It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
FBI General Counsel James A. Baker is purportedly under a Department of Justice criminal investigation for allegedly leaking classified national security information to the media, according to multiple government officials close to the probe who spoke with Sara Carter, an investigative reporter.
The FBI told Carter that the bureau won’t comment on Baker and will not confirm or deny any investigation. This comes as Department of Justice Attorney General Jeff Sessions said he would soon be making an announcement regarding the progress of leak investigations. A DOJ official declined to comment on Carter’s inquiry into Baker but did say the planned announcement by Sessions is part of the push by President Donald Trump to end the leaks coming out of the White House, the Justice Department, the intelligence community, and other federal government departments.
“President Trump can and should smash the leftist coalition,” police adviser and firearms expert John M. Snyder said Friday. “The failure so far to deal effectively with the health care issue shows that political and government issues must be dealt with head on.”
originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: xuenchen
leaked damning info to the "press".
So let's focus on who the leaker might be rather than the ''damning information'' on Trump.
originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: xuenchen
leaked damning info to the "press".
So let's focus on who the leaker might be rather than the ''damning information'' on Trump.
originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: xuenchen
leaked damning info to the "press".
So let's focus on who the leaker might be rather than the ''damning information'' on Trump.
originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: TerryMcGuire
But doing that would shatter the illusion! Best to focus on the messenger rather than the message to avoid that altogether.
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: Grambler
Being anti-Trump isn't being partisan. At this point, it's common sense.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: Grambler
Being anti-Trump isn't being partisan. At this point, it's common sense.
Yes we know, you are all for the intelligence services committing felonies to overthrow the elected leader of the country.
But you are also the person who felt that Berkeley rioters had a constitutional right to riot and punch political opponents, so no big surprise.
originally posted by: underwerks
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: Grambler
Being anti-Trump isn't being partisan. At this point, it's common sense.
Yes we know, you are all for the intelligence services committing felonies to overthrow the elected leader of the country.
But you are also the person who felt that Berkeley rioters had a constitutional right to riot and punch political opponents, so no big surprise.
Umm, ok.
If you could point out where I've ever said I support intelligence agencies committing felonies to overthrow the president, that'd be great.
Putting words in other people's mouth doesn't make them correct..
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: underwerks
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: Grambler
Being anti-Trump isn't being partisan. At this point, it's common sense.
Yes we know, you are all for the intelligence services committing felonies to overthrow the elected leader of the country.
But you are also the person who felt that Berkeley rioters had a constitutional right to riot and punch political opponents, so no big surprise.
Umm, ok.
If you could point out where I've ever said I support intelligence agencies committing felonies to overthrow the president, that'd be great.
Putting words in other people's mouth doesn't make them correct..
I said the intelligence agencies if they were leaking this info (which is a felony) would be acting partisan.
You say that is just common sense, implying its not a big deal.
Or if you would like to clarify and condemn these partisan leaks, thats fine by me.
originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Grambler
Not trusting the press,I take what is pushed by media lightly, that includes what some of the press says about ''this, and what other areas of the press say about ''that. What my question to OP was, was simple. OP claimed the information was ''damning'', and if that is what OP believes, then why focus on the leaker and not the information itself. OP made no defense against the ''damning info'' just against possible leaker.