Modus Operandi or Old News? Comey Under Investigation In New Leak Probe

Former FBI Director James Comey is back in the news this week after The New York Times  reported late Thursday that he is again under investigation for leaking information to the media. The Justice Department Inspector General previously found that Comey was a leaker and violated FBI policy in his handling of FBI memos, including material  containing the “code name and true identity” of a sensitive source. Now, he is again accused of leaking information. There is an element of a modus operandi in the story since the same academic Comey used in the earlier leaks is also named in this leak, Columbia Law Professor Daniel Richman.

The Times reports that Comey is under investigation for illegally leaking information concerning a Russian document obtained by Dutch intelligence from Russian computers that claimed “a tacit understanding between the Clinton campaign and the [Obama] Justice Department over the inquiry into whether she intentionally revealed classified information through her use of a private email server.” The document was discussed by Richman in a 2017 Times article.

The document referenced alleged discussions between Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., then the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, and Leonard Benardo, who worked a George Soros-founded group called Open Society Foundations. It details how Schultz assured Benardo that the fix was in with Lynch who would guarantee that Clinton would not be prosecuted. Both Schultz and Benardo have denied the story.

The Inspector General previously referred Comey for possible prosecution but the Justice Department under Attorney General Bill Barr rejected the prosecution.

What is striking about this story is that the underlying information was not derived from a Comey memo but a classified intelligence document supplied by an allied intelligence service. There is however no details on evidence that Comey used the same conduit in Richman to leak this information. The theory seems to be that Comey was concerned about the document in undermining the decision not to prosecute Clinton. Yet, it is not clear why leaking the information advanced the goal of justifying the non-prosecution position that Comey would announce in his controversial press conference. The coverage says that “suspicions” of Comey’s role were raised by his familiarity with the document and apparently the connection with Richman as someone who previously was used by Comey to leak information.

The Times is suggesting that the belated investigation may be evidence that the Justice Department is “politicizing” its work. What is striking however is that this particular leak was never fully explained on who was responsible or why no action was taken on the leaking of clearly sensitive intelligence shared by an ally.

51 thoughts on “Modus Operandi or Old News? Comey Under Investigation In New Leak Probe”

  1. To “probe” when some person leaks is a bit much. First of all, we all leak. Men usually leak while standing and they must aim.

  2. The Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious scandal in American political history.

    The co-conspirators are:

    Bill Taylor, Eric Ciaramella, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Andrew Weissmann, Comey,

    Christopher Wray, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Laycock, Kadzic, Yates, Baker, Bruce Ohr,

    Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Sir Richard Dearlove, Steele, Simpson,

    Joseph Mifsud, Alexander Downer, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper, Azra Turk, Kerry,

    Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Gina Haspel, Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power, Lynch,

    Rice, Jarrett, Holder, Brazile, Sessions (patsy), Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, Obama et al.

  3. There’s a great article about Comey and Trump at http://www.reason.com. The article points out that most candidates, of both parties, are opposed to upholding the Bill of Rights. Reminder: they all swear a constitutional Oath of Office to uphold the Bill of Rights. The article also covers surprising views of Biden, Warren and John Ashcroft.

  4. OK, here’s at least one of the problems with this piece: “The Times reports that Comey is under investigation for illegally leaking information concerning a RUSSIAN document obtained by Dutch intelligence from RUSSIAN computers that claimed “a tacit understanding between the Clinton campaign and the [Obama] Justice Department over the inquiry into whether she intentionally revealed classified information through her use of a private email server.”

    Need I elaborate?

      1. Can you trust anything that comes from Russian sources? Well, if you are a Trumpster and it helps him, then, the answer is’ “yes”.

            1. There is a Steele Russian Dossier, and it has been discredited.
              If you are not aware of that Dossier ( “There is no such thing”), then it shouldn’t matter to you anyway.

              1. The Steele Dossier was not generated in Russia or by Russians. It is not called “Steele Russian Dossier”. Nothing contained in his report has been PROVEN UNTRUE. It is heavily criticized by Fox, Levin, Breitbart and Limbaugh, but nothing contained therein is proven to be false.

                1. The material for the Steele Russian Dossier was in fact “generated by” Steele’s Russian contacts who in turn fed Steele allegations from their Russian sources.
                  For someone like Natacha, who preaches about being leery of Russian sources, it’s interesting that she tries to promote and defend phony Russian-based opposition research.

            2. Have any of the comments desrcribing Natacha as a 600 lb. woman in a mental institution “been proved untrue”?

  5. The law is not applied equally to all. If you have connections, especially Democrat connections, it appears you’re safe.

    There is asolutely no way on earth an Average Joe could have kept a server in his bathroom, lied about it, in order to circumvent the records act, upload classified information to the Cloud, while under subpoena wipe it with BleachBit and then smash his phones and computers with a hammer. No. Way.

    My Dad used to work in SCIFs. He said there was a red sign over the door. “Feeling lonely tonight? Want to talk to someone? Then forget to lock your safe.”

    No way.

    Today, people leak classified information with utter impunity. As head of the FBI, Comey weaponzied leaks.

    The law and justice should not be politicized. The law should apply equally to everyone.

    But it’s not.

    1. Karen, you’re confused. If Comey leaked the alleged stolen email it was to justify his announcement reopening the Clinton investigation 2 weeks before the election. Check me if I’m wrong, but I think Clinton ran as a Democrat.

    2. Yeah, I agree that the law does not apply equally to everyone, because if it did, Trump would have gone to prison years ago and would still be there. Then, at least the 200+ people who died as a result of his assassination order and the 11 US service members injured in the retaliation attack wouldn’t have been injured.

  6. Comey is a typical FBI agent,corrupt. They are taught this from the get go. I have represented clients involved with them and they will lie, change 402s, any thing to their advantage.

    1. No doubt they don’t measure up to the character of your clients, including when they risk their life in service to the country. I’ve met some of those.

  7. The Link Within The Link

    NYT Story From 2017 Is Highly Informative

    In this column Professor Turley links a story from yesterday’s New York Times regarding new but vague revelations concerning a Dutch intelligence leak suggesting that Hillary Clinton had emailed classified documents at one point. Said revelations are so vague, in fact, that readers will be challenged in assessing their importance. Yet supporters of Donald Trump may seize on these revelations as ‘proof’ that James Comey sought to conceal Clinton wrongdoings.

    However the Times story Turley links contains a link to an earlier Times story from 4/22/17. That piece, entitled “Comey Tried To Shield The FBI From Politics. Then He Shaped An Election”, is incredibly informative. I would highly recommend this article to anyone who has time for it. Said piece takes almost a half hour to read.

    The story reviews the long sequence of events regarding the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email irregularities and the subsequent probe into Russian interference. The entire timeline is told from James Comey’s point of view. In this context, Comey’s perspective, one can see the former FBI Director was walking a political tightrope that was impossible to navigate.

    Comey found himself totally sandwiched between the Obama Justice Department (that may have been partial to Clinton) and Republicans who would furiously denounce the Russia Probe. Comey faced a no-win situation like few public officials have ever had to reckon with. Personally I now have a lot more sympathy for Comey than I ever had before. Someday historians may portray Comey as a hero who unwittingly became a much despised figure.

    1. Yet supporters of Donald Trump may seize on these revelations as ‘proof’ that James Comey sought to conceal Clinton wrongdoings.
      ______________________________________________
      If he wanted to conceal would he not hust rerfr5ain from leaking about it?

    2. You said, “Comey faced a no-win situation like few public officials have ever had to reckon with.”

      Uh, the point isn’t to “win.” The point is to follow the law. Period. If Hillary committed crimes, and she did, she should have been indicted. If Trump did not collude with Russia, then the whole Russia-gate thing should have been deep-sixed early on.

      The only reason why Comey was on a tightrope was because he walked out on one. If he had stuck to doing his job, he would have been fine. But he didn’t.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. Should have been deep sized anyway. collusion is still to this day not a crime. As for Comey I wonder how many of his book deals were just ways of making a pay back look legitimate which is kind of hard when the cop is obviously dirty.

      2. The only reason why Comey was on a tightrope was because he walked out on one. If he had stuck to doing his job, he would have been fine. But he didn’t.
        ____________________________________________
        If Comey had stuck to doing his job Clinton might have been elected president.

        Comey repeatedly helped Trump get elected by improperly releasing negative information that implied criminal conduct by Clinton and the ultimate irony is that Trump fired Comey and used the fact that Comey had improperly and unethically leaked derogatory information about Clinton as the justification for his termination.

        From the memo used to show cause for firing Comey:

        ” On July 5, however, the Director announced his own conclusions about the nation’s most sensitive criminal
        investigation, without the authorization of duly appointed Justice Department leaders.
        Compounding the error, the Director ignored another longstanding principle: we do not hold press conferences to release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation. Derogatory information sometimes is disclosed in the course of criminal investigations and prosecutions, but we never release it gratuitously. The Director laid out his version of the facts for the news media as if it were a closing argument, but without a trial. It is a textbook example of what federal prosecutors and agents are taught not to do.”

      3. Since a SC case from 1941, intent is required for non-military prosecution for releasing classified materials. They could not prove, nor did they suspect intent by Hillary.

        If not for Comey, Trump would be back busting into women’s dressing rooms for thrills.

  8. This looks like more evidence that the deep state was trying to help Trump get elected.
    but somehow
    the morons will all try to spin this as Come
    y leaking information about skulduggery in the DNC and Clinton campaigns was intended to be good for Hillary.

    It looks like Comey risk going to jail to help Trump. He is lucky Trump won and a Comey friendly DOJ was installed.

    1. It’s a shame the commie party can only reverse the names and then claim they won when in fact you were talking about yourselves and the spin is what we just read signed by a programmer of The Collective. REJECTED.

    1. Pat C.,
      From the numerous comments of one particular commentator in these threads, it looks like one of the Tehran jobs has already been taken.

    1. Michael Aarethun – Judicial Watch is trying to reopen the Arwan case. There is going to be a new hearing because the government is not being cooperative with the court.

  9. About time. Isn’t like it wasn’t the one thing completely transparent. Now Cui Bono. and connect the dots.

      1. Considering it carefully Ad Hominem may not be used given the lack of human presence in any of the above statements and many of those sure to follow so just lump them under Programed Collective or PC-Rap. which is self explanatory. Maybe something something induced periodicals. Have fun.

        The latest in Centrist Constitution land? The Left is not holding Primaries this year but is in knock down drag out to see who has to become the loser. Which leftists. Start with RINO and follow the directions excluding the soon to be Independent Constitutional Democrats. Might as well use that name to honor the Citizens right to vote at every level as it’s the one item from that system adopted by the founders and hasn’t been in use by those formerly of that name.

  10. According to Trey Gowdy, Comey was asked about this in a closed session and refused to provide an answer. But Gowdy also said he trusts the Times as far as can throw them.

  11. Comey has Swamp Immunity. It’s all FBI window dressing to look busy. In the FBI, you inadvertently get just short of indicting dirt on a lot of politicians and judges usually involving the three Bs. Comey, like Hoover, knows where the bodies are buried and won’t face his richly deserved day in court. Too bad, watching a tall guy frog-walk is always amusing.

    1. PCS owes me a response. Paul, have you asked your 14 kids whether they are genetically burdened by your hubris and incompetence? Why are you afraid to ask?

      1. Tony – your major premise is flawed. I am neither incompetent nor have hubris. Thus have nothing to ask my wonderful, successful children about.

          1. Tony – You know what they say, talk is cheap. You wouldn’t have lasted a week teaching the kids I did.

      2. YKnot”? Because machine parts of the collective don’t exist in human form and neither do their programmers. Again you can’t claim ad hominem until you can prove a human presence. .

Leave a Reply