JudicialPedia Logo
    • Explore
      • Cash Courts vs. Constitutional Courts
      • The Constitution
    • Resources
    • Browse Cases
    • Support
      • Donate
      • Partner
      • Thank You
    • Contact Us
    Add Case
    Sign in or Register
    Add Case

    PAGE v. COMEY: The FBI in 2014 did a directive in Virginia and other places ALL Public Corruption to be investigated by DC FBI the Cover- Up begins

    • Date
      November 27, 2020
    • City/County
      Washington DC
    • Type of Case
      Civil Rights 29:1983
    • Case Details
    • New Page 0
    • prev
    • next
    • Get directions
    • Leave a review
    • Bookmark
    • Share
    • Report
    • prev
    • next
    Title

    PAGE v. COMEY: The FBI in 2014 did a directive in Virginia and other places ALL Public Corruption to be investigated by DC FBI the Cover- Up begins

    Date
    November 27, 2020
    State or Country
    District of Columbia
    County/City:
    Washington DC
    The Court the Case was filed in

    USDC of the District Court, District of Columbia

    Type of Case
    Civil Rights 29:1983
    Case Number

    1:20-cv-03460

    Judges

    TBD

    Plaintiff

    CARTER PAGE

    Defendant

    JAMES COMEY
    7845 Westmont Ln.
    McLean, VA 22101,

    ANDREW McCABE
    42751 Summerhouse Pl.
    Broadlands, VA 20148,

    KEVIN CLINESMITH
    1375 Keyon St. NW, Apt. 607
    Washington D.C., 20010,

    PETER STRZOK
    3214 Prince William Dr.
    Fairfax, VA 22031,

    LISA PAGE
    1229 D St. NE
    Washington D.C., 20002,

    JOE PIENTKA III
    3227 20th Rd. N
    Arlington, VA 22207

    STEPHEN SOMMA
    6 Overlook Dr.
    Madison, CT 06443,

    BRIAN J. AUTEN
    10245 Quiet Pond Ter.
    Burke, VA 22105,

    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
    950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
    Washington, DC 20530-0001,

    FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATON,
    935 Pennsylvania Ave NW,
    Washington, DC 20535,

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
    Washington, DC 20530-0001,

    JOHN DOES 1-10, and
    JANE DOES 1-10,

    Plaintiff Attorney

    Leslie S McAdoo Gordon
    (202) 293-0534
    Fax: (202) 478-2095
    McAdoo Gordon & Associates, P.C.
    1140 19th St., NW
    Suite 602
    Washington, DC 20036

    ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

    LEAD ATTORNEY

    Timothy Parlatore
    (212) 679-6312
    Fax: (212) 202-4787
    ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

    Comments

    COMPLAINT
    1. On November 10, 2020, Defendant Andrew McCabe testified in front of the Senate
    Judiciary Hearing that “any material misrepresentation or error in a FISA application is
    unacceptable. Period. The FBI should be held to the standard of scrupulous accuracy that the
    [FISA] court demands.” When pushed to explain “Who is responsible for ruining Mr. Carter
    Page’s life?” McCabe finally responded, “We are all responsible for the work that went into that
    FISA.” This lawsuit seeks that accountability and damages against the individuals and agencies
    who wronged Plaintiff, Carter W. Page (“Dr. Page”).
    2. Specifically, Dr. Page seeks relief herein for Defendants’ multiple violations of his
    Constitutional and other legal rights in connection with unlawful surveillance and investigation of
    him by the United States Government. Dr. Page was targeted because of his lawful association
    with the 2016 Presidential campaign of Donald Trump. Dr. Page is entitled to relief for
    Defendants’ unjustified and illegal actions (including violations of federal criminal law), which
    violated federal statutes enacted to prevent unlawful spying on United States persons, as well as
    the Constitution.

