Random Politics & Religion #24

An Augusta woman charged with leaking classified information was indicted by a federal grand jury on one count, but prosecutors said they are likely to add more.

A federal magistrate judge held a detention hearing for Reality Winner Thursday afternoon.

The 25-year-old worked as a contractor for the government and is accused of giving classified information from the National Security Agency to an online news outlet.

She entered a not-guilty plea. The judge denied bond.

Prosecutors argued that the only thing Winner could do if she were released on bail is be recruited by the nation’s enemies.

Based on evidence seized from her home, federal prosecutors detailed Winner's alleged plans to burn down the White House and travel to Afghanistan, pledging her allegiance to the Taliban.

They said in recorded jailhouse calls, she told her mother how to play her side of the story in the media— as someone who was scared she’d disappear from an interrogation room in her Augusta home after Saturday’s raid.

Channel 2’s Nicole Carr was invited into Winner’s home by her parents to see the interrogation room.

“This is where they held her when they did the search of the house and this is where they interrogated her,” said Winner’s mother, Billie-Winner Davis.

Winner opted to stay in her house for questioning and confessed her intent to release damaging classified material to an online media outlet she “admired,” directing agents to find a screenshot of the mailing drop box for The Intercept on her cellphone. The material is described as top secret, detailing a Russian military intelligence attack on a U.S. voting supplier.

“She has no history of being a threat to this nation. Only an asset,” said Gary Davis, Winner’s stepfather.

Prosecutors said a phone call to her sister expressed Winner’s confidence in how to play the court during her bond hearing.

“I’m pretty, white and cute,” she allegedly told her sister. Prosecutors said Winner told her sister she would braid her hair and cry in court.

Prosecutors said she also instructed family members to transfer $30,000 into her mother’s account so she’d appear poor enough for a court-appointed attorney.

The government believes those who knew Winner best did not know an alternate side of her, who confessed to wanting to do harm to the nation through the release of classified documents.

“She offered up her life for this nation and to see her treated so vilely is an insult to every person who’s ever worn a uniform,” Davis said.

Prosecutors also said while Winner was serving in the Air Force she put a removable thumb drive into a top-secret computer. The government testified that it has no idea where that drive is now.

The day ... Comey will be in jail!

During his testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday, former FBI director James Comey revealed that he was the source of leaked memos about his conversations with Donald Trump surrounding the Russia investigation. Comey explained that he shared the memos with his friend, a professor at Columbia University, who then shared them with the New York Times, actions that may violate the FBI’s own employee agreement.

“My judgment was I needed to get [the memos] out into the public square,” Comey said. “So I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. I didn’t do it myself for a variety of reasons, but I asked him to because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.”

By his own account, it seems that Comey may not have followed the agency’s employee agreement, which places numerous restrictions on the use of information or documents acquired during an individual’s employment by the FBI. Paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of the FBI employment agreement appear to cover Comey’s distribution of content he says he created on government property in his capacity as a government official:



Paragraph 2 states that all materials acquired in connection with an employee’s official duties are property of the U.S. government and that such materials must be surrendered to the FBI upon an employee’s separation from the agency. Paragraph 3 states that employees are prohibited from releasing “any information acquired by virtue of my official employment” to “unauthorized individual[s] without prior official written authorization by the FBI.” Paragraph 4 of the agreement requires FBI employees, prior to disclosing or publishing information acquired during their employment, to submit the information to FBI authorities for review to determine whether it is authorized for public release.

So if Comey followed protocol and surrendered all government property, including the memos he produced in his capacity as an FBI employee, it would have been impossible for him to provide the memos to his friend. The fact that he was able to provide hard copies of the memos to both his friend and special counsel Robert Mueller suggests that Comey did not surrender them to authorities as required by the FBI employment agreement.

Page two of the agreement lists the types of information disclosures which are strictly prohibited. Included in the list of information that may not be released without prior written approval by the FBI is “information that relates to any sensitive operational details or the substantive merits of any ongoing or open investigation or case.” While the agreement states that unauthorized disclosure of classified information is a violation of the contract, information does not have to be classified in order to be prohibited from unauthorized disclosure. Comey claims that his memos were unclassified.

Comey’s claim that it would not have been proper to publicly disclose that Trump was not a target of any FBI investigation because the investigation was ongoing and facts could change flies in the face of his decision to provide to his friends records of his meetings about the investigation with the president. If he could not publicly note that Trump was not a target of an ongoing investigation, then why was he able to release FBI records related to that investigation to his friends for the purpose of having those details leaked to the public via the news media? In light of the FBI’s prohibition on publicly sharing documents or information related to ongoing investigations absent prior written authorization, Comey’s dual explanations make little sense.

The FBI employment agreement states that violating any of the included terms may result in termination, civil liability, revocation of security clearances, or even criminal sanctions.

“The government is not in any way suggesting the defendant has become a jihadist or that she is a Taliban sympathizer,” Solari told the judge, according to the AP.

deposing

100% chance of Mueller deposing Trump now?

Only a Sith deals in absolutes !

Trump is under investigation by Mueller. Trump's "vindication" is ultimately meaningless since it wasn't really disputed that he wasn't under personal investigation by the FBI. It's also quite paradoxical to claim vindication from someone you claim is a liar.

Trump never ordered but did ask/suggest he drop the investigation. If not criminal, it's highly unethical for Trump to say what he said especially after clearing the room the way he did. There's also the fact Comey was fired after not going along with Trump's shitty multiple requests. Overall, nothing overtly illegal but *** this isn't how things are supposed to work at all.

"I don't think it's for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct. I took it as a very disturbing thing, very concerning," Comey testified.

Um no.

BURR: Director Comey, did the president at any time ask you to stop the FBI investigation into Russian involvement in the 2016 U.S. elections?

COMEY: Not to my understanding, no.

BURR: Did any individual working for this administration, including the Justice Department, ask you to stop the Russian investigation?
COMEY: No.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes !

Quote:
BURR: Director Comey, did the president at any time ask you to stop the FBI investigation into Russian involvement in the 2016 U.S. elections?

COMEY: Not to my understanding, no.

BURR: Did any individual working for this administration, including the Justice Department, ask you to stop the Russian investigation?
COMEY: No.

But for Pleebo, "No" means "Yes"

Might happen actually.

The FBI employment agreement states that violating any of the included terms may result in termination, civil liability, revocation of security clearances, or even criminal sanctions.

Yeah, there was an exchange with about hoping also.

No one has ever been arrested for hoping either.