In 2018, Obama-era lawyer David Kris wrote that Devin Nunes “falsely accused the FBI of deceiving the FISA Court.”
In 2019, a comprehensive Inspector General Report concluded that the FBI deceived the FISA court in several material ways, and that one FBI agent fabricated evidence in a FISA warrant application.
In 2020, the FISA Court appointed David Kris to oversee the FBI’s compliance with FISA reform.
The FISA Court has endorsed the FBI’s FISA abuse by appointing a biased, hyper-partisan lawyer to oversee the FBI’s compliance with FISA.
David Kris’ past writings reveal an apologist for the FBI’s abuse of the FISA Court.
David Kris spent years at an anti-Trump blog Lawfare running interference for the FBI’s abuse of FISA. In one comprehensive article, Kris made the following assertions:
- “The central irony of the memo prepared by House intelligence chairman Devin Nunes, we now know, is that it tried to deceive the American people in precisely the same way that it falsely accused the FBI of deceiving the FISA Court.”
- “The Nunes memo was dishonest. And if it is allowed to stand, we risk significant collateral damage to essential elements of our democracy.”
- “The Nunes memo’s fundamental claim was that the FBI misled the court about Christopher Steele, the former British agent who was a source of information in the FISA applications on Carter Page…. Today we know that it was not true.”
Kris’ claims in his 2018 blog post have all be repudiated by Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report on FISA. Congressman Devin Nunes did not falsely accuse the FBI of deceiving the FISA Court. Several FBI agents did in fact deceive the FISA Court.
Kris also made what we now know is a false claim in his 2018 article on the Nunes memo: “It’s even more disturbing that a purported oversight memo would withhold key facts from the American people in accusing the government of withholding key facts from the court. Had the FBI done in its FISA applications what Nunes did in his memo, heads would have rolled on Pennsylvania Avenue.”
The IG Report established that the FBI and DOJ withheld key facts from the FISA Court.
Reality is contrary to Kris’ claim that “heads would have rolled” if the FBI had withheld material facts from the FISA Court. One FBI lawyer who fabricated evidence, Kevin Clinesmith, has been referred for criminal investigation. He has not been indicted.
FBI Director Chris Wray has not fired any of the agents who withheld material information from the FISA Court. According to Wray’s most recent filing, he did email the entire FBI a video telling agents to stop lying.
David Kris is a hyper-partisan. Since much of the FISA abuse was potentially politically motivated, the FISA Court cannot appoint someone with a clear political agenda.
David Kris, along with many others, claimed that the IG Report stated that the “FBI errors weren’t political.”
Kris wrote the following:
These FBI errors weren’t political, the IG concluded, but neither are they acceptable, particularly in an investigation involving a presidential campaign. 9/9
— David Kris (@DavidKris) December 9, 2019
Inspector General Michael Horowitz, in his testimony before the Senate on December 18, 2019, rejected Kris’ assertion that the FBI errors weren’t political.
An exchange between IG Horowitz and Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri reveals that there remain substantial questions about political bias within the FBI:
Sen. Hawley: “Was it your conclusion that political bias did not affect any part of the Page investigation, any part of Crossfire Hurricane?”
IG Horowitz: “We did not reach that conclusion.”
Sen. Hawley: “Because I could have sworn, in fact, I know for a fact that I’ve heard that today from this committee. That’s not your conclusion?”
IG Horowitz: “We have been very careful in the connection with the FISA’s for the reasons you mentioned to not reach that conclusion in part – as we’ve talked about earlier – the alteration of the email, the text messages associated with the individual who did that, and our inability to explain or understand, to get good explanations so that we could understand why this all happened.”
Watch IG Horowitz’s testimony here:
David Kris defended the FBI from claims of FISA abuse on Maddow in 2018. Kris in a regular guest on Maddow, in fact, and his position is always hyper-partisan.
With @Maddow discussing “asymmetric political warfare” as Trump & Co. push for further releases of Page FISAs knowing FBI can’t do so without risking compromising investigation, sources and methods. https://t.co/qItZC5WgKD
— David Kris (@DavidKris) July 24, 2018
In a recent court argument in defense of a defamation lawsuit brought against Rachel Maddow, a lawyer for Maddow claimed that Maddow engages in “rhetorical hyperbole, incapable of being proved true or false.” Alex Jones has used a similar defense in defamation cases brought against him.
Kris also believed, falsely, that Mueller would indict Donald Trump for “Russiagate” related crimes.
I suspect that POTUS and his closest advisors are and should be worried that, depending on the evidence, Mueller’s next steps will make it feel like the walls are closing in. 6/6
— David Kris (@DavidKris) July 13, 2018
The FISA Court’s decision to appoint a hyper-partisan who had made repeated false claims about the FBI’s FISA Abuse reveals an attempt by the FISA Court to cover-up the FBI’s crimes.
FISA Warrant applications are made under oath.
FBI agents didn’t let a few typos accidentally slip into their applications.
They lied about material facts.
They lied when they claimed they did not withhold any material evidence from the FISA Court.
These lies are crimes.
