Photo credit: WND.com

Recently a shocking unsealed FISA report was made public after efforts to keep it hidden from Americans, which shows the Obama Administration was engaged in numerous illegal procedures against citizens of the United States.

The Obama Administration, using both the Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder led Department of Justice perpetuated their cultural marxism through not just indoctrination, but by engaging in enormous amounts of illegal "criminal" searches on Americans, according to<a href="https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf"> the FISA report</a>.

<strong><span style="color:red;">Let's discuss FISA momentarily. What is it? How is it used?</span></strong>

As a United States Federal Law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 establishes procedures for both the physical and electronic surveillance and collection of "foreign intelligence information" between "foreign powers" and "agents of foreign powers" suspected of espionage or terrorism against the United States on behalf of a foreign power.

Requests are then adjudicated by a special eleven-member court which is called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

It's not very often that a President would ask for a FISA surveillance to be committed by his Department of Justice using the FBI, nor is it <i>supposed</i> to spy on Americans outside of extreme cases or serious threats to the nation.

<strong><span style="color:red;">It's not meant to be used on Americans, to begin with, outside of National Security matter, but Obama's DOJ used it for precisely the purpose of trying to rig an election for his successor to be Hillary Clinton.</span></strong>

The<a href="https://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/court2017.html"> FISA Court </a>is made up of eleven judges, the Court of Review is made up of an additional three judges who then examines applications which were denied by the FISA court.

So each of these members also knew of any spying which occurred at the hands of the Obama Administration and told not a soul about this occurring.

Legally,<a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act"> FISA searches can be conducted on any foreign individual </a>without any issues whatsoever. All <i>non-U.S. citizens</i> on the entire planet can be searched twenty-four hours a day, three-hundred-sixty-five days a year. FISA searches on foreign individuals have no restrictions at all unless an American is involved.

<strong><span style="color:red;">Fourth Amendment, as we know, which prevents them from being subject to an illegal search or seizure. </span></strong>

Now, for an <i>American</j> to be under surveillance they're called a <i>"702"</i> or <i>FISA-702</i>. All Americans are protected by<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment"> the Fourth Amendment</a>:

<blockquote>"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."</blockquote>

In short: <b>All searches against Americans must have substantial evidence to support a cause for doing so.</b>

This means in any form of a search, including electronic monitoring. This is considered as spying on an American, and there must be a valid reason for doing so.

If you venture towards "Title III", it specifically states that any monitoring of an American must have a Judicial warrant as well as any search of the FISA database involving any American.

Even if a FISA surveillance of a foreign agent is desired, and it involves an American in any way, a warrant is typically needed as well.

<strong><span style="color:red;">There's a different set of standards needed however, when it's being labeled as a matter of "National Security" to spy on an American. </span></strong>

Now this is where it truly becomes interesting folks, and we have the National Security Agency (NSA) stating the Obama Administration, he would use the DOJ's National Security Division and the FBI's Counterintelligence Division (who focus on National Security) as a premise to violate the rights of Americans.

Take note: Anytime you read the word <b>search</b> from here on, it's meaning is <b>surveillance</b>, and also <b>NGO</b> is a Non Governmental Agency, for those unaware.

The NSA Inspector General released a report, titled the<a href="https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/NSA_IG_Report_1_7_16_ST-15-0002.pdf"> <i>"The Report on the Special Study of NSA Controls to Comply with the FISA Amendments Act §§704 and 705(b) Targeting and Minimization Procedures"</i> </a>back on January 7th of 2016, but it wasn't made public.

Later, on May 10th of 2017, a<a href="https://cryptome.org/2017/09/nsa-oig-fisa-702-jan-2016.pdf"> heavily redacted version </a>(even the first is redacted) was made public, but nobody in the media was made aware that it ever had been released.

In the report, the NSA Inspector General says many Americans had their Fourth Amendment rights violated as per the Obama Administration ordering searches upon them.

