Former AG Lynch ‘appeared to have amnesia’ During December Testimony About Carter Page FISA
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch told Congressional lawmakers in closed door testimony that despite the DOJ having approved the FBI warrant and renewals to spy on Carter Page, she did not recall the applications, did not remember the details contained in the applications or the circumstances surrounding conversations about the warrant, according to testimony reviewed by SaraACarter.com.
Lynch “appeared to have amnesia” during her testimony that she delivered in December before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees, said one congressional official, who had knowledge of the hearing. The official said Lynch’s closed-door testimony on Page, a former Trump campaign volunteer, left lawmakers with more questions than answers.
Lynch’s testimony has not yet been made public by the committees.
Tarmac Meeting
It was during 2016, as well, when Lynch, who was then Attorney General for President Barack Obama, came under fire for her infamous Phoenix airport tarmac meeting with former President Bill Clinton. That meeting took place only days before former FBI Director James Comey made the announcement not to file charges against Hillary Clinton for her handling of classified government emails on a private unsecured server. Lynch has always insisted that the meeting was coincidental and that she and Clinton only discussed grandkids and other “innocuous things,” as reported .
However, it is under questioning during the December hearing where Lynch not only evaded questions regarding the tarmac meeting but failed to disclose any information regarding the DOJ’s approval to allow the FBI to spy on Page.
It may be because Lynch’s then Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates signed off on the FISA application. Others who signed off on the warrant and renewals were former FBI Director James Comey, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and the final renewal application on Page that was signed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, according to the House Intelligence Committee’s January, 2018 memo.
Lynch, however, would expect lawmakers to believe that she was never aware that a former member of the Trump campaign was the target of an FBI investigation or a warrant that would allow the bureau to spy on him.
Goodlatte Questions Lynch on Carter Page
Then, under questioning from House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, she listed the standard detailed procedures of what is required from the Attorney General when the FBI files for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Warrant to spy on an American.
“By statute, the Attorney General is the final signatory on the FISA applications,” stated Lynch to the committee. “By regulation, the signatory authority has been delegated – shall I say shared—with the Deputy Attorney General and the head of the national security division as long as the people in those positions are presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed.”
Lynch on Page
I DON’T HAVE ANY RECOLLECTION OF BEING BRIEFED ON THE PAGE APPLICATION EITHER. AND I DON’T HAVE A RECOLLECTION OF SIGNING IT, SAID LYNCH
So she knows the rules and regulations but when asked in more detail about the process of approving the FBI’s application on Page she freezes.
Goodlatte, who was then the chairman of the committee, asked Lynch: “Is that what happened to the Carter Page case?”
“I wasn’t involved in the processing of the Page FISA and I can outline the process for you but I don’t have personal (knowledge) of it,” she said.
Confounded Goodlatte says “no, no, it is just not clear to me, the Attorney General has a role, you often rely upon others to supplement your work in fulfilling that role. Did you have a role in that or were you briefed?”
“I don’t have any recollection of being briefed on the Page application either. And I don’t have a recollection of signing it,” said Lynch in response.
Goodlatte then asks Lynch if she recalls signing any of the renewal applications to continue spying on Page.
“I don’t have a recollection of being involved in the FISA for Mr. Page at all,” she says.
Goodlatte then goes on to ask: “were you briefed about the relevance of Mr. Page’s FISA warrant with regard to this broader Russia investigation?”
Again, Lynch fails to have any memory of anything Page.
“I don’t have a recollection of a briefing of that type, no,” said Lynch.
Goodlatte then asks: “When did you first hear the name Carter Page?”
Lynch: “Again, it would have to have been like late spring of 2016 or so in this context. I don’t recall I knew of him from other sources or not.”
Lynch, Page and Trump
At the time of the Page warrant, the DOJ was feeling the pressure from the FBI to get the warrants signed, said one U.S. official with knowledge of the circumstances surrounding Page’s warrant.
Page didn’t spark much FBI or public interest prior to Trump’s March 21, 2016, announcement that he was a volunteer on the campaign’s foreign policy team. The FBI took notice right away because Page had been in their bailiwick in the past. He was also a perfect target for anti-Trump FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok saw the opportunity to spy on Page, as an opportunity to go after the Trump campaign.
Shortly after Trump’s announcement – sometime in the late Spring – Lynch, had met with former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and Strzok to discuss the news of Page joining the Trump campaign, according to a declassified memorandum.
Lynch’s Contradictions
But according to Lynch’s statements to Congress, she can’t recall anything about Page.
The initial FBI FISA application was granted in late October, 2016 to spy on Page. But the FBI had already opened its investigation into the Trump campaign earlier in the Spring.
