Did FBI Violate Basic Verification Protocols In Presenting Unvetted Claims in FISA Warrant Application?

Did they do "extreme vetting" on the claims made in the Steele Dossier?

No, of course not.

The more apt question is did they do any vetting of any kind whatsoever, and the answer there also appears to be "no."

Sharyl Attkisson:

There are strict rules requiring that each and every fact presented in an FBI request to electronically spy on a U.S. citizen be extreme-vetted for accuracy -- and presented to the court only if verified. There's no dispute that at least some, if not a great deal, of information in the anti-Trump "Steele dossier" was unverified or false. Former FBI director James Comey testified as much himself before a Senate committee in June 2017. Comey repeatedly referred to "salacious" and "unverified" material in the dossier, which turned out to be paid political opposition research against Donald Trump funded first by Republicans, then by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign. Presentation of any such unverified material to the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court to justify a wiretap would appear to violate crucial procedural rules, called "Woods Procedures," designed to protect U.S. citizens. Yet Comey allegedly signed three of the FISA applications on behalf of the FBI. Deputy Director Andrew McCabe reportedly signed one and former Attorney General Sally Yates, then-Acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein each reportedly signed one or more.

Details on the "Woods Procedures," which don't even seem to have been considered here, at the link.

Oh, but maybe they asked long-time Clinton smear merchants Sidney Blumenthal and Cody Shearer if they thought the memo sounded good to them.

posted by Ace at 01:16 PM

| Access Comments