ADVERTISEMENT

Comey might wanna think about getting a lawyer if he doesn't already have one.

Jtommyj

Heisman Candidate
Jan 31, 2016
7,284
3,283
113
James Comey may have misled senators on May 3, when he testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee that he had never been an anonymous source in news reports related to the Russia investigation.

By that time, he had already leaked several private conversations he had with President Trump to his friend Benjamin Wittes, editor-in-chief of the blog Lawfare and former editorial writer for the Washington Post.





Wittes wrote in a piece on May 18, only nine days after Comey was fired, that the former FBI director had shared those conversations “over the previous few months.” He wrote:

Comey never told me the details of the dinner meeting; I don’t think I even knew that there had been a meeting over dinner until I learned it from the Times story. But he did tell me in general terms that early on, Trump had ‘asked for loyalty’ and that Comey had promised him only honesty. He also told me that Trump was perceptibly uncomfortable with this answer.

Wittes also wrote that he had lunch with Comey on March 27, and that they discussed a phone call that Trump had made to him earlier in the day.



Wittes denied those conversations were leaks but were “just conversations between friends, the contents of which one friend is now disclosing.”

However, a leak is the release of unauthorized information, according to a definition by George Washington University professor and legal scholar Jonathan Turley. Incidentally, there is no condition that the information may be published or distributed via physical memo.

And Wittes is arguably a member of the news media. In January, Wittes published a piece on Comey in Lawfare, and he writes and publishes pieces regularly.



It would not have been unreasonable for Comey to think Wittes could publish a piece on their conversations in the future — which is exactly what happened.

Wittes not only wrote about the “loyalty” conversation with Trump in his May 18 blog post, titled: “What James Comey Told Me About Donald Trump,” he but he also wrote about contacting the New York Times as a source to share what Comey had told him. He also discussed contacting the New York Times in a Buzzfeed interivew.

The fact that Wittes did so only after Comey was fired does not change the fact that Comey shared his communications with Trump while he was still FBI director.



Comey’s leaking while still FBI director appears to have extended beyond Wittes.

Comey told senators on June 8 that he decided on May 12 to release his memos of his conversations with Trump to friend Daniel Richman so that he could leak them to the media to prompt a special counsel.

But that doesn’t explain who leaked to the New York Times the conversation about the “loyalty request” on May 11 — a day before Comey said he gave Richman memos of the conversation to leak to media outlets.



That Times story cited “associates,” or “two people who have heard” Comey’s account of the dinner and agreed to keep it quiet while Comey was director.

The Associated Press reported that a day before the New York Times story broke, Comey friend Daniel Richman had commented to the AP that the president had removed “somebody unwilling to pledge absolute loyalty to him.”

From those reports, it appears that Comey told both Wittes and Richman about the conversations while he was FBI director, potentially for the purpose of later leaking to the media.

Despite the leaking, Comey told the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 3, six days before he was fired, that he had “never” been an anonymous news source on “matters relating to” the investigation on the Trump campaign.

Here is a transcript of an exchange between Comey and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) on May 3:

GRASSLEY: Director Comey, have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation?

COMEY: Never.

GRASSLEY: …have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation?

COMEY: No.

GRASSLEY: Has any classified information relating to President Trump or his associates been declassified and share with the media?

COMEY: Not to my knowledge.

What Comey didn’t say was that he had by then already discussed confidential conversations with the president to “friends” — who would later write about those conversations or act as conduits to the media.

Comey also ironically testified that leaks are “always a problem:”

GRASSLEY: You testified before the House Intelligence Committee that a lot of classified matters have ended up in the media recently. Without getting into any particular article, I want to emphasize that, without getting into any particular article, are there any leaks of classified information relating to Mr. Trump or his associates?

COMEY: I don’t want to answer that question, Senator, for reasons I think you know. There have been a variety of leaks — leaks are always a problem, but especially in the last three to six months.

Comey admitted later to the Senate intelligence committee on June 8 that he wrote his memos in a way so that they would not be classified. He said he did that so the memos could be shared more easily among investigators and within the government.

Yet, instead of giving the memos to investigators, he gave them to a friend to leak to the media first, prompting Senate intelligence committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner (D-VA) to say he hoped to get them at some point.

