>Having read, re-read and re-re-read, the recent FISA application release, here’s my take at both the 30,000 ft and granular level.
>First, the elevated review is actually more interesting than the granular, which is remarkably odd considering how far we have traveled with this story.
>Why publicly release the FISA application? After all, even with the voluminous redactions, it is very unusual and it would have been exceptionally easy to deny any FOIA request under the auspices of national security. To highlight this question, consider how stunned Fran Townsend was at the release: “Having run The Justice Dept office responsible for #FISA The release of these documents is irresponsible & will irreversibly weaken counterintelligence & Counterterrorism investigations going forward.”
>Here is where a similar, I would say parallel, release will be overlooked. Remember, it was April 2017 when ODNI Dan Coats released the 99-page FISA Court ruling/opinion on the historic 2015/2016 FISA abuse by the FBI and DOJ-NSD. That release, like this one, while also heavily redacted, seemed out-of-custom for the intelligence apparatus. Coincidentally FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer is a central figure in both releases.
>In the 2017 FISC abuse opinion release, Judge Collyer wrote the ruling. In this 2018 FISA application release, Judge Collyer was the authorizing FISC authority granting the Title-1 search warrant. In an odd way, there’s a particular appearance of connectivity here. For those who are unfamiliar, FISA material is not subject to FOIA; everything connected to FISA and the FISC is considered “classified” at the origination. [Remember that.]
