In the 37 years since the creation of the secret court, only four applications have been rejected by the court. That is FOUR in over 40,000 applications.
From Horowitz’s IG report we now know there were at least 17 errors in just four warrant applications aimed at Trump campaign foreign policy advisor Carter Page.
What this means is that the court has relied – without rationale for such trust – on the honesty and integrity of the FBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Honesty and integrity that are now being questioned even by the court itself, as revealed by Judge Rosemary Collier’s extremely rare “public order” issued yesterday by the normally “secret court”.
If, as it appears, this defines a potential pattern of behavior during the tenure of James Comey at FBI and his partners in the DOJ, one must ask what was Chief Justice Roberts doing as part of his sole oversight function?
Likewise, as the FISA warrants signed by James Comey and others were the basis of the “Russia collusion” narrative, how can Chief Justice Roberts be considered an impartial judge in the President’s looming trial in the United States Senate?
It seems to this observer that Chief Justice Roberts may very well find himself as a witness in the trial the Constitution requires he preside over. This would mean that he could no longer be the Chief Justice. The Constitution is very clear in this:
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
ARTICLE I, SECTION 3, CLAUSE 6
There is no provision for an “alternate” Chief Justice.
If Chief Justice Roberts were to be called as a witness, he would have to resign his position as Chief Justice and a new Chief Justice would have to be named.
In short: “What did Chief Justice Roberts know about the FISA / FISC abuses, and when did he know it?”