Report of Investigation of Former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey’s Disclosure of Sensitive Investigative Information and Handling of Certain Memoranda

https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2019/o1902.pdf

Link posted for convenience. This is one of several DOJ reports many have been waiting for.

33 thoughts on “Report of Investigation of Former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey’s Disclosure of Sensitive Investigative Information and Handling of Certain Memoranda

  1. From what I could discern by reading the conclusions, Comey violated policy, but not law. He was a man who wanted to protect himself against a president he considered possibly dangerous. Particularly after Trump tweeted the veiled threat about corroborating tapes of the Memo 4 meeting.

    We are still waiting for the report regarding the dossier and whether it was misused for FISA warrants. I thought that was due out months ago.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. So, you think it is OK for Intelligence Agency bureaucrats to attempt to select the outcome of the Presidential election, or to try to entrap the President Elect? Well, then, why waste all that money on an election anyway? Just let the bureaucrats make law and enforce it and forget this silly idea of self government.

      Like

      1. Keeping detailed notes on meetings with a president is hardly entrapment. It just makes common sense with any level of governance.

        And Trump’s tangential relationship with truth was well known long before his election. So CYA was a prudent move by anyone.

        How you arrived at my supposed position on selecting Presidents is a mystery.

        Liked by 4 people

    2. RE: “Comey violated policy, but not law.”

      It would be more accurate to say that DOJ chose not to prosecute Comey over matters of law for which the OIG referred findings in the current inquiry.

      That would make this just-released report comparable in many ways to the Mueller report. Perhaps, though, the predictable left/right roles are reversed, with Comey himself, and his supporters claiming exoneration.

      All of us are going to have to think very clearly as we navigate the revelations to come.

      Like

      1. No.

        Even assuming the report HAD found violations of law versus policy, these reports differ wildly in one respect — the Director of the FBI can be be indicted and prosecuted by the DoJ without an act of Congress whereas the target of the Mueller Report could not.

        Liked by 3 people

      2. RE: “What law did Comey break. Memo 4 was not classified.”

        There were multiple memos. Some contained classified material (SECRET and CONFIDENTIAL). All, however, were government property. Comey’s actions thus violated various national security and records laws, which the report details.

        The report also states that OIG refered these findings to the DOJ for prosecution, which DOJ declined to do. I don’t know why.

        Like

      3. RE: “these reports differ wildly in one respect”

        Perhaps, but I’d say that’s a distinction without a difference, since in both cases the DOJ makes a prosecutorial decision. It chose not to say the president should be prosecuted and it chose not to prosecute Comey. As a result, both remain innocent until proven guilty.

        Like

        1. “the DOJ makes a prosecutorial decision.” WRT a sitting POTUS, the DOJ policy was in place prior to any investigations into Mr. Trump. There is no standing policy in place to protect Comey from prosecution. The Mueller Report, while badly written, as we all seem to agree, referred his information to Congress for them to decide on prosecution. Specifically because of the standing DOJ rule.

          Like

  2. Comey’s response today pretty much said it all, and makes clear why no charges were (or should have been) brought.

    Erratic and unstable are NOT what we want or need in a President.

    Liked by 3 people

      1. @Tabor
        Why should he have been fired? For documenting the criminal behavior of his boss? Leave it to a Trumpkin to find this policy violation to be serious while the criminal behavior he documented is no big deal.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Cute little names for opponents are childish.

          For very good reasons, internal FBI documents are not made public unless there is an indictment, or a decision not to indict that requires justification. Comey violated that policy.

          He used his position as FBI director to feed information to the press to influence public policy. He is not an elected official and has no business using his office for that purpose. We don’t need a KGB pulling the strings from behind the curtain.

          Like

          1. “Trumpkins” is about as polite as I can muster in the face of the total bull you are regurgitating. Comey committed no crimes. Contrary to the claims by the Great Trumpkin there were no classified materials compromised. Comey was put in a no-win situation by the criminality of his boss. He was not trying to “influence public policy.” He was trying to make sure that the criminal behavior of the President was not successfully covered up.

            Liked by 1 person

  3. Thanks for the link. We all know how disappointed you are. Prepare yourself for more such disappointments as the other IG reports begin to drop.

