Federal Judge Completely Rejects DOJ Argument – Orders ‘Archey Declarations’ (Descriptions of Comey Memos) Released…

A U.S. District Judge has rejected the DOJ and FBI motion to block the release of the Archey Declarations (descriptions of Comey memos). [Background Here]

In a strongly worded ruling (full pdf below) released moments ago, Federal Judge James Boasberg blasted the DOJ and FBI for attempting to change their filings, claim national security “sources and methods”, and block his prior court ruling – which instructed the DOJ to release the “Archey Declarations”.  The judge is obviously angry:

It must strike readers as erroneous “with the force of a five-week-old, unrefrigerated dead fish.”…

[Backstory for those unfamilar] In the background of what was The Mueller Investigation, there was a FOIA case where the FBI was fighting to stop the release of the Comey memos.  Within that courtroom fight Mueller’s lead FBI agent David Archey wrote a series of declarations to the court describing the content of the memos and arguing why they should be kept classified.

The FOIA fight shifted; and the plaintiff, CNN, argued for public release of the content of the FBI agent’s descriptions, now known as the “Archey Declarations”.

After a lengthy back-and-forth legal contest, on June 7th Judge James E Boasberg agreed to allow the FBI to keep the Comey memo content hidden, but instructed the DOJ/FBI to release the content of the Archey Declarations.  On August 2nd the DOJ/FBI changed their position and claimed national security, “sources and methods” would be compromised by the release of the Archey Declarations.

Today Judge Boasberg completely rejected their argument:

Here’s the ruling: 

Must read, it’s a thing of beauty.

.

OK, so what does this mean?  Well, assuming the DOJ and FBI don’t try to appeal to a higher court…. it means we will get to see the Archey Declarations unredacted.  It also means pressure on the inspector general to release the IG report on James Comey.

The issue at hand is tangentially related to the current Inspector General carve-out report, through the aspect of the Comey Memos.  We are currently anticipating a report from the OIG related to former FBI Director James Comey, his writing of the memos, and the leaking of some of those memos to the media via his friend Daniel Richman.  {LINK}

No-one knows the number of memos that James Comey has written.  [We may get that answer in the IG report.]  There are nine memos written by James Comey surrounding contact and conversations with President-elect and then President Trump (2016/2017).

However, based on the court declarations by Mueller’s former lead FBI investigator David Archey, it sounds like there are many more memos than anyone currently understands; including memos about the investigation of candidate Trump, that were written during the “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation 2016 and 2017, that describe investigative details, sources, operations and code-names of intelligence assets used in the investigation.

The Comey memos are not just about his contact with Donald Trump as a candidate, president-elect or president.   The media keeps downplaying the memos as a few notes taken by the former FBI director, but all of the background information suggest the assembled writing is something more akin to a personal diary.

My strongly researched suspicion is that James Comey kept detailed private notes of what was happening during the operation(s) against Donald Trump and his campaign team, both during the campaign and after the election when President Trump took office.  Just take a look at how David Archey described the content and you can see those notes, now called memos, were in addition to FD 302 reports being filed by FBI officials.

Why James Comey would keep detailed notes beyond what was being officially recorded in the FBI 302 reports is likely a question to be answered within the pending inspector general report.   There’s a lot of sketchy non-transparent stuff going on amid all of this….

This is an example of redacted information in the Archey Declarations that Judge Boasberg had ruled must be released with the redactions removed.  This is what the DOJ and FBI are working to stop from being released to the public:

(Source Link)

You can read the Archey Declarations, as they are included as exhibits in prior rulings, below:

.

The United States Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch, is fighting this court ordered release.  The DOJ Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division is Jody Hunt. That name might be familiar to you because Jody Hunt was Jeff Sessions former chief-of-staff.

We previously anticipated Jody Hunt being involved with this current case; the DOJ and FBI attempt to block release of the memos and declarations.   However, we have recently been informed that Jody Hunt was recused from the case by DOJ lawyers during the time when the Mueller investigation was ongoing.

According to the latest information we can gather, DOJ Asst. Attorney James Burnham  replaced Jody Hunt for all oversight issues in this court battle.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, AG Bill Barr, AG Jeff Sessions, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, FBI, IG Report Comey, IG Report FISA Abuse, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

313 Responses to Federal Judge Completely Rejects DOJ Argument – Orders ‘Archey Declarations’ (Descriptions of Comey Memos) Released…

  1. Donzo says:

    I don’t think Jimmy the Weasel consulted Rice the Resistor when they wrote their respective CYA memos because he can only be saying, in effect, orders came from higher up and she can only be saying they came from down below. Now that’s problematic as it leaves a dead space in the middle. Oh, that’s right, the Deep State. Only it really just a circular firing squad. They’re all guilty.

