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.

 

Some info concerning Comey, from Judicial Watch

page: 1
10

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2018 @ 12:02 PM
link   
While reading comments on Twitter, just now, I stumbled across this article from Judicial Watch... It’s something about Comey coordinating his senate testimony beforehand...

www.judicialwatch.org... /

I don’t know what exactly to make of this, yet, but it might be important... for example, after he was fired, did Comey still have access to FBI files? (Or something)

Oh well... I just felt like adding to the ATS aether.

ETA the last paragraph of the article:

“These documents show that James Comey, who was fired by the president, nevertheless had easy, friendly access to the FBI as he prepped his infamous anti-Trump testimony to the Senate,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This collusion led to Comey’s attacking President Trump and misusing FBI records as part of a vendetta against the president.”


edit on 5/10/2018 by japhrimu because: (no reason given)

edit on Thu May 10 2018 by DontTreadOnMe because: added tags




posted on May, 10 2018 @ 12:24 PM
link   
I like Judicial watch. It isn't usually glorified that much, it actually can seem boring sometimes, but it is most often politically neutral. The stuff I read has been more neutral overall, but I have only read maybe twenty of their articles.



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: japhrimu

Wouldn't it be reasonable to suggest Comey would talk with the FBI to make sure he did not reveal certain information that may be either classified or sensitive to the investigation?



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Well of course Comey talked to Mueller after he was fired.

They both had/have lots of axes to grind.

Especially now with all the exposures and lies.

😎🎁🔐



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

I told somebody recently that “reasonable” has tentatively been ruined for me, by Comey.


But I digress.

I get what you’re saying, and I won’t dispute that... but I don’t buy it.

Though, if we’re postulating, I’d guess Comey was trying to protect himself from perjury, by having the “official” accounts of stuff, but I’m not sure it helped... (this is a stretch, but we’re just guessing, at this point, right?)

I’d like to point out, though, I’m not really taking a stance. I’d like to have as much info, personally, also, before I lock in with a final answer.



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: japhrimu

I'm not "locking in" a final answer either. I'm just saying what should be considered "reasonable".

Occam's razor and all.



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Occam’s razor? I like that term...

(I mean nothing by that, other than aesthetically/poetically)

Isn’t the most likely scenario one in which Comey doesn’t need to be told what’s sensitive or classified?
edit on 5/10/2018 by japhrimu because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: japhrimu

Oh, I don't know. We had a presidential candidate who was so forgetful, she could not remember signing a document stating that they had received specific training on the handling of such so we ought to be able to let a little ol' FBI director slide, eh?

I mean, why would we expect someone who was in charge of the highest law enforcement agency in the land to know what information was sensitive or not?

What's a little extreme carelessness between friends?
edit on 10-5-2018 by jadedANDcynical because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: japhrimu



Isn’t the most likely scenario one in which Comey doesn’t need to be told what’s sensitive or classified?


Most likely? In that case, I'm not sure.

I do know it would be smart to make sure first.



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

I don’t follow... How could he not know?

(I’m not arguing with the “making sure” part)



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

And as long as he doesn’t “intend” to give sensitive info, he should be alright, right?
edit on 5/10/2018 by japhrimu because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: japhrimu



I don’t follow... How could he not know?


Because he was not involved in every little aspect of the investigation.



And as long as he doesn’t “intend” to give sensitive info, he should be alright, right?


Of course.



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Why would he be testifying on that stuff, then?



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

What exposures? What lies? You blowing smoke again?
Oh its disgraceful what's going on. When nothings going on. LOL



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 03:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme


Example of Exposure: recently unredacted stuff or what the article I linked to contains

Example of Lies: Schumer saying IC has “six ways to Sunday” (or something) if getting back at someone...

... or is that not a lie?



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 05:34 PM
link   
This is ridiculous and shows muellers conflict of interest

At the very least, comey would be muellers most crucial witness in any investigation into obstruction of justice

At the most, mueller should be investigating Comey for leaking classified info pertaining to the investigation

Either way, for mueller to be working with comey on testimony toward congress is shady

Further proving why having comeys (who hates trump and leaked info out to start the special counsel ) friend and mentor lead the counsel was a huge mistake and conflict of course interest



new topics

top topics



 
10

log in

join