    So, in this case, the finding is that Comey’s response to a lawless President busy obstructing justice involved violations of policy. Okay. What was that violation? Making it known publicly that he had been asked to back off the Flynn investigation. Oh, the humanity!

    But, a FAR more serious violation of policy was Comey’s taking HRC publicly to the woodshed and thus throwing the election to Trump. Why was THAT behavior not criticized by the IG?

    Liked by 2 people

    1. RE: “What was that violation?”

      Per the report, “Comey improperly disclosed FBI documents and information.” These actions “violated FBI policies and the requirements of his FBI Employment Agreement” (page 56).

      This has been the speculation concerning his memos all along. Now that it is offical, spinning and rationalizing his offense is no longer a sustainable passtime.

      Like

      1. Aye, like most of us, he just couldn’t control his thoughts and observations, and to be sure, they were his thoughts and observations of the criminal behavior of his boss.
        No wonder his boss wanted a loyalty oath.

        Liked by 3 people

      2. @Roberts

        I have already acknowledged the finding of a policy violation. The “FBI document” he improperly disclosed was his own memo for the file on the lawlessness of the President. Leave it to a Trumpkin to find this policy violation to be serious while the behavior he documented is no big deal.

        Liked by 3 people

      3. RE: “I have already acknowledged the finding of a policy violation.”

        Yes, you both acknowledged and characterized it, wrongly.

        Even now, your characterization that the memos were Comey’s property to do with as he pleased is refuted by the OIG.

        Like

        1. Categorized it wrongly how? Comey was moved to start writing these memos based on what was in his highly informed opinion “a lawless President busy obstructing justice.”

          In effect, the IG has concluded that “the inspector general of the Justice Department has determined that it is misconduct for a law enforcement officer to publicly disclose an effort to shut down his investigation.”

          https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-comey-email-report-really-says

          Liked by 3 people

          1. Excellent link, and again, spot on as to what was hidden from no one. The cultists are clinging to the sinking ship with admirable tenacity.

            Liked by 2 people

        2. RE: “Categorized it wrongly how?”

          Per your own source: “The foundation of much of his distress is that the inspector general disagrees with Comey about whether these documents were personal notes or agency records.”

          Your false characterization lies in your assertion, as if it were factually true, that the documents were indeed, personal notes.

          But per your own source, again: The OIG “thinks they are FBI documents, not Comey’s personal memory aids. Fair enough. He may well even be right about that.”

          This is on a par with assuming, again COUNTERFACTUALLY, that Trump is “a lawless President busy obstructing justice.”

          Like

          1. Typical. You have gone off on a tangent and rebutted nothing that I said. I made no claim that Comey’s memo was his own property. I have accepted twice now that what he did was a violation of policy. My only point was that Trumpkins like yourself want to exaggerate this MINOR technical violation while pretending that the gross criminality of the President is no big deal.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. RE: “I made no claim that Comey’s memo was his own property.”

            On the contrary, you wrote that it was “his own memo.” That it wasn’t is precisely the issue the IG investigated and the reason for the report.

            You describe Comey’s violations as “MINOR,” which demonstrably they are not.

            As for your name-calling, please take it with you when you leave.

            Like

          3. His “own memo” means he wrote it. Not that he owned it. Duh.

            Minor – Thanks for confirming my original point. The policy violation was minor and the IG had to really stretch to even make it that, much less a criminal offense. Meanwhile the behavior of the President is demonstrably MAJOR.

            Sorry, but people who call themselves “conservatives” or “Christians” or “patriots” but who continue to support Donald Trump are a new thing that do not merit the use of any of those words. And I do not wish to offend the honorable traditions of the Grand Old Party by referring to such people as “Republicans.” So, “Trumpkins” it is unless you have a better idea.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. None of these Trump instigated “criminal investigations” will result in a DoJ prosecution.
    They will all show policy violations.
    They will all paint the employee/target as personally motivated, or incompetent in some way.
    BUT, they will ALL stop short of criminality.

    For example, prosecute Comey, and guess who gets called as a witness UNDER OATH?

    Liked by 4 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s