James Comey is my Homie

[burntorangebongos 10681]

huh? Someone didn't read the thread at all and just came in with guns blazing for no reason. We can disagree with his decisions but still find him to be an honest man.

Some may think he is not honest, but that is a minority opinion.

So far, no one I've run across has the opinion that he mishandled classified material.

Read the thread, bud. It is a pretty good one, imo. Hugo has even scanned in some of his book which has really added to the discussion.

[jimmyjazz 45560]

5 hours ago, burntorangebongos said:

huh? Someone didn't read the thread at all and just came in with guns blazing for no reason.

He's disconnected on this one.  He neg repped me for saying something that he appears to largely agree with.

Get some sleep, HOOAH.

Edited April 21, 2018 by jimmyjazz

[Ragnarok 103]

Some may not think he is honest because he is not honest. When you go around talking about how honest your are ALL the time, it's a red flag that you are dishonest.  And anybody who says "I don't do weasel moves" is most likely a weasel.  Case in point. He briefs Trump on the dossier, while knowing and telling the President that CNN is looking for a news hook to publish it. Do you think Comey was really unaware that he was providing it?  So he tells the President he "doesn't do weasel moves",  while actually doing the ultimate weasel move to a man he despised. Shameless.

As for his honesty, well, an honest guy runs an honest investigation.  His investigations of Hillary was a sham and a coverup. It is unprecedented to offer immunity to targets in an investigation who proffer testimony that doesn't incriminate anyone else.   It has the exact same effect of offering them immunity in exchange for refusing to incriminate Hillary.   And it's an insult to our intelligence for him to be out there pretending he ran an honest investigation.  I'm happy he is such a lying dishonest weasel though, because if he would have done the right thing and indicted Hillary for her obvious crimes, we'd probably be looking at President Biden right now.  No way Biden loses the midwest.   Trump won mainly because men just detest Hillary.

Edited April 21, 2018 by Ragnarok

[jimmyjazz 45560]

That's absurd.  The "news hook" already existed -- Congress and President Obama had long known about the dossier.

As for the rest of your post, lulz.

[Ragnarok 103]

And Hugo, when you get to the part where Comey discusses in detail why he accepted the proffer from Paul Combetta that he erased all of Hillary's emails all on his own, how about posting that page?

[Ragnarok 103]

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

That's absurd.  The "news hook" already existed -- Congress and President Obama had long known about the dossier.

As for the rest of your post, lulz.

Well, maybe the news hook already existed, but the one the media ran with was that the FBI briefed the President on the dossier...

[Judge Roybeanbag 11810]

How about the fact that James Comey aside, all this shit still exists, and we are not in a vacuum. 

[jimmyjazz 45560]

25 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

Well, maybe the news hook already existed, but the one the media ran with was that the FBI briefed the President on the dossier...

As they did the previous President.

Imagine if Trump had NOT been briefed.  Talk about a shitstorm.

[Anastasis 23394]

Biden got a little creeper in him, but he would be a 1x10^infinity better POTUS than Trump.  We know that if Clinton won, Clinton would have never gotten any legislative wins out of a GOP congress, and GOP would have increased their position mid-terms and taken WH in 2020. If Biden wins, I think it plays out largely the same but he is able to manage at least a couple legislative wins. Biden would have won 2016 in an EC landslide in a match up against Trump.  

we'd probably be looking at President Biden right now

Edited April 21, 2018 by Anastasis

[Hugo Stiglitz 23359]

Comey has a CNN town hall tonight at 7PM.

Also, this was pretty cool.

 

[Ragnarok 103]

On 4/21/2018 at 8:18 AM, Ragnarok said:

And Hugo, when you get to the part where Comey discusses in detail why he accepted the proffer from Paul Combetta that he erased all of Hillary's emails all on his own, how about posting that page?

Well?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23359]

Read the book and find out.

[Ragnarok 103]

No, 'cause I know the lying weasel didn't offer up anything of value.  You can't explain away the inexplicable.

[TwiceHorn 31289]

On 4/21/2018 at 8:09 AM, Ragnarok said:

Some may not think he is honest because he is not honest. When you go around talking about how honest your are ALL the time, it's a red flag that you are dishonest.  And anybody who says "I don't do weasel moves" is most likely a weasel.  Case in point. He briefs Trump on the dossier, while knowing and telling the President that CNN is looking for a news hook to publish it. Do you think Comey was really unaware that he was providing it?  So he tells the President he "doesn't do weasel moves",  while actually doing the ultimate weasel move to a man he despised. Shameless.

As for his honesty, well, an honest guy runs an honest investigation.  His investigations of Hillary was a sham and a coverup. It is unprecedented to offer immunity to targets in an investigation who proffer testimony that doesn't incriminate anyone else.   It has the exact same effect of offering them immunity in exchange for refusing to incriminate Hillary.   And it's an insult to our intelligence for him to be out there pretending he ran an honest investigation.  I'm happy he is such a lying dishonest weasel though, because if he would have done the right thing and indicted Hillary for her obvious crimes, we'd probably be looking at President Biden right now.  No way Biden loses the midwest.   Trump won mainly because men just detest Hillary.

I'm as hard on Comey as anyone, but I'm not convinced that he's dishonest or a weasel.  He's not a very good politician, which may indicate that he is insufficiently dishonest and weaselly.

 

But the bold is not correct.  John Comey couldn't have indicted Hillary Clinton if he wanted to.  Which underscores the whole problem with that deal ab initio:  it wasn't his call, it wasn't his responsiblity.  He never should have publicly assumed it.

Edited April 26, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Ragnarok 103]

Justice was on the record saying they would follow Comey's recommendation.

[PittsburghTiger 6137]

The James Comey memos that leaked to the media and were a catalyst for the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller were more widely shared than previously known, three sources familiar with the matter tell Fox News.

Sources identified former U.S. Attorney and special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald as the likely recipient, and did not rule out a third individual, in addition to Columbia law professor Daniel Richman, who shared contents with the media. The memos documenting Comey’s private conversations with the president are now the subject of a Justice Department Inspector General review over the presence of classified information.

Patrick Fitzgerald is a longtime friend of Comey's and now his lawyer, as first reported by Talking Points Memo. Fitzgerald did not respond to emails or a voicemail seeking comment.  

Fox News asked Fitzgerald how many memos he received, if Comey, Richman or a third party provided them, whether they were stored securely because of classified contents, and whether the FBI took steps -- to include his personal and business electronics -- to mitigate the spill of classified information.  In the event he did not receive any Comey memos, Fitzgerald was invited to provide an on the record statement to Fox News.

The publisher of Comey's book, “A Higher Loyalty,” did not respond to Fox News’ questions. An FBI spokesperson offered no comment.

During his June 2017 Senate testimony, after President Trump fired him, Comey did not describe Richman as an FBI employee, and seemed to give no public indication the memos were shared more broadly. The former FBI director testified that he gave the memos, documenting conversations with the president, to Richman to kick-start what is now the Mueller probe. 

"I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. Didn't do it myself, for a variety of reasons. But I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel," Comey told Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who asked who it was. "A good friend of mine who's a professor at Columbia Law School."

On Tuesday, Richman confirmed to Fox News he worked for Comey at the FBI as a “special government employee” -- known by the shorthand SGE -- on an unpaid basis. Sources familiar with Richman’s FBI work said Comey assigned him to  "special projects." Richman had a security clearance and badge access to the FBI building. Richman's employment was formalized through a memorandum of understanding.

In his book, Comey wrote about Fitzgerald, his “close friend since our days in law school,” and about appointing Fitzgerald as special counsel to investigate the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity.

Comey wrote that on the day Trump fired him, “All I knew was what was reported in the media.  After much scrambling, we learned that a White House employee was on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, trying to deliver a letter to me from the president.  I took a call from my wife, who said she and kids had seen the news.  I replied that I didn’t know whether it was true and we were trying to find out what was going on.  Pat Fitzgerald called and I told him the same thing.”

He also wrote, “The reasons for that firing were lies, but the letter was real. I felt sick to my stomach and slightly dazed.”

