

… and? They were private citizens and the records were relevant to the case. The only reason they’ve got their panties in a knot over this is because they’re trying to cover things up which is exactly why the investigation was happening in the first place. As long as the FBI had a warrant for those records they seized this is a non-story, just an intelligence agency literally doing their job exactly as they’re supposed to.



Sure, but that’s not the way the story is framed. The framing makes it seem like the FBI having the records is the story rather than the FBI firing agents for doing their jobs. The headline is just terrible and is blatantly biased to try to make the agents actions seem nefarious. To be clear I wasn’t criticizing the posting of this story or trying to suggest that the poster shouldn’t have submitted it, it’s more a criticism of reuters and the way they’ve chosen to approach this story. It would have been nice to see an article posted about this that focused more on the blatantly corrupt firing of the agents rather than dedicating most of the story to discussing the seizing of the records and getting sound bites from politicians.