It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Comey Memo's Contained Classified Info

page: 8
38
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle
The hoops people are jumping through to prove Trump right would be fun if not so sad.


To which hoops are you referring?




posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical



There is no 'retroactivly classified.'


Yes there is.

Downloadable legal article from Stanford Law

Do You Have to Keep the Government's Secrets?: Retroactively Classified Documents, the First Amendment, and the Power To Make Secrets Out of the Public Record


The Article begins with examples of retroactive classification, which has targeted material ranging from congressional testimony on the missile-defense system to half-century-old documents at the National Archives. It then examines how the rules that are supposed to limit retroactive classification’s sweep are incapable of doing so in the Internet Age. The Article next asks: Can the government punish someone for disregarding a retroactive classification order? Despite significant statutory and First Amendment concerns, the Article concludes that the answer is yes. Retroactive classification can be enforced by criminal prosecution.



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa



Taken during an official meeting with the President of the United States in an official setting.


There weren't taken during his meetings with the president. The memos were recorded afterwards, in a private setting of Comey's choice, whether it was in car, his office or his home. Comey said their purpose was to document his personal observations and concerns about the president's behavior. Unless Comey was tasked to psychologically examine the president, his opinion of how the meeting went and his observations of the president's behavior isn't official business.



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Again, you're conveniently leaving out a very important bit, from your link:


Retroactive classification is a little-known national security power that allows the government to declassify a document, release it to the public, and then classify it later on — even if the document remains accessible in the public domain.


Meaning that information can only be 'retroactively classified' if it has been previously classified, declassified and then released. The information had to have been classified in the first place in order for this to be valid.



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: windword




Unless Comey was tasked to psychologically examine the president, his opinion of how the meeting went and his observations of the president's behavior isn't official business.


Then why would a qualified lawyer and director of the FBI feel the need to "give his opinion" in a leak?




posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Krakatoa



Taken during an official meeting with the President of the United States in an official setting.


There weren't taken during his meetings with the president. The memos were recorded afterwards, in a private setting of Comey's choice, whether it was in car, his office or his home. Comey said their purpose was to document his personal observations and concerns about the president's behavior. Unless Comey was tasked to psychologically examine the president, his opinion of how the meeting went and his observations of the president's behavior isn't official business.


Honestly. What part of "the medium is irrelevant" do you not understand here? The information he gained from within the meeting was in his head. HE decided to transfer that information from his memory to a written form. Once that is done, regardless of his location at transcription, is the property of the FBI.

Period.
No argument.
That is the law.

And to add to that, he transferred the information (which could have been classified at inception) to person or persons that did not have the required clearance and in a form that did not protect that information from being intercepted.



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 05:20 PM
link   
This is going to be hilarious if everyone but Hillary goes to jail. Or ironic. Traitors are in the WH.



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: jadedANDcynical



There is no 'retroactivly classified.'


Yes there is.

Downloadable legal article from Stanford Law

Do You Have to Keep the Government's Secrets?: Retroactively Classified Documents, the First Amendment, and the Power To Make Secrets Out of the Public Record


The Article begins with examples of retroactive classification, which has targeted material ranging from congressional testimony on the missile-defense system to half-century-old documents at the National Archives. It then examines how the rules that are supposed to limit retroactive classification’s sweep are incapable of doing so in the Internet Age. The Article next asks: Can the government punish someone for disregarding a retroactive classification order? Despite significant statutory and First Amendment concerns, the Article concludes that the answer is yes. Retroactive classification can be enforced by criminal prosecution.



ummm excuse me,,,,, you forgot the important fact, from your source:


retroactive classification is a little-known national security power that allows the government to declassify a document, release it to the public, and then classify it later on — even if the document remains accessible in the public domain.


Comey did use the phrase up-classified...which means that something was not classified when created, but became classified at later date. I have never heard of that until he said it during his testimony.
edit on R362017-07-10T17:36:38-05:00k367Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 05:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

I hope they prosecute him and make an example of him. Lock him up!



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa




Comey did use the phrase up-classified...which means that something was not classified when created, but became classified at later date. I have never heard of that until he said it during his testimony.


Okay. I stand corrected on the definition of "retroactively classified". But, the first I heard of "up-classified" then, is during the HRC email investigation and she claimed the documents in question weren't classified at the time they were transmitted, but were designated classified later. Collin Powel and Condi Rice both confirmed that the same thing had happened to them. And, they used personal email to conduct official business, but not classified business.



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Jonjonj



Then why would a qualified lawyer and director of the FBI feel the need to "give his opinion" in a leak?


That's the billion dollar question! He should have come out personally with the memos, or had the people he had forward his memos to bring them forward to committees. My feeling is that Comey got his feathers in a fluff and made a mistake in having someone else leak the memo to the press.

Imagine if he would have come out on one of the Sunday talk shows with this info! HA!
edit on 10-7-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa




The information he gained from within the meeting was in his head. HE decided to transfer that information from his memory to a written form. Once that is done, regardless of his location at transcription, is the property of the FBI.


I don't think his observations and personal notes on concerning behavior of the president belongs to the FBI. IF he kept a journal of his feelings about his FBI adventures and his colleagues, would that be FBI property too? These memos weren't official FBI documents, in my opinion.



