The Goat Pen

bluetick wrote:

eCat wrote:
not its not incorrect - he's still a representative and its a horseshit move.

Jesus, you said he leaked as FBI Director and HE WAS NOT FBI DIRECTOR. Do you know wtf incorrect means? It's not a "yeah, but" proposition.

whether you are the current or the former, he leaked it in a position to damage the presidents credibility, not as a private citizen, but as the FBI director - as in someone in a position to have privileged conversations with the POTUS

Private citizen has no bearing for an FBI director days removed from his job.


and I shouldn't have to explain that to anyone, even someone intentionally being obtuse on here.

"Certainly that had more to do with his impeachment that any "interfering" which I can't find any specific examples other than firing a prosecutor and not handing over evidence in a timely manner, and/or destroying evidence"

Not comparing Nixon (or Trump) to Hitler, but that's like saying "Other than breaking their treaties and invading other countries, and oh yeah, that thing with the jews, the Nazis weren't so bad"...

[youtube]ySxJiUp8qd8[/youtube]

[youtube]M54HidVSCvY[/youtube]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... ation.html

S,ITYS.

hedge wrote:"Certainly that had more to do with his impeachment that any "interfering" which I can't find any specific examples other than firing a prosecutor and not handing over evidence in a timely manner, and/or destroying evidence"

Not comparing Nixon (or Trump) to Hitler, but that's like saying "Other than breaking their treaties and invading other countries, and oh yeah, that thing with the jews, the Nazis weren't so bad"...

that wasn't the point, the point was that there were 4 other points to article 2 that are clearly written to arrive at impeachment and point 5 was "and oh yeah, he didn't cooperate"

and then make #5 out to be the driver that led to his impeachment to support your Trump argument.

eCat wrote:

bluetick wrote:

eCat wrote:
not its not incorrect - he's still a representative and its a horseshit move.

Jesus, you said he leaked as FBI Director and HE WAS NOT FBI DIRECTOR. Do you know wtf incorrect means? It's not a "yeah, but" proposition.

whether you are the current or the former, he leaked it in a position to damage the presidents credibility, not as a private citizen, but as the FBI director - as in someone in a position to have privileged conversations with the POTUS

Private citizen has no bearing for an FBI director days removed from his job.


and I shouldn't have to explain that to anyone, even someone intentionally being obtuse on here.

Comey leaked that memo to his pal expressly because he was the newly-fired EX-FBI Director. You saying there's no distinction between him being the current or the former is crazy. Comey would have had no reason to leak if he was still the acting FBI head. Who's being obtuse?

Facts matter. You said Comey was FBI Director when he leaked that memo, and he clearly was not. Care to triple-down? heh

not surprisingly you're missing the point

I'm not interested in debating it with you. I knew he wasn't the FBI director when leaked it. Its irrelevant to him trying to damage the credibility of the president. Whether he is FBI director or ex-FBI director.

Professor Tiger wrote:[youtube]ySxJiUp8qd8[/youtube]

Congrats,prof...your boy Trump apparently is scot free. Flynn, Manafort, Paige, hell - maybe even son-in-law Kushner, the satellite peeps will be taken down, but who cares -- nobody can accuse you of voting for THEM, right? Oh wait - you said you didn't vote for the current prez either...... ... ..........ah well, congrats anyway I guess.

Matthews looked as wigged out as McCain did today (whoa), but who am I to argue with his leg-tingles?

eCat wrote:not surprisingly you're missing the point

I'm not interested in debating it with you. I knew he wasn't the FBI director when leaked it. Its irrelevant to him trying to damage the credibility of the president. Whether he is FBI director or ex-FBI director.

That's a shame; I love this shit. I was going to ask you what you thought of AG Lynch and President Bill Clinton's meeting on the tarmac.

bluetick wrote:

Professor Tiger wrote:[youtube]ySxJiUp8qd8[/youtube]

Matthews looked as wigged out as McCain did today (whoa), but who am I to argue with his leg-tingles?

Today's events, and Matthews reaction to it, reminded me of this:

[youtube]rGv1VKAybcI[/youtube]

General Pickett is Ike Clanton!

comey leaked an FBI document

those memo's done as the director in regards to conversations recorded with the president should have been given to special counsel/or one of many of the investigating agencies.

comey states 3 times the president wasn't under investigation to his face

you think he would have told him that if anything had ever been found linking trump to collusion with the russians

You've got to keep the puppet on the string...

bluetick wrote:Incorrect. Comey leaked his memo as an un-employed private citizen.

Incorrect incorrect. Any memos Comey wrote about his conversations with Trump are still government property, with lots of rules attached.

Just read the link below. Read every word. SBU is the lowest level of classification of government documents. It can even cover office gossip, much less conversations between POTUS and the FBI Director. Comey was required to sign it at some point:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/file/819311/download

That non-disclosure agreement does not end when Comey became a private citizen. It specifically says so. It is still in force. Now think about the leaks he just admitted to yesterday, all of them in direct violation of that non-disclosure agreement he signed.

He's in trouble.

Trump told everybody what they talked about. Well, he lied about what they talked about and then claimed he had a tape of it...

I posted on the narrow topic of huge legal risk Comey took by leaking information he signed an agreement not to. I'm trying to avoid commenting on the broader topic of whether Trump colluded with the Russians, since I told Tick I would limit my comments to S,ITYS. Besides, that conspiracy theory got thoroughly disemboweled last Thursday. No need to pile on.

But now I hope the country can look at the separate issue of the Obama administration surveilling, unmasking, and then leaking the campaign of the presidential candidate of the opposing party.

It has been ALLEGED that in the waning days of the Obama administration, his IC and FBI suddenly began requesting the unmasking of an unprecedented number of US citizens identities - well into the thousands. The country deserves to know if these allegations are true, and if so, why.

It has also been ALLEGED that the FISA courts approved that wholesale unmasking. It is the FISA courts job to balance legitimate national security needs with the first amendment. The country deserves to know if the FISA courts were granting the government a huge number of unmaskings, and if so, why. The FISA courts should not be kangaroo courts, simply enabling the campaign equipped with an NSA/CIA/FBI to spy on a campaign not so equipped.

Worst of all, it has been ALLEGED that, in the last days of the Obama presidency, his officials suddenly changed the rules governing access to unmasked information, making that information available to an extremely large number of government agencies and not just ones that are "need to know." The country deserves if that allegation is true, and if so, why. We DO know that some of that unmasked information was illegally leaked to the press for partisan advantage.

Maybe we can finally start talking about that stuff now.

This whole Comey/Trump thing feels like a game. Nobody will remember any of this in a few months when Iran supposedly flies a jet too close into Turkish airspace.

the democrats have alot invested in this - they aren't going to let it go away

Correct. This is where the Democrats are:

[youtube]VYPsoxpt0BU[/youtube]

Professor Tiger wrote:

bluetick wrote:Incorrect. Comey leaked his memo as an un-employed private citizen.

Incorrect incorrect. Any memos Comey wrote about his conversations with Trump are still government property, with lots of rules attached.

No. Comey being unemployed when the leak occured is a BASIC FACT that stands apart from legality, motivations, dickishness etc. I held that he wouldn't have leaked that memo through his professor pal if he still had the job, but even that rational judgement is open for debate. Comey's status as EX-director at the moment of the deed is not. Nod if you understand.

Just read the link below. Read every word. SBU is the lowest level of classification of government documents. It can even cover office gossip, much less conversations between POTUS and the FBI Director. Comey was required to sign it at some point:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/file/819311/download

That non-disclosure agreement does not end when Comey became a private citizen. It specifically says so. It is still in force. Now think about the leaks he just admitted to yesterday, all of them in direct violation of that non-disclosure agreement he signed.

He's in trouble.

Goody; he's in trouble. Dumbass did way more to put this freakshow in the WH than any Russian election meddling, imo.

Professor Tiger wrote:It has been ALLEGED that in the waning days of the Obama administration, his IC and FBI suddenly began requesting the unmasking of an unprecedented number of US citizens identities - well into the thousands. The country deserves to know if these allegations are true, and if so, why.

I read 2200 unmasking requests in 2015, and 1900 in 2016. Wouldn't you think there'd be more in 2016, seeing as how it was mid-'16 before the Russian election meddling became known? If the NSA intercepts 150 million foreign phono convos...is 1900 unmaskings 'unprecedented'? Care to provide more context?

It has also been ALLEGED that the FISA courts approved that wholesale unmasking. It is the FISA courts job to balance legitimate national security needs with the first amendment. The country deserves to know if the FISA courts were granting the government a huge number of unmaskings, and if so, why. The FISA courts should not be kangaroo courts, simply enabling the campaign equipped with an NSA/CIA/FBI to spy on a campaign not so equipped.

After 9/11 the Bush administration was busted approving 4 million warrantless wiretaps and that's why we have the FISA courts operating as they do. Requests and all parts of the process are documented, no doubt you'll get your answers. Is it your understanding that the FISA courts are partisan and prone to favor a particular campaign?

Worst of all, it has been ALLEGED that, in the last days of the Obama presidency, his officials suddenly changed the rules governing access to unmasked information, making that information available to an extremely large number of government agencies and not just ones that are "need to know." The country deserves if that allegation is true, and if so, why.

How can that be ALLEGED? Either the rules were changed or they weren't right? Care to be more specific?

We DO know that some of that unmasked information was illegally leaked to the press for partisan advantage?

So you had the president, vice-president, and atty general saying/lying publicly that there had NEVER been ANY contacts between the campaign and Russians as late as Feb 2017. How does that figure into the concept of partisan advantage, iyo?