I guess it comes down to the word “indict.” My mistake.
The fact remains, not one FISC judge has availed themselves of any of the remedies available to them in response to the felonies committed in their courts.
Any opinion as to why that is?
The judges would claim to have used the best remedy available. They bar certain individuals from the various intelligence services from appearing before the court.
That’s called accountability.
The judges are invested in their own version of “integrity.” This involves not facing reality, but instead confining the thought process to what they want to see, excluding material that would “harm integrity.”
The whole thing is a sham erected for the purpose of misleading the public.
They make good money doing it too.
The problem has always been that while the FBI was gunning for Trump, their witnesses were not vetted because they believed their lies, or appeared to have believed. So, the FISA court doesn't really have a case for contempt. I could be wrong. Russia, Russia, Russia went on for years and was difficult to follow it at the time, much less now remember.
That said, I don't believe in a secretive un-Constitutional court like FISA. It was only time until their absolute power got corrupted by bad actors. It should be disbanded. Like I said, even the head judge stated frustration that the FBI didn't provide FISA with the facts for their initial warrants. Then the FBI continued to get same type snooping warrants with the same info, IIRC.
And while we're at disbanding FISA, get rid of the political DHS. Bad Bush mistake to push it, but everyone wanted something big done after 9/11.