"Journalists" who are less informed than their audience
We already know the answers to all of those questions. We've seen the redacted FISA application for Page. We know the FISC judges were not properly informed of the origins of the Steele dossier (they got a footnote suggesting it may have been paid for by political opponents, but not specifically by the opposing candidate, or going into any additional detail about the credibility problems with Steele and his information). We know they did not concede Steele's political motivations beyond that footnote, unless it was hidden in one of the redacted sections, which seems unlikely. We know the judges did not know the allegations were unverified because they are supposed to be presented only with verified information -- there is an entire chain of procedure and signoffs that need to happen before the FISA is submitted, and each and every person who signed those applications committed perjury because their signatures are supposed to provide that the application has been verified.
Horowitz's FISA report is going to be less "Did we screw up?" and more "What do we do about it?" I'm not very optimistic based on his recommendations in the Clinton email report, but there may be a new Barr to get over for this upcoming report...
This entry was published Tue Jul 30 06:47:22 CDT 2019 by TriggerFinger
and last updated 2019-07-30 06:47:22.0.