FISA C

Part 1 of 3

Q 541

What [19] people are currently meeting in a 'safe' room [heavily guarded]?

Why did everyone leave their phones, all other electronic devices in Room 239?

Why does it take the information going PUBLIC before JUSTICE is served?

Why is the D party MAKING EVERY EFFORT TO BLOCK THE RELEASE OF THIS FISA-C INFO?

WHY DID RR PLEAD TO RYAN MOMENTS AGO TO PREVENT THE RELEASE OF THIS INFORMATION?

WHERE IS AS?

[8] FIRED.

[X] JAILED.

Possible SUICIDES.

++/+ TICK TOCK.

Q

———————————————————————————–

Two individuals are hinted at in this post.

Room 239 may be the office of Senator Crapo (R) in the Dirksen Senate Office Building. Sen Crapo is on the Senate's Judiciary Committee among other committees and subcommittees one of which is comprised of 19 members.

AS may be Adam Schiff who is a House Representative in Room 2269 Rayburn House Office Building. He is on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and also on the House Appropriations Committee (as an Ex Officio member) and on two of its subcommittees. None of these are comprised of 19 members.

Two committees are each comprised of 19 members.

The Senate Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts has 15 members plus 4 Ex Officio members.

Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was scheduled to hold a closed briefing on Intelligence Matters, 18-JAN-2018, in Room 219, Hart Senate Office Building. While Q Post 541 was dated 18-JAN-2018, its timestamp was 21:16 EST (9:16 PM), the briefing was scheduled for 2:00PM.

Of course, a committee can meet with a quorum less than the number of its members; and committees can meet to question witnesses who might be counted about the [19] in Q Post 541.

The other clue about the meeting is that the [19] left their phones and electronic devices in Room 239. If that is Crapo's Senate office, then, Room 239 might have been a convenient neutral location in close proximity with the 'safe' room. Crapo's office is in Dirksen. There are SCIFs in that vicinity.

If Room 239 also served as a clue as to one of the attendees and thus which committee met that day at that hour, then, perhaps Crapo was a member or a witness. He is on the Senate's Oversight subcommittee (as noted above) which has an office at 224 Dirksen, which would be same floor as Crapo's office.

In addition two individuals are named.

Paul Ryan is the Republican leader of the majority in the House, and as such is a member of the "gang of eight" (described below) which provides oversight over the FISA Court system.

Rod Rosenstein (RR) was the Deputy Attorney General at this time, 18-JAN-2018, and also has a role in the FISA Court sytem. For example, he signed-off on applications for FISA warrants or surveillance.

continued…

>>4412445

FISA C

Part 2 of 3

Q Post 541 also gives clues as to the nature of the meeting and thus hints at the committee which met. (Of course, the meeting may not have been that of a committee but of some sort of ad hoc grouping across various committees, House and Senate.)

The topic of the meeting, FISA-C information, is of the type that would come under the perview of a variety of House and Senate committees. House and Senate Judiciary Committees pertain, but it is the combination of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence which is directly responsible for oversight of the FISA Court system.

See 50 U.S. Code § 3093

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/3093#c_2

The system is very secretive. Oversight is very much constrained. Of all the House Representatives and all the Senators, most of the limited access to FISA-C info is restricted to Executive briefings for 8 individuals – each of the two party's leaders in the House and Senate, the chair and ranking member of the House and of the Senate committees on Intelligence.

This group is known as the gang of eight. So if the meeting in Q Post 541 included 19 individuals, it may have been broadened to include members of the Administration (for example from the FBI and DOJ and perhaps Homeland Security) and maybe agents also.

It is also possible that the meeting, held at 9:00 PM, was a hearing of the FISA Court to review with a judge or judges information that is not necessarily transcribed during court hearings. Records are kept, however, and these are subject to oversight but usually not to publication.

The FISA Court has hearings in very secure rooms in the E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse (northwest side of the intersection of Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues, behind the bottom left corner of the legend in the attached map). The FISA Court holds hearing at any time of the day and any day of the week.

