DOJ Set To Release Comey's Memos, Could Lead To End Of Mueller's Investigation, Top Democrat Says

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: introvert

NAdler said that subpoenaing Rosenstein would hurt his credibility and the mueller investigation; you are right not the actual memos themselves.

He seems awfully afraid to have these memos come out.

What possible justification could be had for keeping congress, which has oversight of the investigations, from seeing memos that Comeys freind (with no security clearance) and journalists have seen?

If its so secretive and impactful evidence, then this in itself is an admission that it shouldnt have been viewed by non governmental people.

This is a thinlly veiled excuse to keep congress from seeing these documents, as the doj and fbi have been doing at every turn.

So lets hope they get made public soon.

The justification is congress is a joke. They are at an all time partisan high with leaks on all sides.

The ideal that these people are noble is absurd.

However it is the way it's supposed to work with congresional oversight.


Let's day they have evidence, real evidence of wrong doing. The last thing they want are leaks. It's just as possible as your scenario.

The law is the law.

You are worried about leaks now? Yeah, cause the intel community proved they are so tight lipped. Oh wait, whats that, they have been leaking over and over and over again?

How about we just follow the law?

It is clear that many inside the intel community, as we have seen proof just this past couple of weeks with comey and Mcabe, act out of political or personal benefit. This is why there needs to be oversight.

The law is not really the law. There are loopholes and exceptions.

And I saw this far before with Ashcroft. As I told you there were 75 fisa violations in his first year as AG. WTF did people expect when they kept eroding the law for 17 years.

Now it's all on obama? It's actually congress that caused and allowed this. The same people you seem to trust.

I trust having as much oversight as possible.

You trust the intel community, who it has been proven pver and over again recently to be liars, self serving, and politically biased.

You for some reason are arguing against making their work as public as possible, or even having congress be allowed to see it.

Its surreal.

Ok whats you solution?

I guess we should just leave the intel community act with no oversight whatsoever; thjey should be allowed to spy on whoever they want, cleak what they want, charge anyone they want; and anyone who thinks they should be overseen by congress is somehow cheering for the bad guys.

Unbelievable.

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: Grambler

Reports coming in that the DOJ has just delivered these
"memos" to congress, finding a link now,

The were read by the committeesame months ago. The people who say mueller should stay.

And the examiner pretty much showed how out of context the daily wire presented this.

Which sucks. I like Shapiro.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: introvert

NAdler said that subpoenaing Rosenstein would hurt his credibility and the mueller investigation; you are right not the actual memos themselves.

He seems awfully afraid to have these memos come out.

What possible justification could be had for keeping congress, which has oversight of the investigations, from seeing memos that Comeys freind (with no security clearance) and journalists have seen?

If its so secretive and impactful evidence, then this in itself is an admission that it shouldnt have been viewed by non governmental people.

This is a thinlly veiled excuse to keep congress from seeing these documents, as the doj and fbi have been doing at every turn.

So lets hope they get made public soon.

The justification is congress is a joke. They are at an all time partisan high with leaks on all sides.

The ideal that these people are noble is absurd.

However it is the way it's supposed to work with congresional oversight.


Let's day they have evidence, real evidence of wrong doing. The last thing they want are leaks. It's just as possible as your scenario.

The law is the law.

You are worried about leaks now? Yeah, cause the intel community proved they are so tight lipped. Oh wait, whats that, they have been leaking over and over and over again?

How about we just follow the law?

It is clear that many inside the intel community, as we have seen proof just this past couple of weeks with comey and Mcabe, act out of political or personal benefit. This is why there needs to be oversight.

The law is not really the law. There are loopholes and exceptions.

And I saw this far before with Ashcroft. As I told you there were 75 fisa violations in his first year as AG. WTF did people expect when they kept eroding the law for 17 years.

Now it's all on obama? It's actually congress that caused and allowed this. The same people you seem to trust.

I trust having as much oversight as possible.

You trust the intel community, who it has been proven pver and over again recently to be liars, self serving, and politically biased.

You for some reason are arguing against making their work as public as possible, or even having congress be allowed to see it.

Its surreal.

Ok whats you solution?

I guess we should just leave the intel community act with no oversight whatsoever; thjey should be allowed to spy on whoever they want, cleak what they want, charge anyone they want; and anyone who thinks they should be overseen by congress is somehow cheering for the bad guys.

Unbelievable.

Lol.

My solution attack the laws that allow this. As I constantly advocate.

And to not trust guys who vote to expand spying and fisa powers.

But sure have your strawman.

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: introvert

NAdler said that subpoenaing Rosenstein would hurt his credibility and the mueller investigation; you are right not the actual memos themselves.

He seems awfully afraid to have these memos come out.

What possible justification could be had for keeping congress, which has oversight of the investigations, from seeing memos that Comeys freind (with no security clearance) and journalists have seen?

If its so secretive and impactful evidence, then this in itself is an admission that it shouldnt have been viewed by non governmental people.

This is a thinlly veiled excuse to keep congress from seeing these documents, as the doj and fbi have been doing at every turn.

So lets hope they get made public soon.

The justification is congress is a joke. They are at an all time partisan high with leaks on all sides.

The ideal that these people are noble is absurd.

However it is the way it's supposed to work with congresional oversight.


Let's day they have evidence, real evidence of wrong doing. The last thing they want are leaks. It's just as possible as your scenario.

The law is the law.

You are worried about leaks now? Yeah, cause the intel community proved they are so tight lipped. Oh wait, whats that, they have been leaking over and over and over again?

How about we just follow the law?

It is clear that many inside the intel community, as we have seen proof just this past couple of weeks with comey and Mcabe, act out of political or personal benefit. This is why there needs to be oversight.

The law is not really the law. There are loopholes and exceptions.

And I saw this far before with Ashcroft. As I told you there were 75 fisa violations in his first year as AG. WTF did people expect when they kept eroding the law for 17 years.

Now it's all on obama? It's actually congress that caused and allowed this. The same people you seem to trust.

I trust having as much oversight as possible.

You trust the intel community, who it has been proven pver and over again recently to be liars, self serving, and politically biased.

You for some reason are arguing against making their work as public as possible, or even having congress be allowed to see it.

Its surreal.

Ok whats you solution?

I guess we should just leave the intel community act with no oversight whatsoever; thjey should be allowed to spy on whoever they want, cleak what they want, charge anyone they want; and anyone who thinks they should be overseen by congress is somehow cheering for the bad guys.

Unbelievable.

Lol.

My solution attack the laws that allow this. As I constantly advocate.

And to not trust guys who vote to expand spying and fisa powers.

But sure have your strawman.

Strawman? You were the one saying I must trust the bad people that are congress.

Of course I am against fisa powers expansion. Apparently you are too the way you are speaking.

Presumably because you think they will be misused, by the intel community.

Now you are against that intel community having any oversight, which makes no sense.

originally posted by: luthier


The were read by the committeesame months ago. The people who say mueller should stay.

And the examiner pretty much showed how out of context the daily wire presented this.

Which sucks. I like Shapiro.

Possibly in a redacted form...

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: introvert

NAdler said that subpoenaing Rosenstein would hurt his credibility and the mueller investigation; you are right not the actual memos themselves.

He seems awfully afraid to have these memos come out.

What possible justification could be had for keeping congress, which has oversight of the investigations, from seeing memos that Comeys freind (with no security clearance) and journalists have seen?

If its so secretive and impactful evidence, then this in itself is an admission that it shouldnt have been viewed by non governmental people.

This is a thinlly veiled excuse to keep congress from seeing these documents, as the doj and fbi have been doing at every turn.

So lets hope they get made public soon.

The justification is congress is a joke. They are at an all time partisan high with leaks on all sides.

The ideal that these people are noble is absurd.

However it is the way it's supposed to work with congresional oversight.


Let's day they have evidence, real evidence of wrong doing. The last thing they want are leaks. It's just as possible as your scenario.

The law is the law.

You are worried about leaks now? Yeah, cause the intel community proved they are so tight lipped. Oh wait, whats that, they have been leaking over and over and over again?

How about we just follow the law?

It is clear that many inside the intel community, as we have seen proof just this past couple of weeks with comey and Mcabe, act out of political or personal benefit. This is why there needs to be oversight.

The law is not really the law. There are loopholes and exceptions.

And I saw this far before with Ashcroft. As I told you there were 75 fisa violations in his first year as AG. WTF did people expect when they kept eroding the law for 17 years.

Now it's all on obama? It's actually congress that caused and allowed this. The same people you seem to trust.

I trust having as much oversight as possible.

You trust the intel community, who it has been proven pver and over again recently to be liars, self serving, and politically biased.

You for some reason are arguing against making their work as public as possible, or even having congress be allowed to see it.

Its surreal.

Ok whats you solution?

I guess we should just leave the intel community act with no oversight whatsoever; thjey should be allowed to spy on whoever they want, cleak what they want, charge anyone they want; and anyone who thinks they should be overseen by congress is somehow cheering for the bad guys.

Unbelievable.

Lol.

My solution attack the laws that allow this. As I constantly advocate.

And to not trust guys who vote to expand spying and fisa powers.

But sure have your strawman.

Strawman? You were the one saying I must trust the bad people that are congress.

Of course I am against fisa powers expansion. Apparently you are too the way you are speaking.

Presumably because you think they will be misused, by the intel community.

Now you are against that intel community having any oversight, which makes no sense.

Yeah. I am against oversight from people who vote to expand fisa powers and spying power of the government.

Like I said my solution is to vote and promote people against those things. Not just assume oversight by crooks on other crooks does a damp thing.

People totaly miss the point the laws allowed this. Not Obama not ashcroft not lynch bUT the fact congress has no balls and doesn't stop it.

Now I am supposed to trust their "oversight"?

It's a joke. Just like how people loved Ken star and bringing down Clinton for a bj when it was real estate fraud they were after.

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: luthier


The were read by the committeesame months ago. The people who say mueller should stay.

And the examiner pretty much showed how out of context the daily wire presented this.

Which sucks. I like Shapiro.

Possibly in a redacted form...

Nope. Grassley commented and read them all.

a reply to: Grambler

So after fighting tooth and nail, it seems as if the DOJ will finally release the memos.

Why were they afraid to do so, and why is Nadler suggesting it could lead to rosenstein being placed in contempt and the investigation shut down.

The key is timing. What has changed? I only know of one thing: Breaking: Congress refers Comey McCabe Clinton Page Strzok Lynch others for criminal prosecution. The referral described does not implicate Rosenstein, but it does exclude him from the requested investigation.

I will continue saying this until it is either acted upon or proved untrue: The FBI is the kingpin to the entire Washington DC swamp. The ref erral for prosecution mentioned above implicates a prior FBI Director, a prior FBI Assistant Director, and two FBI agents on charges ranging from Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees and forward. My thoughts are that this was timed to coincide with internal investigations that have been quietly ongoing and now are to the point that exposure will likely not impede the search for justice.

It's a deep, wide swamp, full of all manner of swamp critters. Foolhardy indeed would it be to attempt to clean it up without first knowing what lurks beneath the surface of still, black water.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Grambler

On Thursday, sources told CNN that the U.S. Department of Justice is expected to release the memos of former FBI Director James Comey to Congress at some point today.

In a January report from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, Grassley wrote: "After a review of the seven memoranda created by former Director Comey, it is now clear that four are marked classified at various levels of sensitivity. Former Director Comey reportedly provided copies of four memos to Columbia Law School Professor Daniel Richman. If true, that would mean at least one disclosed memo contained information now-marked classified."

The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), said that releasing Comey's memos puts Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in serious jeopardy of being "being placed in contempt of Congress and the special counsel investigation of being shut down," the Washington Examiner reported.

www.dailywire.com...

So after fighting tooth and nail, it seems as if the DOJ will finally release the memos.

Why were they afraid to do so, and why is Nadler suggesting it could lead to rosenstein being placed in contempt and the investigation shut down.

Could it be that they both know the material in there is damning, and proves comey committed crimes or acted out of bias, and the entire impetus for the special counsel was a sham?

Hopefully we find out.

Between this and the story about rosenstein supposedly saying trump is not a target of mueller, www.abovetopsecret.com...

My predication is the new anti trump narrative will switch to the Mueller investigation isnt the real important thing,. it is the NY attorney who raided Trumps lawyer that is the real big deal.

It will be never ending; Trump colluded with russia, oh we cant prove that, well he obstructed justice! OH darn, well we will raid his lawyers office to say he violated campaign finances!

And on and on.

My guess would be that Trump issued a directive to hold onto them as long as possible for release as close as they can to midterm elections. If there is enough damming evidence in it, the investigations could be far reaching and squash any chance the Dems have for gaining power in the midterms unless they begin distancing themselves from certain folks now.

If I'm right, we will start to see them turn on eachother soon.

Best way to win is to get your opponent to implode and fight itself.

Are you advocating this as a good and Noble plan?

Not advocating anything...just stating an opinion based on how its played out so far.

a reply to: Grambler

I feel that the past few years have clearly illustrated that the rule of law is applied with a partisan slant.

I am disgusted with all of DC.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grambler

I feel that the past few years have clearly illustrated that the rule of law is applied with a partisan slant.

I am disgusted with all of DC.

People keep talking about oversight. I am like from who? Other gang members? Or rival gangs?

The problem are the LAWS! People seem to care more when there favorite politician is spied on more than when they themselves are.

a reply to: luthier

When a corrupt government is in charge of oversight it's like putting Overeaters Anonymous in charge of Pizza Hut.

a reply to: DBCowboy

It honestly bothers me that politicians getting abused by the government makes more noise than the people getting abused.

