DOJ inspector general found Carter Page FISA extensions were illegally obtained

Loading

 

The Justice Department inspector general has determined the three Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant extensions against onetime Trump campaign aide Carter Page were illegally obtained, attorney Joe diGenova said on Thursday.

In an investigation that began last year, Inspector General Michael Horowitz is examining the Justice Department’s and FBI’s compliance with legal requirements as well as policies and procedures in applications filed with the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court related to Page as part of a larger counterintelligence probe into Trump’s campaign.

The inspector general inquiry is expected to be completed in either late May or June, and diGenova, a former U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said Democrats on Capitol Hill are working overtime to investigate and discredit President Trump.

“They are doing that as a diversionary tactic away from the inevitable conclusions of the DOJ inspector general, Michael Horowitz, who, by the way, we have learned has concluded that the final three FISA extensions were illegally obtained,” diGenova said on Fox Business. “The only question now is whether or not the first FISA was illegally obtained.”

He pointed to memos, obtained by conservative group Citizens United through open-records litigation, that suggest the FBI might have misled the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in the first warrant application about an unverified dossier.

Horowitz “apparently, as a result of those disclosures … which he was unaware of — the bureau hid those memos from Horowitz — as a result of that they’re doing additional work on the first FISA. It may be that all four FISAs will have been obtained illegally,” diGenova said.

More at the Washington Examiner

 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
52 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

@Deplorable Me:

if you had no problem when the Democrats did it

Why do you pretend to know what my thoughts were on things that happened when I wasn’t commenting here?

@Michael:

Why do you pretend to know what my thoughts were on things that happened when I wasn’t commenting here?

Because you are always afforded the opportunity to dispute the conclusions but, instead, you pretend a different point was attempted to be made. Just like with collusion, obstruction, taxes, racism, etc, etc, etc, when one LIES to make their point, it means they either don’t have confidence in making their point with facts or they are ashamed of the point they believe in.