A Deeply Fractured US

[Brad Sallows]

DoJ always has a choice. That's a fact, too.

 

[KevinB]

Was it though?

I will assume from your response that you don’t really understand what those two types of classification mean.

SI, or Special Intelligence is coming from COMINT/ELINT and generally still has source direct info. It hasn’t been scrubbed to just the gained data.
Having this information outside of control is exceptionally concerning due to the potential damage it can cause the USA, and partner nations.

HSC is the same boat but for Human Intelligence, the source data has not been scrubbed. This is absolutely appalling that anyone would be so utterly cavalier with files of this nature that not just could significantly harm the interest of the United States if they where accessed inappropriately, but cause significant harm, or death to the assets in place and their families.


At this point it’s well beyond Hillary Clinton and her criminal stupidity, and one has to wonder WTF really goes on in DJT’s head, because that sort of information never should have left the WH, and he really does need to get burned at the stake.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

DoJ always has a choice. That's a fact, too.

Yup, they had the same choice to make with Clinton. Different tact and outcome though. Their choice 100%.

 

[brihard]

DoJ always has a choice. That's a fact, too.

Yes. They could have chosen to send another subpoena when they had reasonable grounds to believe that the first one had resulted in only a partial return of documents and a wilful concealing and keeping of others. You can always tell someone “give me the rest of my stuff back!” when you retrieve some of what has been stolen from you.

Or, after they only give some back and you learn they have more, you can engage the thinking part of your brain and realize that if they intended to cooperate, they probably would have already.

Given that there was SI and HCS in there, I’m gobsmacked the search warrant didn’t happen much sooner. There have to have been new sources of information relatively shortly before the warrant was obtained.

Don’t lose sight of the fact that multiple crimes are being investigated, including obstruction of an investigation, and that what we know so far indicated they had reason to believe further evidence was being concealed. DOJ was well within their rights to seek a search warrant, and given the extreme sensitivity of the material in question, it would have been a gross delinquency in their responsibility to enforce American law and protect American national security not to. It would frankly be idiotic and reckless to trust a subsequent subpoena to protect the overriding national interest. Not is there any requirement to even use one subpoena in the first place if there’s PC to believe a crime took place. The extended timeline and ‘pretty-please’ approach to retrieving classified material was extremely solicitous of the former President and his interests. Nobody else would get that kind of leeway.

I can’t overemphasize how sensitive SI and HCS are. That stuff should literally never leave a SCIF. This type of information can get key capabilities compromised and neutralized, and can get key sources killed.

 

[Brad Sallows]

If the search didn't happen sooner it probably means the content wasn't that important, panic over the colour it's painted (designation) notwithstanding.

 

[KevinB]

If the search didn't happen sooner it probably means the content wasn't that important, panic over the colour it's painted (designation) notwithstanding.

Or someone just reported it now…

This website has some pretty solid background on classifications.

The US Classification System

A weblog about Signals Intelligence, Communications Security and top level telecommunications equipment

www.electrospaces.net

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I will assume from your response that you don’t really understand what those two types of classification mean.

SI, or Special Intelligence is coming from COMINT/ELINT and generally still has source direct info. It hasn’t been scrubbed to just the gained data.
Having this information outside of control is exceptionally concerning due to the potential damage it can cause the USA, and partner nations.

HSC is the same boat but for Human Intelligence, the source data has not been scrubbed. This is absolutely appalling that anyone would be so utterly cavalier with files of this nature that not just could significantly harm the interest of the United States if they where accessed inappropriately, but cause significant harm, or death to the assets in place and their families.


At this point it’s well beyond Hillary Clinton and her criminal stupidity, and one has to wonder WTF really goes on in DJT’s head, because that sort of information never should have left the WH, and he really does need to get burned at the stake.

So, zero presumption of innocence then. Clinton meh, Trump is Satan. Because the FBI & DOJ say so?

I'll continue to swing back to their exemplary conduct and methods in obtaining FISA warrants, etc as to claims of absolute truth now. If they lied on those warrants, who can say, at this point, they didn't lie on these ones. Easy peezy, no one got hung the last time so why not do it again? They have proven their bias and that they will do whatever is necessary to stop Trump from ruining their picnic. I can look at both sides with a somewhat jaundiced eye. I am not dumping on rank and file. I'm on about the head of the snake.
Pretend I'm from Missouri, Show Me.

 

[KevinB]

So, zero presumption of innocence then. Clinton meh, Trump is Satan. Because the FBI & DOJ say so?

Oh I think Hillary should have been jailed.

My point is the scope of the issue. HRC was stupid but didn’t have the same access.

I'll continue to swing back to their exemplary conduct and methods in obtaining FISA warrants, etc as to claims of absolute truth now. If they lied on those warrants, who can say, at this point, they didn't lie on these ones.

The fact this is the first time a former President’s residence has been subject to a search and seizure warrant would tend to lead me to the belief that it was a last resort sort of item.

Easy peezy, no one got hung the last time so why not do it again? They have proven their bias and that they will do whatever is necessary to stop Trump from ruining their picnic. I can look at both sides with a somewhat jaundiced eye. I am not dumping on rank and file. I'm on about the head of the snake.
Pretend I'm from Missouri, Show Me.

Go read the link I posted, you can probably read between the lines with what has been leaked in the press and my link descriptions to SI info as to what was in at least 1 of the files, and perhaps more.

 

[brihard]

If the search didn't happen sooner it probably means the content wasn't that important, panic over the colour it's painted (designation) notwithstanding.

No, it means they probably didn’t have Probable Cause at an earlier time, but then developed it in light of new evidence. That’s how criminal investigations work. You dig, and you dig, and once in a while something comes loose that points you in a new direction. Maybe a party to the suspected offense flips, maybe you get new information from a security video or a wiretap, maybe a confidential human source approaches you to provide information, maybe your ongoing analysis of data you’ve had in your possession unearths something you hadn’t yet seen… All kinds of things go into building PC for subsequent judicial authorizations. A criminal investigation isn’t always a rapid progression from step to step. Sometimes you also need to await legal advice on how precisely to handle new evidence or new circumstances, and that can cause delays too.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Let's see if I can cover all my bases in one post, so I can go back to watching.

After the last two years, I don't trust either of our current governments to do the right thing.

I'm not an outlier, a conspiracy theorist or otherwise. There are millions upon millions upon millions that have the same issues as myself. The government is not to be trusted to act honourably without severe oversight. And right now, there isn't any oversight.

I'm not voting in the US, so while the elephant sneezes and it affects us somewhat, I have the luxury of critiquing without repercussion.

I'm also not going to pretend I know exactly what drives them to act illegally. But once bit, twice shy. Both our governments are full of liars, cheats, deviants and those whose only interest lies with themselves. So, until it's ALL out in the open and proven beyond a reasonable doubt and all the arguments are made, I will continue to have a healthy dose of skeptism towards the authorities.

I am also not inclined to believe the legacy media to tell the truth. They've been proven to be the most mercenary, influential liars out there. Only one instance of their malfeasance is required to prove their true existence. Hunter Biden's laptop.

So because the 'reports' say one thing or the other, they have done absolutely zero to make us think they have changed and believe them.

If anything should be argued, it is whether we should still run off on tangents, make statements and discuss, based on leaks, MSM reports, redacted documents and rumours.

Before we run out and build the gallows, the least we should be doing is waiting for the indictments, which will lay out what the problems were. If an indictment is even forth coming.

Until those are handed down, everything is speculation. Warrants and affidavits are investigating tools that don't make determinations on what charges get laid. Evidence, then charges. Not charges and finding evidence to fit. That is what the indictment is for and when it comes down and is argued in court. That is when we'll know the charges and what evidence was procured to back those charges. If it comes to that. Lots of investigations never result in indictments.

Pretty sure that takes care of my position. Until the conditions I've mentioned are forthcoming, I'm going to do my damndest to stay out of hypothetical discussions.

I will just keep an open mind until then. When the evidence is actually all shown and the arguments to suppress have been worked out. Once the trial evidence and charges are verified, then we have something to discuss.

I don't know how others do it, but when I did an investigation and thought charges were warranted, I made my case in the brief. That brief went off to legal. Legal determined what charges should be laid, if any. They would send the subpoena, I'd swear it and deliver it. I would attend court as the investigator. But basically, once the investigation brief left my hands, the case wasn't mine anymore. Warrants were a different story and only serves to piss off LEOs when they find out what we did for collecting evidence but I'd be happy to explain if you wish.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I'm sure it works like that, in most cases.

Trump is exceptional. So many people in so many places with so much authority have so much dislike for him that a prudent baseline assumption is: if nothing significant turned up in months/years regarding a particular issue, nothing significant will turn up because there is nothing to turn up. What emerges is a lot of "serious business, this time for sure" talk/speculation/leaks designed to stoke political fires.

Yes, this time could be different. Every new thing could be different than all the past things. But the prudent assumption remains the same.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Like the nuclear code kerfuffle.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I'm watching Zuckerberg on Rogan right now. He's telling Rogan how the FBI came to him, explained the fact of life to him and he ended up suppressing the biden laptop story during the election cycle.

2 for 3 so far.

 

[TacticalTea]

There are good Republicans. Trump is not one of them. We did not need 4 years of his tenure to see that. Shamelessly mocking disabled individuals and fallen or captured soldiers should have been enough.

I don't know why so many cling to him and defend him to the utmost, for no apparent reason other than contrarianism.

But I do know that - despite a point that was made ITT a few pages back - it is entirely possible for 46% of a country's population to be politically unreasonable. Though I hate to draw this comparison given the risk of derailment, Hitler was also elected by a plurality of his countrymen. Democracy is fallible.

Yes, there are failures on the Left, especially in the education sector. The answer to those failures, however, need not be to destroy the American republic, which is what troubled transitions of power, unchecked foreign election interference, politically-sanctioned insurrection events, and illegal dissemination of critically sensitive national security information leads to.

Trump achieved very little while in power. Only the tax bill comes to mind, and it helped the richest far more than it did the poorest as benefits to the latter expire in 2025, while more than doubling the treasury's deficit, before the pandemic (on which Trump was lethargic) had even shown itself. Pushing against China (yet failing to join the best instrument against it, the CPTPP) was nice, but distracted from Russia - the immediate threat -, on which he was unfathomably soft.

Edit: I'll add that I never bought in to the idea that either Trump or Biden are/were mentally unfit for office. Similar claims towards Reagan or Putin are/were equally worthless in my view. All of those individuals are/were there to project an image and provide direction to their administrations, not to pilot fighter jets or administer medical care.

 

[lenaitch]

Let's see if I can cover all my bases in one post, so I can go back to watching.

After the last two years, I don't trust either of our current governments to do the right thing.

I'm not an outlier, a conspiracy theorist or otherwise. There are millions upon millions upon millions that have the same issues as myself. The government is not to be trusted to act honourably without severe oversight. And right now, there isn't any oversight.

I'm not voting in the US, so while the elephant sneezes and it affects us somewhat, I have the luxury of critiquing without repercussion.

I'm also not going to pretend I know exactly what drives them to act illegally. But once bit, twice shy. Both our governments are full of liars, cheats, deviants and those whose only interest lies with themselves. So, until it's ALL out in the open and proven beyond a reasonable doubt and all the arguments are made, I will continue to have a healthy dose of skeptism towards the authorities.

I am also not inclined to believe the legacy media to tell the truth. They've been proven to be the most mercenary, influential liars out there. Only one instance of their malfeasance is required to prove their true existence. Hunter Biden's laptop.

So because the 'reports' say one thing or the other, they have done absolutely zero to make us think they have changed and believe them.

If anything should be argued, it is whether we should still run off on tangents, make statements and discuss, based on leaks, MSM reports, redacted documents and rumours.

Before we run out and build the gallows, the least we should be doing is waiting for the indictments, which will lay out what the problems were. If an indictment is even forth coming.

Until those are handed down, everything is speculation. Warrants and affidavits are investigating tools that don't make determinations on what charges get laid. Evidence, then charges. Not charges and finding evidence to fit. That is what the indictment is for and when it comes down and is argued in court. That is when we'll know the charges and what evidence was procured to back those charges. If it comes to that. Lots of investigations never result in indictments.

Pretty sure that takes care of my position. Until the conditions I've mentioned are forthcoming, I'm going to do my damndest to stay out of hypothetical discussions.

I will just keep an open mind until then. When the evidence is actually all shown and the arguments to suppress have been worked out. Once the trial evidence and charges are verified, then we have something to discuss.

I don't know how others do it, but when I did an investigation and thought charges were warranted, I made my case in the brief. That brief went off to legal. Legal determined what charges should be laid, if any. They would send the subpoena, I'd swear it and deliver it. I would attend court as the investigator. But basically, once the investigation brief left my hands, the case wasn't mine anymore. Warrants were a different story and only serves to piss off LEOs when they find out what we did for collecting evidence but I'd be happy to explain if you wish.

You seem to be the only one here drawing a straight line between the Affidavit and guilt, and I get the sense that if charges are laid and the criminal justice system finds guilt, you won't believe them either.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Trump achieved very little while in power.

3 USSC nominations and the consequences thereof seem to be a big deal to Americans on both sides of the aisle.

I don't know why so many cling to him and defend him to the utmost, for no apparent reason other than contrarianism.

Not that large a minority clings to him. There's a larger set of people that recognize that some useful things were done, and that some people violated norms in order to get Trump, and that the latter were in each case unwise.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

There are good Republicans. Trump is not one of them. We did not need 4 years of his tenure to see that. Shamelessly mocking disabled individuals and fallen or captured soldiers should have been enough.

I don't know why so many cling to him and defend him to the utmost, for no apparent reason other than contrarianism.

But I do know that - despite a point that was made ITT a few pages back - it is entirely possible for 46% of a country's population to be politically unreasonable. Though I hate to draw this comparison given the risk of derailment, Hitler was also elected by a plurality of his countrymen. Democracy is fallible.

Yes, there are failures on the Left, especially in the education sector. The answer to those failures, however, need not be to destroy the American republic, which is what troubled transitions of power, unchecked foreign election interference, politically-sanctioned insurrection events, and illegal dissemination of critically sensitive national security information leads to.

Trump achieved very little while in power. Only the tax bill comes to mind, and it helped the richest far more than it did the poorest as benefits to the latter expire in 2025, while more than doubling the treasury's deficit, before the pandemic (on which Trump was lethargic) had even shown itself. Pushing against China (yet failing to join the best instrument against it, the CPTPP) was nice, but distracted from Russia - the immediate threat -, on which he was unfathomably soft.

Edit: I'll add that I never bought in to the idea that either Trump or Biden are/were mentally unfit for office. Similar claims towards Reagan or Putin are/were equally worthless in my view. All of those individuals are/were there to project an image and provide direction to their administrations, not to pilot fighter jets or administer medical care.

Thanks for that. I don't agee with much of what your saying. But you are entitled to follow your thoughts. It's immaterial though. Much like my contrary position, it's simply an opinion. Like everyone else's here, it carries no weight or consequence except partisan wailing. Buried under all the prose and probabilities, trials and tribulations, condemnations and defenses, it is nothing more than a biased, partisan discussion of the life of one man.

It only ends in hard feeling with zero accomplished.

 

[Eaglelord17]

There are good Republicans. Trump is not one of them. We did not need 4 years of his tenure to see that. Shamelessly mocking disabled individuals and fallen or captured soldiers should have been enough.

I don't know why so many cling to him and defend him to the utmost, for no apparent reason other than contrarianism.

But I do know that - despite a point that was made ITT a few pages back - it is entirely possible for 46% of a country's population to be politically unreasonable. Though I hate to draw this comparison given the risk of derailment, Hitler was also elected by a plurality of his countrymen. Democracy is fallible.

Yes, there are failures on the Left, especially in the education sector. The answer to those failures, however, need not be to destroy the American republic, which is what troubled transitions of power, unchecked foreign election interference, politically-sanctioned insurrection events, and illegal dissemination of critically sensitive national security information leads to.

Trump achieved very little while in power. Only the tax bill comes to mind, and it helped the richest far more than it did the poorest as benefits to the latter expire in 2025, while more than doubling the treasury's deficit, before the pandemic (on which Trump was lethargic) had even shown itself. Pushing against China (yet failing to join the best instrument against it, the CPTPP) was nice, but distracted from Russia - the immediate threat -, on which he was unfathomably soft.

Edit: I'll add that I never bought in to the idea that either Trump or Biden are/were mentally unfit for office. Similar claims towards Reagan or Putin are/were equally worthless in my view. All of those individuals are/were there to project an image and provide direction to their administrations, not to pilot fighter jets or administer medical care.

I suspect its more what he represents than what he is. At the end of the day, he is to many Americans a direct tie to a rose coloured past. They likely perceive a attack on him as a attack on that idea. There is also the issue of complete bias on the media reporting on him. When you attack him over every little thing but don't congratulate on the good things, people start to question the little things your attacking him on. Then when it is something serious, its a bit of a boy who cried wolf situation.

At the end of the day he is a draft dodging coward who is directly responsible for the death of thousands of the Kurds, our allies. And when questioned on it he dared to say where were the Kurds on D-day. He may have become the representative of that rose coloured past, but he most certainly doesn't live up to the ideals of that era.

 

[dapaterson]

CIA was concerned in late 2021 about a dramatic increase in confidential assets being compromised, arrested and killed.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1563356586373877760

 

[kkwd]

CIA was concerned in late 2021 about a dramatic increase in confidential assets being compromised, arrested and killed.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1563356586373877760

Is this guy going to be banned from Twitter for posting disinformation?
This cable story came out last October and covers years of lost personnel.
As for the last statement, he better provide proof of that or retract it.
Edit to Add : It will be a cold day in hell when I go to Twitter for information. It is for entertainment only. That's just a personal opinion of course.
Story Link

CIA admits to losing dozens of informants around the world: NYT​

by Monique Beals - 10/05/21 2:24 PM ET
Leading counterintelligence officials issued a memo to all of the CIA’s global stations saying that a concerning number of U.S. informants were being captured and executed.
The CIA’s counterintelligence mission center investigated dozens of incidents in the last few years that involved killings, arrests or compromises of foreign informants. In an unusual move, the message sent via a top secret cable included the specific number of agents killed by other intelligence agencies, according to The New York Times.
Officials said that level of detail is a sign of the significance of the cable. Announcing the specific number of killings is rare as that figure is typically held under wraps from the public and even from some CIA employees, the Times noted.
The cable, which also cited the issue of putting “mission over security,” comes amid recent efforts by countries like Russia, China, Iran and Pakistan to find CIA informants and turn them into double agents, the Times reported.
The memo also noted long standing issues like placing too much trust in sources, a speedy recruiting process and inadequate attention to potential intelligence risks among other problems.
The uptick in compromised informants highlights the more sophisticated ways in which foreign intelligence agencies are tracking the CIA’s actions. These mechanisms include artificial intelligence, facial recognition tools and other hacking methods, per the Times.
The New York Times also reported that CIA case officers were sometimes promoted for recruiting spies often regardless of the success, performance or quality of that spy.
“No one at the end of the day is being held responsible when things go south with an agent,” Douglas London, a former CIA operative who was unaware of the cable, said to the Times. “Sometimes there are things beyond our control but there are also occasions of sloppiness and neglect and people in senior positions are never held responsible.”
People who have read the cable added that it was intended for the officers who are most directly involved in enlisting and vetting potential new informants, the Times reported.
The CIA declined to comment on the matter.