Period.
No argument.
That is the law.


That is rarely the case. We'll just have to agree to disagree and see how this pans out.



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Krakatoa




The information he gained from within the meeting was in his head. HE decided to transfer that information from his memory to a written form. Once that is done, regardless of his location at transcription, is the property of the FBI.


I don't think his observations and personal notes on concerning behavior of the president belongs to the FBI. IF he kept a journal of his feelings about his FBI adventures and his colleagues, would that be FBI property too? These memos weren't official FBI documents, in my opinion.



Period.
No argument.
That is the law.


That is rarely the case. We'll just have to agree to disagree and see how this pans out.



Any recollection of that kind related to those type of meetings need to be vetted first to determine of there is anything that is classified FIRST, before being released as unclassified. If I did that with information and impressions of meetings I have been in without them being vetted would result in me being in jail and losing my clearance.

But then, I am a simple cog in that machine so I don't get special dispensation for being "reckless".



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa



But then, I am a simple cog in that machine so I don't get special dispensation for being "reckless".


And there you go!

Just for your information:


Comey testified last month that he considered the memos to be his own personal property.



"So, you didn't consider your memo or your sense of that conversation to be a government document?" Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., asked Comey on June 8. "You considered it to be, somehow, your own personal document that you could share to the media as you wanted through a friend?"

"Correct," Comey answered. "I understood this to be my recollection recorded of my conversation with the president. As a private citizen, I thought it important to get it out."
www.newsmax.com...


Agree or disagree, that's his story and I don't think it's settled yet.


edit on 10-7-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 06:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Krakatoa



But then, I am a simple cog in that machine so I don't get special dispensation for being "reckless".


And there you go!

Just for your information:


Comey testified last month that he considered the memos to be his own personal property.



"So, you didn't consider your memo or your sense of that conversation to be a government document?" Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., asked Comey on June 8. "You considered it to be, somehow, your own personal document that you could share to the media as you wanted through a friend?"

"Correct," Comey answered. "I understood this to be my recollection recorded of my conversation with the president. As a private citizen, I thought it important to get it out."
www.newsmax.com...


Agree or disagree, that's his story and I don't it settled yet.



And I think he was wrong in making that assumption according to the law and the system for data classification. We will see if the legal system actually works in this case. We can only hope.



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa


"Up Classified" would explain WHY the memos were not originally classified, as the leaked-on law professors says...

""One day after The Hill reported that "more than half" of Comey's leaked memos of his conversations with Donald Trump contained classified information, the Columbia University Law School professor, confidant of former FBI Director James Comey, and ultimately leaker to the NYT has spoken up, and in taking another page out of Hillary Clinton's playbook, countered the accusation that Comey violated FBI protocol because none of the memos were marked classified.""

Source: www.zerohedge.com...



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

This is actually what patreus got in trouble for. He shared his recollections of meetings with the president with his biographer.



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Lordy, who has seen these alleged memos? Senate Intelligence committee requested them weeks ago. Still being denied access. Maybe they're FAKE?



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: windword


These memos weren't official FBI documents, in my opinion.


and


Agree or disagree, that's his story and I don't think it's settled yet.


Again, neither your opinion nor what Comey considers to be his personal property need not enter consideration when the statute is clear:


(a) Records Defined.—
(1)In general.—As used in this chapter, the term “records”—
(A) includes all recorded information, regardless of form or characteristics, made or received by a Federal agency under Federal law or in connection with the transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate for preservation by that agency or its legitimate successor as evidence of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of the United States Government or because of the informational value of data in them; and
(B) does not include—
(i) library and museum material made or acquired and preserved solely for reference or exhibition purposes; or
(ii) duplicate copies of records preserved only for convenience.
(2)Recorded information defined.—
For purposes of paragraph (1), the term “recorded information” includes all traditional forms of records, regardless of physical form or characteristics, including information created, manipulated, communicated, or stored in digital or electronic form
emphases mine

44 U.S. Code § 3301 - Definition of records

By the way, the FBI (direct .pdf link) definition includes the phrase, "or its agents," after, "...by a Federal agency," just in case you were going to try and use that as a way to weasel out of this pertaining specifically to Comey and his memos.

Please make note of the phrase, "because of the informational value of data in them," as it is key to determining whether or not Comey's notes are government records.

You who are trying to use the information in Comey's notes to hang president Trump with need to understand that this information is what makes them eligible to become government records regardless of all of the facts Krakatoa has presented in regards to time, place, means and method of note taking.

I do agree with you that this isn't settled yet; Comey is the one who implied the need for intent to prosecute gross negligence when he clearly said former Secretary Clinton was, "extremely careless," in the handling of classified information. He is now trying to redefine what a federal record is.



posted on Jul, 10 2017 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical


Allow me to bold my own emphasis:

includes all recorded information, regardless of form or characteristics, made or received by a Federal agency under Federal law or in connection with the transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate for preservation by that agency or its legitimate successor as evidence of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of the United States Government or because of the informational value of data in them; and
(B) does not include—


Comey's notes were not a requirement of his duties under federal law. They didn't reflect a transaction of public business. They weren't required to be preserved. There existence wasn't required to even be reported. They served no evidence as to the policies, functions etc., of the FBI.



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join