WARNER: I found it very interesting that, that in the memo that you wrote after this February 14th pull-aside, you made clear that you wrote that memo in a way that was unclassified. If you affirmatively made the decision to write a memo that was unclassified, was that because you felt at some point, the facts of that meeting would have to come clean and come clear, and actually be able to be cleared in a way that could be shared with the American people?

COMEY: Well, I remember thinking, this is a very disturbing development, really important to our work. I need to document it and preserve it in a way, and this committee gets this, but sometimes when things are classified, it tangled them up.

If I write it such a way that doesn’t include anything of a classification, that would make it easier for to us discuss within the FBI and the government, and to hold onto it in a way that makes it accessible to us.

WARNER: Well again it’s our hope particularly since you are a pretty knowledgeable guy and wrote this in a way that it was unqualified this committee will get access that unclassified document. I this I it will be important to our investigation.

President Trump’s legal team is now preparing to file complaints against former FBI Director James Comey, as early as next week, with the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General and the Senate Judiciary Committee, according to a source close to the team.

Their case against Comey may include conversations Comey had with Wittes and Richman, among other “friends.”

Trump attorney Marc Kasowitz has alleged that Comey’s leaks of privileged information “began no later than March 2017, when friends of Mr. Comey have stated he disclosed to them the conversations he had with the President during their January 27, 2017 dinner and February 14, 2017 White House meeting.”

It’s not clear what consequences Comey might face for sharing those conversations with Wittes and Richman, but legal scholars say that leaking the physical memos recalling those conversations has put him in hot water.

While Comey has said he considered the memos his own personal documents, Turley has argued that the memos are FBI property, and that Comey violated federal laws by releasing them without informing the Justice Department.

“These were documents prepared on an FBI computer addressing a highly sensitive investigation on facts that he considered material to that investigation. Indeed, he conveyed that information confidentially to his top aides and later said that he wanted the information to be given to the special counsel because it was important to the investigation,” he wrote in The Hill on June 12.

The DOJ IG already has one review of Comey open on his handling of the Clinton email investigation and whether the new complaints will lead to an expansion of that review, a new review, or an investigation is unclear.

A spokesman for the DOJ IG said that it would depend on the “scope” of the review or investigation, and any public acknowledgment would depend on whether there is “intense public interest.”

Grassley has also indicated that he will follow up on whether there are ongoing investigations into leaks from the FBI. His office did not respond to several inquiries as to where that stands.
 
Why don't you guys list the source of your garbage pieces anymore?
This is simply an essay published at the behest of Trump's lawyers as part of their defense strategy to tar and smear anyone who may stand against Trump.
There's nothing but speculation and pure pablum in this piece.
Comey isn't an idiot, he's a skilled lawyer and seasoned prosecutor. He knows the rules, and if I had to bet I'd say he didn't cross any of them.
But as we say around here..... we'll see.
 
Sh*t in one hand and wish in the other and see which fills up first.

Trumps attempts to turn everything around, change the subject and make it about leaks is not only transparent, it's fruitless. He's in so far over his head it's pathetic to watch.

His bluff about taping conversations with Comey blew up in face when Comey told his buddy about odd and uncomfortable meetings with Trump and provided him copies of contemporaneous notes about what transpired. In effect, Donnie's ploy begat Mueller's role as Special Investigator. That puts a smile on my face.
 
Sh*t in one hand and wish in the other and see which fills up first.

Trumps attempts to turn everything around, change the subject and make it about leaks is not only transparent, it's fruitless. He's in so far over his head it's pathetic to watch.

His bluff about taping conversations with Comey blew up in face when Comey told his buddy about odd and uncomfortable meetings with Trump and provided him copies of contemporaneous notes about what transpired. In effect, Donnie's ploy begat Mueller's role as Special Investigator. That puts a smile on my face.
Your first line is hysterically ironic. That is exactly what liberals have been doing with the Trump accusations for months...and you're one of the worst offenders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jtommyj
Why don't you guys list the source of your garbage pieces anymore?
This is simply an essay published at the behest of Trump's lawyers as part of their defense strategy to tar and smear anyone who may stand against Trump.
There's nothing but speculation and pure pablum in this piece.
Comey isn't an idiot, he's a skilled lawyer and seasoned prosecutor. He knows the rules, and if I had to bet I'd say he didn't cross any of them.
But as we say around here..... we'll see.

You're kidding,right?

It lists the sources right in the article and who they write for, what they wrote, and when.

It quotes Wittes, the AP, NYT, along with transcripts of Grassley and Warner.

How is that speculating ?
 
You're kidding,right?

It lists the sources right in the article and who they write for, what they wrote, and when.

It quotes Wittes, the AP, NYT, along with transcripts of Grassley and Warner.

How is that speculating ?
Not kidding a bit, what are you ashamed of? Source the article!

It is rank speculation. Drawing silly and improper conclusions from quotes is speculation.
 
You're kidding,right?

It lists the sources right in the article and who they write for, what they wrote, and when.

It quotes Wittes, the AP, NYT, along with transcripts of Grassley and Warner.

How is that speculating ?
Not kidding a bit, what are you ashamed of? Source the article!

It is rank speculation. Drawing silly and improper conclusions from quotes is speculation.

I'm not ashamed of anything. How can direct quotes from Wittes, Comeys boy who wrote about what Comey told him speculation.

We are reading the same thing, correct?

It's Wittes, editor in chief of the blog Lawfare and former editorial writer for the Washington Post that is directly quoting what his friend Comey told him about the Trump meetings.

There is precedence to believe him, after Comey said he purposely leaked the info on memos to his law professor friend to try to get a special prosecutor named.

Not sure how you figure someone's friend directly quoting him numerous times on different meetings is speculating.

As far as the source, I read a lot of sources so if I feel like it later I'll try to find it.

If you really want to know if the quotes are legit, just Google Lawfare, Wittes blog, and read them yourself.
 
I'm not ashamed of anything. How can direct quotes from Wittes, Comeys boy who wrote about what Comey told him speculation.

We are reading the same thing, correct?

It's Wittes, editor in chief of the blog Lawfare and former editorial writer for the Washington Post that is directly quoting what his friend Comey told him about the Trump meetings.

There is precedence to believe him, after Comey said he purposely leaked the info on memos to his law professor friend to try to get a special prosecutor named.

Not sure how you figure someone's friend directly quoting him numerous times on different meetings is speculating.

As far as the source, I read a lot of sources so if I feel like it later I'll try to find it.

If you really want to know if the quotes are legit, just Google Lawfare, Wittes blog, and read them yourself.
You take the time to copy and paste, why not just link the article? Clearly it is carrying water for the Trump lawyers, so don't try to hide it, just source it.

Anyone can take a quote and make it out to be something it isn't. That is speculation on the part of the interpreter of the quote. This isn't complicated.

What you copy and pasted was an opinion piece speculating that Comey did something illegal. You know....fake news!
 
I'm not ashamed of anything. How can direct quotes from Wittes, Comeys boy who wrote about what Comey told him speculation.

We are reading the same thing, correct?

It's Wittes, editor in chief of the blog Lawfare and former editorial writer for the Washington Post that is directly quoting what his friend Comey told him about the Trump meetings.

There is precedence to believe him, after Comey said he purposely leaked the info on memos to his law professor friend to try to get a special prosecutor named.

Not sure how you figure someone's friend directly quoting him numerous times on different meetings is speculating.

As far as the source, I read a lot of sources so if I feel like it later I'll try to find it.

If you really want to know if the quotes are legit, just Google Lawfare, Wittes blog, and read them yourself.
You take the time to copy and paste, why not just link the article? Clearly it is carrying water for the Trump lawyers, so don't try to hide it, just source it.

Anyone can take a quote and make it out to be something it isn't. That is speculation on the part of the interpreter of the quote. This isn't complicated.

What you copy and pasted was an opinion piece speculating that Comey did something illegal. You know....fake news!

Lol, so Comeys friend would take his quotes and make it something it isn't?
You're out there this morning.

I told you where the articles are. At Wittes blog, Lawfare. Go look at it and judge for yourself whether they're legit.