    Liked by 14 people

  2. Bill says:

    Maybe this was asked up thread, but why is Barr letting the DOJ stonewall this type of thing when he said he was concerned about the spying on Trump?

    1. He needs this to stay secret so it doesn’t taint any on going cases. If that’s the case why not make that argument in court?

    2. He’s letting these agents bury themselves by showing their colors in this effort to stonewall.

    3. He’s deep state, knew it would reach this point and it will taint the case while looking like he tried to keep it secret (even though he didn’t argue that point… raised eyebrow)

    4. The DOJ is more like the movie The departed then we want to acknowledge, and nobody has a clue wtf is going on or who’s in charge.

    Any way you slice it, I hate it all… minus number 2.

    Liked by 8 people

    • Donzo says:

      Delay is the strategy and has been for quite some time. So why then does Barr allow these delays to continue? He could be giving them the rope to hang themselves knowing the attempts at subterfuge will only reflect badly on the perps knowing he already has themmby the balls and there’s no way out. Or not, and Barr is a traitor. I indulge myself in the former explanation. But damn, when are these San Francisco liberals iwngnuts going to apologize to me in the lunchroom when they are finally proven to have been wrong the whole time? Nah! That will never happen. They will view it as a Trump conspiracy and that he actually is a Russian agent. But I digress…

      Liked by 2 people

    • dawg says:

      Maybe you know this but The Departed was based on Whitey Bulger, played by jack Nicholson

      Liked by 2 people

      • Bill says:

        The Departed was loosely based on Bulger. The way things went down in that movie are not factual. If you watch any of the real documentaries on Bulger it was waaaaay different then the departed.

        Like

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      why is Barr letting the DOJ stonewall this type of thing when he said he was concerned about the spying on Trump?

      The “stonewall” is effectively over: DENIED.
      “For these reasons, the Court will deny Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration. A separate Order so stating will issue this day.”

      This case started 2 years ago BEFORE Barr was there.

      Why would he step in when the FBI was LOSING and was just handed their final loss?
      All that’s left for the judge to do now a formal order from the court to release.

      What he does NOW is all what matters:
      Does he let the FBI proceed with appeal and what form does that appeal take?

      Like

      • Bill says:

        KVS, Barr was given declass authority by Trump. That’s why.

        Like

        • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

          Anything that can keep the appearance of Barr not “interfering” is preferable at this point.

          Especially a decision on a 2 year old case made and validated by a different branch of government (JUDICIAL) and favorable to a news network that hates both Trump AND Barr.

          Additionally it’s one less thing Barr needs to exert his focus and energy on.
          Again why get involved when the adversary is already losing?

          Now if Barr inserts himself in some way to BLOCK the release…..then I’ll get concerned precisely because of the reason you state.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Greeneghis Khan says:

      There is the political aspect of this that is not being directly acknowledged here.
      The issue was ongoing before Barr was appointed as was mentioned, but if he just steps in a stops or changes course in some of these inquiries, it will be bad optics for the admin via the media. They tried once with the Barr already with his handling of the Mueller report.

      What is happening in real time which is too slow for us cold anger types is that multiple groups are discovering and addressing this whole shyatt show to where justice for this becomes a non partisan issue.

      Like

  3. Bogeyfree says:

    Here’s another question about all this…….

    If Barr is hunting for the truth, and he now has the authority to declassify any document, don’t you think Barr would look at these memos specifically and if they help expose the truth why does he allow Wray who reports to Barr to fight so vehemently from unveiling these?

    Clearly these can’t soil or destroy any case he is building.

    Doesn’t it seem more likely that they fight exposure tooth and nail because it is all about protection of the institutions?

    Liked by 5 people

    • nimrodman says:

      I’m not so sure they’re all about “protecting the institutions”
      That seems a bit too generously high-minded an assumption

      I’d bet it’s more about
      “protecting their buddies (read “fellow travelers”; read “co-conspirators”)

      Liked by 1 person

      • Jederman says:

        “I’d bet it’s more about “protecting their buddies…”

        In addition to those who don’t even know who they are. My theory has always been that the “institution” so often mentioned is obama and his loathsome crew.

