re: Steele relied on claims posted by a random person on CNN website to "verify" dossier

quote:

---

It’s like he is forgetting the whole reason the woods procedures were put in place. Mueller got lit up in 2001-2002 for shady fisa practices. The procedures were put in place. They weren’t followed here....and Decatur can’t fathom it’s because of shadiness. Nope. Judges would know. Did judges get smarter since 2001? Because those judges back than sure seemed pissed they didn’t know.

---

quote:

---

All indications are that they were followed.

---

quote:

---

All indications are that they were followed

---

quote:

---

The judges had access to pretty much anything they wanted to support a PC determination, including the Woods file. Their satisfaction is what matters. There is nothing here providing any support to a claim that the judges were misled by the FBI. The three renewals by three additional judges should be a hint that that the FBI put together solid packages. It should also tell you that the surveillance yielded foreign intelligence information.

---

quote:

---

this point I'm not sure how this differs from a textbook case of how the process should work.

---

quote:

---

The third point, and the crux of McCarthy’s argument, is that the FBI did not properly “verify” the information in the application, which is a technical requirement in a FISA application. McCarthy claims that the FBI was not permitted to rely solely on hearsay information provided by Steele, its source of information, but rather was required to test the credibility of, and reliance on, each sub-source who gave information to Steele. But that is simply not what is required in FISA applications (or criminal wiretap applications), and in particular under the Woods Procedures that govern FISA applications. Under FISA, “verification” simply requires both the FBI and lawyers in the Department of Justice to verify that the facts as set forth in the affidavit are supported by evidence obtained as part of the investigation. That does not mean, however, that the FBI is required, for example, to travel to Russia to interview a sub-source to confirm that the sub-source actually did tell Steele what Steele reported to the FBI. That, of course, almost certainly would not be possible. It is therefore not surprising that McCarthy cites no authority for his assertion that such a step is required.

The reason why hearsay information is permitted in warrant applications is simple: It is hard enough for law enforcement to develop sources who can infiltrate criminal organizations or foreign threats to our national security. If the FBI were required to not only learn of the information from its own sources but also confirm that information with the sub-sources, it would not be able to do its job. Instead, the FBI is legally entitled to rely upon the assertions of a previously credible source, such as Steele, in relaying information from other sub-sources to whom the FBI does not have direct access.

---