You keep avoiding that. Why not find out for yourself? Even if I link the article if I can find it what will that change?

Like you said, it was a copy and paste. What do you think is going to change if I can find the article.

You're just trying to play a little game of, since you can't combat the substance , you'll try to impeach the source.
So I'm pointing you right to the original source, once again, Wittes blog Lawfare.

Why are you avoiding going there? Afraid you'll find something that doesn't fit your narrative?

Like I said, if I feel like it later I'll try to find the article. But I don't take orders from you or anyone else here.

I've led you to the water in numerous posts. If you're too afraid to drink then die of thirst.
 
  • Like
Reactions: paulbl99
Your first line is hysterically ironic. That is exactly what liberals have been doing with the Trump accusations for months...and you're one of the worst offenders.
What exactly have I been wishing for? I detest Trump and think he's an over-matched simpleton.

My most fervent wish has been to hope upon hope that Trump exhibit one shred of Presidential behavior and action. It's become obvious he simply doesn't have it in him to not act like an ill tempered, short fused buffoon.
 
Lol, so Comeys friend would take his quotes and make it something it isn't?
You're out there this morning.

I told you where the articles are. At Wittes blog, Lawfare. Go look at it and judge for yourself whether they're legit.

You keep avoiding that. Why not find out for yourself? Even if I link the article if I can find it what will that change?

Like you said, it was a copy and paste. What do you think is going to change if I can find the article.

You're just trying to play a little game of, since you can't combat the substance , you'll try to impeach the source.
So I'm pointing you right to the original source, once again, Wittes blog Lawfare.

Why are you avoiding going there? Afraid you'll find something that doesn't fit your narrative?

Like I said, if I feel like it later I'll try to find the article. But I don't take orders from you or anyone else here.

I've led you to the water in numerous posts. If you're too afraid to drink then die of thirst.
It's not my job clean up your messes, source or no source your choice.
But by not linking sources, it dilutes the message.
Blogs are agenda driven, so the source is important.

You need to get some sleep. You also need to brush up on what a leak is, what is an illegal leak, what the first amendment protects as to "leaks", then you'll understand why this article is an opinion piece full of speculation.
 
Lol, so Comeys friend would take his quotes and make it something it isn't?
You're out there this morning.

I told you where the articles are. At Wittes blog, Lawfare. Go look at it and judge for yourself whether they're legit.

You keep avoiding that. Why not find out for yourself? Even if I link the article if I can find it what will that change?

Like you said, it was a copy and paste. What do you think is going to change if I can find the article.

You're just trying to play a little game of, since you can't combat the substance , you'll try to impeach the source.
So I'm pointing you right to the original source, once again, Wittes blog Lawfare.

Why are you avoiding going there? Afraid you'll find something that doesn't fit your narrative?

Like I said, if I feel like it later I'll try to find the article. But I don't take orders from you or anyone else here.

I've led you to the water in numerous posts. If you're too afraid to drink then die of thirst.
It's not my job clean up your messes, source or no source your choice.
But by not linking sources, it dilutes the message.
Blogs are agenda driven, so the source is important.

You need to get some sleep. You also need to brush up on what a leak is, what is an illegal leak, what the first amendment protects as to "leaks", then you'll understand why this article is an opinion piece full of speculation.

I don't need to brush up on anything.
If blogs are agenda driven, then what in your right mind thinks this blogger, who is Comeys friend ,again,would have an agenda against his friend.

It's clear you're not getting it. The blogger,again Comeys friend, let me say it again, Comeys friend would have an agenda against his friend.

It's clear you're afraid of what you'll find on his blog, therefore you'll just ignore it which is your right.

But don't talk about cleaning up my mess just because you're afraid of what you'll find if you go to, Again, the blog of Comeys friend who writes of his conversations with Comey about his Trump conversations and gives a timeline of those conversations, many of which occurred while Comey was indeed still an official of the Government. He was sharing FBI information with a private citizen. That is a no-brainer.
 
I don't need to brush up on anything.
If blogs are agenda driven, then what in your right mind thinks this blogger, who is Comeys friend ,again,would have an agenda against his friend.

