Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.992 [SLACK_001206] · slack_pm:msg:10343

Date: 2021-08-16 18:14
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Robert F. Garry
Topics: Intelligence community assessments

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

Scripps letter is all fine with me. Yes, you can be sure that Tony gave the Intelligence Community the unredactedemails from February 1, 2. Based on a conversation that I had with the FBI and CIA I'm sure they have had everything (excepting this Slack channel) for some time, including the Bloom emails.

Extracted statements

Rule-extracted, not adjudicated. The grade says what may be done with each one; read the document above before relying on any of them.

Statement	Grade	Attribution	Stance
Yes, you can be sure that Tony gave the Intelligence Community the unredactedemails from February 1, 2.	own voice, substantive	speaker_own	asserts
Based on a conversation that I had with the FBI and CIA I'm sure they have had everything (excepting this Slack channel) for some time, including the Bloom emails.	own voice, substantive	speaker_own	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

Yes, you can be sure that Tony gave the Intelligence Community the unredactedemails from February 1, 2.

own voice, substantive

speaker_own

asserts

Based on a conversation that I had with the FBI and CIA I'm sure they have had everything (excepting this Slack channel) for some time, including the Bloom emails.

own voice, substantive

speaker_own

asserts

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

2021-08-16 17:42 Kristian G. Andersen open

I agree with Eddie's concern and I flagged this exact issue with the lawyers. The difference here being that we're dealing with a confidential response to congress and not entities like US RTK.That said, I'm in agreement with Eddie's concern, so let me relay that to our lawyers - I think they'll chose to _not_ include based on that feedback. (Emails 1 and 3 will be included, but they're already public unredacted).
2021-08-16 17:51 Edward C. Holmes open

I just don't believe these emails will stay confidential
2021-08-16 17:52 Kristian G. Andersen open

That's my concern too. To be clear though - they might well already have them.
2021-08-16 17:53 Kristian G. Andersen open

(because, presumably, the intelligence community already have them - which is fine, I still find it annoying these were so heavily redacted)
2021-08-16 18:14 Robert F. Garry

Scripps letter is all fine with me. Yes, you can be sure that Tony gave the Intelligence Community the unredactedemails from February 1, 2. Based on a conversation that I had with the FBI and CIA I'm sure they have had everything (excepting this Slack channel) for some time, including the Bloom emails.

Full conversation →