        Like

    • Jederman says:

      It’s one thing to find the truth, what you do or don’t do with it is the big story.

      Like

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      why does he allow Wray who reports to Barr to fight so vehemently from unveiling these?

      Because “Wray” was LOSING the fight and in fact LOST IT……

      …..IN THE JUDICIAL BRANCH….(an “impartial” one separate from his own)………

      So why get involved?

      The real question is will he allow “Wray” to keep fighting.

      Like

  4. GSparrow says:

    CNN’s determination in pursuing the release of the “Archey Declarations” indicates they might have been convinced “by unnamed sources” that the Memos will not be positive reading for P Trump or his supporters. Judge James Boasberg has impressive credentials and seems to have a stellar record but he was appointed by Obama so if you add that to the fact that CNN was making the request in this politically poisonous environment, it usually indicates bad news for the Trump side. But that is only a statistically based insinuation and not a proven one in this case.

    sundance’s opinion is that the Comey Memos will be “devastating to the U.S. Department of Justice and FBI” and not P Trump and that seems like the most reasonable expectation given all that has been uncovered already by CTH etc and in the final conclusions of the Weissmann Dossier.

    Liked by 8 people

    • Donzo says:

      Well, if the efforts to conceal the redacted portions of the Archey Declarations were actually intended to fail so that the resultant sunlight was damaging to POTUS, that would be quite the coup, so to speak. But such a scenario would not fit the the FBI’s MO to date.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Louisiana Tea Rose says:

      Since when has “the Government” declined to release/leak info that would be damaging to Trump?

      Liked by 4 people

  5. The Boss says:

    This latest ruling reads like a report card you wouldn’t want to show your parents.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. The Gipper Lives says:

    An Obama judge with some integrity? I assumed one or two slipped by but I’d never actually seen it until now,

    It reminds me of the time the Forensics team at DOJ refused to frame Officer Darren Wilson, despite the Race War on Cops incited by Obama, Holder, Sharpton and CNN.

    Liked by 10 people

  7. Yawn, so many crimes, so little time. Someone wake me when the indictments go out.

    Liked by 4 people

    • steph_gray says:

      Okay, to all the wake-me-whens:

      Buy a alarm clock!

      It’s no one else’s job to wake you just because you choose to snooze through history being made daily.

      Liked by 8 people

      • GP says:

        History being made daily? If you call the sun rising every morning “history” then I suppose so. This type of $h*t has been going on for decades in our 2-tiered justice system. I don’t need an alarm clock because no one is going to jail-or even be indicted.

        We keep making excuses for inaction hoping that what we really know in the pit of our stomach is not true. But it is true.

        Liked by 2 people

      • If these criminals get their way, then history will be re-written and bleached. Don’t worry, I’ll get someone else to wake me up when the new and revised history books hit the stores.

        Like

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      Seems you woke up long enough to contribute…….well, nothing.

      Beddy-bye is over at CNN.

      I hear Cuomo does a great rendition of “Hush Little Baby” with a surprisingly soothing voice and for a strong guy he can be amazingly gentle while tucking you back in

      Like

  8. arze says:

    The DOJ/FBi trying to hide Archey because of concern about relations with foreign governments cannot have any rational basis at this point.

    And if Archey show collusion between the Comey/Obama gang and, say, the UK — and that would be their collusion against Trump: all the more reason they are in the public interest — to read and digest.

    If UK Ambassador to the USA, Sir Kim Darroch’s cables that were leaked a month ago, in which he said the Steele Dossier was to be believed, if THAT did not affect relations between the UK and US, then what possibly could? Darroch was UK’s ambassador to USA from Jan. 2016 – July 2019.

    Liked by 5 people

  9. Bogeyfree says:

    I’m going to be the first that predicts Barr resigns by Jan 30.

    Like

    • dallasdan says:

      I anticipate he will stay on the job unless and until fired by President Trump. He was McConnell’s and the Dems AG nominee from the start, and was confirmed with atypical bi-partisan support to clean-up the mess and “protect the institutions of the FBI and DOJ,” interpreted as prevent justice from being served.

      He knows the President won’t create a firestorm by firing him in an election year. Barr is on the job for the duration, and eliminating Epstein was just an untimely and distasteful inconvenience. JMO

      Like

      • underwhelmingposter says:

        Yes. A nasty job! But someone had to do it!

