FeaturedNationNational SecurityPolitics

Was the DNC/Clinton campaign-funded dossier used to obtain warrants on Trump team from the secret court?

The unverified dossier alleging connections between President Trump’s campaign and the Russians was used as evidence by the FBI to gain approval from a secret court to monitor members of Trump’s team, this reporter has learned.

A large portion of the evidence presented in the salacious 35-page dossier put together by former British spy Christopher Steele, has either been proven wrong or remains unsubstantiated. However, the FBI gained approval nevertheless to surveil members of Trump’s campaign and “it’s outrageous and clearly should be thoroughly investigated,” said a senior law enforcement source, with knowledge of the process.

Multiple sources told this reporter that the dossier was used along with other evidence to obtain the warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as FISC. The sources also stressed that there will be more information in the coming week regarding systemic “FISA abuse.”

“(The dossier) certainly played a role in obtaining the warrant,” added another senior U.S. official, with knowledge of the dossier. “Congress needs to look at the FBI officials who were handling this case and see what, if anything, was verified in the dossier. I think an important question is whether the FBI paid anything to the source for the dossier.”

On Wednesday, Sean Hannity said he has also independently confirmed that the dossier was used to obtain the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) warrant from three separate sources.

Listen to Sean Hannity here

One very senior source said the dossier played “a significant role” in obtaining the warrant Hannity said on his radio show Wednesday.

FBI officials could not be immediately reached for comment.

On Friday, members of the House Intelligence Committee went to the Justice Department to review the FBI and DOJ documents requested last August by Chairman Devin Nunes, congressional sources said. The information is essential to the committee’s investigation of Steele, the dossier and Fusion GPS.

In October, the Washington Post revealed that Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton campaign paid the now embattled research firm Fusion GPS to fund the research into the dossier. Marc E. Elias, who was a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC allegedly retained Fusion GPS, but the campaign failed to disclose those payments on its finance records.

In April, CNN reported that the dossier was used to monitor communications of Carter Page, who volunteered as a national security advisor with the Trump campaign for a short period of time. But in December, a New York Times story seemed to suggest that the inquiry into the Trump campaign and its alleged ties to Russia began with George Papadopoulos, who worked as a foreign policy advisor to Trump campaign.

Sources told the New York Times that it was Papadopoulos’ conversation with a Australian diplomat at London bar in May 2016 that caught the attention of the FBI.

“Now that the dirt has spilled on the dossier, it looks like some officials are trying to deflect by saying the inquiry began with Papadopoulos,” said the senior law enforcement official.

 

Show More

Related Articles

141 thoughts on “Was the DNC/Clinton campaign-funded dossier used to obtain warrants on Trump team from the secret court?”

  1. SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE INTERVIEW OF: GLENN SIMPSON
    Q. Do you know who paid for Mr. Steele’s trip to Rome to meet with the FBI?
    A. I have read recently that — I think in a letter from Senator Grassley that the FBI reimbursed the expense, but to be clear, I mean, that’s it. He was, to my knowledge, not been compensated for that work or any other work during this time.

    https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/senators-grassley-graham-refer-christopher-steele-criminal-investigation

    The attachment is Classified, but Mr. Simpson thinks he was reimbursed at a minimum for a plane trip to Rome from the FBI.

      1. In the article there is a quote from a senior US official.
        “I think an important question is whether the FBI payed anything to the source for the dossier.”

        That question is answered in the Glenn Simpson testimony. The FBI paid at minimum for a trip to Rome to Christopher Steele. If that is also the max they paid him then that is not so bad, but if they paid him more… that is another story.

      2. Besides the fact that there’s no evidence that they did, why would that matter?

        Let’s start from the beginning: there’s no way a FISA court would issue a warrant based solely on unverified intelligence. Also, the evidence indicates that both the FISA warrant and investigation into Russian collusion started before the FBI took Steele seriously: nothing seems to have happened after the Rome meeting, and it wasn’t until the fall that the FBI really interviewed him.