The writing was on the wall 17 years ago and every day since has gotten worse.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Grambler

On Thursday, sources told CNN that the U.S. Department of Justice is expected to release the memos of former FBI Director James Comey to Congress at some point today.

In a January report from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, Grassley wrote: "After a review of the seven memoranda created by former Director Comey, it is now clear that four are marked classified at various levels of sensitivity. Former Director Comey reportedly provided copies of four memos to Columbia Law School Professor Daniel Richman. If true, that would mean at least one disclosed memo contained information now-marked classified."

The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), said that releasing Comey's memos puts Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in serious jeopardy of being "being placed in contempt of Congress and the special counsel investigation of being shut down," the Washington Examiner reported.

www.dailywire.com...

So after fighting tooth and nail, it seems as if the DOJ will finally release the memos.

Why were they afraid to do so, and why is Nadler suggesting it could lead to rosenstein being placed in contempt and the investigation shut down.

Could it be that they both know the material in there is damning, and proves comey committed crimes or acted out of bias, and the entire impetus for the special counsel was a sham?

Hopefully we find out.

Between this and the story about rosenstein supposedly saying trump is not a target of mueller, www.abovetopsecret.com...

My predication is the new anti trump narrative will switch to the Mueller investigation isnt the real important thing,. it is the NY attorney who raided Trumps lawyer that is the real big deal.

It will be never ending; Trump colluded with russia, oh we cant prove that, well he obstructed justice! OH darn, well we will raid his lawyers office to say he violated campaign finances!

And on and on.

My guess would be that Trump issued a directive to hold onto them as long as possible for release as close as they can to midterm elections. If there is enough damming evidence in it, the investigations could be far reaching and squash any chance the Dems have for gaining power in the midterms unless they begin distancing themselves from certain folks now.

If I'm right, we will start to see them turn on eachother soon.

Best way to win is to get your opponent to implode and fight itself.

Are you advocating this as a good and Noble plan?

Not advocating anything...just stating an opinion based on how its played out so far.

But winning that way would be great in your opinion ?

Just trying to figure it out.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: DBCowboy

It honestly bothers me that politicians getting abused by the government makes more noise than the people getting abused.

The writing was on the wall 17 years ago and every day since has gotten worse.

Pfft!

They're politicians!

We're just the underclass. You can't expect them to live under the same laws as us!

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: DBCowboy

It honestly bothers me that politicians getting abused by the government makes more noise than the people getting abused.

The writing was on the wall 17 years ago and every day since has gotten worse.

Pfft!

They're politicians!

We're just the underclass. You can't expect them to live under the same laws as us!

Couldn't have said it better myself.

I mean we differ on things but I think we both know these #!! $$! Pretty much all suck. The outliers like Paul or tulsi are seen as extremist or swept under the rug for silly things like privacy or budgets.

a reply to: Grambler

"After a review of the seven memoranda created by former Director Comey, it is now clear that four are marked classified at various levels of sensitivity. Former Director Comey reportedly provided copies of four memos to Columbia Law School Professor Daniel Richman. If true, that would mean at least one disclosed memo contained information now-marked classified."

'Extremely careless, without intent' - I think that's what Comey said of Clintons conduct regarding the handling of classified information.

I don't believe for one second that Hillary was simply having a multitude of 'blonde moments' whenever it came to her and the proper handling of classified information, mainly because 'hammer', but also because 'bleach-bit'.

So, with the benefit of hindsight, it appears that Comey was likewise intentionally mishandling classified information so as to play politics - pretty much the worst type of conduct the Director of FBI (any Director) could possibly undertake as it goes against absolutely everything that office stands for.

When the dust finally settles regarding the fallout from a clearly unexpected and unanticipated Trump Presidency, I think the public are going to see just how deep the deep state has penetrated the Constitutional Republic and control the top politicians and lawmakers of America.

Despite popular opinion to the contrary, both Dems & Reps bat for the same boss - only becoming manifestly evident since the rise of Trump onto the US political scene. In 6 years, when Trump completes his 2nd term, I doubt there will be much support for the 2 main political parties - why would anyone support an outfit whose main M.O is to exploit average Joe so as to protect the deep state and it's desire to control both sides of the game?

originally posted by: luthier

Nope. Grassley commented and read them all.

I read that only a few poeple had access, now Devin Nunes
and the Intel Committee will have them. Ok?

Let's protect Bob Mueller as special counsel so when he turns his attention to the Democrat Crooks they can't fire him either.

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: luthier

Nope. Grassley commented and read them all.

I read that only a few poeple had access, now Devin Nunes
and the Intel Committee will have them. Ok?

dailycaller.com...