| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| DOJ Will Allow House, Senate Intel Committees Access To Carter Page FISA Documents |
| 2018-04-07 |
| [Daily Caller] The Department of Justice says it will allow members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees to view surveillance warrants granted against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page in what the agency is calling an "extraordinary accommodation." DOJ is allowing the access to the four warrant applications in response to demands from California Rep. Devin Nunes, the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Nunes threatened earlier this week to take legal action if the DOJ did not provide all committee members access to the four Page warrants, which were issued in 2016 and 2017 by judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court. Nunes also demanded that the FBI hand over an internal document known as an Electronic Communication (EC), which laid out the basis for the bureau’s investigation into possible Trump campaign collusion with the Russian government. (RELATED: House Intel Chairman Threatens Legal Action Against FBI, DOJ Over Russia Records) |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #6 However, there are limits. With respect to Nunes’s specific demand for the electronic communication — “EC” in investigative jargon — that officially kicked off the counterintelligence “collusion” investigation, the Department of Justice and the FBI seem to have drawn the line. The demand for the document, let us recall, dates back to one of the committee’s August 2017 subpoenas. In his letter Nunes emphasized that the EC is not highly classified and that the FBI has “not been shy about leaking to the press information that the Department and the Bureau refuse to share with Congress.” Apparently declining to produce an unredacted copy of the EC to the committee, Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd engages in indirection. He beats around the bush, saying the department has sought to act in a “manner consistent with relevant legal precedents“ with respect to certain documents. “To date, that accommodation has occurred through briefings and numerous in camera reviews of classified materials,” the letter states, referring to response to the committee’s “legitimate oversight inquiries.” Now they will go one step beyond with respect to the FISA documents, but Boyd tacitly draws the line at the EC. When a lawyer refers to “legal precedents,” he is usually talking about case law. I am quite sure that is not how Boyd is using the term. I infer that he means “past practice.” Here, however, we are dealing with unique circumstances involving an investigation reach |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2018-04-07 20:11 |
| #5 An unelected faceless bureaucracy deigns to listen to the entreaties of the rabble. Tar. Feathers. Rail. Some assembly required. |
| Posted by: magpie 2018-04-07 16:46 |
| #4 Money For Nothing |
| Posted by: newc 2018-04-07 14:02 |
| #3 As I mentioned earlier - the French people discovered very effective treatment for their 'nobility problem'. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2018-04-07 12:00 |
| #2 "Will allow"? "Will allow"? That's the kind of language the French nobility used before 1789. Yeah but it's better than Baraq claiming executive privilege. |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2018-04-07 11:55 |
| #1 "Will allow"? "Will allow"? That's the kind of language the French nobility used before 1789. |
| Posted by: Matt 2018-04-07 11:18 |