FBI Going to Court to Cover Up Steele Dossier

Just read this;

thehill.com...

If this is true, and they succeed in court, what does this mean for Durham's investigation?

Why try to hide this stuff?

a reply to: KnoxMSP

The answer is in the same article -

"We know that terrorist organizations and other hostile or foreign intelligence groups have the capacity and ability to gather information from myriad sources, analyze it and deduce means and methods from disparate details to defeat the U.S. government's collection efforts," an FBI assistant section chief swore in an affidavit supporting the request to keep the documents secret.
Answer is in the article -

a reply to: KnoxMSP

Wray trying to cover for comey
Wont work
Trump beat them
Time for them to clean up

originally posted by: Stevenjames15
a reply to: KnoxMSP

The answer is in the same article -

"We know that terrorist organizations and other hostile or foreign intelligence groups have the capacity and ability to gather information from myriad sources, analyze it and deduce means and methods from disparate details to defeat the U.S. government's collection efforts," an FBI assistant section chief swore in an affidavit supporting the request to keep the documents secret.
Answer is in the article -

That's not an answer, it's an excuse.

And it really won't matter... since Trump can just release them anyways if he wants to.

Head of the executive branch and all that...

Looks to me like this really only affects FOIA requests, which are usually redacted fairly heavily at times anyway. I would surmise that any investigation that Durham and/or Barr are conducting would not be hamstrung by this.

But I'm just some random Internet denizen, so grain of salt and all.

originally posted by: Stevenjames15
a reply to: KnoxMSP

The answer is in the same article -

"We know that terrorist organizations and other hostile or foreign intelligence groups have the capacity and ability to gather information from myriad sources, analyze it and deduce means and methods from disparate details to defeat the U.S. government's collection efforts," an FBI assistant section chief swore in an affidavit supporting the request to keep the documents secret.
Answer is in the article -

Hahahahaha
Right
I got some prime ocean front property in Baltimore I will sell you cheap.

originally posted by: Stevenjames15
a reply to: KnoxMSP

The answer is in the same article -

"We know that terrorist organizations and other hostile or foreign intelligence groups have the capacity and ability to gather information from myriad sources, analyze it and deduce means and methods from disparate details to defeat the U.S. government's collection efforts," an FBI assistant section chief swore in an affidavit supporting the request to keep the documents secret.
Answer is in the article -

You realize that's an excuse, right?

I get it, you can't breakdown an article, I'll help with some relevant parts.

**Steele's contacts at State can't possibly be equated to the nation's most sensitive secrets. The same research he provided to State and the FBI in fall 2016 was being provided to Clinton and the Democratic National Committee, and to the media.

**In fact, Steele was fired from the FBI on Nov. 1, 2016, for leaking information. Any assumption of secrecy, privacy or classification is ludicrous. And a post-firing FBI analysis found most of Steele's dossier was either wrong, could not be corroborated, or simply was made up of public source internet information. In other words, it was garbage intelligence.

Here is the kicker and Coup de gras, so to speak...

On its face, the FBI's behavior in the Citizens United case isn't about protecting national security secrets. It's about protecting the bureau's reputation from revelations its agents knew derogatory information about Steele and his work before they used his dossier to support a surveillance warrant targeting the Trump campaign and failed to disclose that information to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).

We know, they know. It is up to us to continue to expose these people to the general public.

Kudos to the editor and I'll end it with his ending statement.

Claiming FBI agents have a privacy right to avoid facing hard questions, portraying public source documents as national secrets and doing the Muhammad Ali "rope-a-dope" dance to thwart disclosure is not an acceptable alternative. 

It's a lesson Chris Wray should learn, quickly.

a reply to: KnoxMSP

There are a couple points here...


1) I’m pretty sure the president can declassify ANYTHING... by law...

So I think trump could declassify anything he thought made his point, and assuming it did make his point. No one could argue after the fact..


Assuming he could declassify anything, this is smoke and mirrors..


2) it would be real easy to pitch a fit Over a benign classification , and pretend it was hiding the silver bullet that proves your point..


Which would pair nicely with the president having the authority to declassify anything..


3) to the greater point of classified info...

The “ways and means” clause which not only allows classifying important state secrets, but also ANYTHING that might lead back to those secrets, has been a license to steal for the government..