Hello and welcome, I'm Gina Shakespeare,
today on Declassified,
Comey's testimony truth or lies? We have key revelations,
this story by Jeff Carlson,
just before we get underway, please feel free to subscribe,
like and hit the notifications button,
you can also join the conversation on Twitter and Facebook.
The recent congressional testimony by former FBI Director James Comey
has caused no shortage of outrage over his lack of recollection and ongoing deflections.
But lost within that outrage have been a number of important facts
that were actually communicated during his testimony,
today we're going to discover it all.
So Comey's interview was notably not under oath,
but he was required by law to answer questions from Congress truthfully,
which has suddenly gained significant weight
after special counsel Robert Mueller prosecuted former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen,
for lying to Congress.
Consider this crucial and telling statement by Comey regarding the Steele dossier,
now you all know about the Steele dossier because we've covered it on our channel in depth.
"What I understand by verified is we then try to replicate the source information,
so that it becomes FBI investigation and our conclusions rather than a reliable source's.
That's what I understand it, the difference to be.
"And that work wasn't completed by the time I left in May of 2017,
to my knowledge."
Comey is telling congressional investigators the Steele dossier wasn't verified as of May 2017.
The dossier was used as the primary piece of evidence by the FBI to obtain the Carter Page FISA warrant,
remember the date? On Oct. 21, 2016.
Former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe testified to the House Intelligence Committee in December 2017
that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.
The importance of Comey's statement can't be overemphasized.
The Steele dossier was never confirmed or verified by the FBI,
yet it was used by the FBI as the primary piece of evidence before the FISA Court.
Ok next, Another crucial exchange occurred during an exchange with Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.).
In this instance,
Comey is discussing the difficulty in prosecuting Hillary Clinton,
due to the inability of the FBI to prove intent
the lack of evidence proving Clinton intentionally placed classified information with another party.
Word for word here we go.
Gowdy said: Director Comey, what element was missing in July of 2016,
when you had the press conference,
that might have been found in October on Anthony Weiner's computer?
Comey: I don't know it's an element,
but what was—the key ingredient that was missing in the Clinton investigation
was any indication that she knew she was doing something she shouldn't be doing.
And so what the Weiner trove potentially held was evidence of that intention,
especially in the form of the emails from her BlackBerry during her first three months as Secretary of State.
The Justice Department (DOJ) Inspector General's report released in June
generally agrees with Comey's assessment on lack of intent,
noting that "Section 793(f)(1) likely required a state of mind
that was 'so gross as to almost suggest deliberate intention,' criminally reckless,
or 'something that falls just short of being willful,' as well as evidence
that the individuals who sent emails containing classified information 'knowingly'
included or transferred such information onto unclassified systems."
I know theres a lot of details in here,
but just stick with me, this is heating up.
Remember we're digging into Comey's Testimony to establish is it: Truth or is it Lies?
Comey then discussed the potential importance of the Clinton emails contained on Weiner's laptop:
Gowdy said, Tell me how the existence of that information may have impacted the element of intent.
Comey said, "My understanding is …
the Department of Justice has always required before it will bring those
misdemeanor indications of intention or harm to the United States or obstruction of justice,
those kinds of things."
And that was the ingredient we didn't have in the Clinton case.
And so the Weiner trove held the prospect that we
because it might contain evidence of the beginning of her use of her unclassified system,
might hold that evidence.
… What made Weiner's computer a horse of a different color
was the size of the trove and the emails potentially from the first three months
as Secretary of State a very different kettle of fish.
Comey then clarified his thought process behind the potential value within those early emails:
Gowdy said What, in particular,
in the beginning stages of her tenure would have addressed an element that you thought was missing?
Comey said Oh, that's easy to answer.
If there was going to be evidence that she knew she was communicating in a way she shouldn't
explicit evidence—common sense tells you it's likely to be at the beginning,
when someone encountered her mode or means of communication and said: Hey, boss,
you know you can't do that.
You know you can't talk about this kind of thing or that kind of thing on an unclassified system.
It's much more likely to be at the beginning,
which we never found, those three months, than much later.
Based on the IG report,
it seems clear that McCabe had been briefed on—and understood
the significance of the emails on Weiner's laptop.
Less clear is when McCabe made Comey fully aware of the find on Weiner's laptop.
We know that McCabe told the Office of the Inspector General
that he recalled talking to Comey about the issue "right around the time [McCabe] found out about it."
McCabe described it as a "fly-by," where the Weiner laptop was "like one in a list of things that we discussed."
We also know that "text messages of FBI Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok indicated that he,
McCabe, and Priestap discussed the Weiner laptop on Sept. 28."
The IG report tells us: "Following the briefing from the FBI Midyear team on Oct.27, 2016,
Comey authorized the Midyear team to seek a search warrant,
telling the OIG that 'the volume of emails' and the presence of BlackBerry emails on the Weiner laptop
were 'two highly significant facts.'
McCabe joined this meeting by phone but was asked not to participate,
and subsequently recused himself from the Midyear investigation
into Clinton's use of a private email server, on Nov. 1, 2016."
Ok lets move onto the next part of this story,
Comey Didn't Know Steele Worked for Fusion GPS.
