Sandbox – 9jun17

June 2017
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3
4	5	6	7	8	9	10
11	12	13	14	15	16	17
18	19	20	21	22	23	24
25	26	27	28	29	30

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

Sandbox – 9jun17

09 June 2017

[Well, there you have it. Former FBI director Comey is a politician for all seasons. Where else can you find a man who can deliver to both sides of a terminally divided Washington a smorgasbord version of events that can concurrently bring pleasure if not outright glee to both sides of the aisle? Everyone found much to like in what he said – a tour de force performance by the now ever copasetic, cautiously comportable (yet cowardly?) Comey. gjr]

Posted in Comment Sandbox

190 responses to “Sandbox – 9jun17”

fish

10 June 2017

Posted by: Gregory | 10 June 2017 at 11:32 AM
RIP Adam West, who made peace with his post-Batman typecasting
Godspeed Batman!
Probably even better than Shatner at “getting the joke”.

LikeLike
Gregory

10 June 2017

And now for something completely different
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FdVJWyoncdU
RIP Adam West, who made peace with his post-Batman typecasting

LikeLike
fish

10 June 2017

Posted by: Gregory | 10 June 2017 at 11:46 AM

…..and much like Batman it looks like you are in rerun!

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

10 June 2017

It’s past noon. Where are those darn polls?

LikeLike
Steve Frisch

10 June 2017

Paul, here is are a couple of good links to legal blogs discussing the issue, with specific citations of cases and links to the decisions:
https://www.lawfareblog.com/law-leaks
https://shugerblog.com
https://bpicampus.com/2017/06/09/the-comey-hearing-fact-and-fiction/

LikeLike
Gregory

10 June 2017

Steven Frisch, six figure CEO of the wretchedly misnamed Sierra Business Council, wrote

I am sorry there is nothing ‘privileged’ about a conversation between two government officials if no classified material is contained. Clearing a room does not make the information classified. There may be an expectation of confidentiality while someone is an employee, but if they leave the prohibition leaves. If that were not the case no one who left service in the White House would ver able to write a book 🙂
It is my understanding that the memo’s are in the possession of the Special Counsel. The memos have not been classified. Comey testimony did not include the documents as exhibits–he recalled their content from memory.
So in short–the information was not classified. As someone who held a security clearance for many years I assume you could tell the difference between a classified document and an embarrassing one.

The Hill isn’t a “right wing blog” and they’ve carried a piece from Jonathan Hurley…

In fact, there was a great deal wrong with their release, and Comey likely knew it. These were documents prepared on an FBI computer addressing a highly sensitive investigation on facts that he considered material to that investigation. Indeed, he conveyed that information confidentially to his top aides and later said that he wanted the information to be given to the special counsel because it was important to the investigation.
Many in the media have tried to spin this as not a “leak” because leaks by definition only involve classified information. That is entirely untrue as shown by history. Leaks involve the release of unauthorized information — not only classified information. Many of the most important leaks historically have involved pictures and facts not classified but embarrassing to a government. More importantly, federal regulations refer to unauthorized disclosures not just classified information.
Comey’s position would effectively gut a host of federal rules and regulations. He is suggesting that any federal employee effectively owns documents created during federal employment in relation to an ongoing investigation so long as they address the information to themselves. FBI agents routinely write such memos in investigations. They are called 302s to memorialize field interviews or fact acquisitions. They are treated as FBI information.
The Justice Department routinely claims such memos as privileged and covered by the deliberative process privilege and other privileges. Indeed, if this information were sought under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) it would likely have been denied. Among other things, the Justice Department and FBI routinely claim privilege “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency.”
Of course, Comey did not know if there was a privilege or classification claim by either the Justice Department or the White House because he never asked for review. He just woke up in the middle of night upset about Trump’s name calling and released the damaging information. In doing so, he used these memos not as a shield but a sword.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He has served as defense counsel in national security cases involving classified information and alleged leaks to the media.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/337160-opinion-the-damaging-case-against-james-comey

LikeLike
Steve Frisch

10 June 2017

Yes Greg I believe I clearly noted in a previous post that just about the only mainline legal scholar not taking the position that this was not a leak was Jonathan Hurley [SIC] (Turley).
By the way you can shove your critique of my salary right up your [expletive deleted].

LikeLike
Gregory

10 June 2017

Steven Frisch, the links you gave to Paul (I hope that wasn’t private) at 12:38 are all the opinions of progressive activists. Is that where you get all your curious ideas?
Yes, you had mentioned Turley. It was hard not to notice the elephant in the room sitting on your premise. So, Stevie, where are those 20 learned articles refuting Turley? I doubt The BPI Squirrel writing undercover at BPICampus.com meets that definition even under their own name.

LikeLike
George Rebane

10 June 2017

PaulE 1124am – I am not a legal scholar but just a student of law, so I don’t have at my fingertips a bunch of case law to cite in support of my interpretations. These have been formed over years of security lectures/instructions and (admittedly incomplete) readings of the relevant statutes. I had to go through these first on active duty as a battalion S-2 (Intelligence Officer) holding a TOP SECRET-NO FORN clearance in a Strac combat unit on the Fulda Gap; then twenty some years more as a DoD contractor doing highly classified work. In the latter period I was also often the ‘security officer’ of the company and had to brief new staff about to get their first security clearance on how to classify the new stuff we invented (yes, I was empowered to classify newly generated documents), the handling of classified materials, and the disposition of their own notes that involved work. The bottom line was (and still is) that your notes regarding your work are NOT your own, and you have no right to dispose of them as you will even after leaving your employment during which the notes were generated.
In the interval I’ll have to leave you with the findings cited by SteveF 1238pm and Gregory 1248pm.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

10 June 2017

Mainline legal scholar- a euphemism for correct thought party line stalwart. 😉

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

10 June 2017

Turley is a nationally respected legal mind. Frisch, not so much. But hey he thinks he knows something about everything and you know what that means.

LikeLike
Gregory

10 June 2017

“Indeed, he conveyed that information confidentially to his top aides and later said that he wanted the information to be given to the special counsel because it was important to the investigation.” -Hurley
So, it was important information mentioned in confidence to Comey’s top aides, important to the sc’s investigation, but valueless to the government as a whole so Comey was free to chat about it to the press laundered through a 3rd party. Does that sum up the progressive view of the matter, Steve?

LikeLike
Gregory

10 June 2017

Did it again… Turley. Turley. Turley. Misspellings, begone!

LikeLike
Paul Emery

10 June 2017

Either way I find it not plausible that Comey would make up such an elaborate lie and for what purpose, The fact that he created a running commentary of his meetings with Trump and shared his personal recollections to his associates means if he was lying it would have been an elaborate process from the start. Trump should keep his mouth shut and let this pass. Instead he’s threatening legal action which will keep it in the News. Bad move. Again, he’s messing with the big boys and he’s quite an amatuer i this business as Speaker Ryan has so accurately noted.
“The President’s new at this. He’s new to government. So, he probably wasn’t steeped in the long-running protocols that establish the relationships between DOJ, FBI and White Houses. He’s just new to this.”
Pushed further by CNN, Ryan said, “I’m not saying it’s an acceptable excuse. It’s just my observation.”
“He’s new at government, and so therefore I think that he — he is learning as he goes,” Ryan said.

LikeLike
Gregory

10 June 2017

Paul, Comey was/is a skilled D.C. Beltway operator who knows how to cover his own ass. Elaborate lie? Not at all. Shadings of the truth and selective “memorializing” is more like it.
He was playing to an audience, pure and simple, wishing everyone to make a binary call… is he lying, or is Trump? Before the latest spectacle, I was more inclined to say Trump than I am now.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

10 June 2017

Legal opinions are flying, which makes it interesting. All in all, I don’t think Comey will get more than wrist slap and maybe some nice words by somebody as he enters the next chapter in his life….or maybe the ole Kick Me sign taped to the back of his tall frame.
I can’t trash the man anymore than Hillary did. Afterall, Comey was the reason she lost the election so he can’t be all that bad. Boy, they sure were screaming for his head after than announcement he made 11 days before the election, just as the new Obamacare insurance premiums were being mailed out. The legal scholars were really citing DoJ protocol and rules and whether he broke them all by dropping that October Surprise. There were investigations called for, talking heads jabbering and flinging spittle, some Congressional Committes leaped into action and….whatever happened to all those investigations about Comey influencing the election.p?? A field day for legal opinions, I recal.
Now the shoe is on the other foot. If the talking heads are going at it again after the Dems called for his ouster, and Trump committed treason or obstruction for obliging their calls as well as proven correct for firing the Leaket-in-Cheif….and now he can’t be fired cause he is already fired and the R’s are calling for his head…….well, it seems to me that Comey was put into the unenviable position of being way over his head. Think about it. A lawyer made FBI head that never investigated a case in his life. Sorta like that gal Obama put in to run the Air Force and come to find out she couldn’t even fly a Piper Cub.
Comey tried, but you can’t please everyone. Or anyone. Poor guy. He should have stayed in law prosecuting folks or defending folks like the Clintons’ Whitewater case. Hmmm, both Comey and Lynch were on that legal team. Together again after all these years, but I digress.
One thing I did find puzzling about the former FBI Director. He could not find any intent for Hillary violating numerous Federal statues, yet can dicipher Trump’s intent like an open book. That is plumb amazing.
https://www.facebook.com/lastamericapatriots/photos/a.235087906641439.1073741826.235086849974878/865092400307650/?type=3&theater
Darn it. Did it again. Comey AND the Russians stole the election from Hillary. It was not just Comey. But the Russians could not do it without an American’s help. You don’t think that American was McCain do you? Or was it Trump? Or was it James Comey? Stay tuned. More will be revealed in the fullness of time.

LikeLike
Steve Frisch

10 June 2017

Just to be clear I was the first one here to note the Turley dissent. I could do the list of noted scholars and legal professionals but I would just suggest you all go read the damn articles….it is so like you to use one noted dissent as proof of concept.
Paul nailed the real problem here….Comey’s recollection of the meeting was noted and shared with colleagues contemporaneously and the Presidents recollection was shared with no one at the time (he went out of his way to keep it secret) and is a moving target of raving sleep deprived blubber.
Comey is believable and Trump is a lying sack…Comey and Mueller will destroy this MOFO…

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

10 June 2017

No Stevie, Trump will be the only one left standing. Comey made it up and is a liar. That will be proven. You and your ilk are just mad the smartest guy in the room whipped your guy Bernie and gal Hillary. Easy to beat you all said. Well guess who is crying crocodile tears. Not me or my winning an Trump. So get use to eight full years. Americans are already tiring of your games and will punish your team in 2018.

LikeLike
Walt

10 June 2017

For our LIBS. CNN busted for manufacturing fake news.
http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/10/more-footage-leaks-of-cnns-staged-muslim-anti-terror-protest-video/

LikeLike
Paul Emery

10 June 2017

How will Trump “prove Comey was a liar Todd? Tapes, sure That was just another Trump lie, even suggesting that there might be.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

10 June 2017

Keep on saying it all you want, that does not make it so @ 242 That does not change the fact that all employees of the FBI sign forms that tell them generated documents are FBI property and they may not disseminate them outside the government. Saying under sworn testimony that you gave it to a 3rd party with the intent to disclose to the press is saying you committed a violation. 😉

LikeLike
Walt

10 June 2017

Gotta love “might”. Paul and friends still hang their hat on AGW “might” be real too.
But get ready for SNOW in June.

LikeLike
Walt

10 June 2017

Oh.. Yaa.. Then their is this “might”… Ever hear of Bigfoot? He “might” really exist too.
Got one chained up in your back yard Paul or Steve?

LikeLike
Paul Emery

10 June 2017

We have one in the White House Walt.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

10 June 2017

Yes we have a really good leader and President in the White House. He defeats the libnuts at every tuen. Golly, why is that?

LikeLike
Walt

10 June 2017

No Paul, she left with the last President.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

10 June 2017

Well po’ ol’ PE and the eco warrior will get to hear the only opinion that matters; the AG. Sessions announced he will visit the intel. committee Tuesday to respond to Comey. 😉

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

10 June 2017

I am sure the good man, Jeff Sessions, will be very correct. But the democrats will try to make him into a villian. Hell, I listened to Chuk U Schumer on infrastructure and he made that sound like a conspiracy. The democrats are unhinged just like PaulE and SteveF.

LikeLike
Walt

10 June 2017

Notice our LIBS still live by double standards. It was no big deal with “O” and Co.’s cover ups and obstruction of justice. It’s fine when their own does it.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

10 June 2017

Didn’t vote for O or Hillary Walt. Why weren’t the busted Walt? The pubbers controll everything. Go get em Trump. You’re being a wimp.

LikeLike
Walt

10 June 2017

You still shine his shoes. You own it. Remember Fast and furious? “O” covered Holder’s ass.
“O” stopped that investigation. ( that’s clear obstruction.)
That’s fact Paul, not “might”.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

10 June 2017

Holder and Lynch are why po’ ol’ PE. The new AG can absolutely revisit the decision made last Oct., it wasn’t that long ago. Perhaps this time they will actually empanel a grand jury. 😉

LikeLike
Walt

10 June 2017

BTW. You just LIED again Paul. Yes you DID vote for “O”. Just because you claim to not voted for him the second time, in no way absolves you of voting for him the fist time.(nice try.) More of your credibility down the crapper.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

10 June 2017

Most Walt? 😉

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

10 June 2017

Paul, if I may, didn’t you mean to say you vote for Obama in 2012? Hate to have people say you lied or mischaracterize your intent. Perhaps you could bolster your credibility by saving “I did not vote for O the second time or Hillary, Walt” instead of your “Didn’t vote for O or Hillary, Walt” as per your 4:58 pm. Hope that was helpful, waterboy.

Walt, he did not vote for O the 2nd time. In fact, he has vowed to never ever vote for a major party candidate again. Paul has been quite clear and adamant about that. And he did not vote for Jill Stein like that Portland wack job did who stabbed 3 innocent people, two to death. Walt, Paul did not vote for them, he just carries the water for their causes.
Walt, cut Paul some slack. Remember, he had TDS and his mind ain’t right since the WMDs days. I must repeat myself and remind all that it is a federal hate crime to be mean to the mentally disabled. TDS is real and a very present danger to the inflicted and afflicted. Try to bear than in mind when dealing with those poor souls who have lost their ever loving minds. Perhaps Laura’s Law can be invoked if the our waterboy becomes a threat to himself or others, but for now just pretend he is Crazy Uncle Parker invited over to share the Thanksgiving feast.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

10 June 2017

Don I think you missed the point of my 2:42. Comey is believable because he provided his recollection contemporaneously. Trump just has a history of lying. Juries are not voters. Eventually as the dirt keeps coming out Republicans will realize that the man is less important to them than the party.

LikeLike
Russ

10 June 2017

French President Offers US Climate Scientists €1.5 Million Each to Move to France
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
French President Emmanuel Macron has launched a new website which offers senior US climate researchers up to €1.5 Million (almost USD $1.7 million) each to move to France. My question to US climate scientists – what are you waiting for?
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/10/french-president-offers-us-climate-scientists-e1-5-million-each-to-move-to-france/
If Trump cuts off their grant funds this may be the only way they can feed their families, move to France. As good socialist they will love adopting the EU regulations on when they can use the toaster and microwave.

LikeLike
Walt

10 June 2017

Well,, if Paul can’t even hold his own against a broken down ditch digger (still one foot in the grave and another on a banana peel) he should stay out of the fight, and stay in his safe space. His own words are his enemy. I think he’s working on redefining “might” as to insinuate fact.(good luck with that)

LikeLike
Walt

10 June 2017

No Steve, Comey has yet to even produce those documents. Do they even exist?
He got canned and is buttsore. That’s what disgruntled people do. Try and get some payback.
He cleared Trump, but cut his own throat.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

10 June 2017

Walt all good points. Trump is the President and Comey is now an unemployed lawyer. I too have not seen those memos typed on a government comuter in Comey’s car afer the meeting. So until they are produced and verified no go. I recall the birth certs of O were photo shopped and were not available to his dem pal the gov of Hawaii. Yep, you can’t trust a dem or a fired employee. But Frisch does.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

10 June 2017

OMG @ 549 REALLY? So the guy who was ok with the cover ups and didn’t resign when told to lie about the status of the Clinton investigation is trustworthy? Didn’t resign when he was denied a grand jury for the investigation? The guy who knew the fix was in on the investigation when slick willy’s jet just happened to end up parked next to Lynch during the investigation/campaign? The guy who had the delusion he was a prosecutor and had an unprecedented news conference? That grand standing pile of play dough?
The guy who gave the organized crime Clinton machine lackys immunity and let them destroy evidence? The same guy who incredibly didn’t get a subpoena for the DNC servers like a good lap dog? THAT guy is credible? Go tell it to CNN

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

10 June 2017

The bigger picture is that Paul and Mr. Frish believe this might be the smoking gun that takes Trump down. To be fair, Steve’s advice (challenge) to Don was to give it 30 days and get back to me. Not a bad challenge. I might take that one up. Gentlemen’s bet of course. No money or things of value exchange hands, creating a taxable event. They are watching us. :).
So, this might be the end of Trump as President of these United States, eh? Well, some were quite certain that Trump would be out of office by the end of the month…..forget which month that was when those hot flashes were being thrown our way. February? March? Hard to keep up with all the sure bets.
I know, I know, we have heard it all before. “But, but, but this time it is different” This is The One, I really mean it this time. Forget collusion, forget Russia, we got Trump by the short curlys now! This time is different. This is It, the MOAB of the Century. if not, no harm, no foul. Only thing injured is an already sullied reputation.
If this ain’t the one to end Trump, then keeping digging boys. There is gold in them thar hills. Dig, dig, dig until you find The Glory Hole and grab that treasure.

LikeLike
Steve Frisch

11 June 2017

I find this whole exchange very funny. The most important question out there is what contact did Trump campaign and administration officials have with agents of Russia; what contact did the President or candidate have; if there was contact what was the content of those meetings?
The Comey memo is merely a sideshow in the larger investigation of contact and its content.
We know that at least 4 Trump administration or campaign officials lied about contact with Russia; Flynn, Manafort, Kushner and Sessions. No one involved in any of those meeting should be in any position power entailing a security clearance until these questions are answered.
Sessions lied to Congress about at least two and probably three contacts with the Russians. He has had to recuse himself from the investigation of contacts with the Russians and events connected to that issue. Flynn is likely facing charges under the Corrupt Foreign Practices act (and not the Logan Act) and for lying to the FBI.
I am actually glad you are standing with Trump. Trump will destroy the Republican Party–he will leave the party so covered in his slime that it is severely weakened for the mid-term elections–he will leave a stain on the Party that only grows larger and sets harder the longer you stand with him.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

11 June 2017

Not funny except fr you input Stevie. We are of course correct and you are a partisan socialist. So there you go. Not a “shred” of corruption your boy said to O’Reilly. Same here with Trump.

LikeLike
Steve Frisch

11 June 2017

Besides the fact that I have no idea what, “Not a shred of corruption your boy said to O’Reilly,” means since I have no “boy” and I don’t watch O’Reilly (and probably couldn’t now unless I watched some third rate web site where former anchors who sexually harass women hang out, I think its pretty clear that your identity is so wrapped up in the grievance politics of our new populist Führer that you have ceased to be an actual American.
Embracing the values of this President is tantamount to a rejection of so many bedrock American values ensconced in our constitution and founding principles that I wonder if you guys really know how alien you have become.

LikeLike
George Rebane

11 June 2017

An observation: This comment stream contains comments that are trying to make two distinct threads – one debating the propriety of debating whether Comey’s leak was legal or not, and the other the nature of the content/impact of the leak. Leftwing readers launched the claim that only we foothills “yahoos” were so ignorant as to debate the legality question, and then without a blink switched to arguing that their experts outnumbered our experts in the now admitted national debate (e.g. SteveF 1036am). Perhaps our progressive readers can finally accept that the debate in these pages was proper and not isolated, and focus on whether the leak was legal and why or why not. I don’t think we can resolve it by some ‘consensus of experts’ argument since neither side fully accepts the other’s cadre of experts. So on what basis do we reasonably proceed, or do we give a crap and just continue as above?

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

11 June 2017

Fifty percent plus one. Victory!

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

11 June 2017

Since this i the sandbox how about those temperatures? 15-20 lower than normal. Snow in the Sierra Nevada. I bet those AGW fanatics will call it “weather”. What a hoot!

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

11 June 2017

Steve, I agree this whole Comey thing is a side show. The whole collusion thing is ridiculous. There is no there there….in bottomline terms to affect the election or sway one voter. You know it, I know it, wish more people know it.
Todd, I believe, was referring to President Obama stating publicly that there is “not one smidgen of evidence of corruption at the IRS” concerning the delay, denial, and turning IRS agents on citizens and groups who applied for 401c status, as well as their donors members, and all associated. When Obama stated “no smidgen” unequivocally, the first thing Lois Lerner told Congress was ” On the advice of my lawyers, I take the 5th.” Not a smidgen of corruption?
Two points:
1) It’s just a game of “your side did it too!” It is a sideshow and distraction. It’s a fun game to play, yet goes nowhere. Hard to sidestep that one. Even you were slack jawed that we would focus on the legality of Comey leaking memos he wrote on a gov’t computer while sitting his SUV outside instead of the content of the memo. Conversely, Punchy refused to acknowledge the contents of Wikileaks (which no one has proven doctored or altered) and focused solely on Trump “used stolen e-mails to help his campaign!” Masterfully sidestepped any discussion or comment on the content of Wikileaks. That knife cuts both ways, depending on who is holding the knife.
I maintain to this hour that Wikileaks did not lay a hand on Hillary since the leaks were mostly about the DNC’s cozy relationship with MSM, what Clinton campaign staffers and surrogates at Lefty PACs were saying, etc. They were not about Hillary herself, nor did she write them. Wikileaks were another sideshow and it was fun when folks called us racists, we countered that Podesta’s boys called them Taco Bowls or were anti-Semitic. But, nothing to do with why Hillary lost or why the Democrat Party continued its shellacking in lower seats across the fruited plain. It was all a sideshow and “your side did it too!” Did not change one voter’s mind about Hillary or Tump..
2) Now it is just a game of gotcha. There was no Russian collusion with Trump or Trump’s campaign. So, all you got is Sessions is a big fat liar? Trump is a big fat liar? Oh, I am certain there will be some Scotter Libbies to be nailed, but not for outing a CIA agent who had a clerical desk job. Bob Novak did that, not Scotter or Bush. But, we won’t mention that. Scotter lied! Flynn lied on his job application!
Kushner tried to collude with a forgein power! Treason! Secret backdoor channel for nefarious dastardly deeds! Hmm, I would say Obama had a backdoor channel to Iran since his 2008 campaign. Gotcha! No, gotcha back! And on and on it goes. My hands play the game and are dirty, you hands play the same game and are dirty.
So, lay it out there. The Russian-American collusion story fell apart. So, what do you have besides Trump is a big fat liar? All Punchy has is popularity contests (polls) and TDS. What cards are you holding? Gotcha cards are like throwing deuces on the table. Got any Ace in the hole? Holding back any one-eyed jacks?

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

11 June 2017

What are the bedrock principles of our nation? This writer spares neither Trump, Comey, or that Reality chick. Far enough.
https://patriotpost.us/opinion/49542

LikeLike