During President Trump’s first term, the FBI, under the Obama administration, misled the FISA Court to obtain a warrant to spy on Carter Page, a Trump campaign aide. Disgraced FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith altered an email to falsely state that Page was “not a source” for the CIA. Clinesmith’s deceit led to a conviction, resulting in 12 months of probation and a temporary suspension of his law license.
It’s important to note that several lawyers, including Jeff Clark and Sidney Powell, face severe sanctions for challenging the 2020 Election results. These attorneys, along with others, are undergoing scrutiny for their legal actions. The contrast between their situation and Clinesmith’s lenient punishment is striking.
Falsifying evidence, especially to a secret FISA Court, is a grave offense. This court provides no defense representation or transcripts for accountability. Such actions risk infringing on U.S. citizens’ Fourth Amendment rights without their knowledge.
Using the “Two-Hop Rule,” FISA warrants allow surveillance beyond the intended target. This method potentially granted the FBI access to spy on President Trump. Such overreach raises significant concerns about privacy violations.
Recently, Dan Scavino, President Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff, revealed on X that he was subjected to similar overreach. Scavino disclosed that Google was compelled to release his private information to the FBI. He described this experience as “LAWFARE at its finest.”
Scavino had no way to challenge the FBI’s claims, and he did not disclose the FBI’s justification. A Freedom of Information Act request is underway to seek those records. This publication will provide updates once the FBI responds.
Imagine serving in Trump’s White House and receiving an intrusive email years later under Biden’s administration. This scenario reflects the ongoing legal battles faced by Trump officials. Dan Scavino’s experience is a testament to these challenges.
Kash Patel, the FBI Director, acknowledged Scavino’s situation by sharing it on his FBI X account. Patel simply stated, “I got one of those too…” The timing of these subpoenas remains unclear.
Both Scavino and Patel played significant roles during Trump’s first term. Their involvement in key government positions makes the FBI’s actions particularly concerning. The Gateway Pundit has contacted Scavino for more details on the timeline.
Kash Patel held several notable positions, including Senior Director for Counterterrorism at the NSC. He also served as Chief of Staff to the Acting Secretary of Defense. Patel’s background adds weight to the situation’s severity.
Patel previously worked as a senior aide to then-Rep. Devin Nunes. He was the chief investigator for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. This role involved scrutinizing the FBI’s conduct during the Crossfire Hurricane probe.
Government ethics rules mandate avoiding actual and perceived conflicts of interest. If Patel’s investigations occurred during his examination of Crossfire Hurricane, it could signal a conflict. The timing and context of these investigations are crucial.
Google’s policy requires notifying investigation targets after legal restrictions lift. Ezra Cohen-Watnick questioned Google’s compliance with subpoenas targeting Trump officials. He wondered why Google didn’t resist these requests.
Under Google’s Privacy & Terms, they claim to review requests to ensure legal compliance. They aim to narrow the scope or object to requests when possible. It’s uncertain whether they challenged requests related to Scavino or Patel.
The cooperation of major tech companies in such legal matters is noteworthy. Their actions can significantly impact individuals’ privacy rights. The implications of these collaborations merit further examination.
The unfolding events highlight the ongoing legal and ethical debates surrounding political investigations. The balance between national security and individual rights remains delicate. Observers continue to scrutinize these developments closely.
