Was a FISA warrant issued last year or not?

[B2G]

I've read conflicting accounts here. I remember this being widely reported in November regarding a server. Clinton even tweeted about it at the end of October.

So is that warrant not being questioned? I'm getting confused...

[KittyWampus]

1. Clapper said not for Trump Tower. But yes, for others. But we don't know except for Flynn.

[B2G]

2. But wasn't the server IN Trump Tower? nt

[MineralMan]

5. They'd monitor the server on the other end, not the one in

Trump Tower. That's how it works. If they happen to see communications with a server in Trump Tower, that's OK, because they weren't monitoring all communications from the Trump Tower server.

You can monitor from either the sending or receiving end. It might not seem to make a difference, but it does in a legal sense.

[KittyWampus]

10. The Alfa Bank servers did not need a FISA warrant. The activity was observed remotely.

In that instance, no FISA warrant was even needed. People who understand computers were sending signals and observing what was going on.

My understanding is that they don't have the information that was being sent back and forth between servers.

It's alleged by Trumpland it was just spam.

[Justice]

4. Did Clapper say yes, for others? I didn't hear that - transcript of MTP at link.

“For the part of the national security apparatus that I oversaw as DNI, there was no such wiretap activity mounted against the president-elect at the time, or as a candidate, or against his campaign.”

“I can deny” the existence of any FISA court order for surveillance of Trump Tower, the former director added.

Clapper told Todd that, in the intelligence report released in January concluding Russian interference in the 2016 election, “we had no evidence of such collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia, but “this could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government.”

Clapper left on Jan. 20.

http://www.nbcumv.com/news/mtp-exclusive-fmr-dni-clapper-%E2%80%98no-such-wiretap-activity-mounted-against%E2%80%99-trump-%E2%80%98no-evidence

Is Clapper being "cute" because FISA focused on foreign banks not Trump or his campaign, but if they can prove banks used to contribute Russian money into campaign, would take action against campaigns?

BBC Article says FISA against 2 Russian banks: "On 15 October, the US secret intelligence court issued a warrant to investigate two Russian banks. This news was given to me by several sources and corroborated by someone I will identify only as a senior member of the US intelligence community. He would never volunteer anything - giving up classified information would be illegal - but he would confirm or deny what I had heard from other sources.

Neither Mr Trump nor his associates are named in the Fisa order, which would only cover foreign citizens or foreign entities - in this case the Russian banks. But ultimately, the investigation is looking for transfers of money from Russia to the United States, each one, if proved, a felony offence.

[KittyWampus]

11. No, he didn't say yes for others and wasn't asked this weekend that I know of. And we can parse

what he said. He said Trump Towers was not listened to. But that is real estate/business. It doesn't mean that Trump wasn't.

[MineralMan]

3. No doubt many FISA orders have been issued.

It's just that none of them involved wire-tapping Trump Tower phones. More likely the monitoring of phones was done at the other end of the conversation. As for that server, the same thing would probably apply. The surveillance would be done on the server at the other end of the exchanges.

It's not that easy to get a warrant to tap a U.S. citizen's phone. It's much easier, however, to get a warrant to monitor conversations with some non-citizen by monitoring the non-citizen's phone.

There are thousands and thousands of warrants that do that, I have no doubt. It may seem a technicality, but it's not. If you are monitoring communications of a connection owned by a non-citizen, you are only capturing communications from a US citizen if they contact the monitored connection. Other communications by the US citizen are not monitored. That is how it is usually done.

[jmg257]

6. I'd make this a poll, cause God knows I can't tell anymore. I thought it was a given (BBC Guardian)

But now Clapper says 'no wiretaps for trump/campaign, no FISA court for trump tower'.

"Fake news" indeed.

[B2G]

7. I'd like to hear that from someone other than Clapper.

His track record with the truth isn't the best.

[jmg257]

9. UGH. Was there anyone besides Clapper? Seems so...

Senior law enforcement and intelligence officials who worked in the Obama administration have said that there were no secret intelligence warrants regarding Mr. Trump.

{then goes on about Clapper only}

In addition to being concerned about potential attacks on the bureau’s credibility, senior F.B.I. officials are said to be worried that the notion of a court-approved wiretap will raise the public’s expectations that the federal authorities have significant evidence implicating the Trump campaign in colluding with Russia’s efforts to disrupt the presidential election.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/05/us/politics/trump-seeks-inquiry-into-allegations-that-obama-tapped-his-phones.html?_r=0

[Raine1967]

8. I hope this helps:

https://heatst.com/world/exclusive-fbi-granted-fisa-warrant-covering-trump-camps-ties-to-russia/

The FISA warrant was granted in connection with the investigation of suspected activity between the server and two banks, SVB Bank and Alfa Bank. However, it is thought in the intelligence community that the warrant covers any ‘US person’ connected to this investigation, and thus covers Donald Trump and at least three further men who have either formed part of his campaign or acted as his media surrogates. The warrant was sought, they say, because actionable intelligence on the matter provided by friendly foreign agencies could not properly be examined without a warrant by US intelligence as it involves ‘US Persons’ who come under the remit of the FBI and not the CIA. Should a counter-intelligence investigation lead to criminal prosecutions, sources say, the Justice Department is concerned that the chain of evidence have a basis in a clear warrant.

In June, when the first FISA warrant was denied, the FBI was reportedly alarmed at Carter Page’s trip to Moscow and meetings with Russian officials, one week before the DNC was hacked. Counter intelligence agencies later reported to both Presidential candidates that Russia had carried out this hack; Donald Trump said publicly in the third debate that ‘our country has no idea’ if Russia did the hacking. The discovery of the Trump Tower private Russian server, however, communicating with Alfa Bank, changed matters, sources report.

Mensch stands by her reporting:

Link to tweet

[MedusaX]

12. Yes but....

This whole Election/ Russia investigation originated in response to the HACKING of DNC ....

Which led to Russia

Which led to Motivation of Russia

Which first was merely "disruption" then escalated to "influence"...
initially purposeful influence against Hillary. ..
then
to the purposeful influence in favor of Trump...,..

and ultimately investigations of possible collusion between Trump campaign & Russian Govt. to influence election outcome


The FISA warrants were issued before the HACKING investigations had arrived at the "Trump collusion" possibility.....
therefore the FISA warrants would not have been issued for the primary purpose of monitoring Trump/Tower...

So if Trump communications were collected it would only be those instances where
Trump / Trump Tower would have either contacted or been contacted by an entity/person for which a FISA warrant had been issued..

Think of it like your phone bill...
If I get a warrant for your phone bill
I can then see all of your incoming & outgoing call information...

Now go one step further...
If I have a warrant to monitor your communications...
by default I am going to have access to both sides of the communication...

When a FISA warrant is granted regarding a foreign entity/individuals "communications"....

it permits the inclusion of any US entities/persons side of the communications which are Collected as part of the communications made by the foreign entity who is the subject of the FISA warrant

Whereas without the FISA ...
the US entities/persons side of the communications collected must be ignored/ removed