Not only were they collecting information from well placed sources within the campaign but former British spy Christopher Steele had been supplying the FBI and DOJ with unverified information he was collecting from sources, some of which were unreliable Russians.
By the summer, the bureau had obtained the dossier through Steele, who was working on behalf of now embattled research firm Fusion GPS. Fusion GPS was paid for the research by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
And it was the unverified dossier that was used as the bulk of evidence to obtain the warrant to spy on Page.
FISA Court Reprimands DOJ and FBI Spying on Americans
It was in April, 2017 that this reporter along with John Solomon first published the declassified and heavily redacted memorandum by signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, who heads the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) court.
Collyer noted in the memorandum that the court had learned in a notice filed Oct. 26, 2016, that National Security Agency analysts had been conducting prohibited queries of databases “with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the court.”
It was also just days after the court had approved the FISA to spy on Page.
The memorandum is vital in understanding to what lengths the NSA and the FBI have taken to spy on American communications.
It was also eye opening and a major reason why the Page FISA warrant is a central cause taken up by the former Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Ca.
It was at this same time that Lynch, and the FBI had filed the FISA warrant with the same secret court to spy on Page. However, the court at the time of the Page FISA application, would be relying on the bureau’s own word that the information contained in the FISA was backed by reliable evidence. It was not, according to the final Russia report submitted by Nunes’ committee.
“Very Serious” Constitutional Issue
The court, however, takes the violations that occurred seriously. As noted, the court discovered that the U.S. intelligence agencies had been conducting illegal surveillance on American citizens over a five-year period. It drew sharp criticism from the court, which called the matter a “very serious” constitutional issue.
But what about Page, along with others like him who may never know that a U.S. agency is spying on their communications?
That has yet to be addressed by the secret court or the Department of Justice.
If Collyer’s criticism against the upstream data searches to spy on Americans is any indication, then alleged violations under the law in conducting surveillance on Page based on unproven accusations in a FISA are just as daunting for the FBI and DOJ.
Nunes, told this reporter in an interview last month, that the Page FISA must be thoroughly investigated and laws must change in an effort to protect essential American rights guaranteed by the constitution.
The committee, then under Nunes leadership, revealed that the FBI and DOJ failed to disclose pertinent information to the court when they obtained a FISA and three renewal warrants on Page. Further, the FBI used unsubstantiated information from a dossier put together by Steele and paid for by the opposition.
“The FISC court should take action against the people who misled them,” said Nunes. “It’s impossible for the court to say that they were not misled.”
The FISA Court And DOJ Must Act
Collyer describes the expansive intrusion by the intelligence community “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.” Because of this, there is no way that the court can ignore what happened to Page.
It is up to the DOJ, now under Attorney General William Barr, to ensure that Lynch, Yates, Comey and others who participated in the targeting of an American citizen be investigated.
The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.
Therefore, Page’s case isn’t just about one person – it’s about everyone’s right to be granted reasonable protection from corrupt officials or intrusive government agencies.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
47 visitors
"On June 8, 2017, former FBI head James Comey testified under oath that Lynch had instructed him (during the course of a private conversation) to not refer to the Clinton email scandal as an "investigation" and instead refer to it as a "matter". He also said that the directive, combined with Lynch's Phoenix ramp meeting with former President Clinton, led him to make his independent announcement regarding the Clinton email probe last July. In his closely watched Senate Intelligence Committee testimony, otherwise devoted to discussing the circumstances of his firing, Comey said that tarmac meeting was a "deciding factor" in his decision to act alone to update the public on the Clinton probe—and protect the Bureau's reputation."
Are these partisan hacks above the law?
As usual, the President may be part of the discussion, but comments that simply call him names will be deleted.
It would appear so considering Trump said "I do not recall" or "I don't remember" 27 times in his answers to Mueller's questions.
"Following the release of the redacted Mueller report, President Donald Trump’s lawyers provided the full transcript of Trump’s written answers to questions Mueller posed to the president during his investigation.
More than two dozen times, Trump’s answers included phrases like “I can’t remember” or “I do not recall.”
So I guess the supposed mass amnesia doesn't play partisan politics and deeply infects those of both parties.
Which were not even given under oath.
Whenever there is no real answer, the best answer it, "But, but, but, but, TRUMP, TRUMP, LOOK AT TRUMP.
This woman is going to be hauled in front of Durham and then before a Grand Jury. If she still can't remember anything, I'd bet that a few days in a drunk tank for contempt will improve her memory.
Which would only further prove that Vic's point about partisans being above the law only really applies to the liar in chief who gets away with it due to Justice department rules not to indict a sitting President or force him to testify before a grand jury. Trying to attack and accuse every Obama official while not holding Trump and his cabinet to the same standards is the only reason I pointed out the partisan nature of this ridiculous hit piece.
Then there is always the opposite reaction when someone on the left "can't recall".................. 39 times .
Sorry about the but, but, but, Hilary but c'mon people. They all have memory problems...........when it's convenient.
BUT, BUT, BUT, BUT, TRUMP, TRUMP, TRUMP. Deflection
This entire seed is nothing but "BUT, BUT, BUT, BUT, OBAMA, OBAMA, OBAMA. Deflection". All I did was hold up a mirror to the useless morons trying to trot out another Obama official crying about her "selective amnesia" when their own candidates apparently can't remember their own names when in the hot seat. This seed was nothing but a dumb ass "Lynch mob" using a complaint of a tactic used over and over again by Trump and his staff of liars and criminals.
Did you forget that he is the POTUS? But bringing him up is deflection, and Obama, isn't? LOL
They have ODS and HDS, apparently.
Check out the source this was seeded from. A Hannity shill.
Don't you have a Michelle Obama has a penis seed to comment on?
Don't you have some to look for?
That reminds me...
Trump is not the topic of article. Is it OK with you that Lynch could be in serious legal trouble?
Once Barr and Durham get going good, indictments could come flying thick and fast.
This seed was nothing but a dumb ass "Lynch mob" using a complaint of a tactic used over and over again by Trump and his staff of liars and criminals.
It appears some serious abuses of power and weaponizing of government agencies was going on full time in 0bama's administration. The public wants to what really went on in that regime. This is the worst kind of scandal that could bedevil the progressives coming up on an election year.
Sara Carter is nothing but a Hannity, far right op-ed pundit.
This seed is nothing but her opinion on her own blog site.
It is in no way news or any breaking new details. As said earlier it is nothing but a hit piece to muddy the waters and turn the focus elsewhere.
I had thought the Barr investigation into the investigation was about to be completed, yet for some reason it is never talked about and never any conclusions.
Not really, none of them are being indicted and a case of supposed "amnesia" proves nothing.
Some whiny religious conservatives bitter over the successes of a black man as President want to go on fishing expeditions to find anything to justify their hate of an excellent President who will go down in history as one of the most respected while the current occupant will likely spend time in jail as soon as he's booted out in January of 2021.
That is what some Trump sycophants hope and pray for, anything to deflect and distract from the monumental disaster we've had to endure for the last two and a half years. But they will be left with a big nothing-burger showing that the Obama administration did everything by the book while the Trump administration is shitting all over the law and the American people.
The so-called …. "SMARTEST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD".....sure can go "REAL DUMB" when needed !
So true. Trump, who constantly brags about what a genius he is, and how he has one of the greatest memories, conveniently couldn't remember jack shit when interviewed for the Mueller investigation.
The "Smartest People in the world were on the "Mueller Team", and even they couldn't come up with a definitive verdict. Like Lynch, they just "Couldn't come to an honest conclusion, but conjecture seemed fitting !
Just another But Trumper...
So what do you think about Lynch's selective amnesia? Government records confirm what she now can't seem to remember.
I think I would put partisanship aside and worry more about a corrupt Government official.
It amazes me how people like you comment so much on the Mueller report while clearly having never bothered to read it. Let's play a game - can you tell me WHY Mueller didn't come up with a definitive verdict? He clearly stated the reason. Go read the report and get back to me.
Then why do you always defend Trump? You're far more partisan than I am.
Considering Trump is the one who always brags about how smart he is and what a great memory he has, he seems a much better fit for It Is Me's comment than Lynch.
Now, if this seed turns out to be true (the committee hasn't yet released any details, and Sara A Carter is apparently a Hannity shill and therefore probably about as honest as he is), then yes - Lynch's selective amnesia is also bullshit.
I do?
Typical liberal response can't discuss the article but lets talk about others.
More but Trump.....
There you go, now that wasn't so hard was it.
This here and the whole Tarmac meeting with Clinton just makes her look bad. The thing is I believe she is a good person and was just following orders. I would like to hear what she thought when she was told that slick willy was popping on over to have a cup of tea and discuss "Grandkids"
Well yes, unless you're a hypocrite, what Trump has done is every bit as bad as what this Hannity shill is claiming Lynch did. I'm far more concerned about the President lying (or being so old and senile that he can't remember things any longer, even what a Cat 5 is) than a former AG. I'm far more concerned about the President ordering his toadies to not even testify to Congress - if he hadn't done anything wrong, why would he be so afraid? Why was he too afraid to testify himself, or to provide actual answers? Makes him look bad, as if he has something major to hide.
