FWIW - SCOTUS will have no bearing on HRC and the Cabal's fate. Their fate has already been determined.
"
Criminal defendants in the Article III judicial system have an automatic right to appeal to federal
courts of appeal and then a right to petition the Supreme Court for final review. In contrast,
defendants in military cases typically may not appeal their cases to the U.S. Supreme Court
unless the highest military court, the CAAF, had also granted discretionary review in the case"
SCOTUS appoints the FISC judges, but there is a FISC appeals court in between, known as the FISCR. I have no idea if SCOTUS actually gets involved in FISC rulings.
The bigger question is, there would have to be grounds for a SCOTUS review. And then there is the appeals process through FISCR. I'm more inclined to believe that there is so much evidence to support illegal spying activities. And that no defense counsel will be able to assemble a reasonable argument in front of a non-corrupt judge as to why an appeal above FISCR to SCOTUS would be needed. I'm pretty sure "they have it all".
FISCR reviews denials, right? But the more apt point, would be or perhaps should be, approved FISA activities. Not sure is FISCR has oversight of approved FISAs though - do you know?
Not to my knowledge. I saw some stats the other day (didn't save the link) but under Hussein the number of FISA warrant apps went up significantly with the vast majority of them being approved. And a very high percentage, of the very few denials, were sent back to "build a better case". And it was a very low percentage of those which were approved upon appeal. (Now I'm kicking myself for not saving that infographic). I recall average warrant applications being in the high 400s per year. They have dropped significantly under Trump. And more denials.
Hm, I had it in my head that FISCR only review previous FISC decisions that were denied (but not the ones that were approved) - can't seem to find a link for that though. Too many dustbunnies in my old geezer skull, p'haps.
I guess that makes sense - FISA warrants that are approved, could only be theoretically appealed by the same govt agency that applied for the warrant in the first place, and why would they appeal an approved one? Hence, FISCR only sees reviews for denied or modified warrants.
view the rest of the comments →
AlienEskimo ago
Hillary must be terrified of what will happen to her once Trump's SC pick takes his seat on the bench
Blacksmith21 ago
FWIW - SCOTUS will have no bearing on HRC and the Cabal's fate. Their fate has already been determined.
" Criminal defendants in the Article III judicial system have an automatic right to appeal to federal courts of appeal and then a right to petition the Supreme Court for final review. In contrast, defendants in military cases typically may not appeal their cases to the U.S. Supreme Court unless the highest military court, the CAAF, had also granted discretionary review in the case"
AlienEskimo ago
Do you think SC oversight of FISC/FISA activities will play no role in this?
Blacksmith21 ago
SCOTUS appoints the FISC judges, but there is a FISC appeals court in between, known as the FISCR. I have no idea if SCOTUS actually gets involved in FISC rulings.
The bigger question is, there would have to be grounds for a SCOTUS review. And then there is the appeals process through FISCR. I'm more inclined to believe that there is so much evidence to support illegal spying activities. And that no defense counsel will be able to assemble a reasonable argument in front of a non-corrupt judge as to why an appeal above FISCR to SCOTUS would be needed. I'm pretty sure "they have it all".
AlienEskimo ago
FISCR reviews denials, right? But the more apt point, would be or perhaps should be, approved FISA activities. Not sure is FISCR has oversight of approved FISAs though - do you know?
Blacksmith21 ago
Not to my knowledge. I saw some stats the other day (didn't save the link) but under Hussein the number of FISA warrant apps went up significantly with the vast majority of them being approved. And a very high percentage, of the very few denials, were sent back to "build a better case". And it was a very low percentage of those which were approved upon appeal. (Now I'm kicking myself for not saving that infographic). I recall average warrant applications being in the high 400s per year. They have dropped significantly under Trump. And more denials.
FISCR reviews previous FISC decisions: http://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/public-filings
Now I have to read the one with JW to see what that's about.
AlienEskimo ago
Hm, I had it in my head that FISCR only review previous FISC decisions that were denied (but not the ones that were approved) - can't seem to find a link for that though. Too many dustbunnies in my old geezer skull, p'haps.
Edit: hmmm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court_of_Review
I guess that makes sense - FISA warrants that are approved, could only be theoretically appealed by the same govt agency that applied for the warrant in the first place, and why would they appeal an approved one? Hence, FISCR only sees reviews for denied or modified warrants.
Blacksmith21 ago
P11 too. PDF warning: http://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/FISC%20Misc%2018-03%20Judicial%20Watch%20Inc%27s%20Motion%20For%20Publication%20of%20Transcripts%20180725_2.pdf
AlienEskimo ago
Hmmm, so the first appeal to FISCR occurred in 2002 (although the FISA court was established in 1978): https://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/fiscr111802.html
Blacksmith21 ago
Read down a little bit. Table showing # of warrants per year. Interesting numbers, though not sure if I can conclude anything concrete from it:
These guys do great work like Judicial Watch: https://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/fisa/stats/default.html
AlienEskimo ago
I hadn't even heard of them before today, reading your replies led me to do some extra digging
Blacksmith21 ago
Tom Fitton should have his face carved alongside Flynn, Trump and Rogers at the next Mt. Rushmore.
And I live in the Swamp ; )
AlienEskimo ago
Thanks