        Like

      • desperatelyseekingmelania says:

        I still scratch my head over why Trump waited ’til after the 2018 midterms to fire Sessions. As if it mattered whether it was done before or after. If anything, doing it before might have bolstered his (Trump’s) support. Certainly he didn’t win any votes for Republicans by keeping Sessions around.

        Like

        • Redzone says:

          Firing Sessions too prematurely would have resulted in Mueller filing Obstruction charges. PT was being lured into that and other traps, but didn’t take the bait.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Julian says:

            Firing Sessions would have had no impact on “Obstruction”.

            You know why? Sessions was completely RECUSED from the Mueller investigation in case you weren’t aware and the President is allowed to have his own Attorney-General.

            Like

        • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

          I still scratch my head over why Trump waited ’til after the 2018 midterms to fire Sessions. As if it mattered whether it was done before or after. If anything, doing it before might have bolstered his (Trump’s) support.

          But not support where it most counted: In the Senate.
          This has been hashed and re-hashed several times.

          The Senate REPUBLICANS made it clear:
          Sessions-RR-Mueller were “hands-off”.
          IOW the “jury” made it clear that would be an “impeachable offense”

          If he fired Sessions
          Senate Impeachment trial would already be over and Pence would be President right now.
          (Senate Republicans would have an “easy” case of Obstruction of Justice to remove him)

          He was able to get away with it because he did it THE DAY AFTER the Dems took the House……
          leaving the impeachment dirty work in the House to the DEMS and Senate R’s thought either the Dems or Mueller would come through.

          BTW: Trump’s great play was the Whitaker “Vacancies Act” interim appt.

          Like

          • desperatelyseekingmelania says:

            I would have been inclined to call their bluff re: impeachment for firing Sessions (but not Mueller). But then nobody ever elected me president.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

              In poker they call that going “ALL IN”.

              There is no appealing removal by the Senate who has “the SOLE POWER to try all impeachments” according to the Constitution.
              IOW: There is no one to appeal that decision to.

              Like

              • farrier105 says:

                By “Sessions being recused has nothing to do with the investigation” means Sessions was OUT OF THE INVESTIGATION, so firing his ass has nothing to do with it either, since Sessions had no control over the investigation, unless it is followed with OVERT ACTION TO OBSTRUCT THE INVESTIGATION BY THE NEW AG.

                We got a new AG before March, William Barr. In January, Mueller asked for six more months on his grand jury, but two months later, after Barr, Mueller is closing shop with “no more new indictments.” He only used two months, or less, of the six AFTER BARR TOOK OVER. This didn’t prompt any impeachment action, did it? Well, we are dealing with an investigation that BOTH PARTIES permitted to be run by two fact witnesses, Mueller and Rosenstein, are we not? You see, you have some reasonable suspicion that Barr ordered the thing shut down, yet no one made a move toward impeachment on those grounds, did they?

                In Watergate, as I pointed out, Congress waited until the SMOKING GUN TAPE was made public to begin the move toward impeachment. They had absolute proof of obstruction of the investigation by Nixon getting the CIA to stop the FBI investigation. Nixon lost all support in the Senate, opening to door to CONVICTION. Yes, impeachment is POLITICAL, but cannot be seen as TOTALLY so. It is still for “High crimes and misdemeanors,” which is why it is so rare, with only two Presidents being impeached. The first was more “political” than the second and failed to get a conviction.

                Like

                • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                  “Sessions being recused has nothing to do with the investigation” means Sessions was OUT OF THE INVESTIGATION, so firing his ass has nothing to do with it either,
                  Which is right where the Republican Senators wanted him:
                  Not interfering with the real investigation: OBSTRUCTION.
                  Firing Sessions (or RR, Mueller) WAS their smoking gun.
                  THEY SAID SO.
                  “Russia” would have gone by the wayside and obstruction would be the whole ballgame..
                  Like it is now….only the House DEMS are doing the dirty work.

                  This didn’t prompt any impeachment action, did it?
                  This is precisely what Nadler says he is doing right now…….an impeachment inquiry.
                  By October he says.

                  This is far from over.

                  We get peeps from Paul and Graham but
                  where are the R Senators unanimously calling this out as a FRAUD…..even AFTER MUELLER’s disasterous testimony?
                  The Steele Dossier and Mifsud were out of the purview of the Special Counsel’s office???
                  Give me a break.
                  Not political?
                  A completely unpredicated counterintel investigation, a now exposed fraudulent SC investigation (PapaD goes to jail for lying but Mifsud isn’t even indicted?)
                  Oh and not one US LE agency confirmed the Russian “hack”
                  And what do we get from the Senate?
                  Outrage?
                  Demands (esp. from the SIC) that the IC cooperate with Barr/Durham?
                  Offers of legislation REQUIRING the IC to turn over all info?
                  Nope.
                  Crickets.

                  Burr’s SIC apparently is STILL investigating “Russia collusion” or at least withholding their report.

                  It’s COMPLETELY political.
                  Throw out “the book”.
                  Trump is THAT DANGEROUS to them.

                  Like

                • farrier105 says:

                  What did they do when Sessions was forced to resign? NOTHING.

                  What did they do when Barr told Mueller to wrap it up? NOTHING.

                  What did they do about the 10 alleged examples of “obstruction” in the Mueller Report? NOTHING.

                  Why? Because there is no evidence of “high crimes and misdemeanors, therefore they cannot impeach with what they have now. THEY NEED A CRIME. It can’t just be political.

                  Stop extrapolating Mueller with Congressional impeachment proceedings. Sure that was political. The whole thing has been one big conflict of interest as I have pointed out, but impeachment cannot just be POLITICAL. It is a political act to get someone out of office because of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

                  Nadler is fishing for crime–everywhere and anywhere because he needs some kind of pretext to impeach. Nothing that has happened to date has opened that door for them, so they are looking EVERYWHERE. They have no crime. So, they look for crime, BECAUSE….they need SOMETHING like unto a crime to do this.

                  I keep telling you people it is easier to gin up a predicate for a counterintelligence investigation than you think.

                  Barr was CIA. What is he doing investigating the CIA? Once again, someone who is an interested party is running an investigation in this thing. The whole thing is illegitimate.

                  Like

                • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                  So far afield of where this conversation started I simply don’t care anymore.
                  I answered your original question sometime ago.
                  Trump couldn’t FIRE Sessions long before because Senate R’s told him he couldn’t.

                  And he in fact he NEVER DID.

                  Like

                • farrier105 says:

                  The Senate does not start impeachment and were therefore making yet another toothless threat about firing Sessions. We all know what happened to Sessions. He was forced out and no one did anything. They never COULD have done anything as firing Sessions could never have been interpreted as a “high crime or misdemeanor,” which is Constitutionally required at least in appearance.

                  To charge obstruction, you must commit an act designed to obstruct. Firing Sessions was never any such thing. Only an act of obstruction FOLLOWING the firing, with Trump acting in concert with the new AG, could be charged. We should all know and understand this now. It was always an empty threat, particularly from the Senate who cannot impeach a fly.

                  This entire affair has been a bad joke. The worst part is I am beginning to suspect its meaning is much different from our assumptions.

                  Like

                • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                  “To charge obstruction, you must commit an act designed to obstruct”

                  Jim Clapper lies to Senate about NSA data collection
                  Brennan spies on Senate and lies
                  Sec Clinton creates server in direct contravention of Congress’ FOIA/FRA laws. Then destroys them when subpoenaed.
                  The Chief of Security for SIC is the Chief Leaker who “walks”
                  Awan walks

                  Senate says nothing.

                  However what did they say?
                  Don’t fire Sessions.

                  If there is one thing we have learned over the past 3 years is that laws, rules, policies and procedures are NOT applied equally–especially in DC.

                  So you can keep pretending these people MUST DO things while they simply laugh, and do whatever they want.

                  Oh and they get to apply what a “high crime and misdemeanor” as they see fit.
                  And they forewarned that firing Sessions would fit their definition.

                  Nothing from the past applies in the era of Trump.
                  These “lawmakers” were involved in framing candidate Trump as a Russian “spy”. These R Senators sat by idly as their collegue Sessions was accused of working with Russians to undermine an election.
                  (SD has documented here the Republicans that were involved in this)
                  and then tried to take him down as Pres.

                  And you’re talking about “laws” they must follow.

                  Like

                • farrier105 says:

                  If you were correct about this the impeachment bill would have already passed and the trial completed. They can’t impeach him for forcing Sessions to resign. They could not have impeached him for firing Sessions. Firing Sessions, who was recused from the investigation, could never be construed as obstruction as a President can fire an AG at any time. Separation of powers in the Constitution make that very clear, which is why there was no impeachment action after Sessions was forced to resign, after the Mid-Terms no less when firing him while the GOP had a majority would make more sense. Not only that, but when Barr ended the Mueller investigation there was no impeachment. Whitaker takes over for Sessions after Trump forces him out. Leftists protest and demand Whitaker recuse, but he does not. Nothing done by Democrat majority in House.

                  Barr gets confirmed and tells Mueller to wrap up. Nothing was done about that, either, although it follows the “logic” that firing Sessions is, somehow, “obstruction.” To this day there is no overt move to impeach Trump for Sessions being forced out, Whitaker not recusing himself, and Barr ending the investigation.

                  “If there is one thing we have learned over the past 3 years is that laws, rules, policies and procedures are NOT applied equally–especially in DC.”

                  Everyone knows that. That is not in dispute here, and these two facts are not related. It doesn’t matter what the Republicans in the Senate did, or did not, do about all of this. What actually HAPPENED is what is important here.

                  The Mueller investigation ended after Mueller only used about 2 months of his 6 months grand jury extension he secured in January. The Mueller investigation ended once Barr took over. Nothing was done about it by the Democrats in Congress after all of their previous threats.

                  The fact that they did not impeach, because there was no plausible crime they could allege Trump of committing, does not mean that they are not CORRUPT. You fail to see that there are times when they have no choice by follow the law as that is what is best for THEIR interests at that particular point in time. Being overtly political about an impeachment this close to an election would not be smart politics. They had to have a PLAUSIBLE crime to charge Trump in a bill of impeachment. They didn’t have one. If they did, they would have impeached. It isn’t rocket science.

                  Your Awan Brothers and Trump-Russia arguments are just not germane to whether or not Trump could have been impeached for firing Sessions. As to whether or not Sessions was actually pushed out, take a look at what the Democrats’ auxiliaries in the media had to say about the departure of Sessions:

                  https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=bWpeXaWJIYSt5wLCkbHgDw&q=Sessions+Fired&oq=Sessions+Fired&gs_l=psy-ab.3…4097.6582..7224…0.0..0.94.1119.14……0….1..gws-wiz…….0j0i131j0i22i30.6mp9kYtJswQ&ved=0ahUKEwjl89fbnpbkAhWE1lkKHcJIDPwQ4dUDCAc&uact=5

                  Like

          • desperatelyseekingmelania says:

            One other question if you may be so kind: if firing Sessions was an impeachable “offense” prior to the midterms, why was it not still that just days afterward?

            Liked by 1 person

            • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

              1) First: Sessions technically “resigned” he was NOT “fired”.
              2) The “resigning” of Sessions was justified by the historical precedent of Cabinet member turnover AFTER mid-term elections.
              3) The Dems won the House. Senate R’s knew the DEMS would be the ones doing the dirty work: unrelentingly investigating POTUS to pursue impeachment.
              WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE DOING.

              Can you name ONE Republican senator that has come to POTUS’ defense calling the Trump Russia collusion investigation a fraud much less one that is saying “enough is enough?”
              Compare that to DEM Senator’s that came to Bill Clinton’s defense even though Clinton had committed ACTUAL crimes.

              Hell….The Republican led SIC is apparently STILL investigating Trump Russia collusion
              They have yet to produce their report.

              Couple of other things:
              Trump threw a monkey wrench with the Vacancies act appt of Whitaker during the “lame duck” period (versus RR taking over).
              IMO people underestimate the importance of Whitaker—an outsider that got a peek at the scope of the Mueller investigation.

              Still don’t know what to think of Barr but he did shut down SCO and stole both the collusion AND obstruction narrative.

              Not sure if this took R Senators by surprise or if many of them were glad to have an “out” from the whole mess.
              I lean toward the later because they all seem like they just want to “move along”.
              (Except Lindsey Graham who is too busy doing cutsey TV appearances talking about hearings he apparently will never actually hold.)

              Liked by 1 person

              • farrier105 says:

                Sessions offered to resign when it was announced that Rosenstein appointed Mueller Special Counsel. Sessions could have resigned any time. There is no law restricting his resignation to “after Mid-Term elections.”

