These admissions should outrage Americans: The FBI is intentionally failing to document confidential sources’ credibility and reliability problems so defense attorneys do not learn of them! Or, as the IG report concluded, “by withholding potentially critical information from validation reports, the FBI runs the risks that (1) prosecutors may not have complete and reliable information when a CHS serves as a witness and, thus, may have difficulties complying with their discovery obligations.”Indeed, you can’t meet your obligations to disclose exculpatory information if there is a systematic avoidance of documenting that information.
Read the rest.
2 comments:
I found this headline (from the NYTimes) unintentionally hilarious:
A watchdog report criticized parts of the Russia inquiry but exonerated ex-F.B.I. leaders of President Trump's accusations of political bias.
So.... when Rethugs (wrongly, IMO, because lack of evidence doesn't exonerate - that's just not a legal standard) claimed that Mueller's report - which did not find sufficient evidence to conclude that anyone in the Trump campaign colluded w/Russia - somehow "exonerated" Trump, that was a scandalous lie that threatened both our democracy and our very sanity.
Yet Horowitz's report - which did not find sufficient evidence of FBI bias or a conspiracy to target Trump - "exonerates" the FBI.
Two standards in one! Incroyable...
Richard Jewel? Ruby Ridge? Waco 1? Waco 2?
I've been talking about the victims of Leftist totalitarianism for some time now. But America needs their Deep State government goons, or a Horowitz report, to suddenly wake... that's ridiculous.
Post a Comment