    3. The complained of misconduct occurred in connection with the submission of four
    false and misleading warrant applications to engage in electronic surveillance of Dr. Page,
    ostensibly pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”). Four separate Article
    III judges unwittingly approved the false applications, submitted in October 2016, January 2017,
    April 2017, and June 2017, thereby unlawfully resulting in spying on Dr. Page. As has now been
    admitted by (i) the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”), (and (ii) the Federal Bureau of
    Investigation (“FBI”), and/or has been acknowledged by (iii) the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
    Court (“FISC”), the four separate applications for FISA warrants and renewals (collectively, the
    “FISA Warrants”1
    ) to surveil Dr. Page were submitted despite there being no probable cause to
    suspect that Dr. Page was acting as a Foreign Agent of Russia. Consequently, the Defendants’
    unlawful actions allowed them to illegally spy (domestically and internationally) on Dr. Page, a
    patriotic American citizen.
    4. The Defendants’ conduct, which began not later than August 2016, and continued
    through at least September 2017, constituted a fraud on the FISC and violated the Constitutional
    and other rights of Dr. Page.
    I. OVERVIEW OF THE VIOLATIONS
    5. On July 31, 2016, the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation named
    Operation Crossfire Hurricane, putatively concerning the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA),
    to determine whether “individual(s) associated with the Trump campaign are witting of and/or
    coordinating activities with the Government of Russia.” Soon thereafter, Dr. Page and three other
    individuals with whom he had little or no relationship were targeted by the FBI in the Crossfire
    Hurricane investigation.
    6. The FBI investigation soon devolved into an effort to obtain from the FISC a FISA
    warrant authorizing spying and electronic surveillance on Dr. Page.
    7. The FBI did not have probable cause to lawfully obtain a FISA warrant. Instead,
    the FBI used documents furnished by Christopher Steele, a Confidential Human Source (“CHS”).
    As the Crossfire Hurricane team knew, CHS Steele had been paid by the Democratic Party and/or
    the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign to perform “political opposition research” and dig up
    dirt on a connection between the Trump campaign and Russia in order to divert attention from the
    investigation of Clinton’s email practices while she was Secretary of State.
    8. In accordance with core principles of the U.S. Constitution, reinforced by the
    nation’s legal and cultural aversion to spying on its citizens, Congress and the executive branch
    have enacted rigorous requirements that must be met before electronic surveillance of a U.S.
    citizen is legally permitted. To surveil an American citizen, the FISA requires that there be
    probable cause that the target is an “agent of a foreign power” who is “knowingly engag[ing]…in
    clandestine intelligence activities.” In short, to legitimately obtain a FISA warrant against Dr.
    Page, the FBI had to demonstrate that he was a Russian agent who was knowingly engaging in
    intelligence activities on behalf of Russia.
    9. On August 17, 2016, shortly after the inception of the Crossfire Hurricane
    investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”), provided information regarding Dr. Page
    to members of the Crossfire Hurricane team. This information established that Dr. Page had been
    a CIA “operational contact” from 2008 – 2013 (and had similar interactions with the FBI).
    Dr. Page had assisted the CIA in combatting intelligence-related activities pursued by Russia and
    other foreign countries against the United States’ interests. Further, the CIA’s employee had given
    a positive assessment of Dr. Page’s candor. Further, on September 7, 2016, the CIA sent an
    investigative referral to FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of
    Counterintelligence Peter Strzok advising them that Hillary Clinton had approved a plan
    concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S.
    elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server. (Letter of
    Director of National Intelligence, dated September 29, 2020.)
    10. During this same investigative phase, the FBI used a second CHS to surreptitiously
    ask Dr. Page about his activities. In this monitored conversation, Dr. Page denied that he either:
    (i) knew anything about improper or unlawful communications or activities between Russian and
    American citizens, or (ii) had engaged in any improper—much less illegal—activity with any
    individual that was harmful to the interests of the United States. This conversation was recorded
    without Dr. Page’s knowledge and was provided to the FBI.
    11. On September 19, 2016, as referenced above, the FBI received information
    regarding Dr. Page from CHS Steele. In particular, two documents, prepared by CHS Steele,
    falsely alleged unlawful communications and activities involving Dr. Page and two Russians with
    close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin. The FBI “focused on” these two documents from
    Steele to base its claim that there was probable cause to obtain a FISA warrant against Dr. Page.
    12. On September 23, 2016, an article was published in YAHOO! NEWS alleging
    meetings between Dr. Page and the same two Russian individuals. The FBI treated this article as
    corroboration for CHS Steele’s claims when, in fact, Steele was also the source for the Yahoo
    article. Further, on September 25, 2016, Dr. Page sent a letter to then-FBI Director Comey in
    which he categorically denied that he had any such communications with the Russian individuals
    and documented his previous cooperation with the CIA and the FBI to combat Russian spying.
    These false allegations against Dr. Page made by CHS Steele were not investigated by the FBI in
    accordance with its own manuals and procedures. For the FBI to disregard its procedures was
    particularly egregious in this case because the FBI knew that CHS Steele: (a) was being paid to
    provide political “opposition research” on this topic; (b) was essentially the exclusive source of
    information supporting probable cause for the FISA warrant applications, and (c) the CIA had
    warned the FBI of a potential political scheme involving false reporting of collaboration between
    the Trump campaign and Russians.
    13. The more fundamental problem was that the FBI was so intent on obtaining a FISA
    warrant to enable it to spy on the Trump campaign that it did not fully and accurately disclose to
    the FISC the evidence it had obtained as to whether Dr. Page was a Russian agent. To persuade
    the FISC that there was probable cause to believe that Dr. Page was a Russian agent, the
    Defendants provided false or misleading information to the FISC.
    14. The FBI did not advise the FISC that Page had been for many years an “operational
    contact” of the CIA. The FBI did not advise the FISC that CHS Steele had been paid by the
    Democrat party and/or the Clinton campaign to provide opposition research on Donald Trump.
    The FBI did not advise the FISC that Steele’s source (“Primary Sub-source") of information
    against Dr. Page had himself been investigated for attempting to recruit Americans to help spy for
    Russia. The FBI did not advise the FISC that Steele’s Primary Sub-source contradicted critical
    information that Steele attributed to him. Instead, the FBI represented to the FISC that the Primary
    Sub-source was “credible,” without disclosing to the FISC that what the Primary Sub-Source had
    “credibly” reported to the FBI was that the information Steele attributed to him was inaccurate and
    misleading.
    15. Ultimately an FBI attorney altered an email from the CIA in order to falsely deny
    that Dr. Page had been a CIA source serving for many years as an operational contact.
    16. In reality, there was no “probable cause” to support surveillance of Dr. Page. If FBI
    procedures had been followed and an honest and thorough investigation conducted, and if the FBI
    had fully and accurately reported what it knew, the FISA warrants against Dr. Page would neither
    have been sought nor issued.
    17. The individual Defendants fabricated or intentionally disregarded critical evidence,
    and misled the FISC, in order to obtain the FISA warrants. This case is about holding accountable
    the entities and individuals who are responsible for the most egregious violation and abuse of the
    FISA statute since it was enacted over forty years ago.

