Saturday, February 3, 2018

Smart Republican

Following the release of a four-page memo detailing rampant FISA warrant abuse by the FBI and DOJ, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) announced that he will seek the criminal prosecution of FBI and DOJ officials for the "full throated adoption of this illegal misconduct and abuse of FISA by James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Sally Yates and Rod Rosenstein" who Gosar called "traitors to our nation." 
And he was against FISA:

My first year in Congress was the first time I was faced with the decision to reauthorize sections of the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act (FISA). This law, enacted in 1978, nominally allowed for the collection of foreign intelligence on foreign agents suspected of terroristic activities or espionage. That all sounds legitimate. In concept, this law was intended to allow surveillance and spying on non-citizens who posed a terrorist threat to our country.In practice, the law has been repeatedly abused to spy on American citizens. Notable abuses date back to 2002, and most recently, it was used as a political weapon against Donald Trump and his campaign. The reason it can be abused so easily is that the president can authorize spying without a court order. There is a process to get a warrant from a secret tribunal, or FISA court, but this process is merely a rubber stamp. Out of 22,990 applications for permission to spy between 1979 and 2006, only five were denied. That is the definition of a rubber stamp. That is not an independent check and balance. 

So, this was all about abuse of FISA from the beginning, the FBI knew they would get in trouble especially after the complaints by libertarians like Rand Paul.  The bill was just reauthorized.  

Why didn't the co-conspirators calculate the risk before starting the impeachment campaign?  We were all there during the debate on FISA, this was the actual public issue.  Co-conspirators should have figured out the ending to their protocol, hubris set in.

Now, tell me, in his pile of Walrus Dung, how can Mueller find an obstruction of justice? Where to look? Hmm...

No comments: