James Comey

Trump says new FBI notes are ‘total exoneration’ for Flynn

President Trump said Thursday newly revealed FBI notes “totally exonerate” former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn on his conviction of lying to the FBI. “He’s in the process of being exonerated,” Mr. Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “That [note] is total exoneration. When you read the notes, how could you do anything else?” Bombshell documents unsealed Wednesday night revealed that top FBI officials viewed the goal of interviewing Flynn in 2017 was to “get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired.” A handwritten note disclosed that agents wanted to get Flynn to “admit breaking the Logan Act,” which restricts communication between private citizens and foreign governments, and catch him in a lie. The president said Flynn was a victim of “dirty cops.” “These were dirty, filthy cops at the top of the FBI, and you know the names better than I do. And they were dishonest people,” Mr. Trump said. “Gen. Flynn is a fine man. You don’t get to where he is by being bad. The dirty cops came in.” Mr. Trump fired Flynn a month after taking office, saying he had misled Vice President Mike Pence on the extent of his contacts with Russian officials during the presidential transition. Asked Thursday whether he regretted firing Flynn, the president said, “I wish I had [brought him back], with all the information. This is terrible.” He also blamed CNN for helping to “destroy” Flynn and said he hopes the network “is going to give him a fair shake.”

Don’t hold your breath, Mr. President..

Report: Rank-and-File FBI Agents Eager to Blow Whistle on Comey, Holder, Lynch

A new report claims that a significant number of rank-and-file FBI agents are chomping at the bit to expose Obama-era leaders, alleging corruption and even criminal violations of the law. These agents are signaling that the only way they can safely and legally blow the whistle is if Congress subpoenas them individually to provide information about their former bosses. “There are agents all over this country who love the bureau and are sickened by [James] Comey’s behavior and [Andrew] McCabe and [Eric] Holder and [Loretta] Lynch and the thugs like [John] Brennan–who despise the fact that the bureau was used as a tool of political intelligence by the Obama administration thugs,” Joe DiGenova, a former United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, told the Daily Caller. “They are just waiting for a chance to come forward and testify.” In a statement to the Daily Caller, an unnamed FBI agent claimed, “Every special agent I have spoken to in the Washington Field Office wants to see McCabe prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. They feel the same way about Comey.” “All Congress needs to do is subpoena involved personnel and they will tell you what they know. These are honest people. Leadership cannot stop anyone from responding to a subpoena. Those subpoenaed also get legal counsel provided by the government to represent them,” the agent added. Former FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom made similar statements when asked last December about morale at the bureau. “Well, I think there’s a lot of patriots that have had it up to here with what’s going on, and they’re going to step forward and tell people what the shenanigans have been,” Kallstrom told Fox News’ Stuart Varney. “How they shut down the Clinton Foundation investigation, how other things were done that are so anti-what the FBI and the United States and this country is about.” Paul Sperry of RealClearInvestigations reported last Thursday that Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz has “found ‘reasonable grounds’ for believing there has been a violation of federal criminal law in the FBI/DOJ’s handling of the Clinton investigation/s,” adding that the top watchdog official has “referred his findings of potential criminal misconduct to Huber for possible criminal prosecution.”

Opinion/Analysis: Comey’s actions are ‘unworthy’ of the FBI, says former Assistant Director and 24-year veteran agent

Through his actions during his relatively brief tenure as FBI Director and now in penning and promoting a salacious “tell all” book, it is now quite evident that James Comey’s higher loyalty is to James Comey, and James Comey alone. It is not, by any stretch of the imagination, to the FBI, where I served for 24 years, or to the selfless men and women who work there – all of whom he has tossed, once again, into the middle of a political firestorm. The ancient Greeks had a word for the excessive vanity that would cause someone to place his interests before those of his country and those of the dedicated public servants he was called to lead – it’s called hubris. There is no other plausible explanation for his series of ill-advised actions, beginning with the then-director’s now-infamous press conference in July 2016, when he acted contrary to 28 US Code Section 547, Section 9 of the United States Attorneys Manual and over 100 years of established practice between the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). He did this in declaring, without ever consulting with a DOJ prosecutor, that Hillary Clinton was un-prosecutable in the wake of a kid gloves investigation. His actions are unworthy of the storied law enforcement agency I served for close to a quarter of a century, and they shocked many of us who worked with and around him during his years serving in the Department of Justice. The statutes cited above clearly state that the U.S. Justice Department and the United States Attorneys have plenary authority to make prosecution decisions. In contravention of this wisely drawn system of checks and balances, then-FBI Director Comey held his unprecedented press conference and in doing so, he needlessly injected the FBI into one of the most volatile political controversies of our time. Comey’s rationale that he took these actions because Attorney General Loretta Lynch was “conflicted” doesn’t hold water with anyone possessing even a rudimentary knowledge of the federal criminal justice system. The American system was designed by our founding fathers to interject an objective party with legal training between those who are investigating and those who decide whether to invoke the legal process to deprive someone of his or her life, liberty or property. This brilliant system, which Comey trashed, was designed to keep the FBI and other law enforcement agencies out of politics. Now his book renews the controversy to the detriment of nearly everyone but Jim Comey, who is clearly out to repair his tarnished reputation and mete out some payback for his dismissal by President Trump. Sunday’s interview on ABC – and every action he has taken since usurping the role of the Justice Department – has only thrust the FBI deeper into the political crucible. It has also apparently reinforced Comey’s misplaced belief that he, and he alone, is better equipped than anyone else in the criminal justice system to make important decisions. As former director of the FBI, Comey is very familiar with the recusal process and knows full well that if Attorney General Lynch was “conflicted,” the legally appropriate process was for her to delegate decision-making authority to another person inside the Justice Department. He never gave her a chance. Instead of allowing her to fulfill her responsibilities and do the right thing, Comey effectively took her off the hook and placed the FBI on it. He also forever tainted any future prosecution of Hillary Clinton because he, the head of the lead investigative agency, had basically absolved the former Secretary of State of any wrongdoing. Further evidence of Comey’s ego overriding sound judgment is his willingness to leak and tolerate leaks among his inner circle. Leaking information concerning sensitive investigations is a violation of federal law. As the DOJ Inspector General stated in the Andrew McCabe investigation, such leaks serve no public interest whatsoever – aside, of course, from serving the private agendas of McCabe and Comey. Comey’s book removes any doubt that personal animus towards Donald Trump and acute sensitivity to the political environment permeated his inner circle and drove key actions and decisions. Regardless of how one feels about Trump’s presidency, Comey’s petty references to the president’s physical appearance and other aspects of his personality are far more revealing about Comey than anyone else. He describes Donald Trump as acting like a mob boss and not “tethered to the truth.” He pronounces the president a liar and “morally unfit to be president.” If he truly believed this was so, then Jim Comey had a golden opportunity on several occasions to act on conviction and either forcefully stand up to the president or resign on principle. The truth is that Jim Comey relished the role of FBI Director and wanted to keep his job, so he remained silent until he miraculously found the courage to speak up while out promoting his book. I am also particularly concerned that Comey’s grandstanding could be devastating to ongoing prosecutions and investigations by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Our country deserves to know the truth about how extensively the Russians interfered in our election and who may have assisted them. And Comey, as an attorney and officer of the court, knows that as a potential key witness it is highly inappropriate and potentially prejudicial to the prosecution for him to comment on matters in which he played such a significant role – and may have to testify about. It is ironically Comey and his band – including McCabe, Lisa Page and Peter Skrozk (he of the infamous “insurance policy” again Trump being elected) – who will most likely be called as the first witnesses for the defense in any prosecution that the Special Counsel might bring forward. When the director of the FBI, his second in command, the national security lawyer assigned to keep the case within legal boundaries and the lead case agent all express a strong bias or even hatred toward the target(s) of the investigation, they become key defense witnesses. Juries will take note of this bias and question everything that stems from it, meaning Comey has carelessly and needlessly complicated Special Counsel Mueller’s mission. Comey’s book will sell because these kinds of tabloid stories always do. There may have been a time and place for him to tell his story, but now is not that time. His “tell all” is beneath the office of the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who does indeed owe a “higher loyalty” – to the criminal justice system and the mission of the FBI. Jim Comey’s attempt at burnishing his legacy has thrust the FBI back into the political arena even as current Director Chris Wray patiently and doggedly tries – in the models of former directors Robert Mueller, Louie Freeh and William Webster – to extricate the agency from this political environment and return to established procedures and processes free of even a hint of bias or grandstanding. The public needs to understand that this is really not how the FBI operates within today’s criminal justice system. Jim Comey and his discredited inner circle in no way represent the FBI and its dedicated men and women. FBI Agents may have political and personal opinions but they check them at the door as they leave their homes to conduct the public’s business. FBI employees serve in a complex, global environment, many in war zones and international hotspots. They provide the most skilled and professional law enforcement services in the world. They do not deserve to have their professionalism and objectivity called into question because of the actions of Jim Comey, whose time as FBI director was an aberration. It is very painful for this FBI veteran to say that the Comey manuscript, with its petty and gratuitous observations, self-aggrandizement and moralizing, sadly displays an ego that is loyal first and foremost to its author.

Former Assistant FBI Director Chris E. Swecker was the author of that powerful piece that just shredded Jim Comey.  Outstanding!

Lawmakers Recommend Clinton, Comey, Lynch, McCabe for Criminal Referrals

Republican lawmakers on Wednesday sent a slew of criminal referrals to Attorney General Jeff Sessions for a number of Obama administration officials and senior FBI employees for violations of the law in connection to the Clinton email and Trump-Russia investigations. Specifically, they sent criminal referrals to Sessions for: former FBI Director James Comey, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, as well as FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok and his lover, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, for separate violations. The criminal referrals, first reported by investigative journalist Sara Carter, were made by Rep. Ron Desantis (R-FL), a senior member of the House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform Committees who is leaving the House to run for Florida governor, and nine other colleagues. Signatories included: GOP Reps. Andy Biggs (AZ), Dave Brat (VA), Jeff Duncan (SC), Matt Gaetz (FL), Paul A. Gosar (AZ), Andy Harris (MD), Jody Hice (GA), Todd Rokita (IN), Claudia Tenney (NY), and Ted Yoho (FL). “Because we believe that those in positions of high authority should be treated the same as every other American, we want to be sure that the potential violations of law outlined below are vetted appropriately,” said the letter. They said Comey potentially broke the law when he chose not to seek charges against Clinton, for leaking classified memos of his conversations to President Trump to his friend Daniel Richman to give to the press, and for lying to lawmakers. They said Clinton potentially broke the law when disguising payments to Fusion GPS, the firm that produced the Trump dossier, despite mandatory disclosures to the Federal Election Commission. Lynch, they said, potentially broke the law when she threatened a former FBI informant, William Douglas Campbell, who had tried to come forward in 2016 with information related to the Uranium One deal that was approved in 2010. McCabe potentially broke the law when he lied to investigators four times when questioned about a leak that he had arranged, they said. Strzok and Page potentially violated the law by interfering in the investigation of Clinton’s private email server, they said. The letter cites a Wall Street Journal report that said their text messages to one another revealed FBI officials tried to eliminate evidence that Clinton had compromised high-level communications with then-President Obama. “The report provides the following alarming specifics, among others: ‘Mr. Strzok texts Ms. Page to tell her that, in fact, senior officials had decided to water down the reference to President Obama to ‘another senior government official,” the criminal referral said. Finally, the lawmakers referred all Justice Department and FBI personnel, including Comey, McCabe, former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, and former Acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente, for potentially breaking the law by using unverified and/or false information to obtain a surveillance warrant on former Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page. Carter also reported that other recent documents obtained by congressional investigators suggest possible coordination by the Obama White House, the CIA, and the FBI in investigating the Trump campaign. “According to those documents, the senior Obama officials used unsubstantiated evidence to launch allegations in the media that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia during the run-up to the 2016 presidential election,” Carter reported. CIA Director John Brennan had briefed Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) in August 2016, prompting Reid to send a letter to then-FBI Director James Comey asking him to investigate allegations of collusion. Reid then reportedly stayed in close touch with Comey.

Wow!  This is huge!!

Push is on to have ex-FBI chief Comey disbarred after Clinton scandal

A crusading lawyer filed a bar grievance this week accusing former FBI Director James Comey of lying to Congress and destroying potential evidence in the Clinton email scandal, in a process that could end up costing him his law license. Ty Clevenger filed the grievance in New York, where Mr. Comey was a former U.S. attorney and is licenses to practice law. Mr. Clevenger said Mr. Comey’s testimony to Congress that he did not predetermine the outcome of the FBI’s probe into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is belied by revelations this week that he in fact started drafting an exoneration months before even speaking with Mrs. Clinton. “Insofar as Mr. Comey gave materially false testimony to Congress, it appears that he violated Rules 1.0(w), 3.3(a)(1), and 8.4 of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct,” Mr. Clevenger wrote. He also asked to renew grievances in New York against former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, saying Mr. Comey’s claim that she tried to pressure him to downplay the Clinton probe should subject her to scrutiny. The state grievance committee had deferred an investigation in January, saying there were ongoing probes by Congress and they would await the outcome.

A very interesting development..  To read the rest, click on the text above.

Comey drafted letter on Clinton email investigation before completing interviews, FBI confirms

The FBI released documents Monday proving former FBI Director James Comey began drafting a letter regarding Hillary Clinton’s email investigation months before conducting several key interviews, including speaking to Clinton herself. The document release was titled “Drafts of Director Comeys July 5, 2016 Statement Regarding Email Server Investigation Part 01 of 01.” The contents of the email were largely unclear as nearly all of it was redacted. The now-public records show the email titled “Midyear Exam — UNCLASSIFIED” was sent by Comey on May 2, 2016, to Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, general counsel James Baker and chief of staff and senior counselor James Rybicki. On May 16, the documents showed a response email from Rybicki, saying “Please send me any comments on this statement so we may roll into a master doc for discussion with the Director at a future date. Thanks, Jim.” The existence of the documents, reported by Newsweek, were first brought to light by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., also a member of the committee, after they reviewed transcripts of interviews with top Comey aides who alluded to the email’s existence. The Senate Judiciary Committee is investigating Comey in his role as FBI director and President Trump’s decision to fire him in May. The senators penned a letter on Aug. 30 to newly-appointed FBI Director Christopher Wray noting their findings, saying that “it appears that in April or early May of 2016, Mr. Comey had already decided he would issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton. That was long before FBI agents finished their work,” the letter said. “The outcome of an investigation should not be prejudged while FBI agents are still hard at work trying to gather the facts.” Clinton, the Democratic presidential candidate in 2016, was investigated by the FBI for using a private email address and server to handle classified information while serving as secretary of state. In July 2016, Comey famously called Clinton’s email arrangement “extremely careless” though he decided against recommending criminal charges. The existence of such an email draft raised questions about Comey’s Senate testimony in June 2017 regarding his decision to go public with findings in the Clinton email investigation. At the time, Comey testified that he was inclined to publicly announce the results of the probe to “protect the credibility of the investigation,” after then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton had an unscheduled meeting on a tarmac in Arizona. He also said “other things” encouraged him to make the announcement, including Lynch allegedly urging him to refer to the email scandal as a “matter” and not an “investigation.” “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department” in order to close the case “credibly,” he said. Calls for Comey to return to Capitol Hill for questioning have mounted, including from Graham who said he would subpoena Comey if he had to. “He’s coming one way or the other,” Graham said..

Assuming this is all true, Pres. Trump was exactly right in firing then Director Comey.  And, again, if this is all true..  Comey has much to answer for, including the fact that he lied under oath.  This story is developing…

Comey began drafting ‘exoneration statement’ before interviewing Clinton, senators say

Then-FBI Director James Comey began drafting a statement exonerating Hillary Clinton in the investigation into her private email use before interviewing key witnesses, including Clinton herself, two Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee said Thursday. “Conclusion first, fact-gathering second—that’s no way to run an investigation,” Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham wrote in a letter this week to the FBI. “The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy.” Grassley and Graham said they learned about Comey’s draft “exoneration statement” after reviewing transcripts of interviews with top Comey aides. “According to the unredacted portions of the transcripts, it appears that in April or early May of 2016, Mr. Comey had already decided he would issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton,” the senators said. They added, “That was long before FBI agents finished their work. Mr. Comey even circulated an early draft statement to select members of senior FBI leadership. The outcome of an investigation should not be prejudged while FBI agents are still hard at work trying to gather the facts.” Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee in 2016, was investigated by the FBI for using a private email address and server to handle classified information while serving as secretary of state. In July 2016, Comey famously called Clinton’s email arrangement “extremely careless” though he decided against recommending criminal charges. In a news release Thursday, the senators said Comey began drafting a statement in April or May 2016, which was before the FBI interviewed 17 key witnesses, including Clinton herself and other top aides. The statement preceded the FBI entering into an immunity agreement with top Clinton aides with Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson. The transcripts are from interviews conducted by the Office of Special Counsel, which interviewed James Rybicki, Comey’s chief of staff, and Trisha Anderson, the principal deputy general counsel of national security and cyberlaw, the senators said. “It is unclear whether the FBI agents actually investigating the case were aware that Mr. Comey had already decided on the investigation’s outcome while their work was ongoing,” the senators wrote. In the Wednesday letter to FBI Director Chris Wray, the two senators said they have requested all records relating to the drafting of the statement. Comey was fired as FBI director by President Trump in May..

And he had not only the legal authority to do so, but the moral imperative to fire James Comey.  And despite the hypocritical hand wringing by the dominantly liberal mainstream media, and so many Democrat politicians, Trump’s firing of Comey was NOT a “constitutional crisis.”  Clinton fired his FBI director and nobody said boo about it.  So, when MSNBC and other media organs were trumping up (pun intended) that story, it fell flat.  James Comey was a self-serving, narcissistic, corrupt tool who should be investigated for corruption, perjury, and on and on..  This story is just getting started..  So, stay tuned..

Top Lawmaker Demands Investigation into Comey, Former Obama Officials for Leaks of Classified Intel

The chairman of the House National Security Subcommittee is calling on the Department of Justice to launch a formal investigation into former FBI Director James Comey’s alleged leak of classified information, according to an exclusive interview with the Washington Free Beacon in which the lawmaker also called on the Trump administration to purge all former Obama administration holdovers from government. Rep. Ron DeSantis (R., Fla.), a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and chair of its National Security subcommittee, is urging Attorney General Jeff Sessions to launch a full scale investigation into Comey’s handling of a series of potentially classified memos that were leaked to the press earlier this year. Comey admitted in testimony before Congress that he leaked these memos in order to spur an investigation into the Trump administration’s alleged collusion with Russia during the 2016 campaign. Reports alleging these memos contained classified information has riled congressional Republicans and spurred new calls for an investigation into Comey. DeSantis also called on the Trump administration to purge all former Obama administration officials still working in the government, claiming that the holdovers and their allies outside the White House are responsible for an unprecedented series of national security leaks aimed at damaging the Trump administration’s national security apparatus. DeSantis named Ben Rhodes—the former National Security Council official responsible for creating an in-house “echo chamber” meant to mislead reporters and the public about the landmark nuclear deal with Iran—as a primary source of these leaks and urged the House Intelligence Committee to call Rhodes and other former Obama officials to testify publicly about any role they may be playing in spreading classified information to reporters. Comey’s behavior warrants a DOJ investigation due to the former FBI director’s admittance that he disclosed private information to the public in order to damage the Trump administration, according to DeSantis. “Congress needs to press Sessions and other people to make sure they are investigating this because the American people need the truth,” DeSantis told the Free Beacon in a wide-ranging interview. “If he did violate any laws, he needs to be held accountable. If you’re violating laws in service of doing political warfare, that is just absolutely unacceptable, particularly for someone who held such a high position in the government.” Comey has gone on record stating that he “leaked in order to trigger a special counsel, which in some ways is pretty extraordinary,” DeSantis noted. Comey’s actions raise further questions about his ethics, DeSantis said. “Not only is he leaking this stuff, not only were the memos done in the course of his employment and likely government property, he may have disclosed classified information in this quest to basically wage a vendetta against the president because the president fired him and to try and create a special counsel,” DeSantis said. “This guy is really a creature of the swamp. He maneuvers around D.C. in ways that are very similar to how D.C. insiders operate,” DeSantis said of Comey. “He’s one of the best in those regards.” DeSantis and other lawmakers are now seeking copies of Comey’s complete memos in order to review whether classified information may have been leaked to the press in violation of U.S. law.

Drip, drip…  This story continues to develop.  To read the rest of this article, click on the text above.

Gregg Jarrett: If Comey’s in legal jeopardy, will Mueller ride to his rescue?

Hillary Clinton, thanks to James Comey, escaped criminal prosecution for violating the Espionage Act. Now it is Comey who may have violated that same law. If he did, will Comey escape prosecution, courtesy of his good friend, Robert Mueller? The fired FBI Director’s legal predicament comes as The Hill reports that Comey authored seven memorandums reflecting the contents of his conversations with President Trump and that four of the memos “have been determined to contain classified information.” If this is true and Comey kept these documents in his personal possession upon leaving government service and conveyed some of them to another individual without authorization, then it would appear that he committed multiple felonies under the Espionage Act. It is a crime to mishandle classified information: 18 USC 798 and 1924 prohibit a government official from removing a classified document from its proper place of custody to a location which is unsecure and disclosing it to an unauthorized person. Is this what Comey did? It sure looks like it. Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, stored 110 emails containing classified information on her home computer server, an unauthorized place. Yet, Comey misinterpreted the criminal statute by claiming she did not “intend to violate the law.” This is not the legal standard, as any knowledgeable lawyer will tell you. Clinton was never indicted, though she should have been. David Petraeus, former Director of the CIA, was not so fortunate. He pled guilty to removing classified documents to his personal residence where he stored them in an unsecured drawer. He also gave them to his biographer who was not authorized to receive them. John Deutch, also a former CIA Director, agreed to plead guilty to keeping classified material on his unauthorized laptop computer, but was pardoned by President Bill Clinton just days before the formal charges were filed. Comey insists the information contained in the memo he gave to his lawyer friend who leaked it to the media was unclassified. If true, it is not a violation of the Espionage Act. But if Comey gave his friend, Columbia University Professor Daniel C. Richman, any of the four documents containing classified information, then he committed one or more crimes. Richman now claims he received four memos from Comey, but none were marked classified. The good professor may not realize that the “marking” in no way determines its classified status. The content dictates classification, as Fox News Chief Intelligence Correspondent Catherine Herridge has consistently pointed out. Importantly, if Comey maintained these four documents in his personal possession, as his Senate testimony suggests, then he may have committed at least four more crimes in the same way that Clinton, Petraeus and Deutch did. Again, it is a felony to keep documents containing classified information in an unauthorized place, such as your personal possession, home or private unsecured computer. As explained in an earlier column, Comey likely violated another law. All of his memos are, unquestionably, government property under the Federal Records Act and the FBI’s own Records Management regulations. They were composed by him in the course and scope of his employment as the Director of the FBI. In meeting with President Trump, Comey was not acting as a private citizen. Both Congress and the FBI agree on this obvious point. Therefore, the memos were not Comey’s to keep in his possession. It is a crime to convert government property to your own personal use and then give it to another person. 18 USC 641 makes it a felony to “steal, sell or convey” such property to someone else without permission. Comey’s conduct and whether it constitutes numerous crimes should be investigated by Special Counsel, Robert Mueller. Yet, that is not likely to happen. Why? In a previous column, I described in detail how Mueller and Comey have been long-time close friends, allies and partners. They have enjoyed a mentor-protégé relationship. This is precisely why Mueller should have disqualified himself from serving under the special counsel statute (28 CFR 600.7 and 28 CFR 45.2). His strong relationship to Comey creates a genuine conflict of interest and, at the very least, the appearance of impropriety. How can Mueller discharge his responsibilities in a fair, objective and impartial manner? Will the mentor investigate and, if warranted, prosecute his protégé? Doubtful. The prospect of prejudice and favoritism this case presents is anathema to the fair administration of justice. The American people expect and deserve something better than a legal charade.

Agreed!!  And well said, Gregg.  Gregg Jarrett is a Fox News anchor and former defense attorney.  This is a follow up to the story we posted the other day (scroll down about six articles) regarding this subject.  Excellent analysis!!

Report: James Comey Memos Contained ‘Secret’ or ‘Confidential’ Information

More than half of the memos created by former FBI Director James Comey of his private conversations with President Trump have been found to contain classified information, according to a new report. Four of seven memos Comey created had markings making clear they contained information classified at the “secret” or “confidential” level, officials directly familiar with the matter told The Hill. The revelation that four of the seven memos included some sort of classified information “opens a new door of inquiry into whether classified information was mishandled, improperly stored or improperly shared,” it said. “This revelation raises the possibility that Comey broke his own agency’s rules and ignored the same security protocol that he publicly criticized Hillary Clinton for in the waning days of the 2016 presidential election,” it added. Comey had called Clinton “extremely careless” for creating a private email server that stored classified information but did not recommend prosecution because he said there was no evidence of criminal intent. According to the report, congressional investigators have already begun examining whether Comey’s creation, storage, and sharing of the memos violated FBI policy. “Now, congressional investigators are likely to turn their attention to the same issues to determine if Comey mishandled any classified information in his personal memos,” it said. The report noted that the memos were shown to Congress in recent days. The report also said the FBI considers all of the memos to be “government documents,” contrary to Comey’s claim they were “personal documents.” “FBI policy forbids any agent from releasing classified information or any information from ongoing investigations or sensitive operations without prior written permission, and mandates that all records created during official duties are considered to be government property,” the report said. Comey admitted to senators last month that he leaked at least one memo to his friend Daniel Richman, a Columbia Law School professor and former prosecutor so that he could leak them to the New York Times. The memo he was referring to documented a conversation where Trump allegedly asked Comey to drop his investigation into former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. He argued he did so as a “private citizen” and that these were his “personal documents.”