You are 100% correct.

However we must also acknowledge that Trump has complete authority of declassifications.

If he wants to.... he can do it if she doesn't.

We have to ask the question why Trump has not declassified these things when his own appointees don't.

To play the devils advocate, could there be legitimate reasons?

That said.. it's very likely she is implicated to some degree in the documents. She ran the London office during 2016, and a lot of "news" came from London during that time. I'm sure her name is on a few documents, at least.

Unsure why Trump would appoint her, in that case unless he was under the impression she would expose Brennan (but now she is protecting him).

You are 100% correct.

However we must also acknowledge that Trump has complete authority of declassifications.

If he wants to.... he can do it if she doesn't.

We have to ask the question why Trump has not declassified these things when his own appointees don't.

To play the devils advocate, could there be legitimate reasons?

You are 100% correct.

However we must also acknowledge that Trump has complete authority of declassifications.

If he wants to.... he can do it if she doesn't.

We have to ask the question why Trump has not declassified these things when they don't.

To play the devils advocate, could there be legitimate reasons?