 2
clandestine intelligence activities (other than intelligence gathering activities) for
or on behalf of such foreign power, which activities involve or are about to
involve a violation of the criminal statutes of the United States, or knowingly
conspires with other persons to engage in such activities and, therefore, is an
agent of a foreign power as defined by 50 U.S.C. § 1801(b)(2)(E).”
Carter Page was never an agent of Russia, and the FBI knows this and knew it then. How do I know this? Because he’s never been charged to this day. Because I’ve read his sworn testimony. The FBI KNEW this, because Page was involved in a case in 2013 involving Russian agents.
That case is mentioned in the applications, but so much is redacted that it’s not possible to know what they said about it. But we know what they said about it THEN, and that proves they were lying in the applications.
Page 5 “During a recent interview with an identified news organization,” This is a reference to a Washington Post Live interview with James Clapper. washingtonpost.com/video/business…
The reference on page 6: “The important thing is the content that was given to the public." is to this Bloomberg article: bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
Page 7 “According to open source information, in July 2016, Page traveled to
Russia and delivered the commencement address at the New Economic School.7” The footnote is redacted. An open source url is top secret? PUHLEASE! The redactions in this thing are ridiculous & suspicious
Page 7 Source 1 is Christopher Steele
Page 7, regarding Steele, “..and has been an FBI source since… Source #l's reporting has been corroborated and used in criminal proceedings and the FBI assesses Source #1 to be reliable. Source #1 has been compensated by the FBI and the FBI is unaware of any
derogatory information pertaining to Source #1.”
It’s interesting to note that Steele wasn’t fired for leaking to the press but for revealing his association with the FBI. foxnews.com/politics/2018/… I’d be willing to bet that the FBI ASKED him to leak the story. They got pissed when he tied it to them and fired him.
Page 15 “Source #1, who now owns a foreign business/financial intelligence
firm, was approached by an identified U.S. person, who indicated to Source #1 that a” The identified US person is obviously Bruce Simpson.
Page 16 “The FBI
speculates that the identified U.S. person was likely looking for information that
could be used to discredit Candidate #l's campaign.” The FBI NEVER mentioned the Clinton campaign as the funding for the dossier. Flat out lied by omission. More perjury.
Page 16 “Notwithstanding Source #l's reason for conducting the research into Candidate #l's ties to Russia, based on Source #l's previous reporting history
with the FBI, whereby Source #1 provided reliable information to the FBI, the FBI
believes Source #l's
reporting herein to be credible.” So, despite the fact that Steele was biased and despite the fact that Clinton paid for it (although we didn’t bother to tell you that), and despite the fact that we KNOW Page is innocent, we SWEAR we have probable cause. What a farce.
Page 17 mentions the non-existent meeting Page supposedly had with Igor Sechin, so yes, they used dossier information to justify the warrant.
Page 18 mentions the supposed meeting with Divyekin that never took place. Another claim from the dossier. @AdamSchiffCA clearly lied about the contents of the FISA warrant and what was used to justify it. Shame on you, Adam.
Page 21 “a July 2016 article in an identified news organization reported that
Candidate #l's campaign worked behind the scenes,,,” refers to this Washington Post article washingtonpost.com/opinions/globa…
Page 22 cites Michael Isakoff’s article, which we know Steele was the source. yahoo.com/news/u-s-intel…
Page 23, still discussing the Isakoff article. In a footnote: “As discussed above, Source #1 was hired by a business associate to
conduct research into Candidate #l's ties to Russia.” Still no mention of Clinton.
Also this on Page 23: “The FBI does not believe that Source #1 directly provided this information to the press.” Of course they didn’t. They likely asked Steele to leak it but not tell him where they did. Can we tie texts into this? I’d bet we can.
Page 24, STILL using the Isakoff article. You can’t say they didn’t milk the laundered information for all it was worth. This things is beyond pathetic.
Page 24-25, the September 25, 2016 article cited is from Politico: politico.com/story/2016/09/…
Page 26 “an identified news
organization published an article that was based on an interview with Page” refers to this Washington Post article: washingtonpost.com/news/josh-rogi…
Page 32 the FBI states that they have probable cause that Page is an agent of Russia. Complete perjury. An utter lie. And upon this lie was built muh Russia, which still haunts us today.
Page 54, “I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing information
regarding Carter W. Page is true and correct.” The signature is redacted. It’s a Supervisory Special Agent, so perhaps Strzok?
Page 63 The first FISA warrant was signed by James Comey.
Page 65 Sally Yates signed for the DoJ.
Page 66 the signature is redacted. Probably Loretta Lynch.
Page 66 confirms it was Lynch: “The application has been made by a Federal officer and approved by the Attorney General;”
Every single thing having to do with the form and manner of surveillance is redacted. I doubt any of it impacts national security but exposes the bad acts performed. We the people should be able to see these without redactions.
Page 84 - the second application was filed in January 2017. The exact date is redacted, as if that makes one bit of sense.
Strzok made the second application. (page 84)
This is troubling. The second application is basically a regurgitation of the first. It would seem to me that, to get a renewal, you would have to show that the THREE MONTHS of surveillance has revealed at least ONE new fact that fits the criteria for renewal.
Basically, this renewal application looks like the FBI checking in and saying we’re still doing it so we need authorization to do it some more. If you can’t come up with ONE new thing in three months you should not get a renewal. This whole process stinks.
Page 100 “in or about October 2016, the FBI suspended its
relationship with Source #1 due to Source #l's unauthorized disclosure of
information to the press. Notwithstanding the suspension of its relationship with
Source #1, the FBI assesses Source #1 to be reliable”
Of course he is. This whole charade disgusts me.
Page 108. Give me a break.
Certified by Strzok, Signed by Comey, the second application is a joke. No new intelligence to justify renewal. They asked the court for a rubber stamp and got it. If this doesn’t cause Congress to rethink FISA entirely, then the fix is in. Stop abusing our Constitution!
After I stopped last night, I thought about the Buryakov case. The FBI had video, audio and physical surveillance to prove the guy was a Russian agent. They had NONE of that for Page, even after three months of surveillance. Yet the court still authorized more spying.
I don’t know about you, but I find that extremely troubling. This is the most invasive surveillance the govt can do on a citizen. And it’s being approved without a single shred of provable evidence. The court doesn’t escape this unscathed. Americans won’t stand for this.
Page 161: Sally Yates approved the application.
Page 181: Judge Michael Mosman signed the order. At this point it’s becoming clear, the court is relying on the FBI to be telling the truth. That has to change. The court should be a CHECK on the FBI, not a rubber stamp.
Something else I thought of last night, unrelated to this specifically. The FBI needs to change its policy. ALL suspect/witness interviews MUST be recorded. No more relying on the word and memory of agents for the facts. Digital records must be preserved in all cases.
The third application begins on page 182, and again, the day is blocked out. The application was made in April 2017.
Page 182: Third application also submitted by Strzok. So the guy who was so honorable that he could completely ignore his own clear and detestable biases was behind the first three applications.
Page 183: “This verified application reports on developments in the FBI's investigation of the above captioned target since the most recent application
described herein” We shall see.
This is again a complete regurgitation of the previous two applications. Unless there’s something hidden in the redactions (which I doubt, because they look exactly the same), there is nothing new here. Absolutely shameful.
Not once, in all four applications, was the fact revealed that the Clinton campaign paid for the dossier.
Page 225,226: They added information regarding Carter Page’s letter to the FBI (attached)
Page 227: A typical page of this document.
The last page I showed you goes all the way to page 238 before you come to more legible text.
Page 260: Again signed by Strzok. They ought to be able to charge him with perjury for all three of these applications. This is clear abuse of power and the justice system.
Page 269: Again signed by James Comey
Page 271: And signed by Dana Boente
Page 291: The warrant was signed by Anne Conway. ISTM the judges are relying on the judgment of the first judge who approved the warrant and not really asking any questions of the FBI. The first thing they SHOULD be asking is, what NEW information have you obtained in SIX MONTHS.
Page 292: The fourth warrant. The day again is redacted. This makes no sense at all. Why would the day be redacted? It was filed in June 2017. I find myself wondering now why they stopped at four. Was it because the OIG had released the texts?
And this one looks like another regurgitation of the first one. WHY does the court approve these without even bothering to ask, Do you have anything new? You’ve been at this nine months now. No new evidence? Why should I approve another one?
Page 308 is still a reliable source. This despite the fact that Comey has testified that they couldn’t confirm ANYTHING in the dossier. This is really disgusting.
Page 309: This appears in all four apps, but I don’t know if I highlighted it. “The FBI
speculates that the identified U.S. person was likely looking for information that
could be used to discredit Candidate #l's campaign.” Yes. Pure speculation. They had no idea.
This is the kind of bullshit that makes these applications completely despicable. The people involved in this should be ashamed of themselves, but they’re not. They’re actually proud. Jail them all.
Page 316. They’re still using the same articles they used for app #1. There’s nothing new at all. Astounding.
Page 380: Fourth app signed by Strzok.
Page 389: Signed by Andy McCabe
Page 390: “I find that this application regarding Carter W. Page satisfies the
criteria and requirements for such applications set forth in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, as amended, and hereby approve its filing
with this Court.” Signed by Rod Rosenstein.
You’ll noticed that the Attorney who signs the application is not attesting to its accuracy but only that it meets the criteria and requirements. IOW, it’s properly filed and contains the required elements. Only the FBI applicant attests to its veracity. That needs to change.
The DoJ should be required to attest to the veracity of the statements in the application and be held liable for perjury for false statements. That would motivate them to more closely supervise the actions of the FBI. (Not that it would helped with this corrupt bunch.)
Page 412: The warrant was signed by Judge Raymond Dearie. I think the judges had no idea that they were being lied to, but that’s because they didn’t adequately question the FBI’s representations.
I’m considering counting the number of pages for each application and warrant. I’ll post that, if I decide to do it.
App 1: 66 pages
App 2: 78 pages
App 3: 90 pages
App 4: 90 pages

Warrant 1: 16 pages
Warrant 2: 18 pages
Warrant 3: 18 pages
Warrant 4: 19 pages
This concludes my analysis. If I find anything new, I’ll add it.
Today’s Verse of the Day: Ps 32:8 This is so cool “I will instruct you and teach you about the direction you should go. I’l advise you and keep my eye on you.” What a fantastic promise. Don’t worry. Lean on me. I’ll watch over you and guid you. God is great isn’t he?
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Paul Schmehl
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member and get exclusive features!

Premium member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year)

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!