Printing The Legend: The Growing Gap Between Comey’s Image and Actions

The_Man_Who_Shot_Liberty_Valance440px-Comey-FBI-PortraitBelow is my column in the Hill Newspaper on the curious coverage surrounding James Comey and his leaking of his memos on meetings with President Donald Trump.  With the confirmation hearings of Comey’s replacement, Chris Wray, today, the status of the memos may come up in the Senate.

Here is the column:


In one of my favorite Westerns, “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance,” Jimmy Stewart reveals to a reporter that he was not the man who killed villain Liberty Valance — a legend that transformed him from a perceived coward to an inspiration hero and resulted in his being elected U.S. senator and ambassador to Great Britain. The seasoned reporter listens to the whole story, but in the end says that he will not print it.

He states the rule simply as “[w]hen the legend becomes fact…print the legend.” In many ways, James Comey is the Jimmy Stewart of the media production of “The Man Who Shot Lying Trump.” From the outset, reporters and Democrats (who had been calling for Comey’s firing or questioning his judgment) declared him to be the man who fearlessly stood up to a president demanding loyalty pledges and discarding legal and ethical standards.

The problem with that narrative is not the criticism of the actions of President Trump, but the consistent efforts to ignore the equally troubling actions of former FBI Director Comey. Yet, if Trump was to be the irredeemable villain, Comey had to be the immaculate hero. The script glitch centered on three allegations — all of which were actively denied by legal experts. First, Comey leaked memos of his meetings with Trump. Second, those memos constituted government material. Third, the memos were likely classified on some level.

Yes, the memos were leaked.

As I previously wrote, various legal experts went on the air on CNN and other cable news programs to dismiss the allegation (that a few of us printed) that Comey “leaked” his now famous memos detailing meetings with the president. Experts declared that leaks by definition only involve classified information — a facially ridiculous position that was widely stated with complete authority. Whether someone is prosecuted for a leak is a different question but a leak is the release of nonpublic information, not just classified information. University of Pennsylvania Law Professor Claire Finkelstein, CNN Legal Analyst Michael Zeldin, Fordham Law Professor Jed Shugerman, and others dismissed the notion that such memos could be deemed “leaks.”

Comey was a leaker, and he leaked for the oldest of motivations in Washington: to protect himself and hurt his opponents. Comey knew he would be called before the Congress and that these memos would be demanded by both his own former investigators as well as congressional investigators. That could have happened in a matter of days but Comey decided to use a friend to leak the content of the memos to the media (after giving the memos to his friend). In doing so, Comey took control of the media narrative and was lionized by the media.

Recently, the Senate Homeland Security Committee released a majority report that correctly referenced the Comey “leaks.” The report detailed a massive increase in leaks against the Trump administration but highlighted the leak by Comey. What makes that reference most troubling is that Comey was the person with the responsibility to find the leakers in the Trump administration. Yet, after the president expressly asked him to find leakers, Comey became a leaker himself. Moreover, as FBI director, Comey showed no particular sympathy to leakers and his department advanced the most extreme definitions of what constituted FBI information.

Yes, the memos were government property.

When some of us noted that these memos clearly fell within the definition of FBI information and thus they were ostensibly government (not private) property, there was again a chorus of experts dismissing such allegations against Comey. Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent assured CNN that these constitute merely “personal recollections” and would not fall into the definition of government material. Others joined in on the theme that these were like a “personal diary” and thus entirely his private property. Obviously, removing FBI material would not be a reaffirming moment for the Beltway’s lone, lanky hero. But that is what he did.

All FBI agents sign a statement affirming that “all information acquired by me in connection with my official duties with the FBI and all official material to which I have access remain the property of the United States of America” and that an agent “will not reveal, by any means, any information or material from or related to FBI files or any other information acquired by virtue of my official employment to any unauthorized recipient without prior official written authorization by the FBI.”

These were memos prepared on an FBI computer about a meeting on an FBI investigation with the president of the United States in the Oval Office and other locations. The contents were important enough that Comey immediately shared them with his highest management team and consulted on how to deal with the information.

The FBI has now reportedly confirmed that the memos were indeed government property. The Hill, quoting “officials familiar with the documents,” has reported that the FBI has told the Congress that these memos are indeed government documents.

Yes, the memos were classified.

If Comey did leak government property, a third issue was whether the information was considered classified. Once again, the classified status does not determine if this was a leak (it was) or if it was government information (it was). However, many experts insisted that the material was clearly unclassified.

Comey’s representation of the unclassified status struck me as highly questionable at the time. I noted that the information would have likely been classified on some level, including “confidential” under governing standards. Moreover, FBI employees are not given free license (or sole authority) to write things in an “unclassified fashion.” That is why there are classification reviews. Information coming out of meetings with the president are routinely classified, let alone information deemed material to pending investigations.

As I noted earlier, the standards that Comey enforced as director belied his own account. The FBI restricts material generated in relation to investigations as “FBI information.” FBI rules cover any “documents reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated.” Under the Freedom of Information Act, the FBI routinely claims this type of information as either classified or privileged or both.

Comey however repeatedly assured the Senate that there was nothing classified or privileged in the memos. In an exchange with Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), Comey said, “Well, I remember thinking, this is a very disturbing development, really important to our work. I need to document it and preserve it in a way — and — and this committee gets this, but sometimes when things are classified, it tangles them up. It’s hard…” Then Warner interrupted to say, “Amen.”

However, the issue was not the writing of the memos but their removal from the FBI and their leaking to the media. There is a reason why “sometimes when things are classified, it tangles them up.” It is called classification review. That does not give you license to transfer the information into a separate document and declare it a “Dear Diary” entry. That is a loose interpretation that Comey as FBI director never afforded to his subordinates and it would effectively gut the rules governing privileged and classified information.

Not surprisingly, The Hill reported that indeed the memos have been declared classified by the FBI. The newspaper maintains that four of the memos had markings indicating they contained classified material at the “secret” or “confidential” level. It is not clear whether the memos leaked to Comey’s friend and then the media included these memos or contained classified or privileged information.  However, the finding shows that Comey was wrong in claiming that he wrote the memos to avoid any classified information and the removal of the classified memos constitutes a violation of federal rules and FBI protocols.

None of this takes away from the seriousness of Comey’s allegation or the need to investigate possible obstruction of justice. However, it does raise serious questions about own Comey’s judgment and the legality of his actions. Yet, the coverage on these findings has largely been crickets.

It is much like that final scene in “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance”? After Jimmy Stewart unburdened himself that he was a fraudulent hero, he boarded the train back to Washington and thanked the conductor for his kindness. The conductor simply responded, “Nothing’s too good for the man who shot Liberty Valance!”

It seems that in both Westerns and politics, you print the legend.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He was cited in the Senate Homeland Security Committee report on media leaks during the Trump administration.

The views expressed by contributors are their own ad are not the views of The Hill.

212 thoughts on “Printing The Legend: The Growing Gap Between Comey’s Image and Actions”

  1. I for one am glad that JT keeps sawing away at Comey. Its inexcusable, especially from the head of the FBI. Breathtaking hypocrisy, salted with oh so much self righteousness.

    Its a dangerous precedent that someone could merely write top secret information into a diary, leak it, and then claim the espionage/secrecy laws don’t apply since its personal. It is a loop hole as gigantic as the Chelsea Manning/Wikileaks logic (ie I leaked to the internet NOT to our national enemies)….. The press should be ashamed to be handmaiden.

    Comey has shown himself to be just another DC swamp critter.

  2. Donna Brazile will celebrate the one-year anniversary of President Donald Trump’s election with the publication of her book “Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns that Put Donald Trump in the White House.”

    “Though she’s one of the most experienced Democratic operatives in national politics, Brazile has said nothing prepared her for the revelations about Kremlin-directed activity to meddle in the 2016 election or for the personal toll it took on her, which included strange packages being sent to her home”.

    Donna Brazile exemplifies the utter dishonesty of Establishment Dims I hope the Beck’s are successful the DNC Fraud Lawsuit and drains the DNC’s dwindling coffers.

  3. I’m beginning to believe it’s not that anyone opposes Trump on ideological grounds, they just cannot tolerate him making them look bad. I saw a meme today that said the following: If Trump Jr. deleted all of his emails, wiped his server with Bleachbit, and destroyed all of his phones with a hammer, would the media suddenly lose all interest in the story and declare him innocent?

    Maybe if Trump shipped a pallet of cash to North Korea, would that turn off the dogs?

    1. Trump has no ideology. He’s a pig only looking to enrich himself at any cost and willing to sell the country to the Russians to do it.

      1. In all seriousness, I voted against Clinton for exactly the same reason. We can disagree on policy which is only natural, but you need to know that Trump is on a very short leash among conservatives. He is never going to be able to enrich himself at any cost. Conservatives have seen enough of that and they will be calling for his impeachment long before the ink dries on any legitimate evidence. The most ridiculous of concerns is that he will sell our country out to anyone, especially the Russians. Again, conservatives have just stepped up and stopped a continuation of that with Clinton. Never forget that the millions of veterans that effectively swore a blood oath to defend this country will not ever let ANY President sell this country out. EVER!

    1. My second shift just started! I got my second head pat from my pretty black friend and I’m raring to go!

  4. When “Free Press” turns into “Incitement to Riot”

    the perpetrators must be prosecuted.

    “Fake News” published to incite is a crime.

    The CEO’s and Presidents of the MSM

    must now be indicted for aggravated felonies.

  5. “When you strike at a king, you must kill him.”

    ― Ralph Waldo Emerson

    Comrade Comey attempted a “sting” on President Trump

    employing Comey’s vast note taking skill set.

    It may have backfired when Comey failed to report a crime,

    to the FBI as the head of the FBI.

    An inexcusable felony.

            1. I always believed the best job in the world is the one you would be willing to do for free, but that you found some way to get paid for it. You’d have to have no conscience to be paid to be a troll, I don’t care which end of the political spectrum you work for.

  6. Julian Assange, the Wikileaks founder, has claimed that he contacted Donald Trump Jr and tried to persuade him to publish emails showing he was eager to accept sensitive information about Hillary Clinton via the anti-secrecy website.

    Julian Assange : ““He’s surely had advice and/or is confident on the facts. I’d argue that even the completely innocent need @WikiLeaks.””

  7. The idea behind the Administrative Law state or Agency rule, is that the public, Congress and the courts are merely obstacles to maneuver around. They essentially exist to follow the ques from the unelected bureaucrats entrenched in the system. When they become bothersome, or just do not fit the playbill, they are disrupted, destabilized and removed.

  8. Why is trump team always on the defense when they have so much ammunition to bury the opponents with the power of truth?

  9. With all of the dirt on Trump and Trump, Jr., you keep harping on Comey–why? Hasn’t Kellyanne come up with any taking points to pivot the conversation to somehow blame President Obama? By his own admissions, Chump, Jr. has lied about contacts with the Russians. Kushner and Manafort were present, too, and knew the purpose of the meeting. This is even before we get to the truth of what actually happened during the meeting. The fact that there was meeting and that Chump, Jr. said “love it”, when informed that it might produce dirt on Hillary Clinton, establishes that Kushner lied, lied, lied on his disclosure form. Why aren’t you discussing the implications of this instead of focusing on Comey? Does Kushner still have security clearance? We all better hope not. The issues raised by Kushner’s and Manafort’s ties to Russia have far greater implications for the American people than the petty matter of whether Comey disclosed information he shouldn’t have.

    The information Comey “leaked” is information the American public needs to know about Chump and the illegal way he does business. You imply that there is some basis to not disclose Chump’s attempts to coerce the FBI Director to pledge personal loyalty because it is some sort of government secret that the American public has no right to know. You are wrong. The American people are the “government”. Chump’s attempt to exert influence over the FBI Director, who was, at the time, investigating him for ties to Russia, is public information, not confidential, much less classified. As time goes on and more and more information is unearthed, we can now see why Chump wanted to intimidate Comey to back off.

  10. I’m confused ! if it was myself leaking docs classified or otherwise I would be in jail ! Why do government officials have different rules than I ? This is what the American people are sick and tired of ! Government gets away with criminal actions because they pass laws to benefit themselves. Their day is coming when no one will give them the time of day !!!

  11. The more I read Jonathan Turley, the more I love this guy.

    We can only hope that Mueller’s judgement is not clouded by his obvious friendship, affection, and decades long close professional relationship with this clown Comey.

    If you want to have several big laughs while viewing an accurate assessment of Comey….pro comedian Greg Gutfeld nailed Comey a month ago, immediately after Comey’s “testimony:”

    God bless and keep Jonathan Turley.

  12. How many memos did Comey release? By my count it is ONE, singular, not plural, and that memo is his account of a meeting with the President that the President had already put into the public sphere.

    DC operates on leaks. imo, releasing the content of that one memo did not impede or compromise any investigation. As head of the FBI, Comey had an obligation to stop leaks. Find and punish the leakers in order to maintain control of on-going investigations. In this case, the head of the FBI and the FBI itself was attacked by the President by misrepresenting his interactions with the head of the FBI. One memo, the one that told Comey’s version of the meeting was the only one released. I don’t think it told the rank and file of the FBI that leaking was now acceptable.

    Since it was only the one memo that was released, the one the President declassified by speaking publicly about his version of events, and Comey turned the rest over to the Special Prosecutor, I don’t see that he violated any security classification.

    JT’s continuing attack on Comey is puzzling. He’s missing the forest for the trees.

    1. First, what you call an attack, Mr/Mrs. DNC/deep state anonymous nobody operative, is listing undisputed facts, law, and statute/FBI regs, and the professional legal analysis of one of the most highly respected independent cradle to grave Democrat authorities extant. 1% of Turley’s resume blows away your entire pathetic putrid wasted life’s effort (your day job shilling for the DNC is utter fail).

      If you want to parrot DNC memes in this arena, you gotta bring bullets to this legal gun fight, not pathetic DNC talking points a nine year old special ed child could repeat. Save those for cry baby Rachel Maddow’s cartoon columns.

      Your legal argument: “Joey’s mom catches Joey with Joey’s hand on a cookie in the cookie jar right before dinner. Joey: ‘Mom, I am just counting the cookies to make sure my brother did not take one against the rules.'”

    2. “As head of the FBI, Comey had an obligation to stop leaks.”


      “Since it was only one memo that was released…”

      That’s okay.

      Since it was ‘released’ to a friend to leak to the press so Comey could tell his version of events, it’s okay.

      It’s not like Comey had any other choice, like to hold a press conference of his own, or anything.

      How much you wanna bet that this was not the only time Comey “leaked” to the press?

      Comey needs to be investigated, but not by Mueller.

    3. He’s missing the forest for the trees.

      You’ve got that absolutely bass ackwards. The forest that JT sees and is willing to set aside his political preferences is the Amazonian jungle of corruption that exists in Washington D.C. The trees are the political class that you and many, many others are lost in. The leaking of one or 1 million classified documents by anyone is not something to be dismissed. This is not that difficult to comprehend for anyone concerned with national security.

      There’s absolutely nothing wrong with being passionate about politics. We need more people to be engaged with what is going on with our government. But that passion must come with objectivity and right reason. This is supposed to be a blog centered on the law, but comments like yours reflect a poisonous ideology that perpetuates the progressive myth that half the trees in that jungle is always right and the other half need to be eradicated. Just shameful.

      1. LOL – I think his current political preferences are pretty clear. Unwillingness to post about DTJ’s e-mails and collusion makes that starkly evident.

        1. Yep. Steven Colbert’s comments about Trump and Putin would be appropriate here describing the relationship between Turley and the Republicans.

    4. Maybe because his stated reason for leaking was to initiate a special investigation…? That is beyond “impeding and compromising an investigation” on steroids—-its breaking the law to initiate one to bring down a president. And he leaked long before he was subpeonaed…..

      And then there is the troublesome fact that he was head of the country’s highest law enforecement agency—- while breaking the law…..

  13. I’m still not understanding the hoopla over this “Russian lawyer with ties to the Kremlin.” First, has it actually been established that she has ties to the Kremlin? Are these “ties” of any significance? All I heard is that she was a prosecutor 12 years ago and now arranges adoptions. Perhaps in Russia lawyers are held in higher esteem, I don’t know, but in CA, every third person is a lawyer, so that designation in and of itself doesn’t mean anything. If Boris Badanov comes over here, seeking dirt on Putin, and meets with Small Claims, a graduate of Jennifer Flowers College of Law, who was an assistant D.A. a decade ago for Pot County, CA, and now practices family law, is CNN going to devote 24/7 coverage to it? Is JT going to write articles on it? Seriously, any of the thousands of brown-bagging lawyers in Washington who work for some federal agency have “ties” to the U.S. government, but the fact the some attorney works for the EPA or Social Security or the VA, or the Pentagon or the IRS or the DEA, etc, etc. doesn’t mean that he/she has any knowledge of anything significant. I think this Russian adoption attorney was scamming the Trump campaign, and Jr. fell for it. Once he realized she had nothing, he bailed.

    1. TIN, even the janitors at the Kremlin are FSB agents. Don’t you get it?
      EVERYONE in Russia is associated with Putin.
      How else could any of this make sense. . . to Rachel Maddow, Et al.

      1. I enjoyed Tucker Carlson’s take on Pence accusing Don Trump Jr. of “treason:” if you have a conversation about politics with your Russian exchange student living in your home, prepare for a lethal injection after your treason conviction.

    2. She was presented to him as a representative of the government who had “dirt” on Clinton. That Jr., Kushner, and Montfort went to the meeting expecting a campaign contribution from the Russian government they were conspiring to break the law that prevents political campaigns from accepting contributions from foreign governments. Conspiracy is a crime.

      1. Betty Kath, try to apply all the logic you can to this. I hope that when HRC’s investigation comes around you are willing to reapply such sensible logic and follow the facts as presented too.

      2. Had this meeting resulted in the production of any real “dirt” it could arguably (but not certainly) get into some criminal realm. But it didn’t. So he took a meeting. Big deal. Let’s not be so naive here to think political opponents are not on the look out, at all times, for dirt on their opponents. It’s called opposition research. They collect it, and have it, and then use it if and when it becomes necessary.

        Compare that with the Clinton camp, who was behind the fabrication of the so-called Russian “dossier” against Trump, which included flat-out lies. They released it, and the MSM treated it as legitimate, until it was exposed as a fabrication. And then the MSM (surprise!) barely covered the falsehood that they themselves had exposed.

        1. Radica — part of the problem is that there are many in the media and others who still believe the ‘discredited’ dossier is actually true. Does Comey believe it? Does John McCain believe it? This dossier was presented to the FISA court to obtain a warrant. Mueller needs to look into all of this.

          If Mueller does his job, he needs to investigate Crowdstrike, the company paid by the DNC to analyze the DNC server (which is probably long gone) that they say was hacked by Russia.

          The FBI under Comey’s direction, accepted without question or further investigation the Crowdstrike findings that Russia hacked the DNC server. So this entire “Russia hacked the election” narrative is built around taking the word of a contractor hired by the DNC? A server never examined by the FBI? Was Crowdstrike also paid by the FBI to investigate the DNC server? There are lots of questions that have never been answered.

          And Fusion GPS needs to be investigated to find out who paid them to develop the dossier on Trump that was then used to obtain a FISA court warrant. Comey is connected to all of it (including Hillary’s email investigation), so Comey clearly needs to be investigated.

          Let’s see what Mueller does.

          1. You have to give the Democrats credit, I didn’t think there was anyway this bogus farce would act as a bait and switch for all the illegal Clinton, DNC stuff, but it has worked out well…. so far. Not sure it won’t backfire at some point when it all comes out how deep Clintons were in making sure the ruskies had access to domestic strategic materials. Hmmmmmm.

      3. Yes, yes, keep talking. The source of the info that this woman represented the Russian government was….wait for it……………..A RUSSIAN NEWS JOURNALIST! THE MOST HOLY, HONEST, HONORABLE, AND TRUSTWORTHY SOURCE EXTANT!!!!!!!!!!!!


        Please, do keep posting right when you are peeking from your DNC-distributed daily ingestion of psychedelic mushrooms! What time is the evening show?

        1. It is hardly any secret that Russia does this sort of dirty business via oligarchs, lawyers and others who do not carry any official government title. She can deny representing the Russian government. So what? Probably not true. We know what the emails said.

          We don’t know what really transpired during that meeting, but what we do know is that very shortly afterwards, Hillary Clinton’s emails were released, dribble by dribble. Investigators are digging. We’ll see where the evidence leads them. It’s starting to stink.

          What’s important at this juncture is to understand that Chump, Jr., who gave a very impassioned speech about desperate Democrats making up lies about his father’s campaign, bold-faced lied about contacts with Russians. Even more concerning is the fact that Kushner lied on his disclosure form about any meetings with Russians. Neither of them disclosed the contact to the FBI or other law enforcement before or after the meeting. Maybe you could argue that Chump, Jr. and Kushner were rookies, in over their heads, lacking any political experience, which is true, but Manafort sure had experience, and he did know better. He not only knew about the contact, he actually attended the meeting!

          Maybe now you’re beginning to see why Chump fired Comey.

          1. No, tell us why Trump fired Comey. My understanding is that Trump needed to replace Comey with ‘a stronger man’ who wasn’t doing things that made him feel so ‘naseous’ and ‘queasy’ all the time.

    3. You must have missed the part where Don, Jr. took the meeting precisely BECAUSE anti-Clinton information was offered and to be the subject of the meeting. This wasn’t a casual encounter on the street.

        1. 52 US CODE 30121.

          It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—

          (A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
          (B)a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
          (C)an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or

          a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.

            1. A person to SOLICIT, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.

              The person only has to ask or seek to obtain to make it a crime. Setting up a meeting for the express purpose of getting oppo on Clinton from a foreign national would be breaking the law.

            2. Sure, absolutely. We don’t yet know what information was exchanged at the meeting. But we do now the timeline:

              Day 1 – There was no meeting
              Day 2 – It was about adoption
              Day 3 – It was for anti-Clinton stuff, but she didn’t have anything good

              Also right around this exact time is when the hacking started taking place, and emails leaked. This will continue to be drip, drip, drip. But it is no longer “fake news,” you can no longer say that no one from the Trump team met with Russians. All of the past denials and protestations are being proven to be out and out lies.

              1. Also right around this exact time is when the hacking started taking place, and emails leaked.

                That would be a very good place to focus the investigation. Who are all the people that had contact with this Russian woman? Did the leaks begin because Trump Jr. green-lighted the plan? Did the leaks begin as the next step in the plan to implicate Trump?


              2. JC – Agree. And that’s the story – their changing story. It’s not about treason or violating campaign finance law.

                  1. TBob, those are not the facts in question. That was a long, long time ago; prior to the invention of the word pecuniary or treason. Or something like that. Anyway, stay focused. 😉

                    1. I know I know…..I’m sorry…I missed the last few gatherings of our “little fascist, racist coffee klatch” group and I just get so scattered when that happens 😉

          1. “There is no crime in listening to people who say that they have incriminating information on a political opponent, even a foreigner.” – Jonathan Turley

            1. There’s a world of difference between merely listening and soliciting. Listening is passive whereas soliciting is an active attempt to obtain something.

              1. And there’s a difference between “soliciting” information and taking a meeting because incriminating info was “offered.”

              2. Even “actively” gathering info from foreigners does not violate the law. Period.

              1. “While the White House was hyping the Russia threat, elements of the press showed a sudden interest in the infamous Steele dossier, which claimed that Russian intelligence services had caught Trump in Moscow in highly compromising situations. The dossier was opposition research paid for by Trump’s political opponents, and it had circulated for months among reporters covering the election. Because it was based on anonymous sources and entirely unverifiable, however, no reputable news organization had dared to touch it.

                With a little help from the Obama White House, the dossier became fair game for reporters. A government leak let it be known that the intelligence community had briefed Trump on the dossier. If the president-elect was discussing it with his intelligence briefers, so the reasoning went, perhaps there was something to it after all.

                By turning the dossier into hard news, that leak weaponized malicious gossip.”


          2. Now if you really want to apply 52 US Code 30121….remember this from Obama’s campaign in 2008? How many foreign donations do you suppose were made by credit card to Obama’s campaign?

            “Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed.

            Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.”


            1. Oh now stop that Tbob. They aren’t interested in those facts, that would require an intellectual curiosity they have yet to demonstrate. While there is a 12 lane freeway of corruption in D.C., they are only able to see one lane. Have some compassion for our fellow contributors.

            2. TBob, that was Obama. It was okay back then. It’s only wrong now.

            3. T Bob.,
              I think we discussed this earlier; allegations of criminal conduct are to be made only for the purposes of political expediency.
              Otherwise, we would have been having this discussion when Trump’s opponents paid for the opposition research against Trump, the Russian Dossier.
              “The Russians can blackmail Trump!” was the theme then.
              There was virtually no discussion about who paid Steele/GPS Fusion, or whether criminal conductwas involved.
              Thus has very little to do with the law, and absolutely nothing to do with equal application of the law.

          3. L.. Silver:

            So under your expansive notion of “donation of money or other thing of value,” if our Russian Johnnie Cochran gave Trump Jr a lock of Putin’s baby hair with all the sentimental value that entails, Trump Jr, violated 52 USC Sec. 30121. Did you really ever go to law school or just slept at one last night? You’re a riot!!

            1. Correct The Record/DNC/David Brock Whatever are like the Japanese Air Force at the end of WWII. Running out of good pilots, they are just putting warm bodies into the Kamasutras and teaching them how to steer into an American ship. They don’t expect them to come back.

              Silver is like that. It doesn’t take a smart and experienced monkey to fling poo. It just takes a monkey. Plus, he probably works cheap. They probably get a black chick to pat him on the head and say, “Thank you sooo much for helping The Cause, Brother!” and he has leg thrills and is good for another week!

              The “Louise” one, I suspect they got her from the Mt. Sigh Nigh Home For The Severely Histrionic. They just bring a computer to the Day Room, and turn her loose. She sits there, rocking back and forth, and typing nonsense in. But, with all the other DNC silliness being put out there, she fits right in. If they could stop the involuntary rocking movements, and put in contacts to camouflage the “crazy eyes” she could go on MSNBC and maybe even get her own show.

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

              1. “Mt. Sigh Nigh Home For The Severely Histrionic” is a comedy classic. I’m still stunned laughing as I type. Brava!! And the show could be called “Weezy In the Morning!!”

            2. Mespo,…
              I heard that Trump was recently shuttled around Moscow in Russian limos, FOR FREE.
              You can see that this is further evidence of “foreign contributions”, and probably a clear violation of the emoluments clause as well.

              1. And I heard (gasp!) he also “gave” thanks at dinner to
                his Russian hosts thus involving the bribery of foreign officials statute.

                1. Mespo,
                  Two viilations involved here; Trump didn’t pay for the dinner.
                  He received an expensive meal for FREE.
                  If the Russians also passed on important information about a pending security threat in the U.S. ( like they tried to warn us about the Boston Marathon bombers), there could be another violation for teceiving something ” of value”.

Comments are closed.