The FBI will Show Document under Subpoena to Comer and Raskin to Avoid Contempt Charge

[Seymour Flops]

FBI to show House Oversight leaders document in Biden probe on Monday

Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., had threatened to hold FBI Director Christopher Wray in contempt of Congress if he did not turn over the document to the panel.

www.nbcnews.com

The FBI will let the chair and ranking member of the House Oversight Committee review a document describing an allegation that Joe Biden accepted a bribe as vice president, but will black out information that could reveal the source’s identity, a senior law enforcement official said.

Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., subpoenaed the FBI last month for the FD-1023 form, which he and Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, claimed describes an alleged criminal scheme involving Biden “relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions.” Comer has said the scheme involved a $5 million payment from a foreign national in exchange for a policy outcome.

Good news for anyone interested in fighting government corruption, of course. But my question is, why did they wait until they were under threat of contempt holding? If they can show the document on Monday, why could they not show it last Monday? Or they day after they got the request?

I look for the document to be heavily redacted, maybe even to the point of being useless. The DOJ/FBI/DNC is noted for that. If so, that would be the reason for the FBI's continued refusal to provide an actual copy. They are going to show it and brief it, but not provide a copy and not allow it to be photographed. Why would that be if they are going to redact it? Because they don't want to have the public see another document that looks like this:

The volume of the redactions themselves show how corrupt they are, which is what the redactions are intended to hide.

This part is kind of surprising:

The FBI has also expressed concerns that turning over the document could risk the life of the source. Republicans have said they are not interested in the informant’s identity, but the subpoena demands the document in full.

Not surpising that negative information about a senior Democrat is risky for the person providing it. It is surprising that the FBI would admit that. I just hope that the name doesn't get leaked and the poor man or woman hang themselves in their cell.

 

[excalibur]

We the People need to see it.

 

[MarathonMike]

FBI to show House Oversight leaders document in Biden probe on Monday

Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., had threatened to hold FBI Director Christopher Wray in contempt of Congress if he did not turn over the document to the panel.

www.nbcnews.com

The FBI will let the chair and ranking member of the House Oversight Committee review a document describing an allegation that Joe Biden accepted a bribe as vice president, but will black out information that could reveal the source’s identity, a senior law enforcement official said.

Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., subpoenaed the FBI last month for the FD-1023 form, which he and Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, claimed describes an alleged criminal scheme involving Biden “relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions.” Comer has said the scheme involved a $5 million payment from a foreign national in exchange for a policy outcome.

Good news for anyone interested in fighting government corruption, of course. But my question is, why did they wait until they were under threat of contempt holding? If they can show the document on Monday, why could they not show it last Monday? Or they day after they got the request?

I look for the document to be heavily redacted, maybe even to the point of being useless. The DOJ/FBI/DNC is noted for that. If so, that would be the reason for the FBI's continued refusal to provide an actual copy. They are going to show it and brief it, but not provide a copy and not allow it to be photographed. Why would that be if they are going to redact it? Because they don't want to have the public see another document that looks like this:

View attachment 791178

The volume of the redactions themselves show how corrupt they are, which is what the redactions are intended to hide.

This part is kind of surprising:

The FBI has also expressed concerns that turning over the document could risk the life of the source. Republicans have said they are not interested in the informant’s identity, but the subpoena demands the document in full.

Not surpising that negative information about a senior Democrat is risky for the person providing it. It is surprising that the FBI would admit that. I just hope that the name doesn't get leaked and the poor man or woman hang themselves in their cell.

It's already evident how corrupt the FBI has become. This is just latest episode of Democrats giving the finger to the American people. Wray isn't going to show them anything but his ass.

 

[Seymour Flops]

It's already evident how corrupt the FBI has become. This is just latest episode of Democrats giving the finger to the American people. Wray isn't going to show them anything but his ass.

As they have been.

They remind me of that idiot poster I had to ignore due to his oversized mooning sig.

 

[White 6]

We the People need to see it.

I don't need to see it, but it is important that the committee that subpoenaed the document be allowed to see it, as like it or they represent us.
If that is good enough for the chair of the committee, so be it. If not, Wray should comply in a way that is adequate to that committee.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Here, Comer says that he has already seen the document.



He knows what it in it, and he probably has a copy. The whistleblower law allows him to protect the whistle blower. There may be something about that document that would identify the whistle blower which would endanger his or her job and perhaps life. It may be something obvious, like the WB's email address, or it may be that somehow the documents are coded to identify who the copy was given to. Just speculating.

So what Comer needs is an official copy from the FBI, appropriately redacted, that he can show to the public and ask questions about in a hearing. The key is "appropriately." The FBI is noted for inappropriately redacting all actual information from documents that it produces.

So Wray's "offer" to show a heavily redacted copy to two congressmen is a distraction at best. Comer has indicated that he will move to hold Wray in contempt on Wednesday. Of course, the next step is to refer Wray's contempt case to the DOJ/FBI/DNC. It will then of course go nowhere.

But that is if Wray continues to refuse. We will find out if Wray is willing to be the next Eric Holder, of if his reputation means more to him than that.