Report: Carter Page files massive lawsuit against James Comey, FBI, Lisa Page, Peter Stzrok and more


WASHINGTON, D.C.- Former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page has filed an eight-count complaint in the D.C. District Court seeking damages of no less than $75 million from the U.S. government, the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the individuals responsible for obtaining multiple illegal Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act orders against him.

According to reports, the 59-page complaint lists those he is suing including FBI Director James Comey, Assistant Director Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, and Lisa Page. In addition, Page singled out Kevin Clinessmith and FBI Agents Joe Pientka, Stephen Somma, and Brian Auten.

Earlier this year, Clinessmith plead guilty to falsifying an email to hide Page’s past service as a course to the CIA. The complaint also listed other defendants identified merely as John Doe 1-10 and Jane Doe 1-10.

Reportedly, the first four counts of Page’s complaint allege claims under FISA, with one count seeking damages for each of the four FISA court orders the defendants obtained against Page. According to FISA, they provide a private right of action to sue those responsible and:

“Allow an aggrieved person who has been subjected to an electronic surveillance or about whom information obtained by electronic surveillance of such person has been disclosed.”

Allegedly, Page is being represented by D.C. based Leslie McAdoo Gordon. She recently tweeted:

“It is my privilege to represent Carter Page in his suit against the officials who violated his rights in an outrageous abuse of govt power. #Winterishere.”

In addition to stating a civil claim for damages under FISA, Page’s attorney noted in the complaint that FISA makes it a criminal offense to illegally, “engage in electronic surveillance under color of law.”

Page’s fifth cause of action alleges a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which provides that the U.S. is liable for civil wrongs “in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances.”

More simply put, Page can sue the government and its agents for wrongful conduct just like he could a private person. Reportedly:

“This count seeks damages for the individual defendants who committed an abuse of process because they acted with an ulterior motive in using the FISA warrant process to accomplish an end unintended and not permitted by law, to wit, to spy on the Trump presidential campaign by unlawfully invading the privacy of Dr. Page without probable cause.”

In Page’s sixth cause of action, he alleges what is called a Bivens claim, after the Supreme Court case of the same name. In Bivens, the Supreme Court ruled that a plaintiff is entitled to damages from the individual government actors responsible for violating the plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures, when the defendants “act willfully, knowingly, or with a reckless disregard for the truth.”

The final two claims in the suit seek a remedy for Page under the Federal Privacy Act. This Act seeks to force the Department of Justice to update Carter Page’s “individual records” and states that the Department of Justice rejected Page’s request to correct Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report or even conduct a review as required under the Privacy Act.

Page’s final claim, also under the Privacy Act, seeks damages for the harm he suffered when “he was falsely portrayed as a traitor to his country” as well as court costs and attorney fees. 

A principle with McAdoo Gordon’s firm said in a statement:

“Carter’s life has been seriously damaged by the false accusation that he was a Russian spy. It is high time that he receives compensation for the gross and deliberate violations of his civil liberties by government officials.”

In addition to McAdoo Gordon’s counsel, Page is also being represented by John Pierce of Pierce Bainbridge P.C. from Los Angeles, CA., K.L. Lawson Pedigo from the Dallas, TX firm of Miller Keffer & Pedigo, and Timothy Parlatore from the Parlatore Law Group in New York.

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

Is U.S. Attorney Durham dropping two-year investigation into ‘Spygate’ to ‘appease Biden’?

November 16th, 2020

WASHINGTON, DC – One report claims that U.S. Attorney John Durham might be dropping the infamous “Spygate” investigation two years after it began, causing concern that no one will be brought to justice for spying on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and alleged misconduct on behalf of intelligence officials and law enforcement.

Trump has long asserted that the FBI and Obama administration-era officials spied on his campaign and later attempted to spread disinformation tying him to Russia.

According to Sean Davis of The Federalist, a source, who is allegedly familiar with Durham’s investigation, recently informed the web magazine:

“Durham isn’t doing anything. Dropping his investigations. He’s worried about blowback from Biden. What an absolute disgrace.”

In September, Time suggested that Attorney General William Barr ultimately is the person who will control how and when Durham’s findings are presented.

Barr himself said that his initial review of the origins of the Russia probe produced more questions than answers. In an ABC interview last year, Barr said:

“I don’t want to speculate. What I will say is I’ve been trying to get answers to questions and I found that a lot of the answers have been inadequate and I have also found that some of the explanations I’ve gotten don’t hang together. In a sense I have more questions today than I did when I first started.

“The fact of the matter is [special counsel] Bob Mueller did not look at the government’s activities. He was looking at whether or not the Trump campaign had conspired with the Russians.

“He was not going back and looking at the counter intelligence program, and we have a number of investigations underway that touch upon it.

The main one being the office of inspector general that’s looking at the FISA warrants. But as far as I’m aware, no one has really looked across the whole waterfront.”

So, what exactly has Durham been quietly investigating?

In the spring of 2019, Durham’s mission included looking into a number of countries, including Ukraine, that were involved in the counterintelligence investigation directed at Trump’s campaign during the 2016 election.

According to Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec, Durham’s mandate was to determine whether “intelligence collection activities by the U.S. government related to the Trump 2016 Presidential Campaign were lawful and appropriate.”

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

Durham also was tasked with looking into the scandal that involved using Hillary Clinton’s opposition research to lie about Trump being a “Russian asset” to hide her email and private server scandal.

The bad intelligence was used to lie on applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA). It was later learned in leaked documents that President Obama was made aware of Clinton’s plot by then-CIA Chief John Brennan.

Last week, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe said he had regrets after agreeing to a FISA application that sought to renew surveillance on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page in 2017.

McCabe made the admission during a Senate Judiciary Committing hearing last week. McCabe was asked by Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) about whether he would have signed the warrant application in 2017 to surveil Page if he knew then what he knows now.

McCabe replied, “No sir.” He also added:

“I signed a package that included numerous factual errors or failed to include information that should have been brought to the court.”

So far, Durham’s investigation has resulted in one guilty plea from former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith, who admitted to making a false statement when he altered an email used in a request for a warrant against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

It’s not known whether Durham is pursuing other criminal matters, but Barr has traveled internationally to enlist the support of foreign officials in Durham’s investigation, including to the U.K. and Italy, according to Time.

Also, if Durham does not have any other criminal indictments resulting from his investigation, typically the Justice Department would refrain from making much information public.

Time noted the Department tends not to release information about what it has found about someone if that person isn’t going to be criminally charged.

In December of 2019, Justice Department Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz released a report based on his own office’s probe of “Crossfire Hurricane.” Horowitz found that the FBI had adequate justification to open the investigation and did not find evidence of political bias in the decision.

While Horowitz did acknowledge he found lying and wrongdoing by those involved, some were not charged, including former FBI Chief James Comey, because the IG’s office had no authority to refer charges against those no longer under the purview of the government agency, according to PJ Media.

However, both Durham and Barr publicly disagreed with some of Horowitz’s conclusions. Durham released a statement saying:

“Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.”

At the time, some interpreted Durham’s statement as suggesting that criminal indictments might be forthcoming in the future.

Some thought Durham might charge people prior to this year’s presidential election, but others thought he would follow the unwritten “60-day rule” that urged caution on taking major action in any politically significant cases within a window of time before an election if it could affect the results.

Thus far, Durham’s investigation has not affected the election, and there haven’t been any more charges publicly revealed.

New York Times declared Durham’s investigation as essentially over in October:

“Part of Spygate’s fizzle may be related to the fact that three years on, none of Mr. Trump’s political enemies have been charged with crimes.

“Last year, a highly anticipated Justice Department inspector general’s report found no evidence of a politicized plot to spy on the Trump campaign — angering believers who thought the report would vindicate their belief in a criminal ‘deep state’ plot against the president.”

The Epoch Times reported on Nov. 16 that Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) expects Durham to release a report “real soon.”

Jordan, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, spoke with Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo on Sunday and told her Durham is “doing his work” and to “expect some kind of report” in the near future. He also expressed the frustration that others feel:

“Like you, I am frustrated that it didn’t happen sooner, but, look, you and I can’t prosecute anyone. We can’t indict anyone. All we can do is get the facts out to the American people. The Justice Department has to do that. I’m hopeful they are going to have something real soon for the American people.”

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
Facebook Follow First
Related Posts