Deep Institutional Preservation

from @TheLastRefuge2 via Threadreader

1) Quietly (orally) DOJ contacted FISC & requested additional time to respond to questions raised by presiding Judge Boasberg. 

fisc.uscourts.gov/public-filings…

cc: @Techno_Fog ,@almostjingo , @JohnWHuber , @ProfMJCleveland , @LeeSmithDC , @themarketswork , @DevinNunes , @KerriKupecDOJ

mentions 2) Related to the DOJ admissions released Thursday by the FISC about the invalid nature of the FISA applications dated: April 7, 2017 (second renewal - 85 days from prior renewal); and June 29, 2017 (third renewal - 83 days from prior renewal). pg #1

fisc.uscourts.gov/public-filings…

mentions 3) Pg #2 

mentions 4) The FISC has given the DOJ/FBI an additional week to respond. Jan 28th deadline now moved to Feb 5th.

But there's a bigger issue, no-one seems to be catching.

mentions 5) The DOJ has now attested to the FISC the FISA application on April 7, 2017, and the FISA application of June 29th were invalid.

Explained to the court as an outcome of the OIG investigation and the various misstatements and omissions. 

mentions 6) The OIG investigation, which led to the FISC notification, was based partly on Clinesmith "misstatement" (falsification) and partly on material "omissions" of exculpatory information to include wrongful use of the Steele Dossier after FBI knew claims therein were inaccurate.

mentions 7) The Steele Dossier was the framework for the FISA's validity. As testified, without the Dossier the FISA application(s) could not pass muster.

mentions 8) Which begs the question: When did the FBI know the Steele Dossier was sufficiently inaccurate?...

... Such that the FBI knowledge should have led to a retraction of the document as valid for the purpose of future FISA applications.

mentions 9) The OIG report answers that question by giving a timeline of around mid-January. When the primary sub-source was questioned.

As written: "shortly after the FBI filed the Carter Page FISA Renewal" (January 12th, 2017). 

mentions 10) The "mid-January" date also supported by AG Bill Barr statements during his interview with NBC: "they certainly knew in January"... 

mentions 11) So the key admission is that all of the investigative interests, all stakeholders, knew the material claims within the dossier were invalid in/around January... and definitely, unquestionably, by the time the second renewal came around on April 7th, 2017.

mentions 12) Hence the DOJ/FBI admissions to the FISA Court about the second and third renewal being invalid. 

mentions 13) Which brings me to the key question about DAG Rod Rosenstein and his authorizing scope memos.

Did any of these scope memos authorize Robert Mueller to investigate the claims in the Steele Dossier? 

May 17th, 2017
August 2nd, 2017
October 20th, 2017

mentions 14) The reason for the question is simple: 

Why would Rosenstein authorize Mueller to investigate claims in May/Aug/Oct, about information in a dossier the FBI already investigated (before April) and deemed unreliable?

mentions 15) You might say, well... he probably didn't.

However, the Mueller report Pages #11 and #12 specifically says that he *did*.

justice.gov/storage/report…

mentions 16) On Pages #11 and #12 of the Weissmann/Mueller report, the special counsel team outlines the purpose and intent of the probe as delivered by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on August 2nd, 2017: 

mentions 17) The August 2nd, 2017, scope memo, authorizes Robert Mueller to investigate claims only found in the Christopher Steele Dossier.

That's a full five months after the FISA application's use of the dossier that the current DOJ is claiming was invalid in April.

mentions 18) Keep in mind no-one has been allowed to see the August or October expanded Rosenstein scope memos. 

We saw the first authorization from May 17th, 2017: 

mentions 19) But the August 2nd, 2017, scope memo was mostly redacted:

mentions 20) ... and the October 20th, 2017, Scope Memo was completely hidden by the DOJ; and we only found out about it from the Mueller report itself. 

mentions 21) So my question remains: If the FBI investigated the Dossier in January and March, 2017, concluding (per the OIG report) the information therein was unreliable, then why was DAG Rosenstein authorizing Mueller to investigate it? 

/END