<img src="https://media.8ch.net/file_store/9e02528bf7c3bab189055c46078c15c1f14eda195cdcace9399913f897edd706.png" style="max-height:640px;max-width:360px;">

<span style="margin-top:15px;rgba(42,51,6,0.7);font-size:12px;">Credit:<a href="https://cryptome.org/2017/09/nsa-oig-fisa-702-jan-2016.pdf"> NSA Inspector General</a></span>

It specifically states, <b>"We identified [redacted number] queries that were not compliant with FAA §§704 and 705(b)…"</b>

Note the bottom of the image, where you can see <b>"Table 3. Summary of Non-Compliant Queries"</b>, and do your best to ignore the redactions.

<a href="https://www.themarketswork.com/2018/01/15/the-uncovering-section-702-about-queries-independent-contractors-a-new-narrative/"><i>Market Watch</i> </a>explains the factors:

<blockquote>"A "FISA-702(16)" Search Result – would be a search result of the FBI (counter terrorism) database or NSA database that returns an American person as a result of a "To" or "From" (16) type data search."</blockquote>

<blockquote>A "FISA-702(17)" Search Result – would be a search result of the FBI (counter terrorism) database or NSA database that returns an American person (702) as a result of an "ABOUT" (17) type data search.</blockquote>

In layman's terms, both the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation engaged in a reported 5.7% of their total searches, which were in noncompliance, or, <i>illegal</>

5.2% of those illicit searches came from the above-mentioned "ABOUT" section, which means that American citizens were searched by the FBI in violation of their Fourth Amendment rights.

5% of their total searches. That could mean tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of American citizens.

This prompted a <b>full review</b> by the NSA of what exactly was occurring. During the investigation, NSA Director Mike Rogers discovered that the unlawful surveillance was occurring, and be immediately ordered a halt to all activities involving the "ABOUT" query (surveillance of Americans) in mid-2016.

<b>Yes, the NSA were the good guys here.</b>

He then contacted the Department of Justice on October 20th of 2016, just prior to the election, to report these findings to ask why the FBI was undergoing surveillance of Americans unlawfully.

On October 26th of 2016, a compliance officer with the NSA found even more unlawful findings and reported to Rogers about the results.

Six days after speaking to the DOJ, Director Rogers <i>personally</i> went to the FISC court to report these 702(17) findings. It's unclear if he didn't trust the DOJ at that time or not, but we know he personally told the court on October 26th of 2016.

This is literally the weeks leading up to the election folks. The FBI had been undergoing surveillance of Americans (potentially those in the Trump Campaign) illegally.

<b>Who ordered the FBI to do this?</b>

Once Rogers told the court, they </i>immediately</i> investigated the matter themselves.

An unsealed<a href="https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf"> FISA Court Ruling </a>determined that the illegal search queries were occurring far more often than anyone knew.

As it turned out, a shocking 85% (this is more than three-quarters of all of the searches found on Page 82 of the above-unsealed ruling) of all surveillance between November 1st of 2015 and May 1st of 2016 <i>were illegal</i>.

<img src="https://media.8ch.net/file_store/57320d7d47a3e9a82391626b709a11804a15a1c3308f9682f2d59c735fb14b7d.png" style="max-height:640px;max-width:360px;">

<span style="margin-top:15px;rgba(42,51,6,0.7);font-size:12px;">Credit:<a href="https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf"> Unsealed FISA Court Ruling</a></span>

That's an </i>awful lot of crimes</i> having been committed, with <b>85% of the surveillance</b> during that time being illegal.

<strong><span style="color:red;">Example Text</span></strong>

Just who was Barack Obama's FBI and DOJ monitoring? Flynn? Trump's children? Manafort? Trump himself?

The FISA court stated that there was both an institutional <i>"lack of candor"</i> and emphasized that <i>"this is a very serious Fourth Amendment issue"</i>.

I would say so. These were illegal surveillance and everything obtained from them were inadmissible in any case they could have been used in. In fact, it made further investigating useless.

