One of the most interesting new disclosures today in the Comey hearing was the admission by former FBI Director James Comey that he intentionally used a “friend” on the Columbia law faculty to leak his memos to the media. Comey says that he did so to force the appointment of a Special Counsel. However, those memos could be viewed as a government record and potential evidence in a criminal investigation.
Notably, Columbia Law School Professor Daniel Richman on a faculty webpage reads that he is “currently an adviser to FBI Director James B. Comey.” Richman specializes in criminal law and criminal procedure.
The problem is that Comey’s description of his use of an FBI computer to create memoranda to file suggests that these are arguably government documents. Comey admitted that he thought he raised the issue with his staff and recognized that they might be needed by the Department or Congress. They read like a type of field 302 form, which are core investigatory documents.
The admission of leaking the memos is problematic given the overall controversy involving leakers undermining the Administration. Indeed, it creates a curious scene of a former director leaking material against the President after the President repeatedly asked him to crack down on leakers.
Besides being subject to Nondisclosure Agreements, Comey falls under federal laws governing the disclosure of classified and nonclassified information. Assuming that the memos were not classified (though it seems odd that it would not be classified even on the confidential level), there is 18 U.S.C. § 641 which makes it a crime to steal, sell, or convey “any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof.”
There are also ethical and departmental rules against the use of material to damage a former represented person or individual or firm related to prior representation. The FBI website states:
Dissemination of FBI information is made strictly in accordance with provisions of the Privacy Act; Title 5, United States Code, Section 552a; FBI policy and procedures regarding discretionary release of information in accordance with the Privacy Act; and other applicable federal orders and directives.”
Lawyers generally ask for clients or employers to release information, particularly when it may be detrimental to the firm or the client or someone associated with your prior representation.
By the way, waking up in the middle of the night (as described by Comey) is not generally the best time to decide to leak damaging memos against a sitting president. There are times when coffee and a full night’s sleep (and even conferral with counsel) is recommended. Leaking damaging memos is one of those times. Moreover, if Comey was sure of his right to release the memo, why use a law professor to avoid fingerprints?
I find Comey’s admission to be deeply troubling from a professional and ethical standpoint. Would Director Comey have approved such a rule for FBI agents? Thus, an agent can prepare a memo during office hours on an FBI computer about a meeting related to his service . . . but leak that memo to the media. The Justice Department has long defined what constitutes government documents broadly. It is not clear if Comey had the documents reviewed for classification at the confidential level or confirmed that they would be treated as entirely private property. What is clear is that he did not clear the release of the memos with anyone in the government.
Comey’s statement of a good motivation does not negate the concerns over his chosen means of a leak. Moreover, the timing of the leak most clearly benefited Comey not the cause of a Special Counsel. It was clear at that time that a Special Counsel was likely. More importantly, Comey clearly understood that these memos would be sought. That leads inevitably to the question of both motivation as well as means.
What do you think?
TRUMP 2020
PENCE 2024
PENCE 2028
So who do you have in 2032 there dems? (That is still alive)
The Internet is the first thing that humanity has built that humanity doesn’t understand, the largest experiment in anarchy that we have ever had.
Eric Schmidt
If the FBI provides criminal justice services to federal agencies of the executive branch, then is it possible to assert that Mr. Comey had an attorney client relationship with the executive branch and the leak of a client communication is a violation of state bar of Virginia’s rules of ethics? If so, then can Mr Comey obtain a position with a law firm, if he committed an ethical violation of the rules of practice?
The conversation was in Comey’s capacity as FBI Director. As such, his memorandum is a work product of the FBI and the usual caveats apply. And, if Comey believed this disclosure to be legal, why didn’t he schedule an interview with the NYTimes and reveal this information? No, he waited until he was fired, and then “leaked” it anoymously; hoping that it would not be traced back to him. And, if he believed that Trump was engaging in obstruction of justice, why didn’t he make a referral to the DOJ as required by law?
The interesting thing is how Comey didn’t question Lynch when she asked that the HRC investigation be characterized as a “matter”. Instead of standing up as FBI director and stating that he would not engage in political spin, he folded. By his own admission, he was afraid to start a fight. Same thing with Trump, when Trump allegedly said he “hoped” that the Flynn investigation could be wrapped up, Comey doesn’t respond to the President. Any good FBI director would clarify Trump’s statement by asking Trump what he meant or explain to Trump that he hoped that the President was not “ordering” the FBI to stand-down on Flynn. Seems to me that Comey is unqualified to be FBI director if he, by his admission, cannot stand up to Lynch or to Trump. And, that communication regarding Clinton’s emails right before the election was bizarre. Talk about trying to influence an election! Maybe Comey is an attention-seeker; in any event, he doesn’t seem qualified to be FBI director.
You have made a compelling case that he is definitely not qualified to be the FBI Director. He is a snake. If the Senators had questioned him properly it would have been very evident that his actions have very often been self-serving and motivated by something other than love of country. When he answered whether what Trump said about “hope” amounted to obstruction of justice, he said that Mueller would have to determine that. That leaves a cloud over Trump. The answer an honest and competent Director of the FBI would have given would have been that he didn’t see it as obstruction of justice, and that is why he did not report it to the Justice Dept. as he would have been obligated to do, if it had been suspected obstruction. Comey is a snake.
He turned his friend into an accomplice.
He has recently made the argument that there are crimes which will never be prosecuted. This was one and he took advantage of it.
‘Perp-walk” Comey and his friend.
Comey said the POTUS’s tweet forced him to leak. The NYTIMES quoted his leak the day before the Tweet.
Comey was no longer with FBI.. But his after meeting notes with POTUS were created on an FBI device.. About an FBI situation.
Why did he copy and remove those FBI documents from the FBI device?
Comey leaves himself open to the obvious: What else did he copy and walk out with?
Attorney Turley is a scholar and a gentleman His legal analysis on this is spot on. Those comments challenging his comments are uninformed, motivated by ideological bias and mostly just plain foolish.
Comey is a fraud. If he had an ounce of integrity, he would have refused to comply with AG Lynch’s politically motivated order to identify the criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton as a “matter”. He lied to the American public. It wasn’t an inconsequential lie on a trivial matter. Using a friend to do his leaking was cowardly. Why has he done the things he has done? Don’t his actions seem nutty to any of you people?
Comey made some poor choices when he felt intimidated by both Lynch and Trump. He needed to be stronger as he said. Nevertheless, he will find a lucrative position in the private sector. At some point he will write a book about it all I would imagine. Meanwhile,Trump Kushner and the rest of the gang will be sitting in the hot seat as Mueller’s investigation proceeds.
Comey has had a long career in the law and public service. He knows better. His job title included not allowing himself to be intimidated or unduly influenced by anybody.
What evidence is there that he was intimidated by Trump? He didn’t do what the POTUS hoped he would do. On the other hand he complied with AG Lynch’s politically motivated direction to call a criminal investigation a “matter”.
Was he actually intimidated by Lynch, or were his motives also political? He did exonerate poor old Hillary after granting all her underlings immunity. WTF was that about?
How does anybody think this clown has any credibility, or that he was good for the FBI? He is just a wannabe taller version of J Edgar. And I say his behavior has been nutty, cowardly, disgraceful and destructive to the interests of the American people.
PS: You have been told that Trump is not under investigation. Good luck keeping that lie alive. Good luck proving any of the “gang” colluded with the Russkies. What does that alleged collusion even look like? I would like to see some genius present a theory on these “links” to Russia. Did the Trump campaign direct or request the Russians to hack the DNC and that idiot Podesta? The Russians and all our adversaries and some friends are always hacking. They don’t need any prompting. What makes you idiots think that a “gang” of billionaires would risk everything to collude with the Russians just to get thankless jobs very tough they don’t need. It’s a bizarre fantasy of a bunch of delusional sore losers. Mueller won’t find anything and eventually it will be over. In the meantime, the lefties will do as much damage as they can to the operation of their own government. And the press is criminal in their collusion.
Comey is a strong, manly man.
He convicted Martha Stewart.
_______________________
Cato – Gene Healy
“But back in 2004, he led what legal observers call a “petty and vindictive” prosecution against interior design icon Martha Stewart for a lesser offense.”
What if there were no memo, just Comey’s recollection of the conversation? Would he be guilty of a crime by revealing a conversation where he was a participant? Many States (not sure of Federal rules) allow one to tape a telephone conversation by participants in that conversation. And the conversation was not classified. If it were, Trump would have had to retreat to the “safe” room in the WH.
Trump, “I HOPE you can let this go.”
I’m not aware of anyone being arrested for HOPING.
If it is illegal to HOPE, The Right Revered and Cad, Jesse Jackson,
must be arrested for keeping HOPE alive!
“Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?”
I recall a President was elected under the banner of Hope & Change.
FD291 Fed employment agreement
Something not discussed is that neither the actual memo or its verbatim content was shared with the media. As I recall, the professor shared his knowledge of the memo over the phone to a NYT reporter. Does that have a bearing on the argument?
How about 18 USC 2071 & 1519. He wrote, immediately after the meeting with POTUS, the one memo on a government issued laptop, in his government provided auto, and filed it in a government electronic file. To this former DOJ trial atty that is a government doc.
I don’t understand Comey’s motive to leak other than retaliation. Comey states Trump was not under investigation. Comey states Trump was not impeding the Russia investigation. Comey believes if Trump has tapes of their conversation it would back his version. If the tapes support Comey’s version, why would Comey be compelled to leak his notes to get out his side? Where is the justification to leak his notes other than retaliation for firing by damaging Trump’s credibility. Also Comey calls Trumps views of his leadership at FBI a lie. Isn’t Trump entitled to his view based on his knowledge, which may be counter to Comey’s without calling him a liar in a Senate hearing? Again, Comey seems bent on damaging Trump in retaliation for firing.
Put Trump under oath.
Do you really think that putting Trump under oath would accomplish anything? He cares about an oath about as much as he cares about paying his bills.
perjury
Looks like Comey experienced a “performance appraisal” at work.
I think that is legal.
I accept you concession of loss in this case.
You can’t convict for a crime;
you can’t even produce coherent charges.
You now want to create, out of whole cloth, a process crime.
Sorry, you lose.
Yep.
He said that he woke up concerned about Trump’s tweet suggesting that their meetings were taped. If I found out that the POTUS was taping the FBI director, without the latter’s knowledge, I’d want a special prosecutor too.
It is Trump and his team’s actions that bought the SP, not Comey’s.
Trump is also mad at Sessions for recusing himself from the investigation and for the appointment of Mueller.
How can a statement of one’s views of someone else’s behavior be a lie?
The only way is if Mr. Comey knew that Trump really had different views of him.
One wonders how he could know that?
On the other hand, if an employee of mine privately took down every word I said and circulated that among a number of his friends with the apparent purpose of harming me, I would consider that hostile behavior and would certainly view all his actions with suspicion, including his leadership.
Yes!😞
https://twitter.com/RWPUSA/status/873171187932835840