Comey's memos were never classified to begin with

[Flopper]

Apparents according to Odium anytime a govt employee writes something it becomes classified. That would be true if it wasn't super bullshit.

Now they want to lock people up for sharing their own notes. Lol....maybe you can have Flynn chant lock her up and say that sweet line "If I did half of what she did I'd be in jail". Which he did and ironically got you whipped up into a creamy froth

Irrelevant. The notes are Government Property which he stole and then leaked.

Well, then he should be fired.

Oh, wait.

No, he couldn't be fired for leaking the memo's existence because he already had been fired. He had every right to document a meeting with the president and he was within his legal rights to leak the existence of that memo.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Let me type slowly for you..

1. Comey made notes about a meeting with the president of the united states. All of these meetings are considered Top Secret unless they are declassified by the POTUS/whitehouse chief of staff.

2. Notes made by the director are considered work product and thus they are classified by their very nature. (see the employment agreement he signed when he was hired)

3. Comey ADMITTED that he leaked these documents through a third party under oath..

Comey is now in a very precarious position now by leaking classified materials using a third party to a Ny Times reporter.

Comey is screwed...

Neither 1 nor 2 are the slightest bit true. There are no such "automatic" classification systems.

Obviously we have a difference of opinion.....and you aren't the keeper of knowledge here on USMB.
I suggest you take it to court and prove your point....or simply STFU.

I don't have to "take it to court" to prove my point. In fact, the absence of it being taken to court will prove my point.

This isn't a matter of "opinion", it's a matter of SCOTUS case law.

 

[BULLDOG]

Repeating the same thing doesn't make it true.
Link?

It's simple.....the only way Comey could legally relay information that was discussed in private with the president is if it was in his belief that a crime had been committed. Comey doesn't say that. He just said that he later took down notes thinking that Trump would lie about what was said. It was purely to protect his reputation. Problem with that is anything that they discussed could be classified by the president or declared executive privilege. Comey said that he took pains not to give away classified information but he leaked parts of his alleged discussion to the press. This is no different than somebody tapping his phone and giving to the press.....a felony.

Again, you make that claim, yet still no link to show all private conversations with the president are classified. Why not?

Because obviously you don't know or care what classified means. You also don't seem to care about the proper handling of government documents.
Comey refused to indict Hillary for mishandling and destruction of classified documents.
Then he does the same thing himself....simply because he thinks that the false narrative coming from the media is some sort of protection.
The point of all of this is we've had a series of leaks to the press by unnamed sources. The press doesn't really feel they have to prove that any of them are genuine. Now we have the former FBI Director admitting under oath that he was the source of the latest leak.
You see nothing wrong with this.
Leaking private conversations with the president to the press in an attempt to damage his administration is a felony.
Admittedly no crime took place, other than the actual leaking.
Also, Comey said that Loretta Lynch pressured him into not only refusing to call it an investigation but also to refuse to send a recommendation up to the AG.
Apparently Comey has admitted to being in the middle of a conspiracy to coverup an espionage and to aid in the obstruction of justice.

I know what classified means. You haven't shown proof that all private discussions with the president are classified. Are you having trouble understanding that?

Maybe you should try reading other comments on this thread, Mkay?

I read yours. You make claims you don't back up.

 

[mudwhistle]

Repeating the same thing doesn't make it true.
Link?

It's simple.....the only way Comey could legally relay information that was discussed in private with the president is if it was in his belief that a crime had been committed. Comey doesn't say that. He just said that he later took down notes thinking that Trump would lie about what was said. It was purely to protect his reputation. Problem with that is anything that they discussed could be classified by the president or declared executive privilege. Comey said that he took pains not to give away classified information but he leaked parts of his alleged discussion to the press. This is no different than somebody tapping his phone and giving to the press.....a felony.

Again, you make that claim, yet still no link to show all private conversations with the president are classified. Why not?

As long the information is not classified, anything the president says can be revealed. I'm pretty sure that the presidency asking for Comey's loyalty and to go easy on someone he's investigating has not been classified and it certainly could be evidence of a crime.

Not true....is is classified but can be declassified at a later date. Comey didn't wait for the okay so he can be charged with a crime.

Link?

Why not use Google or Bing and look up everything on Executive Privilege.
It may take you half the night....but I suggest you get cracking if you're gonna get it done.

 

[mudwhistle]

Let me type slowly for you..

1. Comey made notes about a meeting with the president of the united states. All of these meetings are considered Top Secret unless they are declassified by the POTUS/whitehouse chief of staff.

2. Notes made by the director are considered work product and thus they are classified by their very nature. (see the employment agreement he signed when he was hired)

3. Comey ADMITTED that he leaked these documents through a third party under oath..

Comey is now in a very precarious position now by leaking classified materials using a third party to a Ny Times reporter.

Comey is screwed...

Neither 1 nor 2 are the slightest bit true. There are no such "automatic" classification systems.

Obviously we have a difference of opinion.....and you aren't the keeper of knowledge here on USMB.
I suggest you take it to court and prove your point....or simply STFU.

I don't have to "take it to court" to prove my point. In fact, the absence of it being taken to court will prove my point.

This isn't a matter of "opinion", it's a matter of SCOTUS case law.

How can it be SCOTUS case law if it never has been in court?
And you and I both know that SCOTUS case law is purely legal opinion.
And I also haven't seen you site the case you claim this applies to.
If you find it, post it and I'll let you know if I think you're full of shit or not.

 

[BULLDOG]

It's simple.....the only way Comey could legally relay information that was discussed in private with the president is if it was in his belief that a crime had been committed. Comey doesn't say that. He just said that he later took down notes thinking that Trump would lie about what was said. It was purely to protect his reputation. Problem with that is anything that they discussed could be classified by the president or declared executive privilege. Comey said that he took pains not to give away classified information but he leaked parts of his alleged discussion to the press. This is no different than somebody tapping his phone and giving to the press.....a felony.

Again, you make that claim, yet still no link to show all private conversations with the president are classified. Why not?

As long the information is not classified, anything the president says can be revealed. I'm pretty sure that the presidency asking for Comey's loyalty and to go easy on someone he's investigating has not been classified and it certainly could be evidence of a crime.

Not true....is is classified but can be declassified at a later date. Comey didn't wait for the okay so he can be charged with a crime.

Link?

Why not use Google or Bing and look up everything on Executive Privilege.
It may take you half the night....but I suggest you get cracking if you're gonna get it done.

Better yet, you could backup your claim with a link. I'm not going to try to prove your point for you. That's your job.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

It's simple.....the only way Comey could legally relay information that was discussed in private with the president is if it was in his belief that a crime had been committed. Comey doesn't say that. He just said that he later took down notes thinking that Trump would lie about what was said. It was purely to protect his reputation. Problem with that is anything that they discussed could be classified by the president or declared executive privilege. Comey said that he took pains not to give away classified information but he leaked parts of his alleged discussion to the press. This is no different than somebody tapping his phone and giving to the press.....a felony.

Again, you make that claim, yet still no link to show all private conversations with the president are classified. Why not?

As long the information is not classified, anything the president says can be revealed. I'm pretty sure that the presidency asking for Comey's loyalty and to go easy on someone he's investigating has not been classified and it certainly could be evidence of a crime.

Not true....is is classified but can be declassified at a later date. Comey didn't wait for the okay so he can be charged with a crime.

Link?

Why not use Google or Bing and look up everything on Executive Privilege.
It may take you half the night....but I suggest you get cracking if you're gonna get it done.

Actually, if you don't want to continue embarrassing yourself, I suggest that you do exactly what you've suggested.

 

[Billy_Bob]

One more tidbit is that Comey reviewed his testimony with Mueller.. So Mueller was in a position to correct Comey, but he allowed him to reveal his distribution of classified materials. Makes me wonder if he is looking at charges against Comey...???

 

[mudwhistle]

Again, you make that claim, yet still no link to show all private conversations with the president are classified. Why not?

As long the information is not classified, anything the president says can be revealed. I'm pretty sure that the presidency asking for Comey's loyalty and to go easy on someone he's investigating has not been classified and it certainly could be evidence of a crime.

Not true....is is classified but can be declassified at a later date. Comey didn't wait for the okay so he can be charged with a crime.

Link?

Why not use Google or Bing and look up everything on Executive Privilege.
It may take you half the night....but I suggest you get cracking if you're gonna get it done.

Actually, if you don't want to continue embarrassing yourself, I suggest that you do exactly what you've suggested.

So you claim it's SCOTUS case law but you also say it never went to court.

Hmmmmmmm.

That's impossible.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Let me type slowly for you..

1. Comey made notes about a meeting with the president of the united states. All of these meetings are considered Top Secret unless they are declassified by the POTUS/whitehouse chief of staff.

2. Notes made by the director are considered work product and thus they are classified by their very nature. (see the employment agreement he signed when he was hired)

3. Comey ADMITTED that he leaked these documents through a third party under oath..

Comey is now in a very precarious position now by leaking classified materials using a third party to a Ny Times reporter.

Comey is screwed...

Neither 1 nor 2 are the slightest bit true. There are no such "automatic" classification systems.

Obviously we have a difference of opinion.....and you aren't the keeper of knowledge here on USMB.
I suggest you take it to court and prove your point....or simply STFU.

I don't have to "take it to court" to prove my point. In fact, the absence of it being taken to court will prove my point.

This isn't a matter of "opinion", it's a matter of SCOTUS case law.

And you and I both know that SCOTUS case law is purely legal opinion.
And I also haven't seen you site the case you claim this applies to.
If you find it, post it and I'll let you know if I think you're full of shit or not.

You've got it all flipped around, cowboy.

There is no "executive privilege" law. It does not exist. "Executive privilege" is a figment of common law - an excuse that allows the executive branch to deny subpoenas from the other two branches.

The statements made by other posters, and then parroted by you, are fiction. They have no basis in law. Lies.

There's no court case to cite because the laws don't exist.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

As long the information is not classified, anything the president says can be revealed. I'm pretty sure that the presidency asking for Comey's loyalty and to go easy on someone he's investigating has not been classified and it certainly could be evidence of a crime.

Not true....is is classified but can be declassified at a later date. Comey didn't wait for the okay so he can be charged with a crime.

Link?

Why not use Google or Bing and look up everything on Executive Privilege.
It may take you half the night....but I suggest you get cracking if you're gonna get it done.

Actually, if you don't want to continue embarrassing yourself, I suggest that you do exactly what you've suggested.

So you claim it's SCOTUS case law but you also say it never went to court.

Hmmmmmmm.

That's impossible.

"Executive privilege" went to SCOTUS with this case: United States v. Nixon - Wikipedia.

"Everything the President says is classified" and "Everything the FBI director does is classified" have not gone to the SCOTUS, because they're not laws.

 

[mudwhistle]

Let me type slowly for you..

1. Comey made notes about a meeting with the president of the united states. All of these meetings are considered Top Secret unless they are declassified by the POTUS/whitehouse chief of staff.

2. Notes made by the director are considered work product and thus they are classified by their very nature. (see the employment agreement he signed when he was hired)

3. Comey ADMITTED that he leaked these documents through a third party under oath..

Comey is now in a very precarious position now by leaking classified materials using a third party to a Ny Times reporter.

Comey is screwed...

Neither 1 nor 2 are the slightest bit true. There are no such "automatic" classification systems.

Obviously we have a difference of opinion.....and you aren't the keeper of knowledge here on USMB.
I suggest you take it to court and prove your point....or simply STFU.

I don't have to "take it to court" to prove my point. In fact, the absence of it being taken to court will prove my point.

This isn't a matter of "opinion", it's a matter of SCOTUS case law.

And you and I both know that SCOTUS case law is purely legal opinion.
And I also haven't seen you site the case you claim this applies to.
If you find it, post it and I'll let you know if I think you're full of shit or not.

You've got it all flipped around, cowboy.

There is no "executive privilege" law. It does not exist. "Executive privilege" is a figment of common law - an excuse that allows the executive branch to deny subpoenas from the other two branches.

The statements made by other posters, and then parroted by you, are fiction. They have no basis in law. Lies.

There's no court case to cite because the laws don't exist.

As is the separation of church and state.
It just doesn't exist.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

One more tidbit is that Comey reviewed his testimony with Mueller.. So Mueller was in a position to correct Comey, but he allowed him to reveal his distribution of classified materials. Makes me wonder if he is looking at charges against Comey...???

Or, just maybe, two career government lawyers understand the law better than you do.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Neither 1 nor 2 are the slightest bit true. There are no such "automatic" classification systems.

Obviously we have a difference of opinion.....and you aren't the keeper of knowledge here on USMB.
I suggest you take it to court and prove your point....or simply STFU.

I don't have to "take it to court" to prove my point. In fact, the absence of it being taken to court will prove my point.

This isn't a matter of "opinion", it's a matter of SCOTUS case law.

And you and I both know that SCOTUS case law is purely legal opinion.
And I also haven't seen you site the case you claim this applies to.
If you find it, post it and I'll let you know if I think you're full of shit or not.

You've got it all flipped around, cowboy.

There is no "executive privilege" law. It does not exist. "Executive privilege" is a figment of common law - an excuse that allows the executive branch to deny subpoenas from the other two branches.

The statements made by other posters, and then parroted by you, are fiction. They have no basis in law. Lies.

There's no court case to cite because the laws don't exist.

As is the separation of church and state.
It just doesn't exist.

As an attempt to wildly change the subject when backed into a corner, I give that 6.5 points out of 10.

You can do better than that, right?

 

[mudwhistle]

Not true....is is classified but can be declassified at a later date. Comey didn't wait for the okay so he can be charged with a crime.

Link?

Why not use Google or Bing and look up everything on Executive Privilege.
It may take you half the night....but I suggest you get cracking if you're gonna get it done.

Actually, if you don't want to continue embarrassing yourself, I suggest that you do exactly what you've suggested.

So you claim it's SCOTUS case law but you also say it never went to court.

Hmmmmmmm.

That's impossible.

"Executive privilege" went to SCOTUS with this case: United States v. Nixon - Wikipedia.

"Everything the President says is classified" and "Everything the FBI director does is classified" have not gone to the SCOTUS, because they're not laws.

Wait a second...you said it never went to court.....now you say it did.
Make up your mind.
And Executive privilege doesn't have to be a law to exist, dumbass.

 

[JBond]

Comey is a clown. In the Hillary investigation he didn't even bother to record her interview and then destroyed all the evidence. Who does that? He also failed to issue warrants for her home and offices and gave deals to everyone involved. A complete white wash by him. But all of a sudden he is filling notebooks with notes about Trump. Sounds legit.

 

[mudwhistle]

Obviously we have a difference of opinion.....and you aren't the keeper of knowledge here on USMB.
I suggest you take it to court and prove your point....or simply STFU.

I don't have to "take it to court" to prove my point. In fact, the absence of it being taken to court will prove my point.

This isn't a matter of "opinion", it's a matter of SCOTUS case law.

And you and I both know that SCOTUS case law is purely legal opinion.
And I also haven't seen you site the case you claim this applies to.
If you find it, post it and I'll let you know if I think you're full of shit or not.

You've got it all flipped around, cowboy.

There is no "executive privilege" law. It does not exist. "Executive privilege" is a figment of common law - an excuse that allows the executive branch to deny subpoenas from the other two branches.

The statements made by other posters, and then parroted by you, are fiction. They have no basis in law. Lies.

There's no court case to cite because the laws don't exist.

As is the separation of church and state.
It just doesn't exist.

As an attempt to wildly change the subject when backed into a corner, I give that 6.5 points out of 10.

You can do better than that, right?

Not really. I was just pointing out something that didn't actually exist yet so many think is law as a counter to your lie about Executive Privilege.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Link?

Why not use Google or Bing and look up everything on Executive Privilege.
It may take you half the night....but I suggest you get cracking if you're gonna get it done.

Actually, if you don't want to continue embarrassing yourself, I suggest that you do exactly what you've suggested.

So you claim it's SCOTUS case law but you also say it never went to court.

Hmmmmmmm.

That's impossible.

"Executive privilege" went to SCOTUS with this case: United States v. Nixon - Wikipedia.

"Everything the President says is classified" and "Everything the FBI director does is classified" have not gone to the SCOTUS, because they're not laws.

Wait a second...you said it never went to court.....now you say it did.
Make up your mind.
And Executive privilege doesn't have to be a law to exist, dumbass.

For it to be "illegal" for Comey to share the details of a private conversation with the President, a law does, in fact, have to exist.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I don't have to "take it to court" to prove my point. In fact, the absence of it being taken to court will prove my point.

This isn't a matter of "opinion", it's a matter of SCOTUS case law.

And you and I both know that SCOTUS case law is purely legal opinion.
And I also haven't seen you site the case you claim this applies to.
If you find it, post it and I'll let you know if I think you're full of shit or not.

You've got it all flipped around, cowboy.

There is no "executive privilege" law. It does not exist. "Executive privilege" is a figment of common law - an excuse that allows the executive branch to deny subpoenas from the other two branches.

The statements made by other posters, and then parroted by you, are fiction. They have no basis in law. Lies.

There's no court case to cite because the laws don't exist.

As is the separation of church and state.
It just doesn't exist.

As an attempt to wildly change the subject when backed into a corner, I give that 6.5 points out of 10.

You can do better than that, right?

Not really. I was just pointing out something that didn't actually exist yet so many think is law as a counter to your lie about Executive Privilege.

Executive privilege exists as common law.

But it doesn't mean what you guys seem to think it does.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Let me type slowly for you..

1. Comey made notes about a meeting with the president of the united states. All of these meetings are considered Top Secret unless they are declassified by the POTUS/whitehouse chief of staff.

2. Notes made by the director are considered work product and thus they are classified by their very nature. (see the employment agreement he signed when he was hired)

3. Comey ADMITTED that he leaked these documents through a third party under oath..

Comey is now in a very precarious position now by leaking classified materials using a third party to a Ny Times reporter.

Comey is screwed...

Neither 1 nor 2 are the slightest bit true. There are no such "automatic" classification systems.

Actually there is..

18USC641-70
18USC641-49

I suggest you do some reading..