FBI ‘Altered’ Evidence That Falsely Cast Carter Page As Russian Spy, Report Says

When is the truth a very undesirable thing? When you are a Democrat. We now know what document FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith altered and it’s a doozy. In the first application for a FISA warrant against Carter Page, the FBI left out the fact that an unnamed Intelligence agency wrote to the FBI letting them know that Carter Page worked with them to take down a Russian agent for corruption.

In the second application, former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith decided to include it, but not until he edited it a bit. He took Page’s cooperation in bringing down a Russian and made the memo read as if Carter Page was the enemy and not a cooperating witness. For his deception, Clinesmith could get up to five years in a federal prison and in all likelihood be disbarred to boot.

The Federalist reported:

“Page, who had previously been an informant and witness for the United States in a federal espionage case against a Russian intelligence official, was targeted by the Obama FBI as a Russian spy helping Putin to steal the election from Hillary Clinton in 2016. According to the IG report, before the FBI and DOJ went to the FISA Court to apply for a warrant to spy on Page, an unnamed U.S. intelligence agency had told the FBI that Carter Page had previously assisted that agency’s efforts against Russian spies. Although exculpatory information about potential spy targets is required in spy warrant applications, Obama’s FBI and DOJ deliberately withheld that information from the spy court in order to paint Page in the worst possible light.”

From The Daily Wire

The report stated that investigators were “deeply concerned that so many basic and fundamental errors were made by three separate, hand-picked investigative teams; on one of the most sensitive FBI investigations; after the matter had been briefed to the highest levels within the FBI; even though the information sought through use of FISA authority related so closely to an ongoing presidential campaign; and even though those involved with the investigation knew that their actions were likely to be subjected to close scrutiny.”