        So there’s really only one question: how much of the dossier did the FBI verify? Steele himself said it was probably 70%-90% accurate, but Carter Page — who was the subject of a FISA warrant — confirmed its claims about him.

        But it’s interesting that so many people are completely indifferent to the fact — and it is a fact — that the Trump campaign repeatedly colluded with Russians, and repeatedly lied about it, sometimes under oath.

      3. You have yet to present any evidence of Russian collusion with Trump to win the election. There is hard fact that says the leak of emails was transferred at a speed that needed to be locally.

        I presented evidence Guccifer 2.0 was not who he said he was.
        I present evidence the FBI paid Steele but you deny that.

        The FISA court did use this as evidence to get a warrant to collect communications from a trump tower server. Was it the only evidence no. You bring up Papadopolise testimony. You ask, “How could he have known Russia has dirt on Hillary?” That is your quote. Hillary has been in politics how long? You think that over that period of time Hillary was so perfect that no one has dirt on Hillary. Let along knew that people had dirt on Hillary when her server was so leaky. The FBI even said it was probable the Russian had hacked her email. LOL

        Your only evidence is the belief that “there is no way Hillary would do that.” when in 8 hours of Testimony Glen Simpson chose to exercise his rights and not answer when asked if his client told him to release the memos to the media.

        Hillary is allowed to collude with foreign powers, the FBI, and the DOJ but we still have no evidence Russia colluded with Trump.

        But you are right we should start from the beginning. How did this whole Russian narrative start?

      4. Everyone knows that “Guccifer” was not who “he” said he was. it’s long been common knowledge that that’s a deceptive tag hiding the identities of a number of hackers.

        The transfer speed “evidence” was immediately dismissed for an obvious reason: those files were almost certainly copies to begin with. Did you really think *every* intelligence agency — including Trump’s hand-selected people — would miss something so obvious?

        And, in fact, I presented lots of evidence. Let me cut and paste: Shortly after the Russians hacked the DNC and DCCC servers — and before that had been announced in the news — George Papadopolous told an Australian diplomat that the Russians had thousands of emails related to Clinton. How did he know that?

        The Trump Tower meeting was straight-up collusion: Fredo was told a representative of the Russian government had dirt on Hillary and he, Kushner, and Manafort met her. They repeatedly lied about the meeting, first denying it happened, then saying it was only about adoptions.

        Every American, regardless of party, should agree that’s both despicable and idiotic. They should have immediately gone to the FBI, not just because any American should do that, but also because it could have been a blackmail setup.

        After the election, Jared Kushner tried to set up a secret backchannel in the Russian embassy to hide communications from *American* intelligence agencies.

        And, of course, Sessions, Flynn, Page, and Papadopolous, ina ddition to Kushner, Manafort, and Trump Jr., have all repeatedly lied, sometimes under oath, about their meeting with Russians.

        They’re either guilty, or these are the stupidest people ever to disgrace the White House.

      5. Still no evidence. You ask how did Papadopoulos know? A question… and then use it as evidence that Trump colluded. Quite the leap in logic.

        Was Papadopoulos at the Trump tower meeting? No, then we have no idea how Papadopoulos knew. Info on how Papadopoulos testimony was useful. It does not amount to any smoking gun though.

        https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-31/papadopoulos-claimed-trump-campaign-approved-russia-meeting

        If we knew that information then that would be evidence. because he could have know through the FBI investigation?

        You state the DNC servers were hacked… but provide no evidence. Hillary stated that 17 intelligence agencies at first believed it was the Russians. Then that was deemed not true and only 3 agreed with that sentiment. FBI, CIA, and ODNI. The only one to release a report was the ODNI, and the FBI never verified the DNC servers were hacked. They relied on Crowd strike, a firm paid by Hillary. The NSA though is a different story. Ex NSA officials think it was a leak.

        https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/bombshell-nsa-experts-say-dnc-hack-was-actually-a-leak-and-inside-job/

        And the Head of the NSA ran to Trump the day he was elected to let him know about the people violating his 4th amendment rights.

