“Let’s Just Send A Couple Of Guys Over”: Comey Admits Another Violation Of Department Protocol and Policy

Below is my column in The Hill Newspaper on the recent admission by James Comey that he intentionally circumvented the White House Counsel and Justice Department protocol to send two agents to interview then National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.  It is a subject that will hopefully be raised this week when Comey appears again before Congress on Monday. Comey describes his sudden realization that he could “get away with” sending “a couple guys over” to the White House. Comey’s epiphany could be his epitaph. 

Here is the column:

“I probably wouldn’t have … gotten away with it.” Those words this week from former FBI Director James Comey could well be chiseled in marble as his epitaph. He was explaining another violation of bureau policy during his tenure days after meeting behind closed doors with House members.

What was shocking was not that Comey violated protocols or policies again but the reaction of the audience to his admission. In describing how he set up a critical meeting with Michael Flynn, former national security adviser to President Trump, the audience was audibly thrilled by his cleverness in keeping Flynn unrepresented by legal counsel and unaware of the true nature of the meeting. Scheduled to testify to House members again next week, Comey may find a less rapturous reception in Congress.

In his interview in New York City, Nicole Wallace asked him, “It’s hard to imagine two FBI agents ending up in the State Room. How did that happen?” The audience erupted when Comey said dryly, “I sent them. Something we’ve, I probably wouldn’t have done or maybe gotten away with in a more organized investigation, a more organized administration. In the George W. Bush administration … or the Obama administration, two men that all of us, perhaps, have increased appreciation for over the last two years. In both of those administrations there was process.” He revealed, “So if the FBI wanted to send agents into the White House itself to interview a senior official, you would work through the White House counsel and there would be discussions and approvals and it would be there. I thought, ‘It’s early enough, let’s just send a couple of guys over.’”

Just send a couple of guys over. One line could not more aptly capture Comey and his own professed view of “ethical leadership.” The interview confirmed what some of us have written about Comey for more than two years. The media consistently reinforced his image as a rules driven and principled public servant, often referring to him as an almost naive Eagle Scout. The Washington Post even ran the headline, “Boy Scout James Comey is no match for Donald Trump.” Yet, the history of Comey shows both an overriding interest in his own actions as well as a willingness to violate rules to achieve that interest. But his comments, including a call to the public to defeat Trump in a “landslide” in the next election, have stripped away any remaining pretense. The fact is, there often was more pretense than principle in his final years as director.

Consider his conduct during the 2016 presidential election, leading up to his controversial press conference and public announcements, which were widely condemned by both Republicans and Democrats. As here, Comey failed to inform the Justice Department or the attorney general of his intended action. In doing so, he was far outside the clear policies and protocols. Indeed, the first public act of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was to issue a memo excoriating Comey for his “serious mistakes” and citing former federal judges, attorneys general, and leading prosecutors who believed that Comey “violated longstanding Justice Department policies and tradition” along with “his obligation to ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the traditions of the department and the FBI.” Rosenstein further added that Comey “refused to admit his errors.”

Then there was Comey’s response to being fired. He removed memos on his meetings with President Trump related to the Russia investigation, then leaked those to the media. The Justice Department rejected Comey’s claims that these were his memos, not FBI material. Some of the material was classified. He violated core FBI rules in removing the memos, and the man tasked to find leakers became a leaker as soon as it suited his own interests. He also undermined the investigation by revealing to Trump and others that the memos existed, information that investigators likely preferred to remain secret before they conducted key interviews.

Then Comey published a book, a sharp departure from prior directors, that discussed the ongoing Russia investigation. He did not pause before rushing it to the shelves, revealing details of the investigation and various meetings while making a fortune for himself. Now Comey has again admitted to violating rules and protocols, by setting up Flynn. Ironically, Comey criticized Trump for breaking protocols in meeting with him alone and asking about an ongoing investigation. He was right in that criticism because there is a formal process for communications between the FBI and the White House. Yet, the same protocols go the other way. If the FBI seeks to interview White House officials in an investigation, they go through the Justice Department, which communicates with White House counsel to arrange the interview. He evaded both in ordering the move.

What was Comey’s justification? Because he could. He refers to the “process” of other administrations. That process, however, was still in place and did not change. Moreover, he noted that he thought he could get away with it because this was “early” in the administration. That is not principle. It is opportunism. He was supposed to work through the Justice Department and not simply follow the rules only if he might be caught breaking them. Former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates is cited in some recently released FBI material as being irate over his decision.

There is a reason for the policy of conferring with counsel. It protects not just the individual but the institution. It prevents rogue or impulsive actions and maintains a clear chain of command within the Justice Department. It is part of the internal rules in how the components of the executive branch function and communicate with each other to preserve both independence and proper review. It is part of the very delicate relationship that Comey accused Trump of violating. There was nothing noble in Comey seeking to reduce the chance that Flynn might have legal counsel. Those same liberals applauding him wildly would presumably be appalled if a police detective proudly described how he prevented a criminal suspect from speaking to a lawyer simply because he could.

Flynn ultimately bears responsibility for any false statements. As special counsel Robert Mueller noted in a court filing, he should have known better, and we should not forget that Flynn ultimately pleaded guilty to lying. However, that does not mean the circumstances or the conduct of FBI officials are irrelevant. The agents, including Andrew McCabe and Peter Strzok, who were both later fired by the FBI for their actions in this investigation, admitted that they discussed warning Flynn about criminal liability for false statements. They warned other witnesses, like former Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos. Yet, they not only omitted that warning with Flynn but did not raise a conflict in his denying that sanctions were discussed with Russian diplomats. They also encouraged Flynn not to bring a lawyer or to inform the White House counsel. Instead, they arranged a meeting just hours after a telephone call with McCabe.

Ultimately, the agents recounted that they did not believe Flynn deliberately lied at the time. Moreover, Flynn told McCabe that he assumed McCabe had read the full transcript of his conversation with the Russian ambassador, an apparent reference to his knowledge that Russian embassy phones were tapped. The comment further raises the question of why Flynn would lie about discussing sanctions if he recalled the discussion and knew of the wiretap. Yet, Comey seemed to delight the audience by taking credit for keeping Flynn in the dark about the FBI interview. When Wallace asked what Flynn thought the FBI agents wanted, Comey replied, “I don’t think he knew. I know we didn’t tell him.” Actually, Comey didn’t tell anyone. Not the White House counsel, not the acting attorney general, not the Justice Department. He “just sent a couple of guys over” to the White House because he could “get away with it.”

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

182 thoughts on ““Let’s Just Send A Couple Of Guys Over”: Comey Admits Another Violation Of Department Protocol and Policy”

    1. I call that 1st FISA warrany & the 3 renewals a Fraud Upon The Court & upon it’s release the end of Mueller mafia gang & some say the the forth coming military tribunals post Jan the 1st. military tribunals. We’ll see.

      And what do they have to say about that illegal spying on Trump going back to 2004?

      Wait a minute, who was the head of the FBI back then??? Hum! Mueller? LOL

      thanks Larry Kayman.

      1. More awesomeness. Thanks for playing “counselor.” Pro tip: hannity and your other sources of obscure loser-loner website operators aren’t real attorneys.

        this is to “but I actually just made all this sh*t up when I got into the ‘shine” okie

    2. When is Trump going to apologize to the American people for appointing a Turkish agent to be in a position of national security?

      It was negligent at best and downright dangerous at worst.

      He didn’t due his due diligence on Flynn and his work for Turkey could easily have been found through background checks.

      Unless of course he knew about Flynn’s work but didn’t care.

      1. When are you Commie/Fascist American Hating Aholes going to stop giving the Iranian Islamic Nutcases, The Commie Chinese, N Koreans etc, US National Security Secrets, etc…???

        You do know what the law calls for what you & others are promoting do you not?

      2. I doubt any of us know just how hard it is to set up a new Administration. Especially by a candidate who didn’t expect to win. Do you remember when the outgoing clinton people stole phone buttons, sabotaged all sorts of communication devices, which cost the tax payer of this country hundreds of thousands of dollars? GWB would not talk about it and it was way under reported. Nice, respectful people, eh? More like the village idiots if U ask me.

    3. While I wholeheartedly agree, I no longer trust this government to do what’s right. Nearly everyone in power is corrupt. I can’t wait for POTUS to release the FISA documents, and I am puzzled why they haven’t been released by now. WTF?

      1. Bob, here’s one link you a can get you’re comments to Trump within the next week or so. just add it to this letter.

        As I understand these issues Trump administration is to address these antitrust, racketeering, etc issues Wednesday …..

        https://writetrump.com/

  1. In describing how he set up a critical meeting with Michael Flynn, former national security adviser to President Trump, the audience was audibly thrilled by his cleverness in keeping Flynn unrepresented by legal counsel and unaware of the true nature of the meeting.

    Thrilled? Who in their right mind is thrilled that our premier law enforcement agency has abused their power? It’s disgusting that so many celebrate lawfare (injustice) as long as it is used against their political foes.

  2. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/12/17/christopher-steele-i-was-hired-to-help-hillary-clinton-challenge-the-2016-election-results/

    Right now the Democrats should throw her overboard along with all her co conspirators. Failing an immediate apology and proper remedial action, all the victims of Hillary from the Bernie supporters to Trump supporters should stage massive civil disobedience. This is really an outrage!

    “Christopher Steele, the former British spy who prepared the Russia “dossier” that has led to more than two years of investigations into President Donald Trump’s campaign, has told a London court that he was hired to provide a basis to challenge the legitimacy of the 2016 presidential election in the event that Trump won.”

    NO GOVERNMENT ACTION ON THIS SHOULD LEAD TO STREET ACTION

  3. Ultimately, Flynn was appointed as NSA even though he was an unregistered agent of Turkey.

    The Trump administration should be ashamed of this since it could have been discovered through good background checks.

    Appointing an agent of a foreign country into a national security role is negligent at best and downright dangerous at worst.

    This alone makes the Trump administration untrustworthy when it comes to national security.

  4. FORMER FLYNN PARTNER INDICTED TODAY

    CHARGE CONCERNS FLYNN’S LOBBYING FOR TURKEY

    A former business partner of Michael T. Flynn has been charged with conspiracy and acting as an agent of a foreign government for his efforts to have Turkish cleric Fethullah Gulen extradited from the United States.

    Bijan Kian made his first appearance in Alexandria federal court Monday morning. According to the indictment, Kian, who ran a lobbying firm with Flynn, conspired with a Turkish businessman to illegally influence government officials and public opinion in the United States against Gulen.

    The indictment demonstrates the extent to which Flynn was secretly working to advance the interests of his Turkish clients while publicly serving as a key surrogate to Donald Trump and auditioning for a role in his administration. According to the newly unsealed court document, Flynn was texting and emailing frequently about how to advance the Turkish agenda throughout the final weeks of the presidential campaign.

    Negotiations began in July 2016, after the Justice Department told the Turkish government that Gulen could not be extradited without more evidence of wrongdoing. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan blames Gulen, who is living in exile in Pennsylvania, for instigating a failed coup in 2016. Gulen has denied involvement.

    “We are ready to engage on what needs to be done,” Kian wrote to the businessman, Ekim Alptekin, on July 27, 2016, according to the court records.

    “I just finished in Ankara after several meetings today” with Turkish ministers, Alptekin wrote back to Kian — who also goes by Rafiekian — and Flynn the next month, according to the indictment. “I have a green light to discuss confidentiality, budget, and the scope of the contract.”

    The contract drawn up in September 2016 was for $600,000, according to the court records, for which Flynn’s consulting firm, the Flynn Intel Group, was expected to “deliver findings and results including but not limited to making criminal referrals” against Gulen.

    Flynn, Kian, and Alptekin met with high-level Turkish officials in New York that month, according to the indictment.

    “The arrow has left the bow!” Kian emailed Alptekin on Nov. 4, 2016, sharing a draft of an 0p-ed Flynn had written arguing that the United States should not provide a “safe haven” for Gulen. “This is a very high profile exposure one day before the election.”

    Flynn’s op-ed was published in The Hill on Nov. 8, the day Trump was elected. It prompted concern in the Justice Department’s national security division and criminal division, where officials wondered why Flynn, aspiring to be national security adviser to the next president, was parroting the talking points of the Turkish government.

    Edited from: “Michael Flynn’s Business Partner Charged With Illegally Lobbying For Turkey”

    Today’s WASHINGTON POST

    1. NOTICE LAST PARAGRAPH ABOVE:

      Flynn wrote an op-ed piece on behalf of Turkey which was published in “The Hill” on Election Day 2016 which drew the attention of Justice Department officials. Comically Professor Turley’s column here was published in “The Hill”.

      1. JT has crossed the line with his opinion of what the law should be and what it is when it comes to Trump. If JT wants, he could be listed with the legal minds of Dershowits, Rudy G, and others at FOX that will watch their standing sink in Trump’s swamp of lies.

    2. Hardly anyone is ever charged with acting as an unregistered foreign agent. To take one example, John Podesta was merely sent a warning letter. What this indicates is that Mueller has allies in the U.S. Attorney’s office in Alexandria.

      1. Tabby, I don’t think Podesta was ever National Security Advisor.

        Aside from Russia contacts, Flynn was lobbying for Turkey while working on Trump’s campaign. Theoretically even ‘Trump’ was the victim here. He didn’t know that Flynn was double-dealing. Flynn was a man-on-the make not unlike Manafort and Cohen. Funny how Trump tends to draw those types.

        1. He had outside interests. You’re working to make that sound sinister, which doesn’t make it sinister.

          Flynn was a man-on-the make not unlike Manafort and Cohen.

          No, he’s a decorated military officer. He also has a lobbying business. So do many quondam Democratic members of Congress you do not criticize at all.

          You’re nothing.

          1. lobby for the wrong allies is illegal. lobbying for the right allies isnt.

            the law isn’t written that way, but it’s enforced that way

          2. And you’re nothing, either Circler.

            2 Associates Of Michael Flynn Charged In Alleged Scheme To Smear Turkish Cleric

            December 17, 20181:45 PM ET

            https://www.npr.org/2018/12/17/677425728/2-associates-of-michael-flynn-charged-in-alleged-scheme-to-smear-turkish-cleric

            Excerpt:

            Two business associates of former national security adviser Michael Flynn have been charged in connection with an alleged plot to smear a Turkish cleric inside the United States with the aim of getting him extradited.

            Bijan Kian, an American who is Flynn’s business partner, and Kamil Ekim Alptekin, a Turkish man, were indicted this month by a grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia, according to court documents unsealed on Monday.

            The men worked for the company Flynn formed after he left government service. Prosecutors charge they did not properly disclose their work as foreign agents and, in fact, constructed a scheme to try to conceal the ultimate origins of their payments in Turkey.

            The Justice Department has resisted extraditing the cleric, Fethullah Gulen, because officials don’t see evidence he had directed a coup in Turkey.

              1. Tabby, the Koch Bros are major donors to NPR. I read a dozen news sites per day and I honestly think that NPR provides some of most comprehensive coverage out there.

                And just for the record, Tabby, what is ‘your’ favorite news source?

                1. I dislike the Kroch bros and I dislike NPR even more. Even though I force myself to listen to them every day. Puke! I hate it. Studio one a is not that bad and the SETI science program is good. BBC is good. The rest of it’s a bunch of propaganda!

                  I hate my apple phone news the most.

                  I like zerohedge and drudge. I know that doesn’t cut the Leftist/ democrat/ anti-conspiracy debunker muster but those two aggregators that i kind of like.

            1. Great catch, anonymous. That explains one of the two heavily redacted investigations alluded to in the SCO’s sentencing memo on Flynn. I’m guessing the second one might be Flynn’s Middle-East graft scheme with the two Georges, Nader and Papadopoulos. But that’s just a guess. It could be almost anything else that Flynn was mixed up with. Keep an eye out.

    3. part of the problem is perhaps that as some outside of the western mediasphere suggest, Gulen is essentially a CIA asset. so, Flynn stepped on CIA toes with this erroneous initiative.

      The CIA is very happy with Democrats today, they’re singing exactly the right tune!

      1. like what you say? well, like this. not sure if this is a good source or not but let it be heard

        https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cia-fetullah-gulen-and-turkeys-failed-july-2016-coup/5622321

        he Office of the Istanbul Prosecutor has issued arrest warrants for two “former” CIA agents, accusing them of involvement in the failed July 2016 coup attempt against the government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. US media and various Washington think-tanks have dismissed the charges as “implausible” and a “likely tit-for-tat” response of Erdogan for the arrest by US authorities of Reza Zarrab, a Turkish-Iranian gold trader accused of violating US sanctions against Iran. Clearly is there is far more behind the accusations than is being said so far.

        On December 1, Turkish prosecutors issued an arrest warrant for Graham E. Fuller, former head of the CIA’s National Intelligence Council and former CIA head of Middle East and East Asia operations. The warrant claims Fuller was in the vicinity of Istanbul the night of the coup attempt at a meeting with another top “former” CIA person, Henri Barkey. It claims both CIA veterans were meeting at the five-star Splendid Hotel on the island of Büyükada some 20 minutes boat ride from Istanbul.

        What’s notable about the charge is the degree of involvement of Fuller with the reclusive Turkish cult leader, Fetullah Gülen, now in exile at an estate in Saylorsburg, Pennsylvania since he was forced to flee Turkey in 1998 to escape trial for treason against the state.

        “One of the Most Encouraging Faces of Islam…”

        In July, 2016, less than a week after Erdogan accused the vast Turkish network of Gülen for being behind the coup, of using a network of senior military officers who had been recruited into the Gülen organization, Fuller wrote for Huffington Post a fulsome praise of Gülen titled, “The Gulen Movement Is Not a Cult; It’s One of the Most Encouraging Faces of Islam Today.” In it Fuller wrote,

        “I believe it is unlikely that Gulen was the mastermind behind the dramatic failed coup attempt against Erdogan last week…”

        Fuller goes on to admit he formally backed granting Gülen special US visa status in 2006:

        “Full disclosure: It is on public record that I wrote a letter as a private citizen in connection with Gülen’s US green card application in 2006 stating that I did not believe that Gülen constituted a security threat to the US…”

        Fuller’s “full disclosure” then however omits the fact that it was not merely a casual letter of recommendation to a man Fuller claimed he had met only once. Fuller’s endorsement of Gülen’s Green Card application was so influential that he managed to override the no votes of the FBI, of attorneys for the US State Department and Homeland Security. In the Gülen hearings, State Department attorneys stated,

        “Because of the large amount of money that Gülen’s movement uses to finance his projects, there are claims that he has secret agreements with Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkic governments. There are suspicions that the CIA is a co-payer in financing these projects.”

        Gülen in NATO’s Gladio

        The ties between Fetullah Gülen and the CIA go way back to the 1980’s when Gülen was recruited to be active in a Turkish right-wing NATO “Gladio” network codenamed Counter-Guerrilla. Gülen broadcast over the CIA’s Radio Free Europe into the Islamic regions of the Soviet Union.

        Counter-Guerrilla members were responsible for a series of far-right terrorist attacks in Turkey and facilitated a bloody US-backed 1980 military coup. Indeed, in a little slip, in his July 2016 defense of Gülen, Fuller writes in praise about Gülen that,

        “He even felt compelled to support the military takeover of the state in 1980 in order to preserve the state…”

        That US-instigated 1980 coup, as Fuller well knows, established a military dictatorship under General Kenan Evren in which 650,000 people were detained, 230,000 people trialed, all political parties, unions and foundations were closed, 171 were killed under custody, hundreds of thousands people were tortured, and thousands are still missing. A former senior US intelligence official later reported that as the 1980 coup was underway, then President Jimmy Carter was informed by an aide who said, “Our boys have done it.” And Gülen, the peaceful Muslim, endorsed that brutal CIA coup.

        Gülen and CIA English Teachers

        In the post-Soviet chaos of the 1990’s in Central Asia the CIA used Gülen and his moderate Islam image to build one of their most extensive networks of subversion reaching across the entire so-called Turkic region of former Soviet Central Asia including Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and even into the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region in the People’s Republic of China, where ethnic Uyghurs have been recruited via Turkey to wage terror in Syria in recent years.

        Erdogan’s Checkmate: CIA-Backed Coup in Turkey Fails, Upsets Global Chessboard
        In 2011, Osman Nuri Gündeş, former head of Foreign Intelligence for the Turkish MIT (the “Turkish CIA”) and chief intelligence adviser in the mid-1990s to Prime Minister Tansu Çiller, published a book that was only released in Turkish. In the book, Gündeş, then 85 and retired, revealed that, during the 1990s, the Gülen schools then growing up across Eurasia were providing a base for hundreds of CIA agents under cover of being “native-speaking English teachers.” According to Gündeş, the Gülen movement “sheltered 130 CIA agents” at its schools in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan alone. The CIA “teachers,” he added, submitted reports to an arm of the Pentagon.

        Gülen’s organization had been active in destabilizing newly-independent Muslim republics of the former Soviet Union from the moment the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, when the nominally Muslim Central Asian former Soviet republics declared their independence from Moscow. Gülen was named by one former FBI authoritative source as “one of the main CIA operation figures in Central Asia and the Caucasus.”

        Who is G. Fuller?

        Even Fuller himself admits that the Gülen organization had some two million members in Turkey on the eve of the July 2016 coup. They had systematically infiltrated and largely controlled national policy, the judiciary, national education and the military. Moreover, Fuller’s CIA associate, Henri Barkey, also under arrest warrant, admitted following the failed coup that he had been in the Istanbul area the night of the coup.

        Image result for Henri Barkey
        Henri Barkey

        Allegedly, Turkish authorities now have evidence that Fuller was also there and reportedly flown out of Istanbul across the border to safety in Greece as it became obvious the coup was failing. The Istanbul prosecutor’s office reportedly determined that Fuller had direct contact with former CIA official Henri Barkey and other suspects involved in the coup attempt. Both Barkey and Fuller, who both co-authored a book on Turkey titled Turkey’s Kurdish Question, are accused of organizing a meeting at Splendid Hotel in Büyükada, a 20 minute boat ride from Istanbul on the day of the coup in July 15 2016.

        To read Fuller’s words on news of the Turkish arrest warrant, one would come away with the impression that Graham Fuller was a minor CIA figure. He wrote,

        “I served only once in Turkey…as the most junior officer in the CIA Base in Istanbul in the mid 1960s. I met Gülen exactly once in my life, long years after retiring from CIA, in an interview I conducted with him 15 years ago in Istanbul.”

        Fuller may have been junior CIA officer in Istanbul in the 1960’s; careers begin somewhere. However he didn’t stay so for long.

        By 1982 the CIA named him National Intelligence Officer for Near East and South Asia. This was in the early years of the CIA Operation Cyclone, the vast CIA covert war in Afghanistan using Mujahideen and using Saudi Osama bin Laden to recruit fanatical jihadist terrorists from the Arab world to kill Soviet soldiers and bog the USSR into what Zbigniew Brzezinski and others referred to as the Soviet’s own Vietnam. Graham Fuller was certainly involved in that CIA Afghan war. He was Kabul CIA Station Chief until 1978, on the eve of the CIA’s launch of their Mujahideen Operation Cyclone.

        Then Fuller was posted to CIA Langley where by 1982 the CIA appointed him National Intelligence Officer for Near East and South Asia, which included bin Laden’s Saudi Arabia as well as Afghanistan and Pakistan and Turkey. In 1986, the CIA appointed Graham Fuller vice-chairman of the National Intelligence Council, where he presumably was in a deciding role in the entire Afghan war and more.

        In 1987 according to the New York Times, Fuller as vice-chair of the CIA National Intelligence Council wrote an “instrumental” memo advising what became the explosive Iran-Contra scandal, in which the CIA would arrange covert arms sales to Iran to feed the US-orchestrated Iran-Iraq War and use the proceeds to illegally fund the Nicaragua right-wing Contras. In 1988 as media began to investigate the illegal Iran-Contra details, Fuller left his very senior CIA for a post with the Pentagon and CIA-tied RAND corporation where he remained until 2000. Some suspect it was to get out of the Congressional Iran-Contra limelight.

        Gülen, Fuller and Central Asia Geopolitics

        Notably, while at RAND he co-authored a highly revealing book with Paul B. Henze in 1993 titled Turkey’s New Geopolitics: From the Balkans to Western China. The book describes precisely the geopolitical network that Gülen has been accused of creating with the CIA after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Henze was also a key CIA figure in the Turkish coup in 1980 that Fuller describes positively in connection with Gülen.

        In the US Congressional Record, Fuller is quoted as saying,

        “The policy of guiding the evolution of Islam and of helping them against our adversaries worked marvelously well in Afghanistan against the Red Army. The same doctrines can still be used to destabilize what remains of Russian power.”

        In this context highly interesting is an interview in 2011, by the Washington Post with Graham Fuller. There Fuller categorically denied charges by former head of Turkish MIT intelligence that Gülen schools across Central Asia served as cover for CIA agents to infiltrate the Muslim republics of former Soviet Union. Fuller stated,

        “I think the story of 130 CIA agents in Gulen schools in Central Asia is pretty wild.”

        Yet Fuller, the former CIA senior official responsible for operations in East Asia and the Middle East wrote a book in 2007 titled The New Turkish Republic: Turkey as a Pivotal State in the Muslim World. At the center of the book was praise for Gülen and his “moderate” Islamic Gülen Movement in Turkey:

        “Gülen’s charismatic personality makes him the number one Islamic figure of Turkey. The Gülen Movement has the largest and most powerful infrastructure and financial resources of any movement in the country. . . The movement has also become international by virtue of its far-flung system of schools. . . in more than a dozen countries including the Muslim countries of the former Soviet Union, Russia, France and the United States.”

        Then Fuller went on in the 2011 Washington Post interview to deny ever knowing George Fidas, a 31-year-long fellow career CIA senior officer and co-signer with Fuller of the letter asking the US State Department to admit Gülen on a special visa:

        “I did not recommend him (Gülen-w.e.) for a residence permit or anything else. As for George Fidas, I have never even heard of him and don’t know who he is.”

        Would so prominent a figure as Graham Fuller, former top CIA official bother to sign an appeal for Fetullah Gülen, a man he claims he met only once, and not examine who else signs? Highly implausible.

        More unlikely, as another co-signer of the Gülen US visa appeal was former Istanbul US Ambassador Morton Abramowitz whose career, like that of Fuller, has involved him with both the Afghan Mujahideen networks. In 1986 as Fuller was running oversight of the Afghan Mujahideen from his senior post at CIA, Abramowitz, as Assistant Secretary of State for intelligence and research in the Reagan administration, helped arrange delivery of the Stinger missiles to the Mujahideen. Abramowitz later co-founded the George Soros-funded International Crisis Group that played a key role in justifying the illegal 1999 US bombing of Serbia and later became a director of the CIA-linked National Endowment for Democracy.

        Whatever the outcome of the Turkish charges against Graham Fuller and his close former CIA associate, Henri Barkey, for their alleged involvement in the failed July 15, 2016 Turkish coup d’etat, it clearly throws a major spotlight of world attention on the relation between the CIA and the Fetullah Gülen organization. To open that can of worms could help fumigate more than thirty years of covert Central Asia and other CIA operations with Osama bin Laden, opium trade, Kosovo drug mafia, Turkish dirty CIA operations and far more. Little wonder Graham Fuller writes a blog with the pathetic title, “Why did Turkey Issue an Arrest Warrant Against Me?”

        F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook” where this article was originally published.

        1. like what you say? well, like this. not sure if this is a good source or not but let it be heard

          It’s a Canadian 9/11 truther site, so, no.

  5. Peter Strzok to Lisa Page, “We’ll stop it.”

    Lisa Page to Peter Strzok, “POTUS wants to know everything we’re doing.”

    Lisa Page to Congress, “The texts mean what the texts say.”
    ________________________________________________

    The co-conspirators in the most prodigious scandal in American political history, the Obama Coup D’etat in America:

    Sessions, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Comey, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Kadzic, Yates, Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan,

    Campbell, Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Clapper, Farkas, Power,

    Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Obama et al.

  6. Trump should go on the offense. Comey and a host of others, including his law professor friend, Daniel C. Richman, should already be indicted. However, after the Russia Hoax investigation ends, a counter-strike should be leveled against the deep state.

  7. First of all, there’s the obvious partisan phony hearings to try to drum up counter-stories to all that’s coming in January after some Judge compels Trump to turn over documents. As of now, here’s what the Republicans have come up with: violations of “protocol and policy”, BUT not substantive violations of LAW, like the fat rodeo clown, Manafort, Flynn, Papadopulous, Cohen, et al.. Just like Trumpy Bear, the Trumpster disciples are getting worried, so Jon Turley and Faux News have to give them something to talk about, some counter-argument to hang their hat on, some way to pivot and criticize anyone who has the goods on you. The Kellyanne Pivot strategy of smoke screen, deflection, whataboutism.

    Turley attempts to create the appearance that Comey somehow hoodwinked poor “lock her up” Flynn by not asking permission from Trump’s lawyer first and by not advising him of his alleged right to counsel or the advisability of obtaining counsel, even implying that he colluded to try to discourage Flynn from obtaining counsel, when he should have had counsel. BUT, it was early in the investigation. Flynn is no innocent, and this wasn’t his first rodeo. He, more than Comey or anyone else, knew what he had done. There were no charges pending. The scope of wrongdoing of Trump, et al wasn’t known and couldn’t be known as of that time. Jon, you’re using your retrospectoscope again. The overarching thing is: FLYNN WAS GUILTY! He even pleaded guilty, so what does it matter whether Comey didn’t follow “protocol or policy”, which is not the law. Did you forget that, Jon, or is this just more of the Faux News strategy of minimizing the criminality of the Trump administration by using whataboutism?

    Turley laughably complains about Comey not going through WH counsel first: “It prevents rogue or impulsive actions and maintains a clear chain of command within the Justice Department. It is part of the internal rules in how the components of the executive branch function and communicate with each other to preserve both independence and proper review.” Jon, you’re really not complaining about someone besides Trump engaging in non-traditional “rogue or impulsive actions” that interfere with the smooth, ethical and efficient operation of government, are you? Come on, now.

    1. Dear multiple Anonymouses: in case you don’t realize it you don’t have to use your real name to post comments. So please just pick a fake name, any fake name, to distinguish yourself from the other Anonymouses.

      1. That particular Anonymous is Natacha. Her emotional disorders, tropes, and ghastly style render her readily recognizable. Diane’s been posting ‘Anonymous’ in addition to her ‘Late4Dinner’ handle. Sometimes she talks to herself. There’s a third Anonymous who is not a head case.

                  1. I forbid it. The one and only original anonymous has been here on this blawg for at least as long as Paul C Schulte has been here. And everybody knows it. The style of the original anonymous is readily recognizable–in fact, unmistakable. Besides, L4D hereby demands the immediate return of swarthmoremom, Linda and the original doo-dah man, Ken.

                    Are you feelzing me, PH?

    2. The Great Natacha said, “Turley laughably complains about Comey not going through WH counsel first . . .”

      It would be laughable were it not for the subtext that Turley studiously ignored. McCabe suggested to Flynn that if he wanted the FBI to go through the WH Counsel, then McCabe would have to get go through DoJ. What Turley is ignoring is that Flynn was almost certainly more afraid of going through WH Counsel, Don McGahn, than Flynn was afraid of McCabe going through the DoJ. That is most likely so because Trump had given Flynn a whole raft of special assignments that were predicated upon Flynn’s proven willingness and ability “to violate protocol and policy.” After all, since Flynn effortlessly lied to Vice-President Pence and who knows who all else on the transition team, going through the WH Counsel, McGahn, was just about the last headache that Flynn needed at that time. I’m not sure whether McCabe knew that Flynn dreaded protocol, policy and McGahn more than Flynn dreaded the DoJ. McCabe may have stumbled into that felicitous circumstance. Okay. So it is laughable. Ha-Ha!

  8. The weaponization of various government agencies against conservatives is a very serious matter. This is how dictatorships rise. You get the true believers in the alphabet soup, and then it won’t matter who’s in office. It’s the bureaucrats that run the country. Add in the Leftist Propaganda mainstream media, and a fair and just election becomes more unlikely with each passing year.

    The Left controls the information that most voters hear. The Left in bureaucratic power target conservatives. Little by little, the country is moving towards the Left, from which Fascism and Socialism rose. It is extremely troubling how many Constitutional rights the Left already seeks to weaken or abolish. One by one, the good of the people becomes more important than the good of the individual, with the Left deciding what is “good”, such as 72 different gender pronouns.

    If we don’t take this seriously, we’ll lose the opportunity to correct it.

    1. Karen, Honey, you watch Faux News and listen to Rush Limbaugh too much. Didn’t they tell you that Flynn, Manafort and Cohen all pleaded guilty to felonies? What they did was criminal, and no amount of bitching by fake “Judge Jeanne” is going to change that, and, no, they didn’t get caught in a “perjury trap” either. They are crooks and so is Trump. Talk about “true believers”, well, Honey, you are one of them. Talk about media power. Who in the media is more powerful than Rupert Murdoch? He’s trying to take over most local television media via Sinclair Broadcasting, and Trump’s trying to help him do it by not enforcing FCC laws that prevent monopolies on local media.

      However, they have accomplished their goal, which is to get you to question the majority of news media. This is how Hitler got started: a power-hungry megalomaniac with a fragile ego who attacked anyone who criticized him, and went after the newspapers and radio who pointed out all of the bad things he did. That describes Trumpy Bear to a “T”. No, Honey, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, the NYT another media are not a bunch of fascists plotting to take away your Constitutional rights. The real threat to the “good of the people” is Trump and heads of various agencies who are rolling back consumer, environmental and educational protections that benefit “the good of the people”. Yes, I know Faux News doesn’t cover this, but check it out.

      1. Anonymous – didn’t CNN tell you that Flynn is likely to pull his plea deal, Manafort’s has already been pulled and Cohen plead guilty to a crime that doesn’t exist. A sterling record for the Mueller team.

        1. Rubbish! Flynn is not pulling out of plea deal in which the prosecutor recommended zero jail time while promising not prosecute Flynn ONLY for those crimes to which Flynn pled guilty–but not for any crimes to which Flynn did not plead guilty. Besides, the man who fired Flynn for doing exactly what Trump told Flynn to do was ever going to pardon Flynn for doing exactly what Trump told Flynn to do. Flynn knows that. It’s why Flynn took the deal from Mueller. The rest of you people really need to start coming up to speed by now. I’m becoming increasingly embarrassed for you.

          1. L4Yoga/Annie/Inga enables David Benson, and the NPCs R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – You need to read Judge Sullivan’s last memo to the parties.

      2. it was totally legal for Flynn to talk to Kislyak. forgetting or maybe lying about it? that’s where the problem came up

        really, manafort, a bunch of old garbage before trump

        cohen: what cohen should not have done which you want to blame on cohen’s lawyer

        NOT VERY IMPRESSIVE!

        1. This is getting tiresome. The fact that Flynn lied about a lawful act is the very thing that raised so much suspicion against Flynn in the minds of Mueller and his crew. Had Strzok and his partner known on January 24th, 2017, when they first interviewed Flynn, what Mueller and his crew would eventually learn about Flynn much later in that year, but before they got Flynn to plead guilty to making false statements on December 1st, 2017, then Strzok and his partner almost certainly would have taken a far more aggressive and hostile stance toward their initial interview of Flynn on January 24th, 2017. Natacha is right. You people are glued to the retrospectoscope. It’s why you can’t keep up with what’s happening now. If Trump were removed from office, it would probably take you people two years to realize that Trump was removed from office.

  9. FLYNN WAS NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR..

    HE SHOULD HAVE WONDERED ABOUT FBI AGENTS AT WHITE HOUSE

    Let’s be honest here, Michael Flynn wasn’t a White House intern or mid-level staffer. Flynn was the National Security Advisor. In that capacity, he was presumably ‘advising’ the president regarding the nation’s security. Therefore, presenting him as a wide-eyed innocent hoodwinked by devious FBI agents is somewhat disingenuous.

    Did Flynn not wonder ‘why’ these FBI agents were dropping in at the White House? Did Flynn not wonder ‘who’ sent them and ‘who’ cleared them? Common sense might have told Flynn the FBI doesn’t question anyone unless it pertains to an investigation. If Flynn lacked the curiosity to determine the nature of their visit, he was probably a poor choice as NSA Advisor.

    Professor Turley fails mention that the lame duck Republican House wanted one last chance to question James Comey (and Loretta Lynch). They already spent several hours questioning Comey last week. According to Comey, their questions focused almost exclusively on Hillary. Questions regarding Trump and Russia were apparently quite sparse.
    In other words, these 11th hour hearings are only a desperate attempt to punch holes in the Russia probe.

  10. They will get Trump, remember when he said to Putin to wait until after the election I’ll have more leverage, oh darn that was Obama. How about letting the Russians buy %20 of our uranium? Drat that was Hilliary, How about the $500,000 he got for that speech he gave in Russia? Dam that was Bill. oh well we will find something someday

    1. Thought police already caught developer Trump for thinking about building in Russian capital. And rat Cohen tape recorded Dr. Evil Trump trying to write a checks to bimbos in 2016 to which Cohen responded: “…no,no,no…”. Never mind that Trump wanted to write checks in his name but instead just like former Clinton crony George S on ABC we should believe that Trump used his hypnotic powers to “instruct” Cohen to say “no, no, no..” and do the transactions Cohen’s convoluted way. And let’s not forget that 90%+ of the crimes that got Cohen thrown in the slammer for were unrelated to Trump. So obvious that bimbo payments were thrown in by Cohen/SDNY/SCO to ensare and embarrass Dr. Evil Trump. Cohen now to portray himself to not only SDNY/SCO but also his own family as some victim. Pathetic.

  11. The ultimate question is if you’ve been threatened by government agents who have already depleted your life savings, falsely ruined your reputation by lieing and leaking about you, intimidating you with the power of the state despite the falseness of their claims, MIGHT YOU AGREE TO PLEAD to something that is absurd but possibly the least of your worries because they have abused their power already and successfully ruined you! Yes – anyone with common sense has known for the last 2 years that these biased, , prejudiced prosecutors working for Mueller were targeting Flynn for absurd charges. And we now know that NO ONE thought he was lieing. This dishonest and sham prosecution and persecution of Flynn (and the same of Page, Papadapoulus and even Manafort) is a clear abuse of power by the government. It illustrates clearly how Democrats will abuse power and should remind all Americans of how those on the left, through out history (Mao, Stalin, Chavez, Castro, etc) will destroy societies and the people.

    1. understand this is a prelude to civil war. they don’t care about ruining lives; indeed they would do much more to punish, if they thought it permissible, and they would certainly take lives if they could.

      understand, the adversaries of the ever shrinking american majority, are a bloodthirsty lot of parasites and bandits. they would cut all our throats and take our stuff if they could.

      the day when things are settled only with elections and lawsuits between the emerging adversaries may be numbered.

  12. …and all of this and much more

    Just to run cover for the real criminals known as Barack Obama and Crooked Hillary (to name a few)

    I sure hope Comey got paid well… $$$💲💲💲$$$

    1. these are the big capos not little ones and yes they have rackets

      a lot of people are just caught up where they are and pick whatever sides seem expedient, like a shop owner in little italy in the 1920s paying protection; they don’t like the rackets but they have few choices

  13. OT:

    A Texas Elementary School Speech Pathologist Refused to Sign a Pro-Israel Oath, Now Mandatory in Many States — So She Lost Her Job

    https://theintercept.com/2018/12/17/israel-texas-anti-bds-law/

    Excerpt:

    Anyone who stands by silently while Bahia Amawi is forced out of the profession she has worked so hard to construct all because of her refusal to renounce her political views and activism — while the young children she helps are denied the professional support they need and deserve — can legitimately and accurately call themselves many things. “Free speech supporter” is most definitely not one of them.

    1. Somebody got a bit carried away with the enforcement of the state law. The state law says the state will not boycott Israel and there for it will not use suppliers who participate in the boycott. It was not intended to interfere with individual rights, but to assure that boycotts of Israel were not used to restrict the goods being provided under state contract. Bahia Amawi is not an employee of the State of Texas, if she was such a clause would not be used in her contract. She is an outside contractor and the clause intended for all contractors providing goods to the state was included in her contract which only provides services. The clause is badly written, in that as an individual, it restricts her personal actions rather than actions that would affect where she obtains (or refuses to obtain) her services to the state.

  14. Jim Comey’s boastful abuse-of-process comments to bloodthirsty lefty audience will come back to haunt him during his congressional testimony today and Flynn sentencing hearing tomorrow.

    1. Excerpted from the transcript linked above:

      STEPHANOPOULOS: Did the president – did Donald Trump know that Michael Cohen was pursuing the Trump Tower in Moscow into the summer of 2016?

      GIULIANI: According to the answer that he gave, it would have covered all the way up to – covered up to November, 2016. Said he had conversations with him but the president didn’t hide this. They know …

      STEPHANOPOULOS: Earlier they had said those conversations stopped in January, 2016.

      GIULIANI: I don’t — I mean, the date — I mean, until you actually sit down and you look at the questions, and you go back and you look at the papers and you look at the — the — you’re not going to know what happened. That’s why — that’s why lawyers, you know, prepare for those answers.

      [end excerpt]

      That’s the president’s lawyer saying on TV that the written answer that Trump gave to the special counsel’s written questions about the Trump Tower Moscow deal “would have covered all the way up to November, 2016.” That means that in Trump’s mind, and in the mind of Giuliani, there supposedly would have been nothing wrong with Trump pursuing the Trump Tower Moscow deal all the way until election day on November 8th, 2016. Keep in mind that Trump has asserted a thoroughly bogus claim of executive privilege over any and all decisions Trump made after the polls closed on November 8th, 2016. And that means that Trump refuses to answer any questions about Trump’s pursuit of the Trump Tower Moscow deal after November 8th, 2016. And that just so happens to include the period of time during which Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn was discussing sanctions with the Russian Ambassador, Sergei Kislyak. Koinkidenke?

      Now back to the dry well and talk of he who refused to let Flynn go.

      1. You do realize, don’t you, that, had Flynn not gotten caught discussing sanctions with Kislyak, and had Comey not sent a couple of guys over to questions Flynn about his discussions with Kislyak, and had Comey actually “let Flynn go,” then Trump would’ve rescinded Obama’s EO sanctions against Russia for the express purpose of getting financing from a Russian bank to build the Trump Tower Moscow? And the first ruble of Russian money that went to Trump’s pocket would have led to Trump’s impeachment and removal from office on a charge of Bribery. Therefore, Comey’s decision to send a couple of guys over to interview Flynn is probably the only real reason that Trump still sits as POTUS.

        1. When I was a kid we used to take decks of cards and see how many stories we could build without it collapsing.
          “You do realize, don’t you”, that Diane manufactures “stories” from with her own house of cards.

          1. You do realize that Comey saved Trump’s presidency from a much earlier demise than the one that is still barreling down the turnpike at breakneck speed. Don’t you?

            Why can’t you defend Flynn on Flynn’s merits? Why can’t you defend Trump on Trump’s merits? Why keep on going back to the same old dry well of attacking Comey instead of defending Flynn and Trump on their own merits? Is there no original thinking allowed amongst you people?

            1. No to the first bogus question from the 7:17 AM post by L4D.
              I’ll pass on her final 4 questions, since they are all Gish Gallop questions, but anyone is free to play along/ trot along if they choose; and I’m sure that L4D would love to keep others busy herding cats.

                1. Anonymous – L4Yoga’s idea is to overwhelm us with BS and we will then believe some of it. It is the “shotgun” approach. With a shotgun you are likely to hit something. Those of us used to her style, just scroll past her ramblings and wait for the real news to tell us what is happening. Like, St. Mueller, in whom we all trust, is not giving Judge Sullivan the first Flynn 302s, but rather the 302s written 6 months later.

                  1. Now there’s your BS for you. Flynn’s lawyers didn’t ask for the 302 from Flynn’s initial interview on January 24th, 2017. Most likely that 302 had already been submitted “under seal” in response to Judge Sullivan’s order for the Brady review a long time ago. The fact that that 302 is still under seal means that there’s nothing exculpatory for Flynn in that 302. And the notion that that 302 wasn’t written up until August 22nd, 2017, is just another instance of the typical “garbling of the record” that results from people like Don Pablo Eschoolbus not understanding what they were reading when they read Flynn’s lawyers requesting the 302 for an SCO interview of Strzok on July 21st, 2017, that was finalized on August 22nd, 2017. And that’s yet more BS from you people. You got nothing. So you just keep going back to the same old dry well that ran dry the first time you checked it. Guess what? It’s still a dry well, Pablito.

                    1. L4Yoga/Annie/Inga enables David Benson, and the NPCs R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – Judge Sullivan demanded the 302s.

                    2. Gee. Thanks, Tom. I’m glad we got that cleared up. Did you notice any significant discrepancies between what The Federalist article claimed versus what L4D claimed? I didn’t.

                      Be advised: If here was anything exculpatory for Flynn in any of the 302s filed under seal, then it would be extremely unlikely for Judge Sullivan, let alone for Flynn’s lawyers, to allow that exculpatory information to remain under seal.

                  2. https://thefederalist.com/2018/12/17/heres-whats-weird-robert-muellers-latest-michael-flynn-filing/
                    PC Schulte,…
                    I’m posting this link here, and below L4B’s comment.
                    The last sentence of the second paragragh states that the 302 was dated Aug. 22, 2017, over 6 months after the January interrogation of Flynn.
                    This account ( about the 302 delay) is consistent with what has been published elsewhere, and happens to be the most recent one.
                    Given L4B’s history of being factually challenged when she finds it expedient, it can take some checking to shift through all of the crap she throws out there.
                    I’ll be gone for a while, but I’ll try to check to see what her Troll Groupie, “Anonymous”, chimes in with.

                    1. You cannot be serious. The Federalist article to which you linked is completely and totally consistent with what I said about the 302 for Flynn’s initial FBI interview on January 24th, 2017. If you cannot perceive that, then you are the one who is “factually challenged.” If you perceive it, but refuse to admit it out loud on the blawg, then you are the one throwing out crap for your Troll Groupies.

                    2. L4B,.. – Trolls don’t use their own names, you moron.
                      You’re better off not talking about “garbling the record”.
                      You talk alternately talk about the 6+months delay as “malarkey”, then concede that there was that delay.
                      You throw in all kinds extratraneouse stuff about when Flynn’s lawyers got the 302, saying they probably got it “long ago”.
                      A 302 is supposed to be a contemporaneous account of an interview….6+ months is not timely, and it is that delay by the FBI that raises questions.
                      Whether or not there is anything exculpatory in the 302 has nothing to do with the issue of that delay; you just throw that in among the other stuff to avoid the issue of addressing the delay.
                      I could try to get specific answers from you to specific questions, but I’d rather try something easier, like nailing jello to the wall.
                      As long as you stick with your Proof by Verbosity, you should be able to “muddle” through, and muddle the issues as well.
                      Also, keep peppering your comments with multiple questions not related to the topic.
                      That’s a nice L4B stunt as well.

                    3. Obviously you didn’t read with comprehension The Federalist article to which you linked. I read it. It didn’t take very long. Everything in that Federalist article is perfectly consistent with everything I said about the damned 302s. Nothing that I said about the damned 302s is controverted by anything in that Federalist article to which you linked but didn’t read with comprehension.

                      There is no amount of Jello that you or anyone else could nail to these boards that will stick there for more than two or three days before L4D eviscerates that garbled nonsense. Anybody who bothers to read with comprehension will attest to the truth of the foregoing assertions.

                    4. Tom Nash – there is a possibility and I mean possibility that the original 302s were submitted and sealed. There are at least 4 sealed entries for the case. Why they would seal the originals unless it makes them look bad is beyond me.

                  3. PC Schulte,…
                    If that loon stated that Christmas was later this month, I would check the calender to fact-check even that statement, given the source.

              1. Anonymous,..
                I have no desire to “keep up” when the comments from a person are all over the board, and there is an endless stream of nonsensical questions.

                1. Giuliani came about as close as a lawyer should come to admitting that his client, Trump, was still pursuing the Trump Tower Moscow deal right up until the polls closed on election day, November 8th, 2016. Giuliani would not have made that admission without a damned good reason. Giuliani is floating a limited hangout cover story for Trump’s pursuit of the Trump Tower Moscow deal as a consolation prize in the event that Trump had lost the election instead of winning it.

                  Here’s the problem: Had Trump lost the election, the sanctions against the Russian banks needed to finance the Trump Tower Moscow would have remained in place. There were only two ways in which those sanctions could have been removed so that those Russian banks could have financed the Trump Tower Moscow. And both of those ways required Trump to win the 2016 election.

                  And that’s why Trump has asserted a thoroughly bogus claim of executive privilege over decisions Trump made during the transition as President-Elect. Because Trump probably didn’t stop pursuing the Trump Tower Moscow deal until August 2nd, 2017, when, under vehement protest, Trump signed into law The Countering America’s Adversaries With Sanctions Act. BTW, the second of the possible methods of removing the sanctions from at least one Russian bank (“delisting”) remains technically possible–albeit, extremely unlikely at this juncture.

                    1. lol you really think you’re an expert on this garbage don’t you.

                      your version of “armchair quarterbacking.”

                      i am pretty sure Meuller isn’t tuning in for your sage advice

              2. Yep, the Old Gish Gallop.

                I truly believe that Late4 and others are paid to disseminate garbage on various blogs and comment sections.

                Way too much zeal for a normal person.

                That is why I mostly ignore Late4 and Peter Shill. You will never have an honest conversation with either of them, any more than one could have an honest public conversation with Joseph Goebbels. All you will get are scripted answers, and deception.

                I notice those same kind of folks on Kunstler’s blog.

                Squeeky Fromm
                Girl Reporter

                1. Squeeky, we need to convince Tom and Allan to stop responding to the L4 NPC. I’m getting cramps in my scrolling finger.

                  1. FFS,..
                    It would not take much convincing to scroll past that arrogant, duplicitous fool.
                    That’s usually what I do, but even in scrolling past her I see examples of her hyper-spin and lies.
                    I know what you’re talking about when you mention “scroll fatigue”.
                    A few people can create, and are creating, an incredible amount of clutter.
                    If I wanted to hear out-and-out propaganda early every morning, I’d get online and listen to recording of Hanoi Hannah, Axis Sally, and Tokyo Rose.
                    It probably would be best if any communication involving L4B consisted of her corresponding with other trolls, and her troll groupies.
                    She obviously has a lot of time to waste other people’s time.

                    1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

                      U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan asked Mueller to submit documents related to Flynn’s FBI interview last week after his defense attorneys suggested in their sentencing memo that Flynn had been entrapped by the agents who interviewed him. The filing has inflamed a theory among conservatives that Flynn was wronged by the Justice Department and by Mueller.

                      [edit]

                      Flynn’s attorneys did not take issue with Mueller’s description of the offense but argued that the circumstances of his FBI interview “warrant the Court’s consideration as it evaluates the seriousness of the offense.”

                      Mueller, who has asked Sullivan to impose a lenient sentence as a result of Flynn’s “substantial assistance” in the ongoing probe, shot back late last week, accusing Flynn of trying to “minimize” the seriousness of his crimes.

                      “The defendant chose to make false statements about his communications with the Russian ambassador weeks before the FBI interview, when he lied about that topic to the media, the incoming Vice President, and other members of the Presidential Transition Team,” Mueller wrote.

                      “When faced with the FBI’s question on January 24, during an interview that was voluntary and cordial, the defendant repeated the same false statements,” he wrote.

                      Monday’s filing includes two near-identical versions of what are called FD-302s, forms on which FBI agents record notes from interviews.

                      Mueller separately filed redacted versions of other documents associated with Flynn’s January 2017 interview late last week.

                      Flynn is scheduled to be sentenced at 11 a.m. Tuesday in federal court in D.C.

                    2. A Judge who unseals, at the prosecutor’s request, a document that a defendant’s lawyers had not requested to be unsealed, because there was no exculpatory evidence for that defendant in that document, despite those same lawyers arguing before that Judge that their client had supposedly been entrapped, is a Judge who is NOT on the verge of doing any big favor for that defendant at his final sentencing.

                      Flynn and his lawyers have probably gotten Flynn jail time at the lower range of the sentencing guidelines, when they could have gotten Flynn zero jail time before they pulled their stupid, stupid interview entrapment stunt on Judge Sullivan. Bad lawyering. Very bad lawyering.

                      P. S. Marco’s right again: Don’t mess with The Marine.

                    3. True. And LOL on the linguisms! Another sure sign of a shill is the voluminous copy and paste stuff from approved propaganda sources. That insures that the shill will not go off script.

                      It is like with click bait. The material does not have to be either true, germane to the instant argument, or relevant to the topic. Just get as many eyeballs as possible on the propaganda.

                      Squeeky Fromm
                      Girl Reporter

                2. Squeeky,..
                  If Late4 is getting paid, she’s likely backed by someone or some organization with deep pockets.
                  She is at least bilingual ( English and Dianese), perhaps multilingual. She has written segments in Latin, and some of the covens perform their black masses in Latin.
                  I’m not absolutely certain if that’s how she came by her knowledge of some Latin, but it’s “highly probable” that she did.
                  Additionally, she can simultaneously talk out of both sides of her mouth.
                  With all if these “qualifications”, she can probably command the higher end of the going rate for hired trolls.

              1. Agreed. But the Trump Troupers seem to think that Judge Sullivan is somehow going to toss the whole special counsel’s investigation on some procedural technicality involving the FBI’s initial interview of Flynn on January 24th, 2017. If they weren’t so downright desperate to make it all just go away already, then I might feel sorry for them.

                1. i have never seen a bunch of Democrats so keen on pushing lame convictions based on improper procedures

                  Back when I went to law school it was usually Republicans that were all for letting in “good faith exceptions” to this or that criminal procedure irregularity–

                  now it’s the Democrats chomping at the bit to unleash the FBI from all previous standards and restraints on abusing its own power.

                  Was it all just to help drug dealers, guys, or do former Generals get the benefit of proper police procedures as well?

                  Cute inversions on the old “if they can do it to the least of us then they can do it to all of us” type speeches: here, the least of us nobodies, are not usually going to be the subject of a massive witchhunt aimed at an incoming POTUS and his cabinet, defined by its clear bias and piss poor procedures!

                  1. Sparrow, you recall Prof. Corey Robin claiming that conservatives have no principles, just improvisations while being advocates for rich people? That’s called ‘projection’. Prof. Robin was most upset when his collection of polemics was taken apart rather thoroughly in The New York Review of Books by Mark Lilla, an intellectual historian who carries a great deal more weight than Robin.

                    You have a few wonks like Mark Kleiman and Harold Pollack who have real knowledge and real policy preferences. For the rest, it’s just the culture wars. There isn’t any there there. Screw ’em.

      1. Excerpted from the article at Lawfare blog entitled “The Flynn Plea Deal: A Quick and Dirty Analysis” the link to which still refuse to post here on Res Ipsa Loquitur:

        The news that former national security adviser Michael Flynn has reached a cooperation and plea deal with Special Counsel Robert Mueller could not come as less of a surprise. Reports of Flynn’s bizarre behavior across a wide spectrum of areas began trickling out even before his tenure as national security adviser ended after only 24 days. These behaviors raised a raft of substantial criminal law questions that have been a matter of open speculation and reporting for months. His problems include, among other things, an alleged kidnapping plot, a plan to build nuclear power plants all over the Middle East, alleged violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) involving at least two different countries, and apparent false statements to the FBI. In light of the scope and range of the activity that reputable news organizations have attributed to Flynn, it is no surprise that he has agreed to cooperate with Mueller in exchange for leniency.

        [end excerpt]

        There’s no such thing as kvetching about Comey without remembering the “substantial criminal law questions” that put poor Mickey Flynn on the hook in the first place. Also remember that Flynn’s alleged Middle Eastern graft scheme is connected to the Trump campaign and the Russian election-meddling and is therefore within the scope of the SCO’s investigation and is almost certainly one of the heavily redacted investigations alluded to in the SCO’s sentencing memo for Flynn.

        Flynn is NOT a good guy.

        1. Also from Lawfare:

          “Lawfare does not take comments. It never has. It never will. We do, however, include social media sharing buttons that allow readers to comment on posts in a fashion visible to their own Facebook friends or Twitter followers. The idea is to permit discussion of Lawfare posts among communities of Facebook and Twitter users. Comments take a great deal of time to moderate, and that’s time better spent on our part producing Lawfare.”

          Jonathan Turley?

              1. He doesn’t seem to understand context very well. I would explain it to him if I thought it was possible. Alas.

                P. S. I got the message loud and clear. I think there’s some other reason that particular link won’t post here. I’ve posted links to Lawfare before without any trouble.

            1. PC Schulte,..
              For a variety of reasons, not everyone uses Facebook or Twitter.
              An upside is that I don’t think that “anonymous” and all the other anonymousescan perpetually hide behind aliases.

                1. Sometimes Krazy Kat Rambler makes it more of litter box than a sandlot in which any human children could safely play.

                  1. Anonymous need not worry if these threads are moved to Facebook or Twitter.
                    She can still probably get comments posted by using some other phony name.
                    Also, there may be a special section for troll groupie and troll flunkies like this particular “anonymous”.
                    Anonymous could bond with them and probably have numerous trolls and troll flunkies to suck up to.

          1. Excerpted from Flynn’s own sentencing memo citing McCabe’s memo about the request for Flynn’s FBI interview:

            Mr. McCabe’s account states: “I explained that I thought the quickest way to get this done was to have a conversation between [General Flynn] and the agents only. I further stated that if LTG Flynn wished to include anyone else in the meeting, like the White House Counsel for instance, that I would need to involve the Department of Justice. [General Flynn] stated that this would not be necessary and agreed to meet with the agents without any additional participants.”

            [end excerpt]

            So Flynn’s lawyers are complaining to Judge Sullivan that McCabe somehow “intimidated” Flynn with the “threat” of calling in the dreaded DoJ if Flynn brought in the WH Counsel or “anyone else.” And that’s why Flynn agreed to be interviewed without a lawyer. The FBI pulled the old good-cop/bad-cop trick on Flynn. “Oh no! Not the DoJ. Anything but the dreaded DoJ.” You know what? It reads to me like Flynn’s lawyers are complaining that McCabe didn’t involve the dreaded DoJ. Flynn’s lawyers are insinuating that had the dreaded DoJ only been brought in, then Flynn would have been informed that it was a crime to make false statements to the FBI.

            Except for one tiny little detail: Flynn might have been even more “intimidated” by the suggestion of bringing in the White House Counsel instead of the dreaded DoJ.

            1. I don’t know if Judge Sullivan will proceed with the sentencing tomorrow; if he and his staff have a lot of “newer” material from Mueller not previously available, it could be delayed.
              The quote in L4D’s second paragraph is, as noted, “Mr. McCabe’s account”.
              There’s really no way of knowing at this point what additional material was submitted by Flynn’s lawyers, by Mueller, or by others.
              Or if that material is in line with the current contents of the sentencing memos.
              Even Comey and McCabe had different accounts of an aspect involved in McCabe’s demotion, then dismissal.

              1. OFCOLA. The quotation of McCabe’s account was cited by Flynn’s lawyers in the sentencing memo that they submitted to Judge Sullivan for Flynn. That necessarily means that Flynn’s lawyers already had McCabe’s memo. Most likely as a result of Sullivan’s previous order for a Brady review. Now if just stop to think about it for a little while, you should be able to realize that the 302 for Flynn’s initial FBI interview on Jan. 24th, 2017, was also most likely submitted “under seal” in response to Sullivan’s order for a Brady review and that Flynn’s lawyers failed to find anything exculpatory for Flynn in that 302. And that’s why they asked for the 302 for the SCO’s interview of Strzok on July 21st, 2017, that was finalized on August 22nd, 2017. Hence all of the incomparably garbled malarkey about the supposedly long delay in writing up Flynn’s initial FBI interview 302. Where’s the evidence for that other than the garble?

        2. You’re not a good guy either. So there. And you are boring. I keep trying to read your posts but my head always hits the keyboard as I slump a-slumber.

    1. Well, that’s your opinion. In reality, the damage that you, your ilk, the gullible rubes, dupes, klan wannabees, pocket-traitors and grifters on the make have done to our beloved country is being remedied as we speak, However, you–like many of the supporters of the bufoonish day glo bozo–are forgetting the most salient question: “What is that ticking sound?”

      this is to “but can we at least visit inmate trump?” phb

      1. ha ridiculous

        hey guess what, we think all the HIllary Lickspittles are the traitors, to undermine the results of a valid election and egg on the saboteurs at DOJ and FBI.

        opinions on such things can vary, but many would be pleased to resolve such things the old fashioned way!

  15. It was more than “Another Violation Of Department Protocol and Policy.” It was a direct violation of the nations most well known law and legal requirement. Something Comey had to have done regardless of all else intentionally.

    See if this sounds familiar

    But if the police fail to read a suspect his or her Miranda-Escobedo rights, the prosecutor can’t use for most purposes anything the suspect says as evidence against the suspect at trial.

    When Must The Police Read Me My Miranda Rights? The Miranda warning is usually given when a person is arrested. However, the Miranda Rights attach during any “custodial interrogation” (when a person is substantially deprived of their freedom and not free to leave) even if the suspect hasn’t been formally arrested.

    In practice they must be given and witnessed as soon as the arresting officer thinks or has a suspicion or wrong doing which is normally well before probable cause or sufficient evidence is determined Comey know this and violated it anyway. He did on another occasion when he failed to Mirandize Hillary Clinton. by using, intentionally, the wrong paragraph of the National Security laws and acting as investigator, judge and jury gave her a free pass using intent when intent is not an element of the crime committed., repeatedly commited

    Let’ suppose NYSD decides to pursue the President. All Trumps lawyer has to say is”Fruit of the Poisoned Tree.” and cite any number of connected incidents. Neither Comey, Meuller and Rosenstein have any excuses.

    All that supposed evidence if it even exists is tossed.

    1. Thanks for playing, “counselor.” Unfortunately, whichever obscure, wackjob loser-loner website from which you garnered your “legal” education is likewise not operated by a lawyer. So sorry for your loss. Pro tip: hannity is not a lawyer and thinks you’re an idiot.

      this is to “but I saw the fruit thingy on a TV show, I think” mikey

      1. has there ever been a criminal defense lawyer who cheered on sneaky FBI and persecutors as much as you?

        bet they love you. not your clients, I mean, the government

Leave a Reply to Justice Holmes Cancel reply