>>5984344

Lawfag here. I am scouring the internet to figure this out, but because these FISA court proceedings are so secret, it is impossible to tell how rare this is. In this case, the judge (we presume) approved the application solely on the documentation, without a hearing.

Wondering how uncommon that is. Or is this the norm? Common sense tells me that if the TOP DOJ and FBI brass must sign off on the application, then it is a big effing deal. So it would surprise me if such an exceptional measure would just be taken at face value by the judge reviewing the application.

Any insights from someone with expertise in this area?

>>5984344

NOTABLE Development here, Baker. This was the rumor back in Sept. 2018 and now it is apparently confirmed.

>>5984509

I thought that at first, too, based on how Sec. 102 reads ("in the absence of a court order"). But I have only seen it reported that the court did issue the FISA warrants, so this would be the order. They just did it–EVERY TIME–without a hearing.