Lying to the FISA court is a serious matter. “It is a crime to make a false statement to a federal court,” Former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova asserts. Especially when those lies are “part of a conspiracy to submit false statements to a court.”
“Given the nature of the evidence of illegal conduct by senior officials in the bureau and the Department of Justice, the only way to handle a criminal investigation is with a special counsel. There is no other option.”
“It is safe to say that based on the record we have available there are a number of officials who apparently did all of those things. That is why there must be a federal grand jury to investigate all of these activities by Obama administration, FBI, DOJ, and intelligence community people.”
It’s clear from the contents of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) memo that the Obama administration conspired to submit false statements. They intentionally made false and fraudulent statements in order to convince the court to allow wiretapping Team Trump.
“It is a crime to engage in electronic surveillance under color of law except by authorization of law. If authorization to obtain electronic surveillance is obtained through lying or fraud, that is a felony.”
Current, as well as former FBI and Justice Department officials, are still lying about it to watchdog committees on Capitol Hill in an attempt to cover it all up, committing even more felony crimes.
“If you testify on your activities in a court of law or on Capitol Hill in pursuing or obtaining select surveillance and you lie about it, that is perjury.”
diGenova acknowledges “the difficulties inherent” when you have to rely on the Justice Department “to pursue charges against Justice Department officials.” Past officials are just as hard to prosecute as current ones which is why such special circumstances call for a “special counsel.”
diGenova knows his way around a special investigation. The former U.S. attorney served as the independent counsel looking into whether George H.W. Bush’s administration did anything wrong with a “search of then-presidential candidate Bill Clinton’s passport file.” They didn’t.
He became very familiar with prosecuting corruption while in charge of the Marion Barry case. At the time in D.C., corruption “was hard to miss.” It was everywhere in the district.
“It was an area where the FBI just didn’t want to get involved. We were able to convince the bureau that it was important. The city was a mess at that point.
Corruption was rampant in every department. There was contract fraud and everything else you could think of. Congress didn’t want to deal with it because the politics of it was very ugly.”
It didn’t take long for things to happen. “These special units we created to deal with political corruption proved to be very effective.” Soon, “people in government who were appalled by what they were seeing started coming forward and cooperating. It certainly woke people up.”
He is also married to Victoria Toensing, the attorney who represents the once “confidential” informant in the Uranium One case. That is another scandal involving both the FBI and DOJ.
Based on reports over the past year related to Ms. Toensing’s client, the agencies conspired to keep an ongoing investigation from the CFIUS committee tasked with approving the Uranium One deal. Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation were up to their ears in it.
The memo released by the HPSCI, which is led by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), spells out exactly how the Obama administration used “the intelligence apparatus to spy on the presidential campaign of the opposition party specifically Donald Trump advisor Carter Page.”
The memo states, in order to get the approval they needed, DOJ and FBI ranking officials “employed dishonesty in convincing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) to grant them the authority to conduct electronic surveillance on an American citizen.”
They went in front of the judge at least four times but intentionally kept quiet about things they knew the judge wouldn’t like.
“In the case of Carter Page, the government had at least four independent opportunities before the FISC to accurately provide an accounting of the relevant facts. However, our findings indicate that, as described below, material and relevant information was omitted.”
If the court had known that Clinton campaign and the DNC paid for the research “repackaged as an intelligence ‘dossier'” that was used to justify a wiretap, they never would have allowed it.
Especially, now that we know the “independent” confirmation coming from a “Yahoo news article,” was planted in the press by Christopher Steele himself.
Steele once referred to himself as “desperate” and “passionate” to stop Trump at any cost. The FBI dropped him as a source when they found out he was telling reporters everything he was telling them.