Original Blog Entry: Oh My, Interesting Ramifications – FISA Court Requires DOJ/FBI To Provide Names of Targets Within Co

konane — Mon, 11 May 2020 18:46:45 GMT

Please read the article if you have time. My day-to-day-person understanding is that if a required document is missing from an action the court is supposed to take on a matter, that matter can not proceed. Why did the judge(s) allow it to go forward? Also if the rest were deficient then again why did the judge(s) allow them to go forward?

Inquiring minds want to know. Highlighting and emphasis mine.

Oh My, Interesting Ramifications FISA Court Requires DOJ/FBI To Provide Names of Targets Within Corrupt Surveillance Applications

......The Woods File is the mandatory FBI evidence file that contains the documentary proof to verify all statements against U.S. persons that are contained in the FISA application. Remember, this is a secret court, the FISA applications result in secret surveillance and wiretaps against U.S. persons outside the fourth amendment.

Within the 29 FISA applications reviewed, four were completely missing the Woods File. Meaning there was zero supportive evidence for any of the FBI claims against U.S. persons underpinning the FISA application. [ie. The FBI just made stuff up]

Of the remaining 25 FISA applications, 100% of them, all of them, were materially deficient on the woods file requirement; and the average number of deficiencies per file was 20. Meaning an average of twenty direct statements against the target, supporting the purpose of the FISA application, sworn by the FBI affiant, were unsubstantiated. [The low was 5, the high was 63, the average per file was 20] .......

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/04/03/oh-my-interesting-ramifications-fisa-court-requires-doj-fbi-to-provide-names-of-targets-within-corrupt-surveillance-applications/

... [ More ]