We'd have ended up with a <i>OJ Simpson outcome in trial</i>, even if a crime had been committed. <b>Take note General Michael Flynn…</b> The surveillance used against Flynn was likely illicit in the first place.

It's also important to note that during the months of November of 2015 until the beginning of May of 2016, there's no major terrorism arrests or operations which occurred inside of the United States that I can find which would explain why 85% of the surveillance committed were illegal.

On Page 83 it states <b>FBI had disclosed raw FISA information, including but not limited to Section 702-acquired information, to a</b> [Redacted].

<img src="https://media.8ch.net/file_store/78e68d6f4d295363959e37d8dc83a2a988c4898ce5557236f2e83d27ac725392.png" style="max-height:640px;max-width:360px;">

<span style="margin-top:15px;rgba(42,51,6,0.7);font-size:12px;">Credit:<a href="https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf"> Unsealed FISA Court Ruling</a></span>

Who is the redacted group? Some suggest it's an independent contractor. Others suggest it could be another government agency. Fusion GPS? A Spy? We don't know.

<strong><span style="color:red;">What we do know is the FBI shared some of the information they've obtained with someone, and as you'll read further down, it's not anyone in the government, at least officially.</span></strong>

The lines which followed are also incredibly interesting, and further support the ideas above. Take a look.

<img src="https://media.8ch.net/file_store/5b13e306cfb74b807887483a2fca86c42f73556edeeb359e5a27ebd8236bf2c5.png" style="max-height:640px;max-width:360px;">

<span style="margin-top:15px;rgba(42,51,6,0.7);font-size:12px;">Credit:<a href="https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf"> Unsealed FISA Court Ruling</a></span>

Whoever the FBI shared the information with, is redacted, but it does show the phrase <b>and "is largely staffed with private contractors"</b>.

<strong><span style="color:red;">Just who in the hell has a right to see this data?</span></strong>

<b>The FBI violated American citizens Fourth Amendment rights, to begin with by the illegal surveillance, and then took that raw data and shared it with a third party?</b>

It doesn't matter who they gave access to. <i>It's illegal to do so</i> since the surveillance was illegal in the first place. This is terrifying.

I'm not saying it was Fusion GPS. I'm not saying it was a spy. I don't know who they shared it with and it doesn't matter <i>who</i> or </i>why</i> when it was an illicit surveillance operation(s) in the first place.

The FISA court ruling goes on to say that <b>certain</b> [redacted] <b>contractors had access raw FISA information on FBI storage systems</b>.

That tiny area which is redacted is same enough for the word or title of "Fusion GPS" to fit.

As The Goldwater reported last week, we know that the FBI sent "someone" to Rome to meet with Christopher Steele, which means the<a href="https://thegoldwater.com/news/16336-FBI-Colluding-with-Clinton-Special-Agent-Shared-Russian-Probe-Info-with-Fusion-GPS-Spy-Steele"> FBI was helping the Clinton Campaign </a>directly because the Clinton Campaign paid for Fusion GPS.

<i>Anything is possible.</i> After the insanity of the first year of the Trump Presidency and the revelations we've seen, it certainly seems to suggest Fusion GPS was the firm who the FBI allowed to view their surveillance data.

It goes on to discuss the NSA's examination of the FBI's surveillance. <b>Personnel who worked with the information were "not directly supervised" by or otherwise under the direction and control of</b> [redacted].

<img src="https://media.8ch.net/file_store/cace76f4843f3ec85aaa987108d7e90e580b2e98f0ca0dd6f1b82b73280c06ca.png" style="max-height:640px;max-width:360px;">

<span style="margin-top:15px;rgba(42,51,6,0.7);font-size:12px;">Credit:<a href="https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf"> Unsealed FISA Court Ruling</a></span>

Control of who? Who had the authority to authorize this? Who's over the FBI in which they must answer outside of the DOJ and perhaps the President, Obama?