It's clear you're not getting it. The blogger,again Comeys friend, let me say it again, Comeys friend would have an agenda against his friend.

It's clear you're afraid of what you'll find on his blog, therefore you'll just ignore it which is your right.

But don't talk about cleaning up my mess just because you're afraid of what you'll find if you go to, Again, the blog of Comeys friend who writes of his conversations with Comey about his Trump conversations and gives a timeline of those conversations, many of which occurred while Comey was indeed still an official of the Government. He was sharing FBI information with a private citizen. That is a no-brainer.
Why do I have to go to the blog if you copy and pasted it. All I asked for was a source.

You are the one who isn't getting it. Everything Comey's friend said may be the gospel truth. It still doesn't mean that it is a prosecutable leak. All leaks aren't created equal. Some leaks are protected by the first amendment. There are no "no brainers".
So clearly you don't understand and need to read up on what is a leak and what the first amendment allows for. Or continue to believe what you wish to, it's all good with me.
 
I don't need to brush up on anything.
If blogs are agenda driven, then what in your right mind thinks this blogger, who is Comeys friend ,again,would have an agenda against his friend.

It's clear you're not getting it. The blogger,again Comeys friend, let me say it again, Comeys friend would have an agenda against his friend.

It's clear you're afraid of what you'll find on his blog, therefore you'll just ignore it which is your right.

But don't talk about cleaning up my mess just because you're afraid of what you'll find if you go to, Again, the blog of Comeys friend who writes of his conversations with Comey about his Trump conversations and gives a timeline of those conversations, many of which occurred while Comey was indeed still an official of the Government. He was sharing FBI information with a private citizen. That is a no-brainer.
Why do I have to go to the blog if you copy and pasted it. All I asked for was a source.

You are the one who isn't getting it. Everything Comey's friend said may be the gospel truth. It still doesn't mean that it is a prosecutable leak. All leaks aren't created equal. Some leaks are protected by the first amendment. There are no "no brainers".
So clearly you don't understand and need to read up on what is a leak and what the first amendment allows for. Or continue to believe what you wish to, it's all good with me.

OMG I can't believe this.

Who said I copied and pasted THE BLOG?

I copied and pasted the article that referred to the blog, then gave you the blogs address, Lawfare, so you could fact check since you had such a hard on for me to link the article.
So to cut out the middle man,the article, I directed you right to the website where Comeys friend has been updating his conversations with Comey. This way it cuts out any editorializing by the writer.
You just can't wrap your head around the fact that if you go to Comeys FRIENDS blog, everything Wittes is quoted as saying in the article is easily verified. The dates of the blogs to read are listed in the OP.

You give me the part of the first amendment that protects a sitting FBI DIRECTOR, using a government owned computer, can memorialize conversations with the sitting President of the United States, share this info WHILE STILL EMPLOYED as the FBI Director with his friend Wittes,a blogger and editorial writer for the Washington Post, and it not be a violation?
 
OMG I can't believe this.

Who said I copied and pasted THE BLOG?

I copied and pasted the article that referred to the blog, then gave you the blogs address, Lawfare, so you could fact check since you had such a hard on for me to link the article.
So to cut out the middle man,the article, I directed you right to the website where Comeys friend has been updating his conversations with Comey. This way it cuts out any editorializing by the writer.
You just can't wrap your head around the fact that if you go to Comeys FRIENDS blog, everything Wittes is quoted as saying in the article is easily verified. The dates of the blogs to read are listed in the OP.

You give me the part of the first amendment that protects a sitting FBI DIRECTOR, using a government owned computer, can memorialize conversations with the sitting President of the United States, share this info WHILE STILL EMPLOYED as the FBI Director with his friend Wittes,a blogger and editorial writer for the Washington Post, and it not be a violation?
When it doesn't involve government secrets or classified information.
Information may be leaked when one thinks it uncovers possible criminal activity.
Good luck proving Comey violated any criminal statutes. He's a very smart and experienced lawyer and former prosecutor. He knew what he was doing.

Here you go, read and learn:
http://www.govexec.com/management/2017/02/when-does-leak-media-violate-law/135737/
 
OMG I can't believe this.

Who said I copied and pasted THE BLOG?

