Clapper: Heavily Redacted Document I Read "Indicated" Dossier Wasn't Primary Source For FISA Warrants

|

CNN commentator and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said the order to further declassify FISA requests for authorization in the Russia-Trump probe sets a "very, very dangerous precedent." Clapper was asked by CNN host Chris Cuomo about future implications of shining a light on FISA documents.

Clapper weighed in on the FISA process for the Carter Page warrant that used documents such as the infamous dossier with deep knowledge and precise memory. He said the dossier was certainly not the "primary source" for the warrant and later said it played "perhaps an input."

Clapper also remarked on the provenance of the dossier, about whether it was paid for or how it was originally funded was noted in the "originally heavily redacted version of the dossier."





"So the dossier was perhaps an input, but certainly not the exclusive one. And as far as the provenance of the dossier and whether or not it was paid for, well, that was indicated, you know, how it was originally funded, and that was indicated in the originally heavily redacted version of the dossier," Clapper said about the dossier.

He supports further redactions in any future declassifications of FISA warrants because, otherwise, "this has bad implications for the future."

"I hope the Department of Justice and the DNI will be very careful about any further redactions because, again, this has bad implications for the future," Clapper said.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN: Do you think that there will be satisfaction that when these documents are made clear, that the American people will see that the FISA applications for Carter Page were really just about the dossier and that there was really nothing there, and this was just ugly politics at play at the highest level?

JAMES CLAPPER, FMR. DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Well, I also don't think that that's what will be demonstrated. In fact, even the earlier version of the redacted FISA authorization to me had enough information in it to indicate that the dossier was certainly not used as the primary source.

Remember this was the fourth -- this was the fourth request on Carter Page going back some years. So the dossier was perhaps an input, but certainly not the exclusive one. And as far as the provenance of the dossier and whether or not it was paid for, well, that was indicated, you know, how it was originally funded, and that was indicated in the originally heavily redacted version of the dossier.

So I think even if -- and I hope they're not. I hope the Department of Justice and the DNI will be very careful about any further redactions because, again, this has bad implications for the future. I don't think it's going to cast much light from an objective factual standpoint. But of course the president's doing this for political reasons, and he's weaponizing another tool available to him that he has authority over much like, you know, taking away clearances from people that disagree with him.

Comment
Show comments Hide Comments

Latest Political Videos

Video Archives