Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

We need more information on this.

Holy crap
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/05/us/politics/cia-informants-killed-captured.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Can Congress or the White House really be trusted with this kind of information?

The active White House always has limited need-to-know access to this kind of information, stuff like this is in the PDB. Only the Gang of 8 in Congress has access to it - leadership and heads of the intelligence committees of both parties in both houses. They’ve asked for this to be unredacted for them but hasn’t happened yet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Can Congress or the White House really be trusted with this kind of information?

No we can’t. Conservatives will sell or give this type of information to our enemies. Anything to own the libs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

We need more information on this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Can Congress or the White House really be trusted with this kind of information?

This is sadly not surprising.

Anonymous wrote:

Jeez. I had read about the fact that we had more informants than usual being compromised. Do you really think it’s connected to Trump? If so, no wonder even the cautious Garland had to act.

What are republican (members of congress) saying now? I know they were all “FBI overreach” at the beginning but haven’t heard anything recently.

Anonymous wrote:Can someone give the TLDR update on the redactions? My life circumstances don’t allow me to spend hours getting details.

1. The only names in the doc are Kash Patel and the judges.
2. The agent, who is not named, lists his credentials and explains what the different acronyms mean, which is interesting.
3. It describes, in detail, the work done to get the docs before the FBI went and got them.
4. Oh, it has one letter from a Dumptruck lawyer basically saying that TFG has something he doesn't and tries to politicize what is, actually, criminal activity.
5. It goes through the different laws probably broken and location of where things can be found.
6. Of note, there was a "special master" ish type agent who searched Office 45. Things found there will be looked at by this team 3 things will happen to possibly AC privilege: ask a judge, ask the client, and one of thing I didn't really understand (non lawyer)

Read it! It won't take long. It's 38 pages and took me about 20 min b/c of the pages of black out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just witnessed my 70 year old father have a mini angry meltdown about the “FBI is out of control”. He’s not full blown trumplican, but an exclusive watch fox viewer.
Anybody else seeing this type of angry reaction to recent developments? His reaction was a little surprising and reminded me of Kubler-Ross a bit.

Can you send him the Karl Rove clip from above?

I tried to bring that and that’s what got me shouted down. It shocked me and I just dropped what I thought was just the normal teasing banter we usually engage in.

Because your father is not just looking at this raid. He’s looking at a host of other FBI oversteps.

Oh do tell us about these FBI oversteps.

Can someone give the TLDR update on the redactions? My life circumstances don’t allow me to spend hours getting details.

Anonymous wrote:Another incompetent legal filing from the Trump team last night. They want a special master to review for executive privilege (no mention of any AC privilege), which doesn't make any sense since the FBI is part of the executive and ignores the PRA requirement that disputes under the PRA have be filed in DC. Also no motion to expedite and they still have not served the US. Unless the judge helps them out, they'll still be briefing this in November.

Worst. Lawyers. Ever.

Another incompetent legal filing from the Trump team last night. They want a special master to review for executive privilege (no mention of any AC privilege), which doesn't make any sense since the FBI is part of the executive and ignores the PRA requirement that disputes under the PRA have be filed in DC. Also no motion to expedite and they still have not served the US. Unless the judge helps them out, they'll still be briefing this in November.

Anonymous wrote:Here's the document in full...and full of black lines:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22267183-govuscourtsflsd6178541021

Light sunday morning reading. This MAL search affidavit is interesting. Also, I think FPOTUS is funny and should not be used, ever again, to refer to any other person. F that particular fpotus

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would it be treason if he did out spy names to foreign adversaries? asking a lawyer.

Treason only applies to aid and comfort to enemies while we are at war.

ok. I can't wait to read the history books written one, two or three decades from now. (I'll be dead in 40 years i assume).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just witnessed my 70 year old father have a mini angry meltdown about the “FBI is out of control”. He’s not full blown trumplican, but an exclusive watch fox viewer.
Anybody else seeing this type of angry reaction to recent developments? His reaction was a little surprising and reminded me of Kubler-Ross a bit.

Can you send him the Karl Rove clip from above?

I tried to bring that and that’s what got me shouted down. It shocked me and I just dropped what I thought was just the normal teasing banter we usually engage in.

Because your father is not just looking at this raid. He’s looking at a host of other FBI oversteps.

And you don’t care anything about what TFG did, amirite?