How we can Stop the FISA Court from Covering Up the FBI’s Crimes
The FISA Court intends to let the FBI get away with their crimes by appointed a hyper-partisan to oversee the FBI.
This is who the FISA Court appointed to assess FBI proposals to clean up their FISA act.
A vocal @DevinNunes critic and apologist for FBI misconduct.
— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) January 11, 2020
Send this article to Senator Josh Hawley by clicking here.
I kept this article very clean and well-sourced.
There is no speculation.
The information speaks for itself.
Even if a person for some reason doesn’t “like me,” they can repurpose this article by using the sources contained in the above article.
We must not let the FISA Court get away with committing fraud on the American people.
The FISA Court must appoint someone non-partisan to oversee the FBI.
Trump Channels CNN in Joe Scarborough “Cold Case”
“It’s possible, but I don’t know.” With those words former FBI Director James Comey set a new standard for media coverage of public figures. Even when there is no evidence to substantiate your claim, even when you’re relying on a document that had been discredited within the FBI, even when you’re quoting work product that was the result of Russian disinformation, you give no quarter to your enemies.
I am referencing the infamous pee-pee interview James Comey gave to ABC. Comey’s words were amplified by every media outlet. No context was added (such as the FBI’s knowing the Steele dossier was funded by Democrats and contained hoaxes from Russian pranksters).
"I honestly never thought these words would come out of my mouth, but I don’t know whether a current host of a major MSNBC show killed a staffer. It’s possible, but I don’t know."
How is that *any* different from this stuff CNN and media did for 3 years? https://t.co/UtFxbLDx8P
— Essential Cernovich (@Cernovich) May 27, 2020
And now Trump is applying these same principles to Joe Scarborough.
Media figures cry foul. What moral authority do they have?
Scarborough’s own colleague Rachel Maddow accuses people of being Russian assets. When called to answer those allegations in court, she claims that her assertions, believed to be statements of fact by her millions of viewers, are “quintessential statements of rhetorical hyperbole, incapable of being proved true or false.”
As much as I’m glad to see Joe Scarborough be treated with the same “journalistic ethics” as he treats others, I feel for the Lori Klausutis family, who no doubt do not want these painful memories resurfaced. Scarborough deserves this, but the Klausutis family does not.
But as always the media is treating itself as the real victim here.
The same media figures who recklessly smeared innocent teenagers from Covington High School as racists have much to say about a need for others to measure their words.
The same media figures who obsess over every mean Tweet a conservative posts ignores Scarborough’s on-air recording joking about the tragic death of a staffer.
Feel some empathy for the Klausutis. They are caught in a battle they didn’t start.
Scarborough, however, is getting exactly what he and everyone else on cable news deserves.
Whoa! Did Joe Scarborough really say this? https://t.co/jXz58vz3zn
— Essential Cernovich (@Cernovich) May 27, 2020
Maddow’s “I’m Not a Real Journalist” Defense Prevails in Court
Any belief that Rachel Maddow is a journalist was set to rest in a San Diego federal courtroom on Friday, with a federal judge dismissed a defamation lawsuit brought against Maddow. The judge concluded that Maddow was far too silly to be taken as a credible news source.
The lawsuit against Maddow was brought by OANN, a news network that Maddow falsely accused on her show as being controlled by the Kremlin.
For the lawsuit to go forward, OANN would had to have shown that Maddow’s show stated facts rather than opinions.
In court Maddow’s lawyer argued that her show was one of “quintessential statements of rhetorical hyperbole, incapable of being proved true or false.” John Nolte called Maddow’s lawyer’s claim “the Alex Jones defense,” although comparing Maddow to Jones is an insult to Jones in light of the Russigate and Avenatti hoaxers Maddow perpetrated.
In any event, the court agreed with Maddow’s lawyers. The defamation claim was dismissed because Maddow’s show is one of “opinion and rhetorical hyperbole,” and Maddow engages in an “exaggeration of the facts.”
If you think I’m exaggerating, read the full ruling.
The judge himself seemed to think Maddow is a silly teenager rather than an actual reporter, as he highlights her show uses terms like “sparkly” and “giblet.” The judge also found it compelling that Maddow moved her head in goofy ways.
Maddow’s win is America’s gain.
No one can credibly claim that Maddow’s show is real news.
Defamation Lawsuit Against Maddow DISMISSED? Lawyer Explains – Viva Frei Vlawg
Susan Rice Sent Herself a Cover Your Butt Memo re General Flynn Unmasking
Susan Rice, the former National Security Adviser under Obama, was so unconcerned with the unmasking going on under her watch that she did what all innocent people do. She sent herself a Memo to Self.
This Memo to self contained this hilarious line:
- President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by Intelligence and law enforcement communities “by the book.”
Disgraced former FBI Director James Comey also suggested withholding information about Russia to the incoming National Security Adviser.
— Brooke Singman (@BrookeSingman) May 19, 2020
CBS reporter Catherine Herridge has the full memo to self here.
— Catherine Herridge (@CBS_Herridge) May 19, 2020