"Patriots are not revolutionaries trying to overthrow the government of the United States.
Patriots are Counter-Revolutionaries trying to prevent the government from overthrowing the Constitution."
The Coach’s Team (TCT) offers the best in conservative essays along with articles taken from various internet sites. The victory of Donald Trump has provided a God-sent opportunity to reverse the years of willful damage done our nation by Barack Hussein Obama.
Sunday, January 14, 2018
Did the Obama DOJ use the Steele dossier to get the FISA warrant?
Sara Carter reports
that the Obama Justice Department obtained a FISA warrant to search or monitor
the activities of persons involved in the Trump campaign based on the
opposition research, known as the dossier, paid by Hillary and the
DNC. The dossier has been challenged as unverified and
unreliable. It is not clear to what extent the dossier was used.
This raises the important issue of
whether the Obama DOJ application for the warrant met the standards of probable
cause under the Fourth Amendment to our Constitution. In Aguilar
v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (1964), the Court stated that the standard to apply
when the facts necessary for probable cause are based on an informant and not
the direct knowledge of the officer swearing the affidavit for probable cause
is as follows:
Although an affidavit supporting a
search warrant may be based on hearsay information and need not reflect the
direct personal observations of the affiant, the magistrate must be informed of
some of the underlying circumstances relied on by the person providing the
information and some of the underlying circumstances from which the affiant
concluded that the informant, whose identity was not disclosed, was creditable
or his information reliable.
The procedure for a warrant is that
the FBI prepares the application for the warrant, then the application is
reviewed by the Department of Justice to ensure compliance with the law.
The FBI and DOJ describe
the area or person to search, the reasons for the search, and the reasons for
The FISA application has
to be approved by the attorney general, which at the time meant Loretta
Lynch. Probable cause is required if the target is a U.S. person.
If the dossier was used to any degree
to obtain the FISA warrant, then the Obama DOJ and FBI relied on the information
supplied by an "informant" – in this case, Christopher Steele and
Fusion GPS – responsible for the dossier. The Obama official who
signed the application did not have personal knowledge of the
facts. He made the application based on the allegations in the
dossier, therefore the application had to establish the reliability of Steele
and Fusion GPS, who compiled the dossier.
The application or affidavit of
probable cause must have disclosed why the Obama DOJ believed that the Steele
dossier was credible. The reliability of an informant is usually
based on the informant having provided reliable information in the
past. This is not the case here, because there is no evidence that
the dossier was used for another warrant and found reliable.
The Obama DOJ should have disclosed
to the FISA court that the dossier was prepared by an ex-British spy; the
amount he received to compile the dossier; and, most important, who paid the
money. The Court should have been informed of the reliability of
Fusion GPS and the amount paid to Fusion. The Court should have been
informed that Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid Fusion for the dossier through a
The FISA court would have had to
evaluate why the Obama DOJ is using information paid for by Hillary Clinton to
spy on the Trump campaign. Clinton paid the Perkins
Coie law firm $12.4 million. Perkins then paid Fusion GPS, which
paid Steele. The Court should have been informed of this to evaluate
the credibility of Fusion, Steele, and the Russian informants.
Further, it appears that Steele
relied on information from Russian informants, who may
have been paid by Fusion or Steele.
This raises a double-hearsay
issue. The Obama DOJ relied on Steele, who relied on Russian
informants. The Obama DOJ should have informed the FISA court why
the Russian informants are reliable in addition to why Steele and Fusion are
If the application does not meet the
standards of probable cause, then all evidence obtained pursuant to the
warrant, and evidence that can be connected to the warrant, cannot be used in a
criminal prosecution. This is called "fruit of the poisonous
tree," which means that if the warrant is bad, then all the evidence
obtained is tainted and cannot be used. There are exceptions, such
as if it was discovered from a source independent of the illegal activity or if
its discovery was inevitable (Silverthorne v. USA, 251 U.S. 385 ).
This is important because Mueller is
probably using evidence developed by use of the FISA warrant. If
Mueller wants to use the evidence, then he has to prove that the warrant was
lawfully obtained, which means he has to prove that the dossier was
reliable. Or Mueller has to prove that he would have discovered the
evidence without the warrant, which would be difficult. Or Mueller
has to prove he obtained it form another source, not the warrant or the
It seems that all roads lead to the
dossier. Mueller, as an officer of the court, should disclose
whether he is using evidence obtained pursuant to the warrant. Did
he use such evidence to prosecute Michael Flynn?
The Dems and mainstream media ridiculed
President Trump when he said Obama "had my wires tapped at Trump Tower." The
facts now show that Obama, through his DOJ and FBI, did authorize spying on the
Trump campaign. Obama's attorney general, Lynch, had to approve the
application for the warrant, which means she had to agree that the dossier was
reliable. It is not credible that Lynch approved the FISA
application without approval from Obama.
Trump was correct on the essential
spying, if not the specific means.
Obama used information gathered and
paid for by Hillary to attempt to discredit Trump.