OOPS: DOJ appears to have inadvertently posted a sealed filing asking Judge Mehta to grill ...

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Popehat Retweeted

OOPS: DOJ appears to have inadvertently posted a sealed filing asking Judge Mehta to grill Oath Keepers defense attorneys about whether they leaked to the NYT that one of the key defense witnesses was a CHS for the FBI.

courtlistener.com
Notice (Other) – #389 in United States v. RHODES, III (D.D.C., 1:22-cr-00015) – CourtListener.com
Notice (Other)

Link to tweet

[msfiddlestix]

1. What is a CHS?

[Native]

2. a confidential human source

[msfiddlestix]

7. ✔️ Ty n/t

[mahatmakanejeeves]

3. I didn't know either. I had to look it up.

https://www.google.com/search?q=chs+for+the+fbi

The Attorney General's Guidelines Regarding the Use of FBI Confidential Human Sources (AG Guidelines) define a CHS as any individual who is believed to be providing useful and credible information to the FBI and whose identity, information, or relationship with the FBI warrants confidential handling.

https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2019/a20009.pdf

[msfiddlestix]

5. Thank you

Sort of what the term "whistleblower" is commonly used. But officially of course in legal docs, it's CHS.

On the other hand, an informant suffices for the public.

Well, is this a bad thing? Something the public would learn eventually, just untimely?

[PunkinPi]

4. According to the thread, CHS is "Confidential human source". nt

[msfiddlestix]

6. ✔️ Ty n/t

[CincyDem]

8. Maybe. DOJ isn't staffed by a pack of third tier lawyers/para legal.

Maybe it was a mistake.

Maybe it was a “mistake”…wink wink.

[DarthDem]

9. I doubt that was inadvertent.