Speculation is rampant concerning Robert Mueller’s history of FISA abuse after it was revealed he’d been hauled into court.


For the last 16 years, most Americans had no idea that under Robert Muller’s rule of the FBI, the FISA abuses were astronomical. Before he became endowed with powers similar to those wielded by Heinrich Himmler, he was employing gestapo tactics with FISA warrants and hauled before the court to explain his abuses of power.

In fact, he cheated and manipulated America’s secret court using carefully crafted omissions, according to testimony just revealed to congressional investigators.

A former FBI lawyer explained that documented abuses landed Mueller in the hot seat before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in 2002 to answer for his baseless deeds.

Mueller, of course, explained it away, but recent activity showed that he is still up to his old tricks of lying and scheming.

Evidence is mounting “that the FBI work preceding his appointment as special prosecutor may have involved improprieties in the securing of a FISA warrant to spy on Donald Trump’s campaign in the final weeks of the 2016 campaign.”

John Solomon wrote, “Such omissions are a serious matter at the FISC, because it is the one court in America where the accused gets no representation or chance to defend himself. And that means the FBI is obligated to disclose evidence of both guilt and innocence about the target of a FISA warrant.”

Trisha Anderson, who recently stepped down as the FBI’s principal deputy general counsel, told House investigators late last year about Mueller’s history of SS tactics.

“It preceded my time with the FBI but as I understood it, there was a pattern of some incidents of omission that were of concern to the FISA court that resulted in former Director Mueller actually appearing before the FISA court,” Anderson told Congress.

Solomon explained, “Other sources who worked for Mueller at the time told me the court’s concerns arose in 2002 and 2003 — shortly after America was stunned by the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks — when the FISC learned the FBI had omitted material facts from FISA warrant applications in more than 75 terrorism cases that dated back to the late 1990s.

“Most of the omissions occurred in FBI work that pre-dated Mueller’s arrival, the sources said. But the court wanted assurances the new sheriff in town was going to stop such widespread abuses.

“Mueller told the court the FBI had created a new system called the Woods Procedures — named for the FBI lawyer who drafted them — to ensure FISA warrant applications were accurate and did not omit material information, according to Anderson’s congressional interview.”

“My understanding is he committed to the court to address the problem and then that the series of reforms that we implemented, including the use of the Woods form, were the direct result of his engagement before the FISA court,” Anderson reportedly explained to Congress.

Mueller did admit ‘instances’ when writing to senators in 2003. “Prior to implementation of the so-called Woods Procedures there were instances where inaccurate information was provided by FBI field offices and headquarters personnel to the Court,” Mueller wrote.

However, “A declassified FISC order from 2002 gives a glimpse into how serious the omissions were: In one case the FBI failed to tell the court that the person they were seeking a FISA warrant to surveil was, in fact, one of their own informants.”

The court expressed concern that “misinformation found its way into the FISA applications and remained uncorrected for more than one year despite procedures to verify the accuracy of FISA pleadings.”

Americans “now know the FBI, in 2016, omitted significant information from the application for the FISA warrant that allowed it to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page in hopes of finding evidence of collusion between Russia and the GOP presidential nominee’s campaign.”

Also, the “FBI failed to tell the court that the primary evidence it used to support its warrant — the so-called Steele dossier — was political opposition research produced on behalf of and paid for by the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s campaign, in hopes of harming Trump’s election chances.”

Also, the “FBI falsely told the court in the first application warrant that it knew of no derogatory information about the dossier author, Christopher Steele, a retired British intelligence operative who worked simultaneously as an FBI source and a Clinton campaign opposition researcher.

“In fact, a senior Justice Department official named Bruce Ohr warned the FBI that Steele was desperate to stop Trump from becoming president, and other evidence showed Steele had been leaking to the media in violation of FBI rules — all derogatory evidence weighing against Steele’s credibility.

“Further, we’ve learned from congressional testimony of other FBI officials that the dossier’s contents had not been corroborated by the FBI when it was used in the FISA application — even though the Woods Procedures mentioned above required that only corroborated evidence be used in support of a warrant request.

“And, finally, we know from sources that the FBI had other evidence suggesting the innocence of two Trump campaign aides it targeted — Page and George Papadopoulos — that wasn’t provided to the court.”

Although some within the deep state controlled Justice Department and FBI have suggested that these recent abuses aren’t really illegal because there’s no obligation to disclose all such information, thanks to congressional testimony by Anderson, this isn’t the case.

However, many people wonder if the FISC judges even care anymore, or if they know that they were lied to, but don’t care about integrity as long as Trump suffers.

Others wonder why such a court is even allowed to exist under the Constitution of the United States, which clearly outlines in the Fourth and Sixth Amendments that such activity is highly illegal.

It appears to many that the FISC and Robert Mueller are conducting the same activities used by the SS in 1930s Germany, and there’s no signs of stopping it.