I copied and pasted the article that referred to the blog, then gave you the blogs address, Lawfare, so you could fact check since you had such a hard on for me to link the article.
So to cut out the middle man,the article, I directed you right to the website where Comeys friend has been updating his conversations with Comey. This way it cuts out any editorializing by the writer.
You just can't wrap your head around the fact that if you go to Comeys FRIENDS blog, everything Wittes is quoted as saying in the article is easily verified. The dates of the blogs to read are listed in the OP.

You give me the part of the first amendment that protects a sitting FBI DIRECTOR, using a government owned computer, can memorialize conversations with the sitting President of the United States, share this info WHILE STILL EMPLOYED as the FBI Director with his friend Wittes,a blogger and editorial writer for the Washington Post, and it not be a violation?
When it doesn't involve government secrets or classified information.
Information may be leaked when one thinks it uncovers possible criminal activity.
Good luck proving Comey violated any criminal statutes. He's a very smart and experienced lawyer and former prosecutor. He knew what he was doing.

Here you go, read and learn:
http://www.govexec.com/management/2017/02/when-does-leak-media-violate-law/135737/

Would you care to tell everyone here what exactly Comey shared with Wittes and if it was government secrets or classified since you seem to be in the loop about the Comey investigation?
You have no idea. You haven't even gone to Wittes blog to read for yourself what was shared.
Therefore your link is baseless, based on nothing factual. I'm sure there are instances where sharing info with the proper authorities is justified.

Why didn't Comey share this info with Rosenstein or the DOJ instead of a journalist if he was so uncomfortable? No balls ?
Remember, this is the guy who was weak enough to cowtow to Lynch about calling the Clinton investigation a "matter".

I don't think he's as smart as you think. Obviously others in government think there's something there worth investigating also.

I'll read your link when your done reading Wittes blog.
 
Would you care to tell everyone here what exactly Comey shared with Wittes and if it was government secrets or classified since you seem to be in the loop about the Comey investigation?
You have no idea. You haven't even gone to Wittes blog to read for yourself what was shared.
Therefore your link is baseless, based on nothing factual. I'm sure there are instances where sharing info with the proper authorities is justified.

Why didn't Comey share this info with Rosenstein or the DOJ instead of a journalist if he was so uncomfortable? No balls ?
Remember, this is the guy who was weak enough to cowtow to Lynch about calling the Clinton investigation a "matter".

I don't think he's as smart as you think. Obviously others in government think there's something there worth investigating also.

I'll read your link when your done reading Wittes blog.
Well, I read the Witte's blog.
No specific information divulged there, just vague references by Comey that Wittes later matched with events in the news.

If you think anything there constitutes a prosecutable leak, then I don't know what to tell you.
But believe what you wish, as you pointed out, I'm not your boss.
 
Would you care to tell everyone here what exactly Comey shared with Wittes and if it was government secrets or classified since you seem to be in the loop about the Comey investigation?
You have no idea. You haven't even gone to Wittes blog to read for yourself what was shared.
Therefore your link is baseless, based on nothing factual. I'm sure there are instances where sharing info with the proper authorities is justified.

Why didn't Comey share this info with Rosenstein or the DOJ instead of a journalist if he was so uncomfortable? No balls ?
Remember, this is the guy who was weak enough to cowtow to Lynch about calling the Clinton investigation a "matter".

I don't think he's as smart as you think. Obviously others in government think there's something there worth investigating also.

I'll read your link when your done reading Wittes blog.
Well, I read the Witte's blog.
No specific information divulged there, just vague references by Comey that Wittes later matched with events in the news.

If you think anything there constitutes a prosecutable leak, then I don't know what to tell you.
But believe what you wish, as you pointed out, I'm not your boss.

Once again, I never said anything there was a prosecutable offense. I'm not a prosecutor nor do I have any info on what other info that Comey may have shared with Wittes that was considered too secret to share.
It sounds like Comey will be investigated. In the OP a legal scholar feels there may have been some wrong doings on Comeys part.
No offense, I just think a law professor and legal scholar has a better grasp on the ins and outs of the legal system than you.
I'm not believing what I wish, I'm choosing to believe a law professor.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT