Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
McGahn's words were clear to me. Numerous passages are properly classified and sensitive. I suppose he could have added the words ... And Should Not Be Declassified, Not Be Released To The Public. How about 'properly classified as classified.'
You weren't looking for something, anything, to criticize, were you
That objection made no sense to me, as well. Very bizarre. It's as if that poster lacks reading comprehension skills.
The idea that only Republican appointed judges can be fair in following the law is silly nonsense.
You and I know that but we have some folks here who demand a purity test which means you are not a dem, you aren't married to one, you don't know any democrats and you actually have trouble spelling the word
There are a couple of ways to release a document that contains "classified information."
One is to identify the classified portions, then redact them to create a public version. The other is to declassify it. The President appeared to have declassified the Nunes memo (?) and released it in its entirety, I believe. He could have done the same with the Minority memo but declined to do so indicating that it contained too much classified and sensitive memo per the Director National Intelligence and the DOJ.
But didn't the DOJ, at least, ALSO object to the release of the Nunes memo?
So HERE we have the person - Trump - who clearly has a vested interested in the issue (per his own post-Nunes memo tweet) ignoring the first recommendation NOT to release but then turning around and using a do-not-release recommendation as the excuse to hold back the Minority memo?
Instead, he sent it back for a rewrite.
Per Spartacus, the supposition is that the Democrats set up this situation by including particularly sensitive material?
Wonder what House procedures are for a release with redaction?
This could be handled one of two ways, one is to release it whole and un-redacted and if there's classified information/sources/methods inside and/or any blowback place it directly at the foot of Schiff and Co as they wrote it KNOWING it could be released to the public.
The second way is to bend to the wishes of DOJ/FBI and let them redact what they think is needed.
What I find kind of funny is those that prior to the Nunes memo being released were screaming about how dangerous it would be to release it without DOJ/FBI redactions and that we should absolutely listen to those two agencies but one week later we shouldn't listen to them and they can't be trusted to redact dangerous information and it's all a scheme to silence the Dem rebuttal.
Yep. Kick it back to the Dems and let them redraft a memo the FBI/DOJ finds to be suitable for release. Why would the Dems object to that?
The only reason I can see is because their memo was purposefully written with information they knew was unpublishable, in order to cause it to require redaction or redrafting, so that when redacts were requested by the DOJ/FBI, the Democrats could play the victim card and claim that Trump was trying to hide something.
These are EXACTLY the sort of antics we have come to expect from these profoundly dishonest and untrustworthy people and anyone who follows this kind of stuff regularly and was not expecting this sort of thing by these people is a true fool.
Trump and the Republicans are happy to release all information that does not compromise critical intelligence that needs to remain confidential, such as confidential sources and methods. Schiff and the Democrats know this. They have been the ones all along trying to block the release of information, while the Republicans have been striving to get it released.
During the evaluation of the Nunes memo, the DOJ/FBI requested that the names of the DOJ/FBI employees in the memo be redacted, obviously because they did not want to be embarrassed. This is an over-use of the redaction privilege of the DOJ/FBI and consequently, those redactions were denied.
The Nunes memo was released unredacted, because the Republicans wrote it to specifically exclude sources and methods, which they knew could not and should not be published. The Democrats of course know all of this and must follow the same rules. The best course of action is for them to revise their memo to remove confidential sources and methods and then resubmit their memo, at which time we will ALL look forward to reading it.
Congress needs to hold to the time-honored procedures of conducting investigations then AFTER the evidence has been gathered releasing majority and minority reports.
Nunes and his memo crap with - joy - the promise of more to come smells to high heaven. I'd be a whole lot more open to Republican allegations of this or that abuse if they weren't going about it in such a half-assed manner biased to the point of outright falsehood.
Why the f*uck are they so desperate? Never been fond of conspiracy theories but I have to say at some point you kind of start to wonder.
Maybe there IS something to this Russia story and Trump screwed up more than I thought possible.
I don't consider the Nunes or Schiff memos reports, but FYI there were interim reports on Benghazi, Clinton's emails, cybersecurity, Wells Fargo, political fundraising, and other investigations.
This could be handled one of two ways, one is to release it whole and un-redacted and if there's classified information/sources/methods inside and/or any blowback place it directly at the foot of Schiff and Co as they wrote it KNOWING it could be released to the public.
The second way is to bend to the wishes of DOJ/FBI and let them redact what they think is needed.
What I find kind of funny is those that prior to the Nunes memo being released were screaming about how dangerous it would be to release it without DOJ/FBI redactions and that we should absolutely listen to those two agencies but one week later we shouldn't listen to them and they can't be trusted to redact dangerous information and it's all a scheme to silence the Dem rebuttal.
How do you match up those two stances?
You do what Trump did with the Nunes memo release it over objections from the FBI and DOJ. Cult45 should be wondering what there is in this memo that Trump doesn't want released.
.... any blowback place it directly at the foot of Schiff and Co ....
that "and Co" includes all the republicans on the house intelligence committee. it was passed for release unanimously.
that's the part that has me skeptical of the WH claims. we have a memo that had bipartisan support for release as-is but, according to the WH, is beyond the use of redactions and needs to be completely rewritten.
McGahn's words were clear to me. Numerous passages are properly classified and sensitive. I suppose he could have added the words ... And Should Not Be Declassified, Not Be Released To The Public. How about 'properly classified as classified.'
You weren't looking for something, anything, to criticize, were you
Well, yes I suppose I was rather.
Following the posts to come ... what do we have? That bias does play a role (e.g. that when you are open to incompetence one sees it) ... that context plays a role (e.g. rededacted vs reclassified) ... that complete review of the record is necessary for accuracy (e.g. see entire letter).
Now comparing the exercise of parsing the McGahn sentence to the Case of the Competing Memos. ...
Bias? The person who is making the final decisions (Trump, of course) is the same person who immediately tweeted out after the Nunes memo was released that:
This memo totally vindicates “Trump” in probe. But the Russian Witch Hunt goes on and on. Their was no Collusion and there was no Obstruction (the word now used because, after one year of looking endlessly and finding NOTHING, collusion is dead). This is an American disgrace!
Context of statements in the Nunes memo / accuracy? Any chance the American public can make an accurate assessment when conclusions in the Nunes memo were apparently drawn without the House Intel having the full record available to them (the transcripts of the what the FBI told the FISC) NOR does the American public have access to the Democratic memo.
Here, I'd be the first to agree that life works best when the ENTIRE SET of relevant documents is available and considered.
I don't consider the Nunes or Schiff memos reports, but FYI there were interim reports on Benghazi, Clinton's emails, cybersecurity, Wells Fargo, political fundraising, and other investigations.
Yes, I know ... and even a nifty little website (at least for Benghazi).
Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryLady
Maybe all the more reason for the Republicans not to have released the Nunes memo to begin with, particularly since the allegations within it appear far from final if Nunes hasn't even examined the relevant FISA transcripts.
Again ... Benghazi. There was a website updating the public ... interim reports ... final reports (majority and minority), all redacted as necessary.
And THAT process doesn't suffice in this instance why?
that "and Co" includes all the republicans on the house intelligence committee. it was passed for release unanimously.
that's the part that has me skeptical of the WH claims. we have a memo that had bipartisan support for release as-is but, according to the WH, is beyond the use of redactions and needs to be completely rewritten.
The Republicans didn't want to release the memo because they knew it would reveal sources, and methods. They know Schiff was just playing a game, they voted to let Schiff play his little game.
Schiff has nothing, but to play games. Schiff can't stop this, he can play all the games he wants.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
