Byron York: Why Are The Comey Memos Secret?

Authored by Byron York, op-ed via The Washington Examiner,

If there is an obstruction of justice case to be made against the president in the Trump-Russia affair, James Comey is in the middle of it.

President Trump's decision to fire the FBI director is often cited as Exhibit A for obstruction, and the foundation for that case is a set of seven memos Comey wrote describing conversations he had with the president between Jan. 6 and April 11, 2017.

The memos are critically important. Portions of them have been leaked to the press, given to a Comey friend, discussed in congressional testimony, and read by a few Capitol Hill lawmakers and staff. Sometimes it seems the only people who have never had a chance to see the Comey memos are the millions of Americans who are trying to make sense of the daily firehose of Trump-Russia news.

They're not likely to see the memos anytime soon. The FBI and the office of Trump-Russia special counsel Robert Mueller have imposed tight restrictions on access to the memos, holding them even more closely than some documents that are classified at a far higher level. Now, with speculation about obstruction ever present in the media, some lawmakers are calling for the memos to be released. It's time for Americans to know what's going on, they say.

The public part of the memo story began on May 16, 2017, when the New York Times published a story headlined, "Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation." The paper reported that a Comey-penned memo detailing a Trump-Comey conversation the day after the firing of national security adviser Michael Flynn was "part of a paper trail Mr. Comey created documenting what he perceived as the president's improper efforts to influence a continuing investigation."

"An FBI agent's contemporaneous notes are widely held up in court as credible evidence of conversations," the Times added.

Members of Congress investigating the Trump-Russia affair, both House and Senate, Democrat and Republican, clamored to see the Comey memos. In a letter dated May 17, 2017 — the day after the Times report — Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and committee member Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., joined ranking Democrats Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island to ask the FBI to "produce all such memos, if they exist."

Other committees made similar requests. As has been the case throughout the investigation, the FBI was not immediately forthcoming. When Comey made a hugely anticipated, post-firing appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee on June 8, 2017, senators still had not seen the memos. They were forced to ask Comey questions not knowing what he had already written down.

Some lawmakers felt particularly aggrieved at the FBI's refusal to turn over the memos when they learned that Comey had given some of the documents to a friend, Columbia University law professor Daniel Richman, for the specific purpose of being leaked to the New York Times, with the ultimate hope that exposure would spur the appointment of a special prosecutor in the Trump-Russia case.

"I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter," Comey told the Senate last June. "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. And so I asked a close friend of mine to do it."

Within hours of Comey's testimony, the bipartisan group on the Senate Judiciary Committee fired off a letter to Richman asking for the memos Comey sent him. Richman said no. He wouldn't even say if he still had any of the memos. A few months later, the committee asked Richman to come in for an interview. He refused. Later, he claimed to be one of Comey's attorneys.

Finally, in July 2017, the FBI allowed lawmakers to see the memos. But the bureau made sure the information in the memo was severely restricted.

For the Senate Judiciary Committee, which directly oversees the FBI, the bureau allowed only two committee staffers to see the memos. They had to go to the FBI, and an FBI minder was in the room at all times. They were not allowed to make copies or take notes. The FBI later took the memos to the Senate to allow Grassley to read them. But the same rules applied: FBI minder, no copies, no notes.

The no-notes restriction was unusual, because committee staff had been allowed to take notes from the Trump-Russia Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, applications, which were highly classified. Some of the Comey memos were not classified at all.

And, of course, both Republicans and Democrats on the Judiciary Committee had asked to be given the memos, not be given a chance to read them. That still hasn't happened. "The chairman and ranking member asked for copies of the memos," said a committee spokesperson Wednesday. "The FBI has yet to actually turn over those documents to the congressional committee tasked with overseeing the bureau and the Justice Department."

On the House side, Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., among a few others, was allowed to read the memos under the same conditions: FBI minder, no copies, no notes.

What struck Gowdy was the general absence of classified information in the memos or any other reason they should remain secret. Out of a total of seven memos, the FBI had marked four as classified at the "secret" or "confidential" levels — not the highest level — but even with those memos, it appeared to Gowdy that they could be released publicly with only minimal blacking-out.

"What would need to be redacted would be incredibly small and really would not interfere with the substance of the memos," Gowdy told me in a phone conversation Wednesday. "I read them a long time ago, and I still don't know why they're not in the public domain. If they were really helpful for the Democrats, they would have been leaked a long time ago."

Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has the same view. "Seeing as Comey already admitted leaking information from his memos to the press, I do think the memos should be released publicly," he said in a statement Wednesday.

So why the secrecy? Especially since the presence of what little classified material there is in the memos doesn't seem to present a problem.

A Justice Department spokesman did not answer an inquiry, but the FBI and Mueller have taken the position that secrecy is necessary because the Trump-Russia probe is an ongoing investigation. Mueller received support two weeks ago when a federal court in Washington denied a Freedom of Information Act request by news organizations to make the memos public. After repeated presentations from Mueller's office, Judge James Boasberg wrote, "the Court is now fully convinced that disclosure 'could reasonably be expected to interfere' with that ongoing investigation."

Boasberg wrote a detailed analysis of the legal arguments in the case. But with Capitol Hill involved, there is always a political side, too. And politically, there are at least five reasons why the memos should not remain secret.

First is the public's right to know, which is strong in a matter of this importance.

Second is the fact that there is not going to be an obstruction of justice trial for Trump; if there is any action against him, it will be the political process of impeachment, beginning in the House of Representatives, and the memos could play a key role.

Third, Comey himself has already leaked portions of the memos.

Fourth, Comey has already testified publicly about some of the same topics covered by the memos.

And fifth, the FBI has already conceded the principle that Congress has a right to see the memos.

Mueller and the FBI remain unconvinced. That could be a matter of principle, or it could be that keeping the Comey memos secret protects Comey's — the star witness's — credibility. It's hard for anyone in public to test the memos', and Comey's, credibility while the documents remain hidden.

And then there is the public impression the memos might make. No one knows whether that would help or hurt Mueller's case. Comey told the Senate that he found some of Trump's statements "very disturbing" and "very concerning." But did he write in the memos that he felt pressured or pushed or that Trump was making an effort to obstruct the investigation? The answer is not clear. If there were an impeachment trial for Trump, it's uncertain whether the memos would prove more valuable to the prosecution or to the defense.

"I have read the memos," Gowdy said on Fox News "Special Report" Monday. "They would be defense Exhibit A in an obstruction of justice case — not prosecution exhibit, defense Exhibit A. If Comey felt obstructed, he did a masterful job of keeping it out of the memos."

Meanwhile, Congress is still trying to learn more about the documents. Last month, Grassley sent the Justice Department another letter trying to figure out who at the Justice Department had handled the memos. Judging by the committee's record, the chairman will keep at it until the public gets a chance to learn the whole story.

Tags

Comments

DuneCreature Thu, 02/15/2018 - 18:10 Permalink

Speaking of everything is a big classified secret......

~~(!)Wow(!)>>> Spook Code Words IV - Targeted Take Down = Murder, Usually Mass <<<(!)Wow(!)

Killing a plane load of people is 'Standard Operating Procedure' for the CIA (The whole dim-damn Intelligence Community actually).

But a CIA specially.

Did you know that I can read minds? .... Really. ..... Here, I'll show you. .... Let's listen into some random mind chatter out there on the Internet;

"Oh no, no, no, they wouldn't do that." ..... "The CIA is on 'our side' and they wouldn't kill a whole lot of extra folks to kill one target dude!" .. "Hahah, listen to that stupid Dune dude! Americans would never allow that to happen." ... "Oh, come on, .the FAA would catch the CIA, silly" ... "DC is on drugs and telling lies again. Listen to his crazy accusations!" ... "My uncle works for the DIA and he says they rarely kill anyone that doesn't need it." ... "What a bullshit artist DuneCreature is. .. The CIA killing people by the dozens? .. Ridiculous!" ... "My mom says the CIA are the good guys, they only kill bad guys and never little kids." ...... "There are a lot of Christians in the CIA and good people like that don't murder others without a good reason."... "The CIA doesn't crash planes, that's the KGB that does that!" .... "Dune is talking SHIT AGAIN!"

Whew! .......... That's why I don't do a lot of random mind reading.

Pretty scary random mind chatter out there, Id say. ..... Naive, to say the least.

Look at it this way; Plane crashes are the perfect cover for a 'CIA hit' or two. .... The target buys a plane ticket and the CIA knows right where the target will be and when. ... Lots of people die in a plane crash so any investigation into any particular victim is going to be pretty superficial. .. No target ever just gets 'winged, wounded or missed' and escapes death in a plane crash. .... The FBI (The NUMBER ONE evil cover-up organization on planet earth) can sweep in and collect any items the victim might have been traveling with (laptops, documents, thumb drives, photos, etc.) under the color of authority and jurisdiction.

AND,.... ever since the BHUAP (Boeing/Honeywell Un-interruptible Auto Pilot) has been installed into every airliner produced in the Western World the CIA can crash, burn and destroy any airplane full of passengers anywhere on the planet at the 'touch of a couple of buttons' or keyboard strokes.

Murder by remote control. .......... A stand-off hit team. ...... Way, way off. .........

CIA - SOP.

Well, all you people out there thinking I'm completely crazy,... you're probably right.

The CIA would never kill a few extra dozen people just to make life easy and convenient for itself. (And maybe to cover up a little other criminal behavior,...... I know it's tough for you people out there to use 'Criminal' and 'CIA' in the same sentence, but practice, and start out slow, you'll get better at it over time.)

Live Hard, I'm On The 'Too Crazy To Travel' - 'DHS No-Fly List' And I Intend To STAY On That List Too,....... I'll Use Budget Rent-A-MRAP And Take The Back Roads On My Way To Grandmother's Pad, Thank You, Die Free

~ DC v8.8

BetterOffDead a Smudge by an… Thu, 02/15/2018 - 19:38 Permalink

Trey Gowdy’s general demeaner I think is a big tell (along with his retirement from the house).  If there was any “there” there for either the collusion case or the FISA case, he would be crusading on principle one way or the other.  Instead, he’s walking away, tired of the whole thing.  He knows this is all red meat for the bases on either side ahead of the mid-terms.

Bread and circuses.

In reply to by a Smudge by an…

DuneCreature 44magnum Thu, 02/15/2018 - 19:01 Permalink

Yep, some of those folks weren’t collateral damage. … Quite a few of the dead on 911 were targeted to silence them. … The other 2800 or so souls were just the price of ‘doing business’ for our callous overlords.

Lots of people, agencies and organizations were in on that covert operation too. .. The FBI big time. ..... They are the Cover-Up and adjustment team and have the authority to keep the lid on anything they want.

The FBI are all some evil fucks.

Boyscouts, my ass.

Live Hard, The Extra Victims Just Couldn’t Be Alerted To Hold The Targets In Place, Die Free

~ DC v8.8

In reply to by 44magnum

DuneCreature Chupacabra-322 Thu, 02/15/2018 - 20:39 Permalink

LOL! .. O Gee Wackers!

The NY mayor's office had a 'hardened emergency' command center (something like a whole floor) .. The CIA had an office. .. The El Dorado Group/Task Force(?) 'The money laundering' investigators from the DoJ, I think. .. The SEC kept records in building 7(Enron and WorldCom documentation for example) ... The FBI had a 'hardened office' and evidence vaults too.

And maybe the Office of Naval Intelligence.

OK, so I winged that list as a test of myself. ..... Now I have to go look all this up. ...... I'll report back after I grade my memory.

Update - Well that wasn't too tough = The WTC Building 7 List

I could have sworn the FBI had an office in 7 too,.....but maybe not.

Live Hard, The Damn Brain Numbing Chemtrails Make Remembering All The Evil Players From 17 Years Ago A Chore, Die Free

~ DC v8.8

In reply to by Chupacabra-322

DuneCreature DuneCreature Thu, 02/15/2018 - 21:17 Permalink

Well, color my memory officially shot to pieces.

The El Dorado Task Force was in Building 6 (Also completely destroyed from explosions within it. .. Cored like an apple would be more like it. ... You know, from tower debris falling down on it. .. It blew up and out, of course.)

"Building 6 was home to the U.S. Customs agency and the El Dorado Task Force, an interagency money-laundering group from 55 agencies created in 1992. The El Dorado Task force was responsible for coordinating all major money-laundering investigations in the U.S." - From the Eye On Citrus website

One more note from my failing memory - The backup Pentagon budget records were in building 6 or 7 too. .... The paper trail, or what trail there actually was, to that missing 2.4 trillion USD.

Live Hard, 911 Basically Covered Up For The Biggest Heist(s) In Human History, Die Free

~ DC v8.8

In reply to by DuneCreature

Winston Churchill DuneCreature Thu, 02/15/2018 - 20:18 Permalink

Kanter Fitzgerald was the suspect in a $600bn UST fraud.The SEC investigating team was in the other tower,

the gold in the vault under WTC plaza vaporized.Cheney and the missing $2.8 trn,reliable sources say really

$9tn.All those weird futures trades in advance.WTC had just gotten notice of compulsory asbestos abatement works

in the billions,and the double indemnity of the insurance.A very profitable day for someone, killing a few thousands

was well worth it for them.Just how did Osama know all that ? /s

In reply to by DuneCreature

chunga Chippewa Partners Thu, 02/15/2018 - 18:29 Permalink

It used to be I thought US gov wasn't actually a "thing", but a collection of really shitty, nasty people. It is a magnet for such people.