Patrick Fitzgerald’s name also was brought up during the Hillary Clinton email investigation in cryptic text messages between FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/25/comey-memos-likely-shared-with-former-us-attorney-patrick-fitzgerald-sources-say.html

[PittsburghTiger 6137]

The Columbia law professor James Comey used as a go-between last year to leak the contents of sensitive memos to the media confirmed to Fox News on Tuesday that he previously worked as a “special government employee” (SGE) for Comey’s FBI on an unpaid basis.

The professor, Daniel Richman, confirmed the special status in response to an inquiry from Fox News, while referring other questions, including on the scope of his work, to the FBI. 

"I did indeed have SGE status with the Bureau (for no pay)," Richman wrote in an email.

Richman emerged last year as the former FBI director’s contact for leaking memos documenting his private discussions with President Trump – memos that are now the subject of an inspector general review over the presence of classified material. Sources familiar with Richman’s status at the FBI told Fox News that he was assigned to "special projects" by Comey, and had a security clearance as well as badge access to the building. Richman’s status was the subject of a Memorandum of Understanding.

While Richman's portfolio included the use of encrypted communications by terror suspects, the sources said Richman also was sent talking points about the FBI's handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation. Those talking points attempted to compare and contrast Clinton's use of an unsecured personal server exclusively for government business with the case of retired Gen. David Petraeus, who shared classified information with his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell, as well as the case brought against the late Sandy Berger. The former national security adviser under President Clinton pleaded guilty to the unauthorized removal and retention of classified material from the National Archives.  

Incidentally, another “special government employee” who has come under scrutiny was Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, among others, previously questioned Abedin's special status that allowed her to work at the Clinton State Department and private-sector entities at the same time.

Lawmakers are only beginning to raise questions about Richman’s status. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo,” said the information about Richman and his special FBI status first emerged during closed-door testimony by Comey's former chief of staff James Rybicki before the House oversight and judiciary committees.

"[D]uring that deposition, it was brought out that Daniel Richman, the guy who information was leaked through to The New York Times, had this special status called special government employee status, where he could sort of come and go in the FBI,” Jordan said. He said he could not speak to the significance, but "it seems kind of interesting that the guy who Comey leaks to is a good friend, who had this sort of unfettered access into the FBI."

Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., also raised questions about the status. 

"It's certainly interesting that Director Comey would offer a special job and give full access to his friend when there are 35,000 employees at the FBI. And it isn't just that he gave these memos to a friend--he gave them to another FBI employee he had hand-picked to act as a 'special government employee' of the FBI. The question becomes: how many other people did he give these memos to?" he told Fox News in a statement.

According to the Office of Government Ethics, a special government employee is "an officer or employee who is retained, designated, appointed, or employed to perform temporary duties, with or without compensation, for not more than 130 days during any period of 365 consecutive days."

Fox News first reached out on Friday to Richman, who initially declined to comment on his special status with the FBI. Based on new information, Fox News on Tuesday provided detailed questions about his responsibilities under the "special projects" portfolio -- and whether they included the Clinton investigation, the Russian counter-intelligence probe, and contact with the media on behalf of senior FBI leadership.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/24/comeys-memo-leak-contact-had-special-government-employee-status-at-fbi.html

[Hugo Stiglitz 23359]

Good luck with putting Comey on trial. 

If he broke the law, I'm sure he'd face the consequences but let's not pretend that this media assault on Comey is about dispensing justice. 

All these facts were well know almost a year ago so please spare me with the Comey leaker narrative. 

 

[David Dennison 18661]

It now appears that Richman had a security clearance, so leaking to him isn't a crime. The information he passed on to the media was unclassified, so there goes that.

 

[jimmyjazz 45560]

Just now, David Dennison said:

It now appears that Richman had a security clearance, so leaking to him isn't a crime. The information he passed on to the media was unclassified, so there goes that.

 

Which is exactly consistent with what he has said all along.  But leaker!!!

[David Dennison 18661]

Team Smart v. Team Stupid is very entertaining.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23359]

Damn, Comey’s book sold more copies in the first week than the combined sales of “Fire and Fury” and Hillary’s ”What Happened”.

Not bad for a guy both parties loves to hate.

 

 

By ALEXANDRA ALTER

April 24, 2018

Former F.B.I. director James Comey’s book, “A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership,” has dominated headlines for more than a week, and became an instant blockbuster, selling more than 600,000 copies in all formats during its first week on sale.

Mr. Comey’s publisher, Flatiron Books, has ordered multiple reprints to meet demand, and now has more than a million copies in print.

The early sales figures for Mr. Comey’s book dwarfed other recent political best sellers. Hillary Clinton’s memoir, “What Happened,” sold more than 300,000 copies in all formats in its first week on sale. And “Fire and Fury,” Michael Wolff’s explosive look inside the Trump White House, sold around 200,000 hardcover copies in its first full week on sale, according to NPD BookScan, which tracks about 85 percent of print sales. Mr. Wolff’s book, which came out in January, has sold more than 2 million copies to date.

 

 

Edited May 11, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Anastasis 23394]

James Comey is not Andrew McCabe's homey.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/05/politics/andrew-mccabe-immunity-grassley/index.html

(CNN)Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe has requested the Senate Judiciary Committee provide him with immunity from prosecution in exchange for testifying at an upcoming congressional hearing focused on how senior officials at the FBI and Justice Department handled the investigation of Hillary Clinton's private email server, according to a letter obtained by CNN.

"Under the terms of such a grant of use immunity, no testimony or other information provided by Mr. McCabe could be used against him in a criminal case," wrote Michael Bromwich, a lawyer for McCabe, to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, who has requested McCabe testify next week.

 

Grassley, an Iowa Republican, has quietly requested that several former officials appear in front of the Judiciary Committee to discuss the long-awaited internal Justice Department report, which sources say will detail a series of missteps surrounding the Justice Department and FBI's investigation into Clinton's handling of classified information while secretary of state.

The inspector general's report has not yet been released, but Grassley has invited former FBI Director James Comey and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch to testify as well, according to those familiar with the plans.

The stakes for McCabe's appearance, however, are particularly high. The former No. 2 at the FBI is entangled in a separate criminal investigation stemming from an earlier report from the inspector general's office that concluded he lied to internal investigators. McCabe has steadfastly denied wrongdoing, but any congressional testimony he provides could have serious implications for his criminal case.

"Mr. McCabe is willing to testify, but because of the criminal referral, he must be afforded suitable legal protection," Bromwich wrote to Grassley. "This is a textbook case for granting use immunity. . . . If this Committee is unwilling or unable to obtain such an order, then Mr. McCabe will have to no choice but to invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination."

 

If McCabe invokes his Fifth Amendment right instead of answering certain questions, it could set up a contentious confrontation with lawmakers. They could serve him with a subpoena and if he continues to refuse to testify, lawmakers could pursue a contempt resolution against him and refer the matter for prosecution by the DC US Attorney's Office or enforce the subpoena through civil action in federal court.

Bromwich's letter also makes clear that McCabe is willing to provide emails that "demonstrate that Mr. McCabe advised former Director Comey, in October 2016, that Mr. McCabe was working with FBI colleagues to correct inaccuracies before certain media stories were published."

 

The discrepancy between Comey's recollection and McCabe's statements to internal investigators about authorizing FBI officials to talk to a reporter about an ongoing investigation regarding the Clinton Foundation in 2016 served as one of the linchpins to the inspector general's earlier report finding he "lacked candor."

 

Grassley wrote to the FBI Tuesday requesting that McCabe be released from a nondisclosure agreement that prevents him from providing those emails, among other records.

 

McCabe was fired from the FBI in March less than two days shy of his retirement after rocky final months of service. During the 2016 campaign, then-Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump latched on to a report that McCabe's wife accepted nearly $500,000 from the political action committee of then-Democratic Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a Clinton family ally, during a failed bid for state Senate in 2015. Though McCabe was not promoted to deputy director at the FBI until months after his wife lost the race, Trump continues to assert on Twitter that McCabe had a conflict of interest in later overseeing the FBI's investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server, given the donations to his wife.

 

Grassley has set the Judiciary hearing for next Monday, but it could be delayed, as the inspector general's report -- while a moving target -- is still not public yet. Sources familiar with the report describe it as a massive undertaking, walking through the events leading up to the 2016 election over roughly 500 pages.

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Comey is a tragic hero and Dorothy all rolled up in one package.  

[David Dennison 18661]

James Comey got Donald Trump elected and he fired him.

What an idiot.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23359]

7 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Comey is a tragic hero and Dorothy all rolled up in one package.  

Comey is the Ned Stark of the Trump Administration 

[Chooky 13302]

Off topic, but Onboard 2.0 held up traffic at a porn shop booth by trying to figure out how to fit his entire ass through the glory hole.

[GRHorn 105]

I hope they don’t give McCabe immunity. One of these higher ups needs to do some time. 

Btw did any of you Surly posters contribute to the Honorable Mr McCabe’s legal fund when he was “wrongfully” fired?  #Hero

[krutov 18]

5 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Comey is the Ned Stark of the Trump Administration 

janos slynt maybe

[The People’s Elbow 707]

Comey was on “Wait Wait...Don’t Tell Me!” today, and it was glorious. 

https://pca.st/episode/38b1a629-db29-4a96-982f-0277ae5e3f54

His segment starts at the 20:00 mark. 

[Anastasis 23394]

Remember that whole Russian disinformation operation that influenced James Comey's handing of the Clinton investigation story in WaPo?  Guess who is apparently being investigated for potential involvement in leaking highly sensitive classified materials related to those articles. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/16/us/politics/leak-investigation-james-comey.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors in Washington are investigating a years-old leak of classified information about a Russian intelligence document, and they appear to be focusing on whether the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey illegally provided details to reporters, according to people familiar with the inquiry.

The case is the second time the Justice Department has investigated leaks potentially involving Mr. Comey, a frequent target of President Trump, who has repeatedly called him a “leaker.” Mr. Trump recently suggested without evidence that Mr. Comey should be prosecuted for “unlawful conduct” and spend years in prison.

The timing of the investigation could raise questions about whether it was motivated at least in part by politics. Prosecutors and F.B.I. agents typically investigate leaks of classified information around the time they appear in the news media, not years later. And the inquiry is the latest politically sensitive matter undertaken by the United States attorney’s office in Washington, which is also conducting an investigation of Mr. Comey’s former deputy, Andrew G. McCabe, that has been plagued by problems.

Law enforcement officials are scrutinizing at least two news articles about the F.B.I. and Mr. Comey, published in The New York Times and The Washington Post in 2017, that mentioned the Russian government document, according to the people familiar with the investigation. Hackers working for Dutch intelligence officials obtained the document and provided it to the F.B.I., and both its existence and the collection of it were highly classified secrets, the people said.

The document played a key role in Mr. Comey’s decision to sideline the Justice Department and announce in July 2016 that the F.B.I. would not recommend that Hillary Clinton face charges in her use of a private email server to conduct government business while secretary of state.

 

Rest is behind the tags

The investigation into the leaks began in recent months, the people said, but it is not clear whether prosecutors have impaneled a grand jury or how many witnesses they have interviewed. What prompted the inquiry is also unclear, but the Russian document was mentioned in a book published last fall, “Deep State: Trump, the F.B.I., and the Rule of Law” by James B. Stewart, a Times reporter.

A lawyer for Mr. Comey declined to comment, as did a spokeswoman for the United States attorney’s office in Washington.

Mr. Trump has repeatedly pressured the Justice Department to investigate his perceived enemies. In 2018, he told the White House counsel at the time, Donald F. McGahn II, to prosecute Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Comey. Mr. McGahn refused, telling the president that he did not have the authority to order investigations and that doing so could prompt abuse-of-power accusations. Mr. Trump had also discussed the appointment of a second special counsel to conduct the investigations he sought.

