If there were informants in the crowd, the defense might just blow their covers and get them killed. The filing simply says questions have to be cleared to protect those sources.
How does this reflect the FBI?
I guess the defense is "yes, we planned a riot, but the FBI knew and didn't stop me...so I am innocent"."..republicandaily.com.."
There you again trying to kill the messenger. Do you not recognize official government documents when you see them?"..republicandaily.com.."
They are going for a mistrial by threatening to reveal who the CHS are.How does this reflect the FBI?
Do you know what a CHS is?
Their interpretation is what is laughable..There you again trying to kill the messenger. Do you not recognize official government documents when you see them?
I understand. That's precisely the point to protect these persons from threats. But the low IQ crowd around here is teeing up on the FBI letters preceding it, as though it's some sort of nefarious plot. Which it isn'tThey are going for a mistrial by threatening to reveal who the CHS are.
Well, you did very good job of laying this out for the J6 conspiracy nuts - good job !Let's all have a sip of coffee and try and focus. CHS would be a confidential human source. Just because it has FBI placed in front of it doesn't mean that there was an army of FBI spies plotting something on January 6th. In that context it means you're not very intelligent if you fall for that. In an actual context what it means is confidential human source. In other words somebody involved in the affairs of the events of that day who can serve as a witness and testify against former collaborators and so on, whose safety needs to be protected. Why? Because crazy people will threaten an attempt to harm such a person. Hence the need to request a pre-screening and ruling by the judge
Yes I know what CHS means I suspect Senator Durbin does too.Let's all have a sip of coffee and try and focus. CHS would be a confidential human source. Just because it has FBI placed in front of it doesn't mean that there was an army of FBI spies plotting something on January 6th. In that context it means you're not very intelligent if you fall for that. In an actual context what it means is confidential human source. In other words somebody involved in the affairs of the events of that day who can serve as a witness and testify against former collaborators and so on, whose safety needs to be protected. Why? Because crazy people will threaten an attempt to harm such a person. Hence the need to request a pre-screening and ruling by the judge
I don't believe anything that comes out of or sympathizes with the Nazi ... er MAGA angertainment industry.There you again trying to kill the messenger. Do you not recognize official government documents when you see them?
Yes. Still nothing nefarious, no matter how hard you tryYes I know what CHS means I suspect Senator Durbin does too.
Senator Dick Durbin:
Today I led a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray requesting information on the FBI’s response to the ongoing threat of domestic terrorism in the U.S. I look forward to Director Wray's prompt response, and his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee next Tuesday.
Specifically regarding embedded agents or informants on Jan 6th.
Director Wray never responded.
Text of Senator Durbin:Yes. Still nothing nefarious, no matter how hard you try
Yes it would be for you.I don't believe anything that comes out of or sympathizes with the Nazi ... er MAGA angertainment industry.
The end analysis of this article is horrible
This is rather appropriate for this thread don't you think?Yes. Still nothing nefarious, no matter how hard you try
They were very much involved.
What does it have to do with your claim of involvement on January 6th?Text of Senator Durbin:
I can't post it due to the1000 character limit but here it is replete with numerous CHS/informant questions.
Director Wray never responded to the Senator......why, do you think?
And if it is found that the FBI either agents or assets urged that riot on, would you change your mind?What does it have to do with your claim of involvement on January 6th?
Maybe Wray doesn't care to answer durbin