Now you all know Christopher Steele from our Spygate coverage,
that's the former M16 officer,
who co-founded Orbis and was hired by Fusion GPS to producer the Dossier on Trump.
Another important factor to consider from Comey's testimony are some answers to basic questions.
Recall that while Comey is not under oath,
recent prosecutions for lying to Congress have re-established meaningful penalties for doing so
Gowdy: Who is Christopher Steele?
Comey: My understanding is that Christopher Steele is a former intelligence officer of an allied nation,
who prepared a series of reports in the summer of 2016 that have become known as the Steele dossier.
Gowdy: How long did he have a relationship with the FBI?
Comey: I don't know.
Gowdy: Did you ever meet him?
Comey: No.
Gowdy: When did you learn he was working for Fusion GPS?
Comey: I don't know that I ever knew that—certainly while I worked at the FBI.
Comey also stated he didn't know that Steele had been terminated by the FBI as a source:
Comey: As I sit here today, since I left the FBI,
I've read stuff in the media about that.
I don't believe I had ever heard anything about that while I was still at the FBI.
Comey was equally unaware that DOJ official Bruce Ohr had an ongoing relationship with Steele,
and that Ohr was transmitting information from Steele to the FBI until May 2017.
Comey would later reiterate most of those assertions regarding Steele
and Ohr during questioning with Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio.
Next up, Comey Unaware That Perkins Coie Associate Passed Information to FBI
On Comey's knowledge of the involvement by Democratic national Committee law firm Perkins Coie,
and FBI General Counsel James Baker,
during an exchange with Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.):
Comey said: I, when I was FBI director,
don't remember ever being told anything about Perkins Coie.
I think I've since read stuff in the media,
but not when I was director.
Meadows: So are you saying that James Baker, your general counsel,
who received direct information from Perkins Coie,
did so and conveyed that to your team without your knowledge?
Comey is saying that he didn't know Steele and was unaware Steele was working for Fusion GPS.
He also says he didn't know that Steele had been terminated by the FBI
as a source for leaking to the media
which also implies he didn't know that Steele had leaked.
Comey also didn't know that Steele had a long-standing relationship with DOJ official Ohr,
let alone the fact that Ohr was transmitting information from Steele to the FBI.
Comey also didn't know about the involvement of Perkins Coie.
Finally, Comey was unaware that the FBI's top legal counsel, James Baker,
was receiving information from Perkins Coie
and transmitting that information to FBI investigators under Comey, McCabe, Strzok, etc.
So truth or lies?
These could all be lies on Comey's part.
If so, they are now part of the congressional record,
and Comey could be referred for lying to Congress.
Alternatively, Comey could be simply telling the truth
that he was unaware of these actions being carried out by the FBI team working under Deputy Director McCabe.
So what is The Timing of Brennan's Involvement here?
Finally, we have another particularly telling exchange
regarding the initiation of the FBI's counterintelligence investigation
known as "Crossfire Hurricane." Sounds very dramatic.
Specifically, we are given a distinct timeframe as to when Comey first became aware
according to him—of any information that any Americans might be working with Russia
That's right, Russia Russia Russia.
Meadows said: Prior to July 31,
2016, when you opened what is now known as,
I guess, Crossfire Hurricane, or this investigation,
was there no effort on part—on the part of the FBI or no knowledge
let me correct that—no knowledge on the part of the FBI of anybody
George Papadopoulos or any others—that potentially could have been involved in this Russian narrative?
At this juncture, Comey cuts off the objections of FBI counsel and answers Meadows's question:
Comey: The first information we had,
certainly the first information that came to my attention that Americans
might be working with the Russians as part of their efforts,
came at the end of July—I think the 31st is too late,
but the last week of July—when we received information from an allied nation
about the conversations their ambassador had in England with George Papadopoulos.
That was the beginning of it,
which is the first time we turned to trying to figure out whether any Americans were working with the Russians.
The first time Comey was made aware of any information
regarding the possible involvement of Americans with Russia was the final week of July 2016,
coming from information passed informally from Australia.
Contrast Comey's statements with previous testimony from CIA Director John Brennan:
"I made sure that anything that was involving U.S. persons,
including anything involving the individuals involved in the Trump campaign,
was shared with the bureau [FBI]."
Note that Brennan says "the bureau"–not Comey.
The BBC reported that Brennan's receipt of information may be traced back to April of 2016:
"Last April [2016], the CIA director was shown intelligence that worried him.
It was—allegedly—a tape recording of a conversation about money
from the Kremlin going into the U.S. presidential campaign."
Brennan would also state that his "intelligence" served as the basis for the FBI counterintelligence investigation:
"I was aware of intelligence and information about contacts between Russian officials
and U.S. persons … and it served as the basis for the FBI investigation."
Notably, Brennan reportedly selected FBI agent Strzok
to work on the Intelligence Community Assessment that was issued on Jan. 6, 2017.
Strzok was referred to as "the intermediary between Brennan and [former FBI Director James] Comey,
and he was one of the authors of the ICAl,"
according to an unidentified source talking to reporter Paul Sperry.
A notable question for Brennan: Whom within "the bureau" did he notify?
So Truth or Lies? What do you think? Please leave your comments in the section below.
From all of us here at Declassified,
thank you for watching and we look forward to seeing you in the next episode.
No comments:
Post a Comment