Seeing a lot of people tossing around the FBI DIOG’s requirement that factual claims in FISA applications be “verified.” It’s important to understand what this means. It does NOT mean “you can’t use information provided by a single source without independent confirmation."
“FISA Verification” is a process delineated in the so-called Woods Procedures; it refers to a records check to confirm that representations in the FISA application accurately reflect information in FBI’s own databases. fas.org/irp/agency/doj…
You can certainly argue that’s substantively inadequate. But formally, each of the applications released this weekend has a “Verification” form attesting under penalty of perjury that it went through the Woods process.
Yes, I’ve read Andy McCarthy’s piece. Don’t take my word for it.
Read the Woods Procedures for FISA “verification” here: fas.org/irp/agency/doj…
Then search for “hearsay” here: law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/r…
Read the Woods Procedures for FISA “verification” here: fas.org/irp/agency/doj…
Then search for “hearsay” here: law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/r…
You think the privacy of U.S. person communications merits stronger protections? Awesome. So do I. But that doesn’t mean the FBI broke the rules as they now stand, & most folks crying foul at the Page FISA have shown little prior interest in tightening those rules.
