Flynn’s name not masked by FBI

[Napoleon]

Is the FBI allowed to conduct searches of Americans without a warrant?

They weren’t conducting a search without a warrant. They had a FISA warrant to monitor the Ambassador’s phone line. They don’t need separate warrants for people who call that line even if they are Americans.

 

[Michael Cole]

That's the point. Unmasking is supported to be a high level, tightly controlled process.
We won't know that until we know who they are and WHY they requested it. If it's for legitimate intelligence or counterintelligence, fine, but if it's for getting vengeance for political rivals, not so much. Given the disclosures recently and investigate is, IMHO, necessary.

You're missing my point. The person making the request doesn't know who American #1 is. It can't be directed at Flynn or anyone else because the person reading the report doesn't know who it is. It's really that simple. If you can show the Obama administration swiftly sought intelligence reports involving parties Flynn contacted, and unmasked all those reports, then you might have a case to argue. The few unmaskings shown by Trump indicate a normal investigative process.

 

[Bullseye]

You're missing my point. The person making the request doesn't know who American #1 is. It can't be directed at Flynn or anyone else because the person reading the report doesn't know who it is. It's really that simple. If you can show the Obama administration swiftly sought intelligence reports involving parties Flynn contacted, and unmasked all those reports, then you might have a case to argue. The few unmaskings shown by Trump indicate a normal investigative process.

Ok, I'm not doing a good job getting my point across, probably useless to continue.

 

[Mr Person]

Ok, I'm not doing a good job getting my point across, probably useless to continue.

Take that one to heart.

 

[Michael Cole]

Ok, I'm not doing a good job getting my point across, probably useless to continue.

I understand what you're saying. You haven't provided a plausible explanation as to how it occurred. Whether Obama went after Flynn is irrelevant to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is this unmasking data provided by Trump doesn't prove anything. If there's some kind of plot to be revealed by unmasking data, Trump could reveal that, but he didn't. You need to dig deeper.

 

[TomFitz]

No one was monitoring Flynn. They were monitoring the Russian Ambassador under a FISA warrant per standard practice.

I know.

I drifted on to Sham Hammity program the other night, and he was shouting at his audience that the Obama administration spied on Flynn.

Which wasn’t true.

Of course, the irony, was that of Flynn was halfway smart to begin with, he would have known not to blab to the Russian Ambassador on the phone.

 

[Lutherf]

They weren’t conducting a search without a warrant. They had a FISA warrant to monitor the Ambassador’s phone line. They don’t need separate warrants for people who call that line even if they are Americans.

They don't need a warrant but they do need to "minimize" the contact which means that any US agency that was listening in to Kislyak would need to have "masked" Flynn's name. If his name was never "unmasked" then the most likely source for the information would have been a foreign intel agency and the most likely source for that would be the UK.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Is the FBI allowed to conduct searches of Americans without a warrant?

Moscow Lutherf

Why is Flynn pacifying our enemy that invaded Ukraine? I thought no one was tougher on Russian than Trump. I guess now Republicans love former KGB agents.

 

[Athanasius68]

They don't need a warrant but they do need to "minimize" the contact which means that any US agency that was listening in to Kislyak would need to have "masked" Flynn's name. If his name was never "unmasked" then the most likely source for the information would have been a foreign intel agency and the most likely source for that would be the UK.

The CIA wouldn't have had to mask either. They are not covered by FISA.

 

[Athanasius68]

I understand what you're saying. You haven't provided a plausible explanation as to how it occurred. Whether Obama went after Flynn is irrelevant to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is this unmasking data provided by Trump doesn't prove anything. If there's some kind of plot to be revealed by unmasking data, Trump could reveal that, but he didn't. You need to dig deeper.

It shows how tightly the Obama Admin was monitoring the Trump transition.

 

[TomFitz]

It shows how tightly the Obama Admin was monitoring the Trump transition.

Well, since the Trump talking point (and the noise campaign) just blew up in his face, you Trumpsters just shrug off the facts and go on believing the noise.

Trump and his noise machine have spent three years trying to promote the Trump lie that his campaign was wiretapped, along with several convenient variations on the theme.

It is true that they started watching Trump officials after officials of various intelligence agencies around the world altered the US that one of their Presidential campaigns was in regular covert contact with agents of Russian intelligence.

This had never happened before. And it would be a cause of concern for ANY country or political figure. Even so, the Americans didnt know about the Trump Tower meeting until after he was president. I doubt that Sally Yates was aware that Trump was in on the scam when she went to discuss Flynns behavior with the new President.

 

[Hypothetical]

give me a break , this was a hatchet job on Flynn from beginning to end.


at the point of issue, they had no viable reason to continue the Flynn investigation and the only reason they met with him was to catch him in a trap.

if you can't see that if we let this go then we allow all sorts of precedence for basically a police state by our own intelligence agencies, then I feel for you.

and the courts are starting to come around:

US Appeals Court Responds

Good News: DC Appeals Court Ruling on Flynn Legal Team's Petition Shows Huge Hurdle Has Been Passed

 

[Rogue Valley]

Are you sure about that? I might be mistaken but I believe that a FISA warrant is obtained for ONE person and if a US person is caught in the communication the identity of that person is required to be "minimized" or withheld unless there is approval to disclose it through "unmasking".

Don't you understand plain English? There is an explanatory link in the OP.

Geezus lol. You're bending like a pretzel to defend Flynn. It's not a good look.

 

[Pound4abrown]

No one was monitoring Flynn. They were monitoring the Russian Ambassador under a FISA warrant per standard practice.

I mean, I get why you said this. But I am not sure why you bothered. This isn't about the truth.
This isn't about the original "lock her up" guy doing things that should have him locked up.
This is about fake outrage to distract from the **** of cluster that is one Donald J Trump.

 

[Lutherf]

The CIA wouldn't have had to mask either. They are not covered by FISA.

That's true when they're investigating foreigners but US citizens still have 4th Amendment protections and their names need to be minimized when collected incidentally.

 

[Athanasius68]

Well, since the Trump talking point (and the noise campaign) just blew up in his face, you Trumpsters just shrug off the facts and go on believing the noise.

Trump and his noise machine have spent three years trying to promote the Trump lie that his campaign was wiretapped, along with several convenient variations on the theme.

It is true that they started watching Trump officials after officials of various intelligence agencies around the world altered the US that one of their Presidential campaigns was in regular covert contact with agents of Russian intelligence.

This had never happened before. And it would be a cause of concern for ANY country or political figure. Even so, the Americans didnt know about the Trump Tower meeting until after he was president. I doubt that Sally Yates was aware that Trump was in on the scam when she went to discuss Flynns behavior with the new President.

We already know that the Obama DOJ and DNI guys had no evidence that Mr. Trump and/or his campaign had conspired with Russia.
That fable is gone.
Now we are left with the problem that there was an investigation into a non-issue, where no facts existed to justify that investigation.

The issue of unmasking simply means the information through a non-FISA means (CIA or a foreign intelligence agency). Perfectly legal, but again, shows how tightly the Obama Admin was monitoring the Trump campaign when they had no basis for doing doing so.

 

[Athanasius68]

That's true when they're investigating foreigners but US citizens still have 4th Amendment protections and their names need to be minimized when collected incidentally.

Not if an American is overseas communicating with somebody else overseas.
And not if the the phone call is not being routed through the USA.
Flynn was in Dominican Republic. We don't know where Kisylak was.

 

[Lutherf]

Don't you understand plain English? There is an explanatory link in the OP.

Geezus lol. You're bending like a pretzel to defend Flynn. It's not a good look.

There is? Is it one of the links that leads to a paywalled article?

Anyway, you seem to be referring to the section 702 provisions of FISA - Q & A: US Warrantless Surveillance Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act | Human Rights Watch

While a warrant isn't required to obtain the communications of US persons under 702 (because, presumably, that information is being collected "incidental" to surveillance of a foreigner) it DOES require minimization of the USS person's identity. I would suggest that if it is not the policy of the FBI and/or NSA to minimize those names as a matter of convenience that such a policy would be completely unconstitutional, ripe for abuse and a threat to the civil rights of all Americans. The law DOES require minimization. That it is common practice not to abide by that aspect of the law as a function of "convenience" for the premier law enforcement agency in the nation is, to say the least, quite troubling.

 

[Lutherf]

Not if an American is overseas communicating with somebody else overseas.
And not if the the phone call is not being routed through the USA.
Flynn was in Dominican Republic. We don't know where Kisylak was.

That's an interesting take. Flynn was in the Dominican Republic at the time of the call. However, he was STILL a US citizen and he still had 4th Amendment protections with regard to US actions.

 

[Athanasius68]

There is? Is it one of the links that leads to a paywalled article?

Anyway, you seem to be referring to the section 702 provisions of FISA - Q & A: US Warrantless Surveillance Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act | Human Rights Watch

While a warrant isn't required to obtain the communications of US persons under 702 (because, presumably, that information is being collected "incidental" to surveillance of a foreigner) it DOES require minimization of the USS person's identity. I would suggest that if it is not the policy of the FBI and/or NSA to minimize those names as a matter of convenience that such a policy would be completely unconstitutional, ripe for abuse and a threat to the civil rights of all Americans. The law DOES require minimization. That it is common practice not to abide by that aspect of the law as a function of "convenience" for the premier law enforcement agency in the nation is, to say the least, quite troubling.

Yes. But the CIA and foreign intelligence agencies are not subject to the FISA laws.
Don't go down that road.
The take-away is that the Obama Admin was tightly monitoring Mr. Flynn-- via numerous intelligence sources.
And President Obama was aware of it.
And all were aware there was no legal reason for such monitoring.
That's what the Rice memo is all about-- blaming Comey for the problem.

 

[Athanasius68]

That's an interesting take. Flynn was in the Dominican Republic at the time of the call. However, he was STILL a US citizen and he still had 4th Amendment protections with regard to US actions.

Kisylak was the target.
There is nothing wrong with that.
If Flynn was recorded via the CIA there is no masking requirement. The CIA is not a law enforcement agency and whatever they collect is not done for the purpose of building a criminal case in a court of law. There job is to collect information.