    to read more: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.224507/gov.uscourts.dcd.224507.1.0.pdf

    Social Networks
    • Other
    • Other
    • Website
    • Other
    Document Links 1 (Scribd et. al)

    https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18694445/page-v-comey/

    Document Link 2

    https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.224507/gov.uscourts.dcd.224507.1.0.pdf

    Document Link 3

    https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/95-carter-page-fisa-documents-foia-release/full/optimized.pdf

  • No comments yet.
  • Add a comment

    Leave a Reply · Cancel reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    You May Also Be Interested In

    Zachary Jordan Alam - Freedom Fighter

    • U.S. District of Court of the District of Columbia (Washington DC) The Civil Rights Court of the United States of America
    • Case 1:21-cr-00190-DLF
    • Civil Rights, Constitutional Rights, charged: 18 U.S.C. §§ 11 l(a) and (b) - Assault on a Federal Officer with a Dangerous or Deadly Weapon 18 U.S.C. § 1361 - Destmction ofGovemment Property over $1 ,000 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2)- Obstmction ofan Official Proceeding 18 U.S.C. §§ l 752(a) and (b) - Unlawful Entty on Restricted Building or Grounds 40 U.S.C. §§ 5104(e)(2)(D), (F) and (G) - Violent Entty and Disorderly Conduct
    • Judge Dabney L. Friedrich

    Howard Betton Adams - Freedom Fighter

    • U.S. District of Court of the District of Columbia (Washington DC) The Civil Rights Court of the United States of America
    • Case 1:21-cr-00358-EGS
    • Civil Rights, Constitutional Rights, 18 U.S.C. § 231(a)(3) - Obstrnction ofLaw Enforcement During Civil Disorder, 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) - Obsttuction ofJustice/Congress, 18 U.S.C. § 1752(a)(l) - Knowingly Entering or Remaining in any Restiicted Building or Grounds Without Lawful Authority, 18 U.S.C. § 1752(a)(2) - Disorderly conduct in restricted building or grounds, 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(D) - Disorderly Conduct on Capitol Grounds, 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(G) - parading or demonstrating in Capitol building. This criminal complaint is based on these facts:
    • Judge Emmet G. Sullivan G. Michael Harvey, U.S. Magistrate Judge

    Daniel Page Adams - Freedom Fighter

    • U.S. District of Court of the District of Columbia (Washington DC) The Civil Rights Court of the United States of America
    • CRIMINAL NO. 2T-CR.O84-OI. 02 PLF
    • Civil Rights, Constitutional Rights, J6 - Charged with 18 U.S.C. 111 Assaulting a Federal Officer 18 U.S.C. 231 (a)(3) Obstructing Law Enforcement Engaged In Official Duties Incident to Civil Disorder 18 U.S.C. 1752(a)(1 )&(2) Knowingly Entering or Remaining in any Restricted Building or Grounds Without Lawful Authority 40 U.S.C. 5104(e)(2)(D)(E)&(G) Violent Entry and Disorderly Conduct on Capitol Grounds This criminal complaint is based on these facts:
    • Senior Judge Paul L. Friedman Magistrate Judge Zia M. Faruqui
    Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on TwitterFollow Us on InstagramFollow Us on Blogger

    Judicial Pedia follows The Constitution of the United States of America which  is the Supreme Law of the United States.    The First Amendment:     Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    Judicial Pedia gives every American a place to exercise The First Amendment.But, when you post and submit a case you agree to the following:   When this form is submitted.The party giving the written statement declares the facts / information stated are true and confirms this to the best of their knowledge. The party confirms that the information here is both accurate and relevant information has not been omitted.

    Liberty Bell

    The Liberty Bell reads:

    "Proclaim Liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants thereof." from Leviticus 25:10.

    Let us continue to "RING" the BELL for Justice.

    • Explore
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us

    © Judicial Pedia. All rights reserved.

    Cart

      • Facebook
      • Twitter
      • WhatsApp
      • Telegram
      • LinkedIn
      • Tumblr
      • VKontakte
      • Mail
      • Copy link