                By the way, Sessions being recused had nothing to do with the investigation. So, how could impeachment occur immediately upon Trump firing him on the basis of “obstruction?” Would there not have to be an overt act of Obstruction on the part of a new AG in order to charge obstruction? Would not any “act of obstruction” have to be traced back to the President in order for him to be charged? Did not the “Smoking Gun” White House tape have to be MADE PUBLIC in order to finally pin an obstruction charge on Nixon? Everyone was suspecting by that time that Nixon was obstructing the investigation, but suspecting was not enough, was it?

                No one actually believed Sessions “resigned,” yet neither Nadler nor Cummings probed Sessions leaving. At least they haven’t as of this time. One would think this would have happened right out of the starting blocks since Sessions leaving was a hair trigger for an obstruction charge.

                Could Sessions not have been fired for cause without obstruction being the result? Could Sessions have violated the law and been discharged without impeachment for “obstruction?”

                Liked by 1 person

                • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                  All vaild points……

                  We now know beyond any doubt—ANY—-the whole ballgame WAS OBSTRUCTION.
                  And spoiler alert:
                  Republicans Senators SUPPORTED and ENABLED it.
                  They supported it by telegraphing to POTUS, the public and THE HOUSE that firing Sessions, RR or Mueller would be “obstruction”. REPUBLICANs did that– in fact they LED it.
                  IOW: The “jury” already ruled.
                  And BTW they are STILL ENABLING it.
                  Eg: The Burr led SIC has STILL NOT finished their “Russia investigation” or produced a report.

                  Name one Senate Republican who has yet to come out and say what has been obvious all along:
                  “Wait…..Steele worked for Hillary and Mifsud is Western Intel……and this is the PREDICATE for all this? WTF!!!????”

                  Onward….
                  There is no law restricting his resignation to “after Mid-Term elections.”
                  Impeachment is political NOT legal and done by the LAWmakers.
                  The “law” is irrelevant here.

                  “Sessions being recused had nothing to do with the investigation”
                  Ummm……don’t have a clue what you’re talking about here.
                  A recused Sessions was KEY to this “investigation”….and that recusal was because of his “Russian interactions”.
                  Mueller finally just “exonerated” him too.
                  (I’m sure his former R colleagues were relieved to find out Jeff wasn’t actually a Russian agent) /s
                  Oh and in Nixon’s time Republicans actually SUPPORTED the President and SAID SO.
                  Nixon was ONE OF THEM.
                  Trump is NOT.
                  Again NOT ONE has called out this “investigation” as the obvious fraud it is…..at ANY TIME….even AFTER Mueller’s CONVENIENTLY EVASIVE testimony.
                  (“Hey Bob…..why didn’t you INDICT MIFSUD for lying to the FBI?

                  “It was out of my purview”)

                  No one actually believed Sessions “resigned,” yet neither Nadler nor Cummings probed Sessions leaving

                  They threatened EXACTLY that.
                  (In fact….depending on how things play out…..they may circle back around to it.)
                  They didn’t get control until late Jan 2019 (though it SEEMS longer it’s only been 8 months) and events have just moved faster than those asshats’ abilities to keep up.
                  They threatened to look into Whitaker—but too late—he’s gone.
                  They threatened to look into Barr’s appointment…..but too late…..
                  Barr shut down the SCO office AND stole the narrative (screwing up EVERYTHING)
                  It took them 2 months just to get a reluctant Mueller to testify, who proved to be a guy that was CLUELESS about what was in HIS OWN REPORT.
                  They are not done with Barr.

                  Hindsight being 20/20
                  Perhaps POTUS should have accepted Sessions resignation offered the day Mueller was appointed (as told by Dowd)

                  But Dowd also revealed that at that point they believed the investigation was only about “Russia collusion” and BE OVER BY DECEMBER 2017.
                  They figured out it was actually a “bait and switch” – ALL ABOUT OBSTRUCTION sometime early 2018.
                  That’s why POTUS didn’t do the declass in SEP either. It appears RR warned him or confirmed to him the obstruction angle.
                  (I suspect RR may have made some deal with Barr-but that’s another tale)
                  “Resigning” Sessions after mid-terms was a brilliant move.
                  It was the first step in messing up the plan for Dems AND Senate Republicans.

                  (hence the reason Burr is slow walking the SIC report)
                  Barr is still the wildcard here.

                  Like

          • litenmaus says:

            “Trump’s great play was the Whitaker “Vacancies Act” interim appt.”