Adam Schiff is a member of the gang of eight. While he would not ordinarily be cleared to attend a court hearing, he would be likely to attend hearings at which the subject was either the FISA-C process or specific documents a judge might have taken into account or would be made available to discuss with elected representatives.

———————————————————————————–

The nature of the information is clearly classified and Q asked "Why does it take the information going PUBLIC before JUSTICE is served?"

The FISA Court system is governed by mostly secret laws and so the attorney who participate are also very constrained. This goes against the principles on which the judicial system in America is based. If an American citizen is subject of surveillance, it is not likely that individual would have opportunity to appeal decisions made by the system. Or even to review those decisions. An individual's attorney would have to become cleared to attend such a hearing anyway.

One of the guiding principles of the judicial system is that "Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done." This is a principle inherited from natural justice which arose in the gradual evolution of the English judicial system. It is the principle which address bias – even the appearance of bias – as antithetical to a neutral arbitration of legal disputes.

If the appearance of bias would be grounds for a recusal, how would that work were there is secrecy and so no "appearance"? If actual bias would be grounds, but a Judge's performance is not reviewed publicly, how would neutrality be assured during a hearing much less on appeal of a hearing? If actual appeals are nonexistent, and the process virtually excludes appeal due to secrecy, how might the public be assured that Justice is done – when it is not seen to be done?

>>4412445

FISA-C

Part 3 of 3

Q also asked: "WHY DID RR PLEAD TO RYAN MOMENTS AGO TO PREVENT THE RELEASE OF THIS INFORMATION?"

This question has layers.

On the surface the question goes to the reasoning proffered by Rosenstein as he tried to convince members of the gang of eight.

The question is made specific and suggests the appeal was made to convince Ryan. What would convince him? What interests are at stake that would give Ryan reason to agree with Rostenstein and decide against release? Q's question may also reflect that Ryan had asked the basic question – why does DOJ (or the Deputy AG) want to prevent the release of this information?

This question can not be answered publicly unless the information is made public – but perhaps even the reasons for Rosensteins protestations would be kept classified. Another more general reason might be used publicly. Disinformation might be used.

The question also invokes Justice. A FISA Court judge is not usually in the business of serving Justice but rather serving "national security interests". That is yet another layer to the question Q asked. Anons are capable of finding more layers again.

———————————————————————————–

The infographic uses as its base layer the map of the corridors of power in Washington DC – the various office buildings in which House, Senate, and the Administration go about the nation's business.

Onto this, layers of information about committees and rooms and hearings are laid out.

On top of it all are the Q posts 540 and 541 which prompted this exercise in the first place. There is not one clear meeting on the official schedule that fits the various hints and clues. This is why our thinking might expand to include possible ad hoc meeting of the G8+ (including witnesses and attorneys and members of the Admin and even a judge). The E. Barrett Prettyman United States Courthouse has 19 chambers/offices for judges.

Q closed by reminding us of those fired/forced out of the DOJ and FBI (and elsewhere).

[8] FIRED.

[X] JAILED.

Possible SUICIDES.

++/+ TICK TOCK.

How might our elected representatives go about removing (firing/forcing) a biased Judge who should have recused? Each is appointed for 7 years so I supposed the clock could run out on a suspect Judge.

Just a question to ponder amidst all of these FISA-C battles.

The broader question of the public accountability of the FISA Court system has begun to gain traction both politically and judicially. The FISA Court has taken up the issue. See Public Filings link below.

Sauces can be found embedded in the infographic, including links to websites.

Other Sauces:

FISC

https://www.fisc.uscourts.gov

Public Filings, FISC

https://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/public-filings?page=1

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court

https://www.dcd.uscourts.gov

https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/gsa-properties/visiting-public-buildings/e-barrett-prettyman-us-courthouse/whats-inside/e-barrett-prettyman-us-courthouse-history