Previously, federal prosecutors in New York scrutinized Mr. Comey after his personal lawyer and friend, Daniel C. Richman, provided the contents of a memo about Mr. Comey’s interactions with Mr. Trump to a Times reporter at Mr. Comey’s request. Though officials retroactively determined that the memo contained classified information, prosecutors declined to charge Mr. Comey with illegally disclosing the material. The Justice Department’s inspector general, who had examined Mr. Comey’s conduct and referred his findings to prosecutors in New York, concluded that Mr. Comey violated F.B.I. policy.

Editors’ Picks

Take a Look at These Rarely Seen Andy Warhol Photos

The Sex Scene Evolves for the #MeToo Era

As Joe Burrow Spoke of Hunger, His Hometown Felt the Lift

The latest investigation involves material that Dutch intelligence operatives siphoned off Russian computers and provided to the United States government. The information included a Russian analysis of what appeared to be an email exchange during the 2016 presidential campaign between Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democrat of Florida who was also the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee at the time, and Leonard Benardo, an official with the Open Society Foundations, a democracy-promoting organization whose founder, George Soros, has long been a target of the far right.

In the email, Ms. Wasserman Schultz suggested that then-Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch would make sure that Mrs. Clinton would not be prosecuted in the email case. Both Ms. Wasserman Schultz and Mr. Benardo have denied being in contact, suggesting the document was meant to be Russian disinformation.

That document was one of the key factors that drove Mr. Comey to hold a news conference in July 2016 announcing that investigators would recommend no charges against Mrs. Clinton. Typically, senior Justice Department officials would decide how to proceed in such a high-profile case, but Mr. Comey was concerned that if Ms. Lynch played a central role in deciding whether to charge Mrs. Clinton, Russia could leak the email.

Image

Representative Deborah Wasserman Schultz has said she never communicated with Leonard Benardo, an official with the Open Society Foundations, suggesting that a document that describes an email exchange between them was meant to be Russian disinformation.Credit...Erin Schaff/The New York Times

Whether the document was fake remains an open question. But American officials at the time did not believe that Ms. Lynch would hinder the Clinton email investigation, and neither Ms. Wasserman Schultz nor Mr. Benardo had any inside information about it. Still, if the Russians had released the information after the inquiry was closed, it could have tainted the outcome, hurt public confidence in the Justice Department and sowed discord.

Prosecutors are also looking at whether Mr. Richman might have played a role in providing the information to reporters about the Russia document and how it figured into Mr. Comey’s rationale about the news conference, according to the people familiar with the investigation. Mr. Comey hired Mr. Richman at one point to consult for the F.B.I. about encryption and other complex legal issues, and investigators have expressed interest in how he operated.

Mr. Richman was quoted in the April 2017 article in The Times that revealed the document’s existence. A month later, The Post named Ms. Wasserman Schultz and Mr. Benardo as subjects of the document in a detailed article. A lawyer for Mr. Richman declined to comment.

Typically, prosecutors would decline to open investigations into older leaks of classified information because the passage of time makes such cases much harder to pursue as the memories of witnesses fade. Also, the initial leaks can generate more leaks as more officials feel comfortable discussing the information with journalists because it has become public.

Multiple news stories about the classified disclosures also make it harder to determine whether one person was speaking to reporters or several people, according to former law enforcement officials. And the larger the universe of government officials who have been briefed on classified information, the more difficult it is to find the leaker, former officials said. In this case, lawmakers were briefed on the Russian document in addition to executive branch officials.

In inquiries where investigators determine that a leak is coming from members of Congress or their staff, political sensitivities make those cases difficult to investigate. Most of the time, former officials said, such inquiries are dead on arrival.

Additionally, investigators could also decline to open an investigation into an older leak because it might further harm national security if the information once again made headlines, as in this inquiry.

“Leak cases are incredibly difficult to prosecute,” said Brian J. Fleming, a former lawyer with the Justice Department who worked on many such cases in his work on national security issues. “They are very challenging to present to a jury both as an evidentiary matter and in terms of presenting a compelling, coherent narrative. That is a big reason so few leak cases get charged and even fewer ever go to trial.”

Still, if a government agency is determined to hunt down the source of a leak, as the C.I.A. was in the case of Jeffrey A. Sterling, a former C.I.A. officer who was convicted of leaking details about an anti-Iran operation to a Times reporter, Justice Department officials generally will pursue the case aggressively.