        But I want to back track to your points. You say that the meeting was treasonous and dirt on Hillary was obtained. Why was it never used then? What was this material that was leaked to the press that sunk her? If you think it was the DNC emails then you are not following the evidence and instead have an objective you are trying to validate. Assange states it was not the Russians. Guccifer 2.0 was fake.

        So, in your book it is ok, Hillary did not disclose working with foreign agents to dig up dirt on Trump and leak it to the public to try and sway the election. We have evidence of all that. Instead we should focus on finding a connection between Trump and Russia colluding to release dirt on Hillary that was never released and that has so far produced no evidence. LOL. Let Mueller keep spinning his wheels. MAGA.

        PS. Setting up back channels after the election has been done and is encouraged by most presidents. It keeps the lines of communication open in the event War is imminent. It prevents catastrophes.

      6. Still no evidence. You ask how did Papadopoulos know? A question… and then use it as evidence that Trump colluded. Quite the leap in logic.

        Was Papadopoulos at the Trump tower meeting? No, then we have no idea how Papadopoulos knew. Info on how Papadopoulos testimony was useful. It does not amount to any smoking gun though.

        https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-31/papadopoulos-claimed-trump-campaign-approved-russia-meeting

        If we knew that information then that would be evidence. because he could have know through the FBI investigation?

        You state the DNC servers were hacked… but provide no evidence. Hillary stated that 17 intelligence agencies at first believed it was the Russians. Then that was deemed not true and only 3 agreed with that sentiment. FBI, CIA, and ODNI. The only one to release a report was the ODNI, and the FBI never verified the DNC servers were hacked. They relied on Crowd strike, a firm paid by Hillary. The NSA though is a different story. Ex NSA officials think it was a leak.

        https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/bombshell-nsa-experts-say-dnc-hack-was-actually-a-leak-and-inside-job/

        And the Head of the NSA ran to Trump the day he was elected to let him know about the people violating his 4th amendment rights.

        But I want to back track to your points. You say that the meeting was treasonous and dirt on Hillary was obtained. Why was it never used then? What was this material that was leaked to the press that sunk her? If you think it was the DNC emails then you are not following the evidence and instead have an objective you are trying to validate. Assange states it was not the Russians. Guccifer 2.0 was fake.

        So, in your book it is ok, Hillary did not disclose working with foreign agents to dig up dirt on Trump and leak it to the public to try and sway the election. We have evidence of all that. Instead we should focus on finding a connection between Trump and Russia colluding to release dirt on Hillary that was never released and that has so far produced no evidence. LOL. Let Mueller keep spinning his wheels. MAGA.

        PS. Setting up back channels after the election has been done and is encouraged by most presidents. It keeps the lines of communication open in the event War is imminent. It prevents catastrophes.

      7. Still no evidence. You ask how did Papadopoulos know? A question… and then use it as evidence that Trump colluded. Quite the leap in logic.

        Was Papadopoulos at the Trump tower meeting? No, then we have no idea how Papadopoulos knew. Info on how Papadopoulos testimony was useful. It does not amount to any smoking gun though.

        https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-31/papadopoulos-claimed-trump-campaign-approved-russia-meeting

        If we knew that information then that would be evidence. because he could have know through the FBI investigation?

        You state the DNC servers were hacked… but provide no evidence. Hillary stated that 17 intelligence agencies at first believed it was the Russians. Then that was deemed not true and only 3 agreed with that sentiment. FBI, CIA, and ODNI. The only one to release a report was the ODNI, and the FBI never verified the DNC servers were hacked. They relied on Crowd strike, a firm paid by Hillary. The NSA though is a different story. Ex NSA officials think it was a leak.

        https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/bombshell-nsa-experts-say-dnc-hack-was-actually-a-leak-and-inside-job/

        And the Head of the NSA ran to Trump the day he was elected to let him know about the people violating his 4th amendment rights.

        But I want to back track to your points. You say that the meeting was treasonous and dirt on Hillary was obtained. Why was it never used then? What was this material that was leaked to the press that sunk her? If you think it was the DNC emails then you are not following the evidence and instead have an objective you are trying to validate. Assange states it was not the Russians. Guccifer 2.0 was fake.

        So, in your book it is ok, Hillary did not disclose working with foreign agents to dig up dirt on Trump and leak it to the public to try and sway the election. We have evidence of all that. Instead we should focus on finding a connection between Trump and Russia colluding to release dirt on Hillary that was never released and that has so far produced no evidence. LOL. Let Mueller keep spinning his wheels.

        PS. Setting up back channels after the election has been done and is encouraged by most presidents. It keeps the lines of communication open in the event War is imminent. It prevents catastrophes.

  2. Pingback: Bits and Pieces |
  3. Good investigative article, Sara!

    All of these covert actions through Secret Court Orders, reminds me of a parallel fiction movie called: “The Star Chamber”

    Synopsis: “Michael Douglas is Stephen Hardin, a young superior court judge in L.A. who’s frustrated with having to set guilty criminals free on technicalities. Hal Holbrook plays the older Judge Caulfield who initiates him into a group of judges who run an illegal secret court that reviews cases then votes to convict and sentence to death…”
    tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Film/TheStarChamber

    In this case with President Trump, it is “allegedly” the Criminal Politicians running the Secret Court; however, that will depend on what your definition of “IS” is. Fiction becomes reality?

      1. Dude, like I said, it depends on who you think the bad guys are.

        Even though the deeds of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ are opposites, reality and circumstance are the factors that will define what is right and wrong in the eyes of the beholder. E.g. two Countries go to war against each other, fighting in the name of God. Who is right and who is wrong?

      2. That’s literally gibberish. It sounds like a 3 am monologue from a stoned Philosophy major who’s too lazy to actually read anything.

    1. “Deep state Clinton group” is a series of random words, like “socialist Benghazi server” or “neoliberal uranium Foundation.”

      I’ll make it really simple: Trump and his campaign colluded with a hostile foreign government in an attempt to win the election. They’re criminals and traitors.

  4. You work for Sinclair Media – who literally have a commercial agreement to promote Trump.

    And when this is all over, all you’re going to be remembered for, is being one of the useful idiots, who tried, in vain, to protect one of the most notorious criminals of the 21st century

  5. Both the CIA and FBI have testified, that they’re also investigating people within the “right wing media”, and GOP, who they think are “local actors”………..ie. working for Russia as well.

    When they say that, they probably mean guys like Sean Hannity and Devin Nunes. Guys who seem pretty desperate for Mueller to stop investigating

  6. Dan Bongino does a great job in this interview. Sara Carter, plays the role of controlled opposition. Carter shiftily helps Hillary Clinton deal with her “Dossier Problem“.

    Unfortunately, but not unpredictably, Sara Carter begins deploying deep state ‘countermeasures’ from her ‘sources’ that are telling her Fusion GPS, Christopher Steele and Hillary Clinton was hoodwinked by a comprehensive Russian disinformation campaign; carried out by professional Russian intelligence agents; who duped the Clinton Campaign into THINKING Trump was a proxy political agent of Russia.

    Ergo,… the ever patriotic Clinton campaign had no other option, except to do their civic duty, and inform the FBI of the Russian claims… and that led to the entire FBI operation investigating candidate Donald Trump. Thankfully, Donald Trump wasn’t a Russian spy.

    Well, there’s the trial balloon narrative from those at risk within the Deep State Clinton group, and there’s Sara Carter testing it out for them:

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/01/13/trial-balloon-sara-carter-and-dan-bongino-discuss-the-steele-dossier-and-the-doj-fbi-fisa-abuse/#more-144540

    1. “Hey guys, here’s a theory that makes no sense and is contradicted by all available evidence. What do you think?”

Leave a Reply

Close
%d bloggers like this: