Senate probes FBI's heavy-handed use of redactions to obstruct congressional investigators

The Hill ^ | June 15, 2018 | SHARYL ATTKISSON,

[Hojczyk]

When it comes to questionable behavior by some inside our intel agencies, there are endless termite tunnels to crawl through and not enough investigative bandwidth — or will — to examine each one.

For the first time in my memory, a member of Congress is exploring one of these relatively uncharted tunnels: improper redactions of government documents. The head of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), is not only seeking redacted material but also is trying to find out who is responsible for withholding it.

Improper redactions are when federal reviewers — in consultation with their political masters — block out parts of documents that the public or Congress is entitled to see. Under policy and law, redactions are only permitted in limited, carefully defined circumstances, such as to protect national security. After all, government officials do not lord over us; they work for us, on our behalf. They own neither the documents they generate nor the information they collect; we do.

Yet, too often, the feds have redacted information in an apparent attempt to obstruct efforts to investigate their actions, or to prevent release of material that implicates them in embarrassing behavior or wrongdoing.

In a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray, Johnson accuses the FBI of providing a “slow-walked, inadequate response” to his queries. “Moving forward, I expect more complete and expeditious responses to my oversight requests,” writes Johnson.

He includes some seemingly outrageous examples found among text messages written by FBI agent Peter Strzok to his reported then-lover, FBI attorney Lisa Page. One of them reads, "Currently fighting with Stu for this FISA," where "Stu for this FISA" was redacted in a version turned over to Congress.

[unixfox]

Gee, another “investigation” by the very swamp dwellers that cause all the messes in the first place.

As usual it will go nowhere.

[neverevergiveup]

Can I redact portions of my taxable income statements?

[janetjanet998]

we’ll stop him...

Nunes on that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLi-P4owxD4

[upchuck]

Thanks for posting this Hojczyk.

Sharyl Attkisson Ping!

Now available: Sharyl's latest book Smear. Five stars!

Watch Sharyl host "Full Measure," a Sunday morning talk show on the Sinclair network. More info.

Want on or off this ping list? Just click Private Reply below and drop me a FReep mail.

[freefdny]

http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/24/andrew-mccabe-spent-70000-table-fbi-hid-congress/
The 70k conference table had to be redacted for national security reasons.

[upchuck]

Last 'graph:

Some members of Congress are privately arguing that they should not look under all the rocks within our intel agencies because they need to protect the system and not undermine America’s faith in it. I would argue that the faith has been broken in many cases, and only turning over the rocks will restore it.

Sheryl is a treasure.

[CivilWarBrewing]

Each and every redaction MUST BE ATTRIBUTED to the individual(s) making the redaction. NO redactions permitted unless for NATIONAL SECURITY PURPOSES ONLY

Any redaction made for the purpose of sparing embarrassment or to CONCEAL ILLEGAL CONDUCT will be considered a violation of law and will be prosecuted accordingly.

There. Fixed it.

[xrmusn]

I am certainly glad to see they are taking swift action.

I am just now starting to read the report of ALL the POLs that partook in the taxpayers ‘slush fund’ that was used as hush money for sexual misconduct. sarc/sarc

[McGavin999]

Easy solution, pass a law that anyone redacting a document must sign their name. That way if it later turns out it shouldn’t have been redacted we know who to fire or demote

[Cen-Tejas]

.…..in my many decades of memory, the Felonious Bureau of Investigation shot the finger to Congress and the American People during the Warren Commission years led every step of the way by Hoover. Thanks to them we were all served up LIES.

So, let’s not act like this is the first time the so called “FBI” has shot the middle finger at the American People!

For a half century, they have accumulated and centralized and bureaucratized arrogance and “legal” criminality on an unbelievable scale. Because of their arrogance toward the American People they need to be broken into 50 offices of various sizes and truly become a bureau of investigators by taking their guns and badges away from them.

Kind of like defanging a rattle snake.

[AnthonySoprano]

.
SENATE is the key word here.

That means people far removed from real life that believe in three separate systems of Justice.

One for the Senate, one for Democrats, and a third for Conservatives.

.

[Mr. K]

If they say they redacted something for “national security’ and later its found out only to be redacted because it embarrasses (or implicates) them then they should be charged with obstruction.

[rolling_stone]

exactly obstructing oversight/justice by omission..case in point stroz saying he would stop trump why haven’t we or Congress seen that before? no excuse for that.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1505

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/obstruction_of_justice

nunez -classic case of obstruction

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/06/14/nunes_on_strzok_text_how_could_that_have_possibly_been_redacted_classic_case_of_obstruction.html

[dmcnash]

Agent Yossarian will just sign it Washington Irving. There are no consequences.

[R_Kangel]

"Can I redact portions of my taxable income statements?

..... Ya ... I donated 110% of my entire income to viable charities last year .... And I can prove it!!! With extremely redacted receipts for my donations. I'm sure that wouldn't flag me for an audit would it!

[TBP]

We want the unredacted version.

[JennysCool]

Americans allowing their government to investigate itself for a couple of centuries or so is the textbook definition of astonishingly, incredibly, stupid. Generation after generation of astonishingly, incredibly stupid.

[GOPJ]

Crime families don’t like people ‘lookin’ at their stuff’ either...

[marktwain]

Some members of Congress are privately arguing that they should not look under all the rocks within our intel agencies because they need to protect the system and not undermine America’s faith in it. I would argue that the faith has been broken in many cases, and only turning over the rocks will restore it.

---

This is a major division between Constitutional government and Progressivism.

A key tenet of Progressivism is the people are too stupid to be allowed to know what the government “experts” know.

A short version of this is “you cannot handle the truth”.

This shows the basic divide. Who is sovreign? The People, or the deep state? In Progressive philosophy, it is the deep state. In Constitutional philosophy, it is the people.

The dilemma for Progressives is they have had to give lip service to saying the People are sovereign, while governing as the state is sovereign. This worked very well as long as they controlled the media and the narrative.

But technological development has changed that. They no longer control the narrative. There are alternatives to the old dominant, Progressive media. The truth of their disdain and contempt for the People is becoming apparent.