I've changed my mind to think there are so many shitty, nasty people in it, pulling and pushing in so many shitty, nasty directions, that it is actually a "thing"and it can't be fixed no matter how many good people try.

It's either gonna kill us all, or vice-versa.

In reply to by Chippewa Partners

MoreFreedom Thu, 02/15/2018 - 18:17 Permalink

"'I have read the memos,' Gowdy said on Fox News Special Report Monday. 'They would be defense Exhibit A in an obstruction of justice case — not prosecution exhibit, defense Exhibit A.'"

The reason Mueller isn't making them public, is because Comey likely put false information into them as part of the attempt to setup Trump for impeachment on obstruction of justice charges.  Comey likely thought his reputation (which has been falling apart along with the whole Obama/Clinton cabal) would make them more believable than Trump, especially with the Democrats and RINOs who want Trump gone. 

Remember Comey knew of the dossier's Clinton/DNC origins, and briefed Obama on it.  So why would S. Rice write a memo to herself in Obama's last days as president, where Obama asked about reasons why he shouldn't share intelligence he gathered regarding Russia (i.e., his surveillance of the Trump campaign) with the incoming president.   The obvious answer is he was doing it illegally and didn't want Trump to know about it.  Any president who doesn't want to share info his administration has gathered with the next president, is trying to cover it up, for a bad reason.  Mueller doesn't want to derail his investigation prematurely. 

Snípéir_Ag_Obair Thu, 02/15/2018 - 18:28 Permalink

Flynn's Devastating Confessions: Trump Colluded With Israel, Tried To Fulfill Campaign Promises 

The anti-Trump "resistance" campaign alleges that the Russian government tried to "influence" the U.S. election. It insinuates that Trump "colluded" with the Russians in these alleged attempts. It has no evidence for any of its claims. The intent of this campaign is to handicap the Trump administration as much as possible and to prevent better U.S. relations with Russia.

A witch hunt was launched in which the Mueller investigation in the alleged election manipulation as well as Congress hearings are used to throw as much dirt as possible into the direction of the Trump administration to then see what might stick. 

While retired army-general Michael Flynn worked for the Trump campaign he was also a lobbyist for a rich person near to the Turkish government. He made $600,000 off that gig. The Trump campaign did not know about this. Flynn also attended an anniversary celebration for Russia Today in Moscow. He had been hired as a paid speaker for the occasion and his speaker agency charged $40,000 for it.

Flynn was fired from the job as National Security Advisor 24 days after Trump#s inauguration. He had been stupid enough to announce that he wanted to reform the CIA and the other intelligence agencies. Those agencies made sure that such would not happen.

Flynn was questioned by the FBI in connection with the Mueller investigation into alleged Russian influence on the 2016 election campaign. He lied to the FBI about some diplomatic contacts he had made on request of the then incoming Trump administration. The FBI managed to prove that he had lied. In the U.S. lying to the FBI is a serious crime. (I am not aware of other country that has such a stupid rule.) Flynn was offered a plea deal. He is supposed to tell Mueller what Mueller wants to hear in exchange for a lower penalty for his "crime" of lying to the FBI.

But look what the real issues were Flynn lied about:

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty Friday to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, and authorities indicated in court he was acting under instructions from senior Trump transition officials in his dealings with the diplomat.

Flynn contacted the senior Russian diplomat in Washington DC. He was surely aware that the NSA and CIA notice and listen in to all such contacts. Flynn had no reason to believe that such contacts were out of norm because they ain't. Incoming administrations need such contacts to prepare their polices.

There are two different issues about which Flynn contacted the Russian ambassador:

In one of the conversations described in court documents, the men discussed an upcoming United Nations Security Council vote on whether to condemn Israel’s building of settlements. At the time, the Obama administration was preparing to allow a Security Council vote on the matter.
...
Mr. Mueller’s investigators have learned through witnesses and documents that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel asked the Trump transition team to lobby other countries to help Israel, according to two people briefed on the inquiry. Investigators have learned that Mr. Flynn and Mr. Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, took the lead in those efforts. Mr. Mueller’s team has emails that show Mr. Flynn saying he would work to kill the vote, the people briefed on the matter said.