<strong><span style="color:red;">Is this more of the "Secret Society" discussion? This part I find extremely disturbing. </span></strong>

If you note the end redactions in the above image, it specifically says <b>The FBI had given the information to the private entity</b> [Redacted] <b>, not to an assisting federal agency.</b>

<strong><span style="color:red;">So it wasn't a government agency. The FBI 100% was sharing already illegally obtained surveillance data with a now confirmed NGO.</span></strong>

The FISA court even blasted the FBI for this, although we should similarly be blasting the FISA court for knowing this occurred and doing nothing about it. I genuinely wonder if the judges on the panel are liberals.

<img src="https://media.8ch.net/file_store/aa293616865748ecbf2cea640ba2e999f43ac0b533c27ef467a626e6fbff3d9a.png" style="max-height:640px;max-width:360px;">

<span style="margin-top:15px;rgba(42,51,6,0.7);font-size:12px;">Credit:<a href="https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf"> Unsealed FISA Court Ruling</a></span>

<b>The Court is nonetheless concerned about the FBI's apparent disregard of minimization rules and whether the FBI may be engaging in similar disclosures of raw Section 702 information that has not been reported.</b>

Concerned? <i>You think so?</i> Every American should be concerned about this. It's outrageous.

Continuing, the court says that this was an intentional act, which is beyond clear at this point, and in my humble opinion (which I lack the evidence for) Barack Hussein Obama's Administration ordered the Department of Justice to carry out this gross mishandling of our intelligence capabilities.

<img src="https://media.8ch.net/file_store/3ae430dab7811ea451bd0f26042b2ad02d487d0ea1befd2412c78a8f077d7076.png" style="max-height:640px;max-width:360px;">

<span style="margin-top:15px;rgba(42,51,6,0.7);font-size:12px;">Credit:<a href="https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf"> Unsealed FISA Court Ruling Final Statement</a></span>

<b>The improper access granted to the</b> [Redacted] <b>contractors was apparently in place</b> [Redacted] <b>and seems to have been the result of deliberate decision-making.</b>

Again, by <i>deliberate decision making</i> for me it only reaffirms the suggestion Barack Obama and his DOJ acted intentionally to work against the Trump campaign with illegal surveillance.

The timeline of the events surrounding Fusion GPS also coincides with the claims I'm making. The surveillance itself occurred between November of 2015 to April 18th of 2016 as we mentioned earlier.

In November of 2015 to April of 2016:

The Federal Bureau of Investigation and the NSD used their private contractors to access the raw FISA information using "To" and "From" FISA-702(16) & "About" FISA-702(17) queries we've already covered.

Sometimes around or prior to the date of April 18th of 2016:

The NSA Director Mike Rogers ordered the NSA compliance officer to undergo an investigation of all of the requests on Americans in 702 NSA compliance.

On April 18th of 2016:

The FBI would discontinue the private contractor access to their raw FISA information for whatever reason, likely because the NSA had caught on to what was occurring.

On April 19th of 2016:

Mary Jacoby who's the wife of Glenn Simpson, one of the Fusion GPS founders, made a visit to the White House<a href="https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/12/21/oh-dear-trail-of-russian-dossier-origination-now-directly-leads-to-the-obama-white-house/"> (great reporting on this matter and the rest from The Conservative Treehouse)</a>.

Late in April of 2016:

The corrupt Hillary Clinton Campaign begins paying Fusion GPS, which we already know without a doubt since her own attorney Marc Elias made the payments and a moronic<a href="https://thegoldwater.com/news/10520-Hillary-Aide-says-he-s-Damn-Glad-Clinton-Campaign-Colluded-with-Russia-to-Smear-Trump"> campaign spokesman Brian Fallon </a>bragged about it (even promoting a response from Press Secretary Sanders).

Then at the end of April of 2016 or potentially the beginning of May of 2016:

The lying, scandalous, corrupt agency made up of foreign intelligence officers, liberal journalists, and spies; Fusion GPS, Hires former MI6 Agent Christopher Steele.

