FBI refuses to disclose documents on Trumps call to Russia to hack Clinton

[blue-wave]

Source: The Guardian

The US justice department is refusing to disclose FBI documents relating to Donald Trump’s highly contentious election year call on Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails.

Senior DoJ officials have declined to release the documents on grounds that such disclosure could “interfere with enforcement proceedings”. In a filing to a federal court in Washington DC, the DoJ states that “because of the existence of an active, ongoing investigation, the FBI anticipates that it will … withhold all records”.

The statement suggests that Trump’s provocative comment last July is being seen by the FBI as relevant to its own ongoing investigation.

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/11/justice-department-fbi-documents-trump-russia-hack-clinton-email

[ProudProgressiveNow]

1. K&R nt

[onenote]

2. Another article blowing the FBI's response to the FOIA request out of proportion

This article and others like it are making a big deal out of the FBI's invocation of the Section 7(A) exemption from disclosure under FOIA. This exemption is routinely and broadly utilized by law enforcement during a pending investigation. Moreover, the fact that the FBI's investigative materials may have documents that reference Trump's statement doesn't mean that those statements are themselves the subject of the investigation or even relevant to it. The reference to Trump's statement might appear in a document that is discussing other matters relevant to the investigation and it is because of those other matters that the FBI is invoking Section 7(A). Drawing conclusions that the invocation of 7(A) means more than that is just speculation.

[HopeAgain]

4. And isn't a kinda odd request?

I mean the public statement is what it is for all to see. Further, it was a request (easily characterized as sarcasm) by Trump to "find" documents which allegedly no longer existed anywhere and could not be produced under a subpoena. Surely if Trump was colluding with Russia, it wouldn't be through a statement made for all to see?

Not that I doubt there was some collusion somewhere, I just don't get the way that FOIA request was worded.

[LiberalArkie]

7. You mean the request wasn't witnessed by 2 people and notarized?

How dare he.

[riversedge]

8. The FBi consideres Trumps comments important. And his campaign is under investigation. Glad they

are not giving out the information at this time.

[onenote]

9. why do you think they consider the statements important?

[LudwigPastorius]

5. Agreed.

I get the feeling that people don't need to force gleaned clues into conclusions with possible jaw-dropping results.

Those may be just around the corner. No speculation needed.

[Honeycombe8]

6. Who filed the FOIA request? nt

[iluvtennis]

3. As they should refuse to disclose them while investigation is on-going. Not sure why the MIT guy...

...and the reporter need the documents anyway.