General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNYT: Informant was American academic who teaches in Britain.
WASHINGTON President Trump accused the F.B.I. on Friday, without evidence, of sending a spy to secretly infiltrate his 2016 campaign for political purposes even before the bureau had any inkling of the phony Russia hoax.
In fact, F.B.I. agents sent an informant to talk to two campaign advisers only after they received evidence that the pair had suspicious contacts linked to Russia during the campaign. The informant, an American academic who teaches in Britain, made contact late that summer with one campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, according to people familiar with the matter. He also met repeatedly in the ensuing months with the other aide, Carter Page, who was also under F.B.I. scrutiny for his ties to Russia.
The role of the informant is at the heart of the newest battle between top law enforcement officials and Mr. Trumps congressional allies over the F.B.I.s most politically charged investigations in decades. The lawmakers, who say they are concerned that federal investigators are abusing their authorities, have demanded documents from the Justice Department about the informant.
Law enforcement officials have refused, saying that handing over the documents would imperil both the sources anonymity and safety. The New York Times has learned the sources identity but typically does not name informants to preserve their safety.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/us/politics/trump-fbi-informant-russia-investigation.html?action=Click&contentCollection=BreakingNews&contentID=67000322&pgtype=Homepage
underpants
(182,271 posts)That is going to burn him up to no end.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)And met repeatedly with Carter Page?
Did they just out the informant? There are only so many American academics in Britain and how many of those would know Carter Page?
I'm sure the Trump people know who this person is. Very sad this is happening.
Wwcd
(6,288 posts)Was Farrow talking about this informant to the MSM?
I didn't see his interview but this was the story they were concerned about.
If the Informant's identity was being held secure as a witness, by the FBI & Mueller, then Farrow or someone else outing who this person was, & saying they knew the source could certainly be a more serious situation.
Journalists can go to prisin for refusing to name their source IF they are brought under oath by DOJ to reveal the name.
Wasn't a journalist in this situation for not revealing who outed CIA Agent Valerie Plame?
I didn't follow that closely at the time so correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm just trying to lend a discussion as to Farrow's revealing info from a source who may be under protection by Mueller's investigation.
Having Trump's Attorney's in a position to demand to know the source now, may put Farrow, or whomever revealed the info, in a position of having to answer under oath who the source of that info is, either give up the sources name or face prison.
If he gives up the source's name it could then jeopardize Mueller's investigation, esp if the source is a protected witness.
It would let Trump's attorneys know what Mueller has on them as far as this witness goes.
The conversation I read last night about this had people yelling at Farrow to STOP TALKING...YOU CAN'T REVEAL THAT ..because it puts Farrow in a tough spot.
I cannot locate the tweet thread where I read this, so if anyone has any info about this..please post it.
Thanks..
riversedge
(69,710 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,107 posts)RockRaven
(14,782 posts)this constitutes a brazen publicly conducted de facto if not de jure conspiracy to attempt murder by Trump/Nunes/et al.
The media ought to be reporting it as such.
Ccarmona
(1,180 posts)Wed get a visit from the FBI, too. The Agent May or may not identify herself (or himself) to any of us, either.
Me.
(35,454 posts)just for a scoop? Do they think people won't be able to figure it out and then, wanting their own scoop, publish the name?
mopinko
(69,804 posts)there was talk that the fbi was being pro-active about this witness. i suspect that means they have been moving people to witness protection.
roamer65
(36,739 posts)He would be a known asset to British Intelligence and they will step in to protect him.