Justice Department officials might also be interested in making an example of Mr. Comey, a development almost certain to please Mr. Trump. Like the Obama administration, the Trump Justice Department has regularly prosecuted officials who provided sensitive information to reporters.

Image

The former F.B.I. deputy director Andrew G. McCabe, center, was accused of misleading investigators conducting an administrative review.Credit...Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

Federal prosecutors in the District of Columbia have embraced politically fraught cases under the United States attorney, Jessie K. Liu, an ambitious prosecutor who has angled for bigger jobs in the Trump administration.

She aggressively pushed for the prosecution of Mr. McCabe on suspicion of lying to investigators about sensitive law enforcement information provided to a reporter. Mr. McCabe was accused of misleading investigators conducting an administrative review, not a criminal inquiry; typically, such cases are not referred for prosecution.

The relatively straightforward case against Mr. McCabe has dragged on for more than 20 months. Prosecutors have refused to tell Mr. McCabe’s lawyers whether they intend to bring charges.

Ms. Liu’s office also charged Gregory B. Craig, a onetime White House counsel in the Obama administration, after prosecutors in New York passed on the case. Mr. Craig was charged with lying to the F.B.I. about his work for the Ukrainian government, but a jury last year quickly acquitted him, handing Ms. Liu an embarrassing defeat.

Mr. Trump nominated Ms. Liu last month to be the Treasury Department’s under secretary for terrorism and financial crimes. He had previously tapped her to be the No. 3 spot in the Justice Department, but she withdrew from consideration after Senator Mike Lee, Republican of Utah, raised concerns about her conservative credentials.

 

Edited January 16, 2020 by Anastasis

[Incredulity 11555]

I am shocked to find there is gambling occurring at this establishment 

[Incredulity 11555]

P.S. James Comey needs to go away. He is one self-righteous POS.

[Blotto 23434]

39 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The timing of the investigation could raise questions about whether it was motivated at least in part by politics.

How dare that author. Trump would never use the justice department for political purposes. That's crazy talk. That would be like Trump withholding foreign aid for political purposes.

[Lagunamadre 1975]

31 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

P.S. James Comey needs to go away. He is one self-righteous POS.

If only self-righteousness were a crime in America. 

[Incredulity 11555]

6 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

If only self-righteousness were a crime in America. 

It appears it might have lead him to commit a crime.

[Lagunamadre 1975]

1 minute ago, Incredulity said:

It appears it might have lead him to commit a crime.

If there is enough evidence to convince a grand jury of that, then he should be indicted and face a jury of his peers. I'm not going to hold my breath. Barr is just throwing some red meat to his Q base, they're getting restless. 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11810]

1 hour ago, Incredulity said:

P.S. James Comey needs to go away. He is one self-righteous POS.

He had gone away, until Pres. Vindictive and has fat henchman Barr decided to continue fruitless investigations into political enemies.     Citizen harassment!!

[BrickHorn 18194]

Oh yay.  More bullshit #bothsides white noise from Surly’s resident diversion artist.  

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13547]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

“Leak cases are incredibly difficult to prosecute,” said Brian J. Fleming, a former lawyer with the Justice Department who worked on many such cases in his work on national security issues. “They are very challenging to present to a jury both as an evidentiary matter and in terms of presenting a compelling, coherent narrative. That is a big reason so few leak cases get charged and even fewer ever go to trial.”

Still, if a government agency is determined to hunt down the source of a leak, as the C.I.A. was in the case of Jeffrey A. Sterling, a former C.I.A. officer who was convicted of leaking details about an anti-Iran operation to a Times reporter, Justice Department officials generally will pursue the case aggressively.

Justice Department officials might also be interested in making an example of Mr. Comey, a development almost certain to please Mr. Trump. Like the Obama administration, the Trump Justice Department has regularly prosecuted officials who provided sensitive information to reporters.

