To be clearer, what I quoted of RR was correct. I didn’t address anything else.
You have added context and you may be correct on the speculation on the “meaning”, of his vaguely worded testimony, there, that you cite.
I think I read that the FISA he signed was “never published”. It was cited by Di Genova, I believe, where he referred to as the first FISA, which was a little confusing, since the actual “First FISA”, as we know, was rejected by the Court, but the context of the commentary was around RR. ( Whom is one Di Genova holds in no esteem.)
You may be on to something about what Rosenstein signed having included a redaction of some consequence. I certainly hope so.
How many did RR sign? I forget. I know he signed *continuations* of the 90 day fisa segments, for Surveillance on Trump and associates.
RR testified about this and IMO it’s significant - he was adamant that he knew what he signed and that nobody else does and people who say they do and conjecture are talking about something he doesn’t recognize as being what he signed. This is the key to whether RR is WH or BH ... he also explained something like, ‘of course it had to be valid because I had experienced D_J and F_I attesting to it’ ... now what was he talking about, the things that were in the prior FISAs or more garbage? Or something else? Or did he let the bad apples present something he then added to?
One other thing I’ve also considered is that Sara Carter once referred to there being multiple sets of books. In the context of “Q” things, there must be things that are visible to the deep state and other things that are exclusively in the domain of the white hats. I believe that one of the first things team Trump did was setup a new communications network so that they could operate securely. In this scenario, there might well be certain filings that deep state people know about and another set that are the things that the white hats are dropping and make up sealed filings, etc. ... TBD! WWG1WGA :)