I'll followup now that I'm out of bed and see that my comment seems controversial and counter to the thread. 2000+ reports from between 1999 to 2017 amounting

I'll followup now that I'm out of bed and see that my comment seems controversial and counter to the thread. 2000+ reports from between 1999 to 2017 amounting to a total of $2tn. Of those reports they only name-check Manafort, a Russian oligarch, and HSBC. How many people are feeling outrage because of the perceived connection between the current administration and corruption when these reports also cover years from the previous 3 administrations? How many characters connected to powerful Democrats could be found among these 2000 reports? What if someone at the IRS leaked their flagged accounts as "possible tax fraud" or if Google leaked suspicious traffic logs as "possible cyber terrorism"? How much information could the general public be expected to glean about actual bad actors based on similar reporting? How many people here actually understand what an SAR contains and why it is created? Can anyone cite me what % of SARs turn out to be indicators of actual crimes? I don't doubt that many of the people in these reports are guilty of crimes, but corruption investigations also take a long time and the more recent reports may very well be relevant to ongoing investigations and having them made public could spook suspects before authorities have gathered enough evidence to bring a charge. That is all, carry on.