Image

The former F.B.I. deputy director Andrew G. McCabe, center, was accused of misleading investigators conducting an administrative review.Credit...Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

Federal prosecutors in the District of Columbia have embraced politically fraught cases under the United States attorney, Jessie K. Liu, an ambitious prosecutor who has angled for bigger jobs in the Trump administration.

She aggressively pushed for the prosecution of Mr. McCabe on suspicion of lying to investigators about sensitive law enforcement information provided to a reporter. Mr. McCabe was accused of misleading investigators conducting an administrative review, not a criminal inquiry; typically, such cases are not referred for prosecution.

The relatively straightforward case against Mr. McCabe has dragged on for more than 20 months. Prosecutors have refused to tell Mr. McCabe’s lawyers whether they intend to bring charges.

Ms. Liu’s office also charged Gregory B. Craig, a onetime White House counsel in the Obama administration, after prosecutors in New York passed on the case. Mr. Craig was charged with lying to the F.B.I. about his work for the Ukrainian government, but a jury last year quickly acquitted him, handing Ms. Liu an embarrassing defeat.

Donald and Bill will get to the bottom of this.

[Anastasis 23394]

28 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

Oh yay.  More bullshit #bothsides white noise from Surly’s resident diversion artist.  

Sorry for NYT’ing bro. 

I guess we will have to rank you in the “James Comey ball cupping club” membership along with Hugo. 

[BrickHorn 18194]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Sorry for NYT’ing bro. 

I guess we will have to rank you in the “James Comey ball cupping club” membership along with Hugo. 

I don’t give a shit about Comey, but his alleged infractions are fucking irrelevant in context.  But of course you are more concerned about leaks than about election interference by a foreign power.  Because all you do here is run interference and generate white noise to drown out legitimate discussion.  

[Anastasis 23394]

1 minute ago, BrickHorn said:

I don’t give a shit about Comey, but his alleged infractions are fucking irrelevant in context.   But of course you are more concerned about leaks than about election interference by a foreign power.  Because all you do here is run interference and generate white noise to drown out legitimate discussion.    

Comey's actions as FBI director in the days immediately preceding the election had a direct and measurable impact on the US election, very likely tilting the election to Trump. The potential that Comey, while in his role as FBI director post election, was orchestrating a media campaign to justify his end around of FBI SOPs using known Russian disinformation is more than a little relevant to a discussion of election interference during 2016. But I guess you only have eyes to see the so-called diversion artistry of posters in this little corner of the internet, and no sense for identifying the kind of actually meaningful diversions being run out of the office of the chief law enforcement official in the country.  Irrelevant in context, I suppose.  

[Anastasis 23394]

If you are not a full fledged member of the club like Hugo, we'll have to put you in for an honorary white knighting membership.  

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13547]

Donald and Bill will avenge Comey's unfair treatment of Hillary.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23359]

Comey is still my homie 

[Anastasis 23394]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Comey is still my homie 

Has anybody ever put together a list of your political hero crushes? It's a pretty elite group. 

Granny

Flake

Pelosi

Comey

Rosenstein

Mueller

Steele

I think Sessions at one point even

 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23359]

You will always be my hero

[JimmyJames 12271]

So this Homey Comey thread got bumped because of an “investigation” being conducted by the most corrupt administration in American history? 

Who will be the one to bump this thread again when the “investigation” amounts to a whole pile of nothingburger bullshit? Anastasis? Hugo,? dead Chrispy or dead Swam? Liddle ol me? That’s what I want to know. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

30 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Comey's actions as FBI director in the days immediately preceding the election had a direct and measurable impact on the US election, very likely tilting the election to Trump. The potential that Comey, while in his role as FBI director post election, was orchestrating a media campaign to justify his end around of FBI SOPs using known Russian disinformation is more than a little relevant to a discussion of election interference during 2016. But I guess you only have eyes to see the so-called diversion artistry of posters in this little corner of the internet, and no sense for identifying the kind of actually meaningful diversions being run out of the office of the chief law enforcement official in the country.  Irrelevant in context, I suppose.  

Are you trying to pretend here that you are mad at Comey for helping trump win and Hillary lose? Because that’s what it looks like you are doing and that’s just fucking insanely mad trolling. Bravo.