Byron York: FBI interview makes big news — so why is it still secret? (1 of 2)

James Baker — the general counsel of the FBI during both the Clinton email and Trump-Russia investigations — sat for two interviews with House investigators last October. After the sessions — one on Oct. 3, the other Oct. 18 — Republican Rep. Mark Meadows called parts of Baker's testimony "explosive." Republicans intended to make the interview transcripts public. The questioning was not conducted in a classified setting, and Baker had FBI and other lawyers with him the whole time. But the House still had to send the transcripts to the FBI for clearance, just to make sure public release would not reveal any classified or otherwise secret information. If Republicans hoped for a quick OK from the bureau, they were sorely disappointed. October passed. Then November. Then December. And now, half of January. The FBI still has the transcripts, and there is no word on when the bureau will clear them for release.

But now, the Baker transcripts are making news, even as they sit on FBI desks. Two major news stories in the past few days have been based in whole or in part on what Baker told lawmakers. Some news organizations appear to have read the transcripts, or at least significant portions of them, or had them read to reporters by someone with access. Suddenly, the Baker transcripts are hot. The most recent of the stories broke Tuesday. In a letter to Justice Department prosecutors, Meadows and Rep. Jim Jordan, now ranking minority on the House Judiciary Committee, revealed that Baker is the subject of a criminal leak investigation. It wasn't clear from the letter what the leak was — it appeared to be dossier-related, and in the interviews the two sides discussed Baker's interactions with Mother Jones journalist David Corn, but it was not clear from the letter what, precisely, the leak involved.'''

To tell the story, Jordan and Meadows included tantalizing bits of the still-secret Baker transcripts. The excerpt began with Daniel Levin, Baker's lawyer, cutting off House investigators as they tried to question Baker. "You may or may not know, he's the subject of a leak investigation which is still — a criminal leak investigation that's still active at the Justice Department," Levin said. It turned out the lawmakers did not know. "You're saying he's under criminal investigation?" said Meadows. "That's why you're not letting him answer?" "Yes," said Levin.

Levin told lawmakers that John Durham, the U.S. attorney in Connecticut, is conducting the investigation. It is not clear why Durham is handling the case, or whether it has anything to do with Connecticut, or whether Durham has a special assignment. But that's what is happening. Jordan noted that Baker had just moments earlier discussed his interactions with Corn. No more, said Levin. "Well, he's talked a little bit about it, but I don't want him talking about conversations he's had with reporters," Levin told Jordan. Jordan pressed. "So he talked to me only about what Mr. Corn may have given him via information or actual documents or recordings or anything else, but he's not allowed to talk to me about information he may have given Mr. Corn himself?" "That's right," said Levin.

The Baker excerpt, revealing the criminal investigation, is a new and important part of the story of the FBI's handling of the Trump-Russia investigation. Release of the full transcripts could shed new light on the FBI's use of the Trump dossier in the Russia probe. But they remain secret — and it is the FBI that has the final word on whether and when to allow the release of information that is unflattering to the FBI.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/byron-york-fbi-interview-makes-big-news-so-why-is-it-still-secret

Articles referenced in this piece:

F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/us/politics/fbi-trump-russia-inquiry.html

Transcripts detail how FBI debated whether Trump was 'following directions' of Russia

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/14/politics/trump-fbi-debate-investigation/index.html

>>4777450

Letter to: John H. Durham, US Attorney's office for the District of Connecticut.

From: Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows, House Republican Oversight Committee

Pelosi asks Trump to reschedule State of the Union, citing ‘security concerns’

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday asked President Trump to reschedule his State of the Union address, citing "security concerns" amid the government shutdown.

“Sadly, given the security concerns and unless government re-opens this week, I suggest that we work together to determine another suitable date after government has re-opened for this address or for you to consider delivering your State of the Union address in writing to the Congress,” the California Democrat wrote in a letter to Trump. Pelosi had previously invited the president to give his address Jan. 29, which Trump accepted.

Pelosi said the government shutdown has had an effect on the Department of Homeland Security and Secret Service, which are responsible for ensuring the safety of top government officials attending the event. Both agencies “have not been funded for 26 days now — with critical departments hamstrung by furloughs,” she wrote. The White House did not immediately respond to the Washington Examiner’s request for comment.

There is no constitutional requirement that the president deliver the address in person. The address was regularly delivered in writing, beginning when President Thomas Jefferson was in the White House. That continued until more than 100 years later, when President Woodrow Wilson began giving the address in person in 1913. Ronald Reagan’s 1986 address was postponed after the space shuttle Challenger exploded less than two minutes after launch on the day of his scheduled address to address Congress. Former President Bill Clinton gave his 1999 State of the Union address in the House chamber in the midst of his Senate impeachment trial — in which he was acquitted weeks later.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/pelosi-asks-trump-to-reschedule-state-of-the-union-citing-security-concerns

Activists hand out fake Washington Post newspapers outside White House declaring Trump's demise

Activists handed out fake copies of the Washington Post print edition on Wednesday outside the White House that said President Trump was abruptly leaving office.

The liberal group MoveOn shared images on social media of the front page, which bore the top headline: "UNPRESIDENTED." The sub-headline said, "Trump hastily departs White House, ending crisis." "Activists are handing out satire newspapers in front of the White House, predicting a near-future in which Trump leaves the presidency," MoveOn said on its instagram account. Another story's headline read: "Celebrations break out worldwide as Trump era ends." A third said: "Pres. Pence begins 'clipped duck' term."

Several journalists commented on the realistic-looking Post fake, with some calling on the outlet to do something about the activists' activities. ".@washingtonpost you might want to deal with the lady handing out fake copies of the Post outside Union Station. I tried to explain why this is problematic but she wasn’t having it," said Ian Kullgren of Politico. Bill Kuchman, also of Politico, noted, "Whoever designed this fake Trump front page has a remarkable strong grasp of Washington Post design. Fonts are a bit off, though."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/activists-hand-out-fake-washington-post-newspapers-outside-white-house-declaring-trumps-demise

>>4777577

>>4777608

>>4777664

Completely and Totally Unhinged

>>4777696

Probably, trying to create civil unrest, riots…ect,