Anonymous ID: 9210ed Jan. 21, 2020, 12:23 a.m. No.7864997   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5026 >>5187 >>5285 >>5338 >>5342 >>5356 >>5523

https://www.lankford.senate.gov/news/press-releases/senator-lankford-questions-intel-chiefs-on-fisa-russia-investigation

 

Senator Lankford: How did you report that, report that to who, how did that conversation go once you identified that we’re uncomfortable with this type?

 

Adm. Michael Rogers: …In return, the court also said we will allow you to continue 702 under the 16 authorizations, but not re-authorize 17 until you show us that you have addressed this. We then went through an internal process interacted with the Department of Justice as well as the court and by March we had come to a solution that the FISA court was comfortable with. The court then authorized us to execute that solution and also then granted us authority for the 17-702 effort.

 

What the hell is he referring to with 17-702? And what are the other 16 authorizations?

Anonymous ID: 9210ed Jan. 21, 2020, 12:39 a.m. No.7865036   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5043 >>5285 >>5342 >>5523

>>7865026

 

>702 is a section in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)

 

>(16) (17) are sub-sections of section 702

 

>Read this article by Jeff Carlson to get up to speed.

 

>https://themarketswork.com/2018/04/01/fisa-surveillance-title-i-iii-and-section-702/

 

I'm aware of that. I'm just trying to find out what the 17th authorization is. I've already dug on the law and it's not clear. The authorizations aren't listed in order of 1-17, so I'm just trying to figure out which is the authorization that was held up. The transcript of that interaction is different from the audio. Rogers repeats himself to really give emphasis to the "17", but that's didn't make it to the transcript.