The Security Council vote was on December 23 2016. The Israeli government lobbied the incoming administration to influence that vote in the Israeli government's interest. The Trump administration in-waiting could not influence the Obama administration which had decided to abstain. It contacted the Russian ambassador to influence the Russians to block the vote in the UNSC. The Russian's did not do such.

The "collusion" here is between the Israeli government and the Trump campaign. The "influence" is two part. A successful Israeli attempt to influence the incoming Trump administration and an unsuccessful attempt by Trump people to influence the Russian UNSC vote. The issue has absolutely zero to do with the U.S. election.

Now onto the second issue:

In the other discussion, according to court documents, Mr. Flynn asked Mr. Kislyak that Moscow refrain from escalating the situation in response to sanctions announced by the Obama administration that day against Russia over its interference in the presidential election. And Mr. Kislyak told Mr. Flynn that Russia “had chosen to moderate its response,” the documents said.

The following day, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia said Moscow would not retaliate against the United States in response to the sanctions.

Mr. Trump praised the Russian leader in a Twitter post.

“Great move on delay (by V. Putin) — I always knew he was very smart!” Mr. Trump wrote.

Throughout his election campaign Trump had loudly argued for better relations with Russia. He said it would be easier to solve global problems if the U.S. and Russia cooperate.

The Obama administration had a generally hostile attitude towards Russia. It walked the relations towards a new cold war. Clinton's loss of the election which she blamed, without evidence, on Russia amplified his moves. According to the book 'Shattered', which describes the Clinton campaign, the decision to blame Russia for her loss was made a day after Trump's victory:

That strategy had been set within twenty-four hours of her concession speech. Mook and Podesta assembled her communications team at the Brooklyn headquarters to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up. For a couple of hours, with Shake Shack containers littering the room, they went over the script they would pitch to the press and the public. Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.

At the end of 2016 Obama sanctioned Russian officials over allegedly influencing the U.S. campaign. No evidence was ever presented that such "influencing" was attempted or happened. Obama just willfully tried to worsen the relations with Russia.

The incoming administration tried to prevent more damage in the relations between the U.S. and Russia by contacting the Russian ambassador. It was a smart and well reasoned measure. There was no "collusion" in this. The "influence" was again from the Trump campaign into the direction of the Russian government, not the other way around. It had nothing to do with the election.

The Clinton fan-boys and girls seem happy with the Flynn's plea deal and are fretting about his contacts with the Russian ambassador. But how this is supposed to show that something nefarious was going on is not discernible.  How the issues Flynn lied about (for whatever stupid reason) are supposed to prove "Russian influence" on the election or "collusion" with Trump during the election campaign is beyond me.

 

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/12/flynns-devastating-confessions-tru…

MuffDiver69 Thu, 02/15/2018 - 18:29 Permalink

 

In this entire shit show there was little to no evidence of any criminal acts with Trump and then a special prosecutor was assigned and even after a year of investigation there have been no charges (other than unrelated acts by Manafort and process crimes created by lying to FBI officers by others). Meanwhile, the absence of any real criminal act by Trump himself is being trumpeted as proof that this shows something is really there and that the investigate should continue.

Meanwhile, despite the abundance of evidence that many likely crimes were committed by Clinton and her people, no investigation is warranted according to the Democrats. How have we gotten to the absurd position where no crime merits a full blown investigation while a preponderance of evidence clearly showing the likelihood of multiple crimes is treated as nothing?

While the question of how our justice system become so perverted remains extremely important, the larger and far more important question is why some of the public is seeming at peace with this situation?

Mzhen Thu, 02/15/2018 - 18:35 Permalink

So which participant in Barry O.'s chain gang suggested to Comey, during the meeting on January 5th, that he write memos to himself after each and every interaction he had with the President?  Was is Ms. Contemporaneous Note herself, Susan Rice?

To Infinity An… Thu, 02/15/2018 - 18:39 Permalink

I remember a time when leaking classified and secret documents to the public (Comey's friend in hopes it would be published) was illegal. Maybe that's just for the sheeple.

DaBard51 Thu, 02/15/2018 - 18:47 Permalink

Contempt of Congress?  Anyone?

Not good, to tell the boss "no" (or "nyet"?).  Hmmmm...

 

When nine hundred years old you become, look this good you will not?

Stormtrooper Thu, 02/15/2018 - 18:50 Permalink

I don't care about any memos.  I'm already converted to the "aware" side.

All I care about is adding more bulk ammo to my "cache" in preparation for the SHTF moment.

Barney Fife Thu, 02/15/2018 - 19:01 Permalink

Who the fuck is at the wheel here? The FBI or CONgress?

If I were in congress and they pulled that shit on me I'd say "do you want your fucking budget slashed? Do you want every future request to us summarily denied. Do you want a contempt of congress charge and time spent in "pound you in the ass federal prison? Then fuck off because YOU are subordinate to US." 

Which would probably lose me the next election as the Deep State first delves into NSA records of every spoken word that came out of my mouth since I was 6, and if they couldn't spin something in "anonymous leaks" to the press they'd sure as fuck manufacture some bull shit like, ohh colluding with the Russians. 

America open your fucking eyes. An agency subordinate to the holder of its purse strings was just told to go fuck themselves when asking to carry out their constitutionally mandated duties. The FBI orders our so-called elected leaders around like trained dogs. 

For those of you that still think that the electoral process matters, please commit suicide. You are worthless and consuming OUR natural resources. 

 

Mr_Potatohead Thu, 02/15/2018 - 19:03 Permalink

The problem here is that the congress critters don't want to exercise their rights or powers under the constitution.  Perpetual political theater seems to be much more desirable. Perhaps that's necessary for many of these people to literally live for another day, but it ain't otherwise difficult to play hardball when you know the rules and have the guts to go for the win.  Stagnation and maintaining the status quo must be their definition of winning.  So in a somewhat twisted way, lack of action probably is playing hardball according to their rules.

G-R-U-N-T Thu, 02/15/2018 - 20:28 Permalink

It's obvious Comey is guilty as hell, along with all the other grunts that had a part in this Spy-O-rama!

Honestly, what horrible specimen's of humanity they are, which begs the question how did these traitorous souls get so high up in the food chain without being discovered? 

Also, both Brennan and Clapper need to get their fabricated 'story' timeline correct, but they can't, because it's crooked as Hank Paulson's little finger.

Can't wait for the IG report.

 

gcjohns1971 Thu, 02/15/2018 - 20:52 Permalink

Pardon?

The memos that Comey gave to an uncleared Law Professor "friend" which he previously said were unclassified are "SECRET"?  

And has the FBI charged Comey with mishandling classified, as they did Manning?  No?

And has the FBI produced these unclassified-but-also-SECRET memos when applied to do so by legal authority vested with oversight, and given clearance appropriate to the classification?  No?

Then issue a warrant to the Capital Police to pick them up.

The FBI IS NOT A CO-EQUAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.   

If it pretends to government power, but does not answer to the Legislative (who make the Laws) or to the Executive (who enforces the Laws) then the FBI is an agent of some non-Constitutional power - i.e. foreign to the Executive, foreign to the Legislative, foreign to The United States.

They are an armed agent of a foreign power.

Shut them down until they comply.

clarion500 Thu, 02/15/2018 - 21:29 Permalink

After everything thats been exposed about FBI political favoritism, collusion with the democrats, text messages between two high integrity employees who were both having affairs (on their spouses, on the taxpayers dime) exhibiting bias against the president, corruption and cover ups within the Clinton email fiasco, and many many more things I could mention but do not have the time to list, WHY OR HOW DOES COMEY THINK HE HAS CREDIBILITY STILL, AND WHY HASN'T ANYONE BEGAN PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ALL THOSE WHO HAVE OBVIOUSLY BROKEN MANY LAWS? 

It seems like they think nobody will notice if they distract long enough away from their crimes, and they expect to get off without even loosing their jobs or pensions, and without one single charge filed for some severe criminal federal and state crimes.

This all makes me sick to see. Its sad to watch anymore, as no matter how much evidence is made public, it is obvious the swamp is deeper than the ocean. the deep state has already won. Now they are just rubbing it in our face. Impeaching Trump will be the icing on the cake.

 

MrBoompi Thu, 02/15/2018 - 21:52 Permalink

We all know there are 2 reasons to classify information.  One is for legitimate national security concerns.  The other is to conceal illegal activities.  

. . . _ _ _ . . . Thu, 02/15/2018 - 23:14 Permalink

"An FBI agent's contemporaneous notes are widely held up in court as credible evidence of conversations," the Times added.

They were not contemporaneous, and they are not credible.