Unsealed FISA court ruling shows 85% of Obama's FBI and DOJ 704-5 FISA searches were illegal prov...

[MindWars]

Unsealed FISA Court Ruling Shows 85% of Obama’s FBI and DOJ 704-5 FISA Searches Were Illegal and Illegally Provided to Government Outsiders - Tea Party News
(Gateway Pundit) – A Report was released in April of 2017 that received no publicity until recently.

The report was a ruling on the results of an investigation or audit into FISA searches made by Obama’s FBI and DOJ during Obama’s time in office.

The report shows Obama’s FBI and DOJ participated in widespread criminal searches and criminal sharing of data with non authorized entities outside of government.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would be a day to celebrate if we could actually put this pos most hated President in history behind bars. We know that won't happen though because everyone up in the Elite league don't get sentenced , prosecuted they area all related they all run the show so they always cover up for each other.

But oh if you or I did even one thing these losers have done we would be looking at the death pentality.

Why Chelsea Manning was Obama's pawn they didn't just let her go for the hell of it.

 

[Skylar]

Unsealed FISA Court Ruling Shows 85% of Obama’s FBI and DOJ 704-5 FISA Searches Were Illegal and Illegally Provided to Government Outsiders - Tea Party News
(Gateway Pundit) – A Report was released in April of 2017 that received no publicity until recently.

The report was a ruling on the results of an investigation or audit into FISA searches made by Obama’s FBI and DOJ during Obama’s time in office.

The report shows Obama’s FBI and DOJ participated in widespread criminal searches and criminal sharing of data with non authorized entities outside of government.

View attachment 174224
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would be a day to celebrate if we could actually put this pos most hated President in history behind bars. We know that won't happen though because everyone up in the Elite league don't get sentenced , prosecuted they area all related they all run the show so they always cover up for each other.

But oh if you or I did even one thing these losers have done we would be looking at the death pentality.

Why Chelsea Manning was Obama's pawn they didn't just let her go for the hell of it.

Laughing....wait, isn't this this court ruling from April of 2017 that last week you were insisting was the secret 'Nunes memo' being released by Alex Jones live?

Its like watching a dog chasing its own tail.

 

[Jackson]

I wouldn't be surprised if this was true, but I need a better link.

 

[MindWars]

The dirt is coming out on this POS loser....

Former Secret Service Agent: FISA Memo will Implicate Obama!

 

[MindWars]

I wouldn't be surprised if this was true, but I need a better link.

Sorry for Obama' lovers there is never a better link.

 

[MindWars]

Narrative shift QAnon is signaling the narrative will
shift once the “Nunes Memo” from the
House Intelligence committee is made public.The memo is expected to reveal the
coup d’état conspiracy within the DOJ
and FBI that extended to Hillary
Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign

TOP SEC CLEARANCE IS MANDATORY FOR ADMISSION
–
HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE?QAnon suggests the Obama/Hillaryconspirators continue to exert power inthe Capital, extending to the ability to
gain access to the SCIF for “outsidecontractors” lacking the required
national security clearance to beadmitted.The outside contractors, unidentified by QAnon, may have included MSMcontracted to the CIA in OperationMockingbird
–
the covert arrangementin which the CIA pays supposedlyindependent journalists to publishunder their by-lines what amounts toCIA talking points.WE SEE YOU. QAnon wants to make the point thatthe Obama/Clinton conspirators areunder national security surveillance.If QAnon is military intelligence[Army], as we suspect, this suggestsPresident Trump may be exertingmilitary powers under a nationalsecurity emergency declaration.

Qanon Decode Multiple Posts Mon Tues Jan 29 & 30 Vers 15.0 Narrative Shifts completed Jan. 31, 2018 JEROME CORSI | Federal Bureau Of Investigation | Wiki Leaks


Some more dirt on the POS CLINTON's and OBAMA . lol

 

[depotoo]

I wouldn't be surprised if this was true, but I need a better link.

I remember something similar. Will try to locate it.

 

[MindWars]

I wouldn't be surprised if this was true, but I need a better link.

I remember something similar. Will try to locate it.

Watch the spin put on it. Any ole source doesn't make it case solid.

 

[Care4all]

THIS explains more....! Plus, there is a link to the original FISA ruling top secret leaked document is in the article...


National
Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens
By Tim Johnson

[email protected]

May 26, 2017 06:37 PM

Updated May 26, 2017 05:37 PM

WASHINGTON
U.S. intelligence agencies conducted illegal surveillance on American citizens over a five-year period, a practice that earned them a sharp rebuke from a secret court that called the matter a “very serious” constitutional issue.

The criticism is in a lengthy secret ruling that lays bare some of the frictions between the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and U.S. intelligence agencies obligated to obtain the court’s approval for surveillance activities.

The ruling, dated April 26 and bearing the label “top secret,” was obtained and published Thursday by the news site Circa.

It is rare that such rulings see the light of day, and the lengthy unraveling of issues in the 99-page document opens a window on how the secret federal court oversees surveillance activities and seeks to curtail those that it deems overstep legal authority.

The document, signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, said the court had learned in a notice filed Oct. 26, 2016, that National Security Agency analysts had been conducting prohibited queries of databases “with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the court.”

It said a judge chastised the NSA’s inspector general and Office of Compliance for Operations for an “institutional ‘lack of candor’ ” for failing to inform the court. It described the matter as “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and is a constitutional bedrock protection against intrusion.

Parts of the ruling were redacted, including sections that give an indication of the extent of the illegal surveillance, which the NSA told the court in a Jan. 3 notice was partly the fault of “human error” and “system design issues” rather than intentional illegal searches.

The NSA inspector general’s office tallied up the number of prohibited searches conducted in a three-month period in 2015, but the number of analysts who made the searches and the number of queries were blacked out in the ruling.

The NSA gathers communications in ways known as “upstream” and “downstream” collection. Upstream collection occurs when data are captured as they move through massive data highways – the internet backbone – within the United States. Downstream collection occurs as data move outside the country along fiber optic cables and satellite links.

Data captured from both upstream and downstream sources are stored in massive databases, available to be searched when analysts need to, often months or as much as two years after the captures took place.

The prohibited searches the court mentioned involved NSA queries into the upstream databanks, which constitute a fraction of all the data NSA captures around the globe but are more likely to contain the emails and phone calls of people in the United States.

Federal law empowers the NSA and CIA to battle foreign terrorist actions against the United States by collecting the electronic communications of targets believed to be outside the country. While communications of U.S. citizens or residents may get hoovered up in such sweeps, they are considered “incidental” and must be “minimized” – removing the identities of Americans – before broader distribution.

The court filing noted an NSA decision March 30 to narrow collection of “upstream” data within the United States. Under that decision, the NSA acknowledged that it had erred in sweeping up the communications of U.S. citizens or residents but said those errors “were not willful.” Even so, the NSA said it would no longer collect certain kinds of data known as “about” communications, in which a U.S. citizen was merely mentioned.

The NSA announced that change publicly on April 28, two days after the court ruling, saying the agency would limit its sweeps to communications either directly to or from a foreign intelligence target. That change would reduce “the likelihood that NSA will acquire communications of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with one of the agency’s foreign intelligence targets.”

The court document also criticized the FBI’s distribution of intelligence data, saying it had disclosed raw surveillance data to sectors of its bureaucracy “largely staffed by private contractors.”

The “contractors had access to raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to the FBI’s requests,” it said, adding that the bureau discontinued the practice on April 18, 2016.


Read more here: Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens

 

[Skylar]

Narrative shift QAnon is signaling the narrative will
shift once the “Nunes Memo” from the
House Intelligence committee is made public.The memo is expected to reveal the
coup d’état conspiracy within the DOJ
and FBI that extended to Hillary
Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign

TOP SEC CLEARANCE IS MANDATORY FOR ADMISSION
–
HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE?QAnon suggests the Obama/Hillaryconspirators continue to exert power inthe Capital, extending to the ability to
gain access to the SCIF for “outsidecontractors” lacking the required
national security clearance to beadmitted.The outside contractors, unidentified by QAnon, may have included MSMcontracted to the CIA in OperationMockingbird
–
the covert arrangementin which the CIA pays supposedlyindependent journalists to publishunder their by-lines what amounts toCIA talking points.WE SEE YOU. QAnon wants to make the point thatthe Obama/Clinton conspirators areunder national security surveillance.If QAnon is military intelligence[Army], as we suspect, this suggestsPresident Trump may be exertingmilitary powers under a nationalsecurity emergency declaration.

Qanon Decode Multiple Posts Mon Tues Jan 29 & 30 Vers 15.0 Narrative Shifts completed Jan. 31, 2018 JEROME CORSI | Federal Bureau Of Investigation | Wiki Leaks


Some more dirt on the POS CLINTON's and OBAMA . lol

I wouldn't be surprised if this was true, but I need a better link.

I remember something similar. Will try to locate it.

Watch the spin put on it. Any ole source doesn't make it case solid.

Your source is infowars and an anonymous blogger. The very court case you're offering us in this thread you insisted was Nunes' 'secret memo' only last week.....because Alex Jones told you it was.

You're clearly having serious problems with sources.

 

[Skylar]

THIS explains more....! Plus, there is a link to the original FISA ruling top secret leaked document is in the article...


National
Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens
By Tim Johnson

[email protected]

May 26, 2017 06:37 PM

Updated May 26, 2017 05:37 PM

WASHINGTON
U.S. intelligence agencies conducted illegal surveillance on American citizens over a five-year period, a practice that earned them a sharp rebuke from a secret court that called the matter a “very serious” constitutional issue.

The criticism is in a lengthy secret ruling that lays bare some of the frictions between the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and U.S. intelligence agencies obligated to obtain the court’s approval for surveillance activities.

The ruling, dated April 26 and bearing the label “top secret,” was obtained and published Thursday by the news site Circa.

It is rare that such rulings see the light of day, and the lengthy unraveling of issues in the 99-page document opens a window on how the secret federal court oversees surveillance activities and seeks to curtail those that it deems overstep legal authority.

The document, signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, said the court had learned in a notice filed Oct. 26, 2016, that National Security Agency analysts had been conducting prohibited queries of databases “with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the court.”

It said a judge chastised the NSA’s inspector general and Office of Compliance for Operations for an “institutional ‘lack of candor’ ” for failing to inform the court. It described the matter as “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and is a constitutional bedrock protection against intrusion.

Parts of the ruling were redacted, including sections that give an indication of the extent of the illegal surveillance, which the NSA told the court in a Jan. 3 notice was partly the fault of “human error” and “system design issues” rather than intentional illegal searches.

The NSA inspector general’s office tallied up the number of prohibited searches conducted in a three-month period in 2015, but the number of analysts who made the searches and the number of queries were blacked out in the ruling.

The NSA gathers communications in ways known as “upstream” and “downstream” collection. Upstream collection occurs when data are captured as they move through massive data highways – the internet backbone – within the United States. Downstream collection occurs as data move outside the country along fiber optic cables and satellite links.

Data captured from both upstream and downstream sources are stored in massive databases, available to be searched when analysts need to, often months or as much as two years after the captures took place.

The prohibited searches the court mentioned involved NSA queries into the upstream databanks, which constitute a fraction of all the data NSA captures around the globe but are more likely to contain the emails and phone calls of people in the United States.

Federal law empowers the NSA and CIA to battle foreign terrorist actions against the United States by collecting the electronic communications of targets believed to be outside the country. While communications of U.S. citizens or residents may get hoovered up in such sweeps, they are considered “incidental” and must be “minimized” – removing the identities of Americans – before broader distribution.

The court filing noted an NSA decision March 30 to narrow collection of “upstream” data within the United States. Under that decision, the NSA acknowledged that it had erred in sweeping up the communications of U.S. citizens or residents but said those errors “were not willful.” Even so, the NSA said it would no longer collect certain kinds of data known as “about” communications, in which a U.S. citizen was merely mentioned.

The NSA announced that change publicly on April 28, two days after the court ruling, saying the agency would limit its sweeps to communications either directly to or from a foreign intelligence target. That change would reduce “the likelihood that NSA will acquire communications of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with one of the agency’s foreign intelligence targets.”

The court document also criticized the FBI’s distribution of intelligence data, saying it had disclosed raw surveillance data to sectors of its bureaucracy “largely staffed by private contractors.”

The “contractors had access to raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to the FBI’s requests,” it said, adding that the bureau discontinued the practice on April 18, 2016.


Read more here: Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens

McClatchy reported this last year.

 

[MindWars]

Isn't this interesting his EXEMPT Tax form

Barack Obama Foundation Irs Form 990 2014 | Irs Tax Forms | Tax Refund

 

[Care4all]

THIS explains more....! Plus, there is a link to the original FISA ruling top secret leaked document is in the article...


National
Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens
By Tim Johnson

[email protected]

May 26, 2017 06:37 PM

Updated May 26, 2017 05:37 PM

WASHINGTON
U.S. intelligence agencies conducted illegal surveillance on American citizens over a five-year period, a practice that earned them a sharp rebuke from a secret court that called the matter a “very serious” constitutional issue.

The criticism is in a lengthy secret ruling that lays bare some of the frictions between the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and U.S. intelligence agencies obligated to obtain the court’s approval for surveillance activities.

The ruling, dated April 26 and bearing the label “top secret,” was obtained and published Thursday by the news site Circa.

It is rare that such rulings see the light of day, and the lengthy unraveling of issues in the 99-page document opens a window on how the secret federal court oversees surveillance activities and seeks to curtail those that it deems overstep legal authority.

The document, signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, said the court had learned in a notice filed Oct. 26, 2016, that National Security Agency analysts had been conducting prohibited queries of databases “with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the court.”

It said a judge chastised the NSA’s inspector general and Office of Compliance for Operations for an “institutional ‘lack of candor’ ” for failing to inform the court. It described the matter as “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and is a constitutional bedrock protection against intrusion.

Parts of the ruling were redacted, including sections that give an indication of the extent of the illegal surveillance, which the NSA told the court in a Jan. 3 notice was partly the fault of “human error” and “system design issues” rather than intentional illegal searches.

The NSA inspector general’s office tallied up the number of prohibited searches conducted in a three-month period in 2015, but the number of analysts who made the searches and the number of queries were blacked out in the ruling.

The NSA gathers communications in ways known as “upstream” and “downstream” collection. Upstream collection occurs when data are captured as they move through massive data highways – the internet backbone – within the United States. Downstream collection occurs as data move outside the country along fiber optic cables and satellite links.

Data captured from both upstream and downstream sources are stored in massive databases, available to be searched when analysts need to, often months or as much as two years after the captures took place.

The prohibited searches the court mentioned involved NSA queries into the upstream databanks, which constitute a fraction of all the data NSA captures around the globe but are more likely to contain the emails and phone calls of people in the United States.

Federal law empowers the NSA and CIA to battle foreign terrorist actions against the United States by collecting the electronic communications of targets believed to be outside the country. While communications of U.S. citizens or residents may get hoovered up in such sweeps, they are considered “incidental” and must be “minimized” – removing the identities of Americans – before broader distribution.

The court filing noted an NSA decision March 30 to narrow collection of “upstream” data within the United States. Under that decision, the NSA acknowledged that it had erred in sweeping up the communications of U.S. citizens or residents but said those errors “were not willful.” Even so, the NSA said it would no longer collect certain kinds of data known as “about” communications, in which a U.S. citizen was merely mentioned.

The NSA announced that change publicly on April 28, two days after the court ruling, saying the agency would limit its sweeps to communications either directly to or from a foreign intelligence target. That change would reduce “the likelihood that NSA will acquire communications of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with one of the agency’s foreign intelligence targets.”

The court document also criticized the FBI’s distribution of intelligence data, saying it had disclosed raw surveillance data to sectors of its bureaucracy “largely staffed by private contractors.”

The “contractors had access to raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to the FBI’s requests,” it said, adding that the bureau discontinued the practice on April 18, 2016.


Read more here: Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens

McClatchy reported this last year.

A lot of sources reported on it last year....my article is from May 2017

But the whole review of the situation was all under the Obama administration....meaning, they had a review of, themselves....

it was not the Trump admin, or Nunes etc that forced this review by the FISA judge....they were nowhere around at the time....

And the review was for a 5 year period.

 

[Skylar]

THIS explains more....! Plus, there is a link to the original FISA ruling top secret leaked document is in the article...


National
Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens
By Tim Johnson

[email protected]

May 26, 2017 06:37 PM

Updated May 26, 2017 05:37 PM

WASHINGTON
U.S. intelligence agencies conducted illegal surveillance on American citizens over a five-year period, a practice that earned them a sharp rebuke from a secret court that called the matter a “very serious” constitutional issue.

The criticism is in a lengthy secret ruling that lays bare some of the frictions between the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and U.S. intelligence agencies obligated to obtain the court’s approval for surveillance activities.

The ruling, dated April 26 and bearing the label “top secret,” was obtained and published Thursday by the news site Circa.

It is rare that such rulings see the light of day, and the lengthy unraveling of issues in the 99-page document opens a window on how the secret federal court oversees surveillance activities and seeks to curtail those that it deems overstep legal authority.

The document, signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, said the court had learned in a notice filed Oct. 26, 2016, that National Security Agency analysts had been conducting prohibited queries of databases “with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the court.”

It said a judge chastised the NSA’s inspector general and Office of Compliance for Operations for an “institutional ‘lack of candor’ ” for failing to inform the court. It described the matter as “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and is a constitutional bedrock protection against intrusion.

Parts of the ruling were redacted, including sections that give an indication of the extent of the illegal surveillance, which the NSA told the court in a Jan. 3 notice was partly the fault of “human error” and “system design issues” rather than intentional illegal searches.

The NSA inspector general’s office tallied up the number of prohibited searches conducted in a three-month period in 2015, but the number of analysts who made the searches and the number of queries were blacked out in the ruling.

The NSA gathers communications in ways known as “upstream” and “downstream” collection. Upstream collection occurs when data are captured as they move through massive data highways – the internet backbone – within the United States. Downstream collection occurs as data move outside the country along fiber optic cables and satellite links.

Data captured from both upstream and downstream sources are stored in massive databases, available to be searched when analysts need to, often months or as much as two years after the captures took place.

The prohibited searches the court mentioned involved NSA queries into the upstream databanks, which constitute a fraction of all the data NSA captures around the globe but are more likely to contain the emails and phone calls of people in the United States.

Federal law empowers the NSA and CIA to battle foreign terrorist actions against the United States by collecting the electronic communications of targets believed to be outside the country. While communications of U.S. citizens or residents may get hoovered up in such sweeps, they are considered “incidental” and must be “minimized” – removing the identities of Americans – before broader distribution.

The court filing noted an NSA decision March 30 to narrow collection of “upstream” data within the United States. Under that decision, the NSA acknowledged that it had erred in sweeping up the communications of U.S. citizens or residents but said those errors “were not willful.” Even so, the NSA said it would no longer collect certain kinds of data known as “about” communications, in which a U.S. citizen was merely mentioned.

The NSA announced that change publicly on April 28, two days after the court ruling, saying the agency would limit its sweeps to communications either directly to or from a foreign intelligence target. That change would reduce “the likelihood that NSA will acquire communications of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with one of the agency’s foreign intelligence targets.”

The court document also criticized the FBI’s distribution of intelligence data, saying it had disclosed raw surveillance data to sectors of its bureaucracy “largely staffed by private contractors.”

The “contractors had access to raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to the FBI’s requests,” it said, adding that the bureau discontinued the practice on April 18, 2016.


Read more here: Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens

McClatchy reported this last year.

A lot of sources reported on it last year....my article is from May 2017

But the whole review of the situation was all under the Obama administration....meaning, they had a review of, themselves....

it was not the Trump admin, or Nunes etc that forced this review by the FISA judge....they were nowhere around at the time....

And the review was for a 5 year period.

Yup. MW has egg all over his face. Which is why he's now spamming irrelevant documents.

Just last week he informed us that Alex Jones was releasing the secret 4 page 'Nunes memo' on the Infowars website. What was actually released was this exact 99 page court ruling from April of last year that was public.

The only part of "The Secret Memo" that MW got right.....was "The"

 

[MindWars]

Another good statement on O moron



FBI Director Wray “Shocked To His Core” By FISA Memo, McCabe ‘Removed’ Next Day, More Heads To Roll: Report

 

[depotoo]

This first page mentions 85% during a set period were non-compliant

From the actual report, much of which is redacted
https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf

 

[depotoo]

See post #16

THIS explains more....! Plus, there is a link to the original FISA ruling top secret leaked document is in the article...


National
Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens
By Tim Johnson

[email protected]

May 26, 2017 06:37 PM

Updated May 26, 2017 05:37 PM

WASHINGTON
U.S. intelligence agencies conducted illegal surveillance on American citizens over a five-year period, a practice that earned them a sharp rebuke from a secret court that called the matter a “very serious” constitutional issue.

The criticism is in a lengthy secret ruling that lays bare some of the frictions between the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and U.S. intelligence agencies obligated to obtain the court’s approval for surveillance activities.

The ruling, dated April 26 and bearing the label “top secret,” was obtained and published Thursday by the news site Circa.

It is rare that such rulings see the light of day, and the lengthy unraveling of issues in the 99-page document opens a window on how the secret federal court oversees surveillance activities and seeks to curtail those that it deems overstep legal authority.

The document, signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, said the court had learned in a notice filed Oct. 26, 2016, that National Security Agency analysts had been conducting prohibited queries of databases “with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the court.”

It said a judge chastised the NSA’s inspector general and Office of Compliance for Operations for an “institutional ‘lack of candor’ ” for failing to inform the court. It described the matter as “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and is a constitutional bedrock protection against intrusion.

Parts of the ruling were redacted, including sections that give an indication of the extent of the illegal surveillance, which the NSA told the court in a Jan. 3 notice was partly the fault of “human error” and “system design issues” rather than intentional illegal searches.

The NSA inspector general’s office tallied up the number of prohibited searches conducted in a three-month period in 2015, but the number of analysts who made the searches and the number of queries were blacked out in the ruling.

The NSA gathers communications in ways known as “upstream” and “downstream” collection. Upstream collection occurs when data are captured as they move through massive data highways – the internet backbone – within the United States. Downstream collection occurs as data move outside the country along fiber optic cables and satellite links.

Data captured from both upstream and downstream sources are stored in massive databases, available to be searched when analysts need to, often months or as much as two years after the captures took place.

The prohibited searches the court mentioned involved NSA queries into the upstream databanks, which constitute a fraction of all the data NSA captures around the globe but are more likely to contain the emails and phone calls of people in the United States.

Federal law empowers the NSA and CIA to battle foreign terrorist actions against the United States by collecting the electronic communications of targets believed to be outside the country. While communications of U.S. citizens or residents may get hoovered up in such sweeps, they are considered “incidental” and must be “minimized” – removing the identities of Americans – before broader distribution.

The court filing noted an NSA decision March 30 to narrow collection of “upstream” data within the United States. Under that decision, the NSA acknowledged that it had erred in sweeping up the communications of U.S. citizens or residents but said those errors “were not willful.” Even so, the NSA said it would no longer collect certain kinds of data known as “about” communications, in which a U.S. citizen was merely mentioned.

The NSA announced that change publicly on April 28, two days after the court ruling, saying the agency would limit its sweeps to communications either directly to or from a foreign intelligence target. That change would reduce “the likelihood that NSA will acquire communications of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with one of the agency’s foreign intelligence targets.”

The court document also criticized the FBI’s distribution of intelligence data, saying it had disclosed raw surveillance data to sectors of its bureaucracy “largely staffed by private contractors.”

The “contractors had access to raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to the FBI’s requests,” it said, adding that the bureau discontinued the practice on April 18, 2016.


Read more here: Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens

McClatchy reported this last year.

A lot of sources reported on it last year....my article is from May 2017

But the whole review of the situation was all under the Obama administration....meaning, they had a review of, themselves....

it was not the Trump admin, or Nunes etc that forced this review by the FISA judge....they were nowhere around at the time....

And the review was for a 5 year period.

Yup. MW has egg all over his face. Which is why he's now spamming irrelevant documents.

Just last week he informed us that Alex Jones was releasing the secret 4 page 'Nunes memo' on the Infowars website. What was actually released was this exact 99 page court ruling from April of last year that was public.

The only part of "The Secret Memo" that MW got right.....was "The"

 

[Skylar]

See post #16

THIS explains more....! Plus, there is a link to the original FISA ruling top secret leaked document is in the article...


National
Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens
By Tim Johnson

[email protected]

May 26, 2017 06:37 PM

Updated May 26, 2017 05:37 PM

WASHINGTON
U.S. intelligence agencies conducted illegal surveillance on American citizens over a five-year period, a practice that earned them a sharp rebuke from a secret court that called the matter a “very serious” constitutional issue.

The criticism is in a lengthy secret ruling that lays bare some of the frictions between the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and U.S. intelligence agencies obligated to obtain the court’s approval for surveillance activities.

The ruling, dated April 26 and bearing the label “top secret,” was obtained and published Thursday by the news site Circa.

It is rare that such rulings see the light of day, and the lengthy unraveling of issues in the 99-page document opens a window on how the secret federal court oversees surveillance activities and seeks to curtail those that it deems overstep legal authority.

The document, signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, said the court had learned in a notice filed Oct. 26, 2016, that National Security Agency analysts had been conducting prohibited queries of databases “with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the court.”

It said a judge chastised the NSA’s inspector general and Office of Compliance for Operations for an “institutional ‘lack of candor’ ” for failing to inform the court. It described the matter as “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and is a constitutional bedrock protection against intrusion.

Parts of the ruling were redacted, including sections that give an indication of the extent of the illegal surveillance, which the NSA told the court in a Jan. 3 notice was partly the fault of “human error” and “system design issues” rather than intentional illegal searches.

The NSA inspector general’s office tallied up the number of prohibited searches conducted in a three-month period in 2015, but the number of analysts who made the searches and the number of queries were blacked out in the ruling.

The NSA gathers communications in ways known as “upstream” and “downstream” collection. Upstream collection occurs when data are captured as they move through massive data highways – the internet backbone – within the United States. Downstream collection occurs as data move outside the country along fiber optic cables and satellite links.

Data captured from both upstream and downstream sources are stored in massive databases, available to be searched when analysts need to, often months or as much as two years after the captures took place.

The prohibited searches the court mentioned involved NSA queries into the upstream databanks, which constitute a fraction of all the data NSA captures around the globe but are more likely to contain the emails and phone calls of people in the United States.

Federal law empowers the NSA and CIA to battle foreign terrorist actions against the United States by collecting the electronic communications of targets believed to be outside the country. While communications of U.S. citizens or residents may get hoovered up in such sweeps, they are considered “incidental” and must be “minimized” – removing the identities of Americans – before broader distribution.

The court filing noted an NSA decision March 30 to narrow collection of “upstream” data within the United States. Under that decision, the NSA acknowledged that it had erred in sweeping up the communications of U.S. citizens or residents but said those errors “were not willful.” Even so, the NSA said it would no longer collect certain kinds of data known as “about” communications, in which a U.S. citizen was merely mentioned.

The NSA announced that change publicly on April 28, two days after the court ruling, saying the agency would limit its sweeps to communications either directly to or from a foreign intelligence target. That change would reduce “the likelihood that NSA will acquire communications of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with one of the agency’s foreign intelligence targets.”

The court document also criticized the FBI’s distribution of intelligence data, saying it had disclosed raw surveillance data to sectors of its bureaucracy “largely staffed by private contractors.”

The “contractors had access to raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to the FBI’s requests,” it said, adding that the bureau discontinued the practice on April 18, 2016.


Read more here: Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens

McClatchy reported this last year.

A lot of sources reported on it last year....my article is from May 2017

But the whole review of the situation was all under the Obama administration....meaning, they had a review of, themselves....

it was not the Trump admin, or Nunes etc that forced this review by the FISA judge....they were nowhere around at the time....

And the review was for a 5 year period.

Yup. MW has egg all over his face. Which is why he's now spamming irrelevant documents.

Just last week he informed us that Alex Jones was releasing the secret 4 page 'Nunes memo' on the Infowars website. What was actually released was this exact 99 page court ruling from April of last year that was public.

The only part of "The Secret Memo" that MW got right.....was "The"

Again, this court ruling was released in April of 2017. It is neither the Nunes Memo nor is it secret. But instead a public court document that was discussed extensively in the media last year.

 

[depotoo]

This is evidence of abuses going on for quite some time. And which occurred within the same time of the fisa’s acquired within the memo.
If you don’t think this is important, just because of the date, just because it isn’t directly related to the memo, what can I say?

See post #16

THIS explains more....! Plus, there is a link to the original FISA ruling top secret leaked document is in the article...


National
Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens
By Tim Johnson

[email protected]

May 26, 2017 06:37 PM

Updated May 26, 2017 05:37 PM

WASHINGTON
U.S. intelligence agencies conducted illegal surveillance on American citizens over a five-year period, a practice that earned them a sharp rebuke from a secret court that called the matter a “very serious” constitutional issue.

The criticism is in a lengthy secret ruling that lays bare some of the frictions between the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and U.S. intelligence agencies obligated to obtain the court’s approval for surveillance activities.

The ruling, dated April 26 and bearing the label “top secret,” was obtained and published Thursday by the news site Circa.

It is rare that such rulings see the light of day, and the lengthy unraveling of issues in the 99-page document opens a window on how the secret federal court oversees surveillance activities and seeks to curtail those that it deems overstep legal authority.

The document, signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, said the court had learned in a notice filed Oct. 26, 2016, that National Security Agency analysts had been conducting prohibited queries of databases “with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the court.”

It said a judge chastised the NSA’s inspector general and Office of Compliance for Operations for an “institutional ‘lack of candor’ ” for failing to inform the court. It described the matter as “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and is a constitutional bedrock protection against intrusion.

Parts of the ruling were redacted, including sections that give an indication of the extent of the illegal surveillance, which the NSA told the court in a Jan. 3 notice was partly the fault of “human error” and “system design issues” rather than intentional illegal searches.

The NSA inspector general’s office tallied up the number of prohibited searches conducted in a three-month period in 2015, but the number of analysts who made the searches and the number of queries were blacked out in the ruling.

The NSA gathers communications in ways known as “upstream” and “downstream” collection. Upstream collection occurs when data are captured as they move through massive data highways – the internet backbone – within the United States. Downstream collection occurs as data move outside the country along fiber optic cables and satellite links.

Data captured from both upstream and downstream sources are stored in massive databases, available to be searched when analysts need to, often months or as much as two years after the captures took place.

The prohibited searches the court mentioned involved NSA queries into the upstream databanks, which constitute a fraction of all the data NSA captures around the globe but are more likely to contain the emails and phone calls of people in the United States.

Federal law empowers the NSA and CIA to battle foreign terrorist actions against the United States by collecting the electronic communications of targets believed to be outside the country. While communications of U.S. citizens or residents may get hoovered up in such sweeps, they are considered “incidental” and must be “minimized” – removing the identities of Americans – before broader distribution.

The court filing noted an NSA decision March 30 to narrow collection of “upstream” data within the United States. Under that decision, the NSA acknowledged that it had erred in sweeping up the communications of U.S. citizens or residents but said those errors “were not willful.” Even so, the NSA said it would no longer collect certain kinds of data known as “about” communications, in which a U.S. citizen was merely mentioned.

The NSA announced that change publicly on April 28, two days after the court ruling, saying the agency would limit its sweeps to communications either directly to or from a foreign intelligence target. That change would reduce “the likelihood that NSA will acquire communications of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with one of the agency’s foreign intelligence targets.”

The court document also criticized the FBI’s distribution of intelligence data, saying it had disclosed raw surveillance data to sectors of its bureaucracy “largely staffed by private contractors.”

The “contractors had access to raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to the FBI’s requests,” it said, adding that the bureau discontinued the practice on April 18, 2016.


Read more here: Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens

McClatchy reported this last year.

A lot of sources reported on it last year....my article is from May 2017

But the whole review of the situation was all under the Obama administration....meaning, they had a review of, themselves....

it was not the Trump admin, or Nunes etc that forced this review by the FISA judge....they were nowhere around at the time....

And the review was for a 5 year period.

Yup. MW has egg all over his face. Which is why he's now spamming irrelevant documents.

Just last week he informed us that Alex Jones was releasing the secret 4 page 'Nunes memo' on the Infowars website. What was actually released was this exact 99 page court ruling from April of last year that was public.

The only part of "The Secret Memo" that MW got right.....was "The"

Again, this court ruling was released in April of 2017. It is neither the Nunes Memo nor is it secret. But instead a public court document that was discussed extensively in the media last year.

 

[Skylar]

This is evidence of abuses going on for quite some time. And which occurred within the same time of the fisa’s acquired within the memo.
If you don’t think this is important, just because of the date, just because it isn’t directly related to the memo, what can I say?

See post #16

McClatchy reported this last year.

A lot of sources reported on it last year....my article is from May 2017

But the whole review of the situation was all under the Obama administration....meaning, they had a review of, themselves....

it was not the Trump admin, or Nunes etc that forced this review by the FISA judge....they were nowhere around at the time....

And the review was for a 5 year period.

Yup. MW has egg all over his face. Which is why he's now spamming irrelevant documents.

Just last week he informed us that Alex Jones was releasing the secret 4 page 'Nunes memo' on the Infowars website. What was actually released was this exact 99 page court ruling from April of last year that was public.

The only part of "The Secret Memo" that MW got right.....was "The"

Again, this court ruling was released in April of 2017. It is neither the Nunes Memo nor is it secret. But instead a public court document that was discussed extensively in the media last year.

It is not the same time period. The time period in question is 2015. It has absolutely nothing to do with the Nunes Memo.

MW fraudulently claimed this 99 public court ruling from last year WAS the 4 page secret Nunes memo.