This here, I'm not so sure about. This is certainly not a credible source. If true, yes it is bad. The tarmac meeting, agreed. Whether anything wrong actually happened, with ethics you need to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.
People read it. Me To.
Nothing is coming of it, no matter how many times one reads it.
Trump fully cooperated with the Mueller investigation which had unlimited resources. At some point enough is enough and one has to say no more.
If Trump has something to hide, then Congress can go through the judicial system and find it, otherwise at this point it is just badgering.
Who interviewed Trump?
And when?
And I don’t have a recollection of signing it
Show me a check I signed a year ago and I probably would not remember signing it. But if it is my signature, I obviously did.
I wouldn't equate signing a check to buy bread to signing a warrant to spy on an American citizen involving Trump.
The point was that I might not remember signing something (a check was just an example) but if it is my signature, I obviously signed it. Get it now?
You wouldn't remember signing a warrant to spy on someone? Especially involving Trump?
I think you get it.
I was challenging the validity of her statement that she didn't remember signing the damned thing. You and I would remember of course. Her, obviously not although I think she is lying through her teeth about it.
If this seed is actually true, I agree - how could she not remember signing something that potentially involved Russian espionage?
My husband still remembered signing the S1 paperwork for the doctor who murdered his family at Ft Brag decades ago.
In the 1980's I saw a boat for sale in Huntington Harbor CA. I went to take a look and make an offer. I found out when I got there that it was Jeffery MacDonalds boat...Deal killer for me.
Ronald Reagan used the words "I do not recall" one hundred sixteen times regarding his authorization of The Iran Conta Affair. Jeff Sessions said the same dozens of times regarding his many documented meetings with known operatives of Russian State Intelligence Services during the 2016 campaign when he was questioned under oath by the US Senate...
That sounds like Hillary's excuse.
I would say the same about Trump be he refused to testify at all.
BUT, BUT, TRUMP, TRUMP. More deflection.
Vic said he was part of the discussion, so go whine to him.
We know you would...
Take it up with Vic... Since you didn't bother to read his rules...
Frosty and others still frantically attempting to deflect.
It's not working. The lefties always seem to appear to comment according to a prewritten script of talking points.
Trump was asked if there was drawing with a magic marker on the map he was holding up (with drawing by magic marker on it) for the cameras and he mumbled "I dont know, I dont know, I dont know".
They should have thrown a net over him right there.
It is like when you catch a kid with a crayon matching the color of the doodling on the living room wall. "Did you do this?" He replies "I don't know."
I hate to draw a conclusion so early, but it would seem that the commentary coming from the left dosen't want to acknowledge the facts being regurgitated in the article. There is really nothing new in it. It merely questions the credibility of Lynch's testimony from December. From that we have the source being questioned, derogatory posters thrown in (which I will delete) and one odd rambling comment about a weather report,
Now for my thoughts. Loretta Lynch will go down in history as the 2nd most corrupt DA in history. Second only to Eric Holder. She met with the husband of someone under investigation (which we only found out about thanks to one courageous reporter - Christopher Sign), she also instructed the FBI director not to refer to it as an investigation, but a "matter" - the same way the Clinton campaign referred to it! Thus far she has slid by thanks to the IG referring to these actions as "errors in Judgement." There are other investigations in progress. However it turns out in the coming months, history will define her tenure as ideologically corrupt.
Carter Page's lame excuse for committing anti-American espionage is that he really realy really did not know that offering to sell US secrets to the goddamn Russians was illegal. Apparently that is the loophole he has used. That he, Carter Page, is just too damn dumb to be held accountable for espionage even though that is what he was engaged in. Everyone plainly agrees that Carter Page is just too damn dumb and mentally disabled to ever be held accountable for what would result in treason charges if coming from someone of normal intelligence. Still, what he was doing was illegal and so it should have been and thus was investigated in due course by the FBI and CIA whether Carter was a childlike idiot moron numbnut, or not...
What is your evidence that he was offering to sell secrets to Russia,
Carter Page has already publically admitted to it all. Carter Page's excuse, which is now believed by US investigators and US law enforcement, is that Carter Page really did not know that the people he was offering his "Consulting Services" to in Moscow Russia regarding his insider information on the Trump campaign were all actually operatives of Russian State Intelligence Services. That is why Carter has not been changed with anti-American espionage by Trump's Justice Department. Page legitimately was too damn dumb to know that what he was doing was illegal and so he gets a pass. Still, it was exactly because Carter Page was actively reaching out to known Russian State Intelligence Services operatives offering to sell his secrets that Page came under suspicion and thus under investigation. Which is just the same as anyone else should be with who has access to our national secrets and who is offering to sell them to our enemies.
FALSE
Link please.