Also in the timeline of both April of 2016 and May of 2016:

The same conniving, deceptive, proven liars at Fusion GPS hired the Nellie Ohr, who was the wife of the Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States Department of Justice in<a href="https://thegoldwater.com/news/14669-GOP-s-Rooney-FBI-and-DOJ-Must-be-Purged-Amidst-McCabe-Ohr-Strzok-Meuller-Corruption"> Bruce Ohr</a>.

Then in May of 2016:

The Trump train was rolling full steam ahead, as he won the primaries unopposed to become the presumptive GOP Nominee for the Presidency.

On May 23rd of 2016:

We know<a href="http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/LicArchive/license.jsp?archive=Y&licKey=12382876"> Nellie Ohr </a>applied for a HAM Radio license, perhaps due to Fusion GPS and their desire to use her as a pawn (she was paid, and her husband had to know this).

In June of 2016:

Corrupt leftist FBI Agent<a href="https://thegoldwater.com/news/13346-The-Same-Anti-Trump-FBI-Agent-who-Investigated-General-Flynn-COVERED-UP-Crimes-for-Hillary-Clinton"> Peter Strzok </a>and most likely the DOJ's<a href="https://thegoldwater.com/news/13532-The-Storm-Justice-Department-Demotes-Associate-Deputy-AG-Ohr-for-Ties-to-Anti-Trump-Fusion-GPS"> Bruce Ohr </a>would with Christopher Steele in Rome, as we mentioned earlier that the FBI was helping Fusion GPS.

Again in late June of 2016:

The fraudulent Trump Dossier had its<a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/kenbensinger/these-reports-allege-trump-has-deep-ties-to-russia?utm_term=.ie2PwD35z6#.xdY5OoVXn1"> first draft completed </a>and it was most likely given to FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok, and apparently<a href="https://thegoldwater.com/news/14316-House-Intelligence-Committee-GRILLS-John-McCain-Associate-Tied-to-Fusion-GPS-Fake-Trump-Dossier"> John McCain and David Kramer also had knowledge of the dossier </a>via a <i>British Ambassador to Russia</i>, Sir Andrew Wood.

Again in June of 2016:

The first FISA 702 Surveillance Authority request was made and denied.

What this suggests is the FBI alongside their foreign counterparts actually invented the Fusion GPS dossier themselves.

Yes, the Obama Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation used American taxpayer dollars to use their best surveillance equipment and techniques against a Presidential candidate to try and affect the outcome of the election.

<strong><span style="color:red;">America, the FBI went rogue and no longer served your interests or the interests of this country the moment they did this. </span></strong>

Again there's no way to know what any of the redactions mean.

What's important to note isn't the connections in the redactions it's the fact that <b>Obama's FBI and DOJ</b> illegally spied on Americans and <b>nothing was ever done about it</b>.

We know this without a doubt now and would have known it before if this hadn't been hidden from the public eye for so long.

We'll certainly know more when the Devin Nunez memo is released. What's really concerning is all of the media trying to say Nunez invented his memo himself in his head.

<b>Look at the damning evidence above from the FISA court and the National Security Agency.</b>

The Obama Administration broke the law. There's zero doubt.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">With that being said, I have personally directed the fix to the unmasking process since taking office and today's vote is about foreign surveillance of foreign bad guys on foreign land. We need it! Get smart!</p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/951457382651056128?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 11, 2018</a></blockquote>

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

This is likely why President Trump has tried to change the way the FISA Court is operating because he and his campaign were victims of its failures to begin with.

Last but not least:

<H3>RELEASE THE MEMO!</h3>

<strong><span style="color:red;">Tips? Info? Send me a message!</span></strong>

—<i>[email protected]</i>

<i>Follow Me On Twitter:</i>

<a href="https://www.twitter.com/IWillRedPillYou">@IWillRedPillYou</a>