Some insight re: the article Q linked in his last post(s):

First, the implication is that the letter posted by the FISC yesterday blasting the FBI really was an attempt at minimizing their own responsibility–they knew full well that the process was corrupt, and quite early on. Those applications should never have been approved.

Secondly, the dates listed the document linked to that article, and the dates shown in the IG report are different–for instance, the IG report states that

>At the request of the FBI, the Department filed four applications with the FISC

>seeking FISA authority targeting Carter Page : the first application on October

>21, 2016, and three renewal applications on January 12, April 7, and June 29,

>2017.

But the document linked to the Adm. Rogers says that

>The Court was required to complete its review of the Initial 2016 Certifications

>within 30 days of their submission, i.e., by October 26, 2016

There could be a difference between the "first application" and the submission of the "Initial 2016 Certifications," I'm not really sure.

Thirdly, according to the "Rules of Proceedings" of the FISC,

>At the request of the government in an adversarial proceeding, the

>Judge must review ex parte and in camera any submissions by the government, or

>portions thereof, which may include classified information

https://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/FISC%20Rules%20of%20Procedure.pdf

So there's a good chance that there's video of the FISC reviewing Adm. Roger's evidence.

It's all pretty complex, but that's three things that seem to jump out. The overall implication would be that the FISC is just as complicit (and corrupt) as the FBI, and should be dismantled or completely re-staffed with real judges.