            I think that Trump’s play of placing Naval Chief Joseph McGuire as ‘Acting’ Director of National Intelligence will eventually be seen in the same light as the Whitaker appointment.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

              God I hope so.

              Liked by 1 person

              • litenmaus says:

                If nothing else Krash, the departure of DNI Coats & Sue Gordon has GOT to be making Schiff sweat bullets…..:0)

                House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) sent a letter Friday to Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats demanding oversight of Attorney General William Barr’s declassification of documents used in the investigation of now refuted claims of collusion between President Trump and Russia.

                The three page letter from Schiff demands: a meeting with Coats to be told what Barr has asked for and what has been provideded so far; copies of everything the intelligence agencies turn over to Barr; prior notification of any declassification by Barr; and any declassification made or about to be made by Barr

                https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/05/schiff-sends-letter-to-dni-coats-demanding-oversight-of-ag-barr-declassification-of-trump-investigation-docs/

                Any agreements between Coats or Gordon with Congressional members are now gone.

                No agreements can be made with the current acting DNI McGuire in time to halt any previous documents from being released. formation

                Liked by 1 person

                • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                  Nice
                  Schiff demanding to see all documents sent between one Cabinet member to another Cabinet member.

                  Good luck with that Adam……and anyway:

                  “Its an ongoing investigation”

                  Liked by 1 person

  10. mtk says:

    In a round about way, “Why would cnn be seeking the FOIA of the comey memos in the first place and having failed that having to settle for the Archey Declarations?”
    Unless cnn believes the comey memos advance the resistance narratives.

    There are two tracks as to Why… in my opinion.

    The first being having been in on the one way street of, “What was being selectively leaked to the MSM from within the fbi and doj”, cnn actually believes the cool aid they have drunk and that the comey memos would stear the resistance ship aright.
    The second tract is this FOIA suit is not cnn first rodeo into the gray area of the media vs the govt over material documents. It can be reasonably argued that cnn knew the outcome over the comey memos would be in the government favor and was gunning for something else?

    The thing is the way this FOIA has unfolded, “Here is what the plantiff(cnn) is walking away with as a win?”

    – The Archey Declarations… With the length that this court battle has been drawn out(meaning with all that I’ve about them) the Archey Declaration are likely summaries of just a subset of the totality of the comey memos that were selected by team mueller to make its legal arguments against their release. The doj didn’t have to argue all the comey memos just enough of them to make its case and wrap them all up behind the firewall of national security.

    – The msm is very likely to protray the Declarations as a complete catalogue of the comey memos to the mutual benefits and understandings of the Swamp. While also engaged in the intellectual dishonesty of not discussing that the Declarations are only those comey memos that team mueller saw fit to use to make its case.

    Therefore the Declarations are only going to tell a half story. That is, “What I mean by gunning for something else?”.

    Liked by 1 person

    • mtk says:

      By a half story… My thoughts are, “What is being hiding in the Comey Memos is a high likelihood that mr. comey was honest with himself and in the coarse of keeping his journal(diary), “Was thinking though the so called ‘insurance policy’ problem via operation crossfire hurricane and the FISC”

      It is my belief there are likely instances where mr. comey identified areas and coarses of actions that needed to taken and/or avoided through playing devil’s advocate.

      Liked by 2 people

      • farrier105 says:

        The only problem with the scenario of Comey thinking out loud in his memos is that FBI documents are not supposed to speculate, but only describe the facts as they are known at a particular point in time. Comey could easily lie in the memos, but would have to make the lies appear to be factual and not theoretical speculations.

        Like

        • mtk says:

          What a hoot! ‘not speculate’

          The fact is much of police work is built on speculation driven by where the evidence leads. Like, uhm… the big ones Motive, Means and Opportunity.

          Here I will spell it out.
          He likely verbally DIAGRAMED his way through the PROBLEMS of Crossfire Hurricane and the FISC abuse that would present(occur) as the ‘small group’ planned and carried out the ‘insurance policy’ by using the ‘by the book’ rules and his knowlegde of the institutional bureaucracy.

          I am talking about gaming the system by staying within the system.

          Part of gaming the system is knowing, “Where and What are the hurdles and pitfalls?”, and knowing, “How to best avoid them?” Otherwise you are going run right smack into them.

          So my scenario is, “How do you fit a square peg in a round hole?” That is made all the more interesting under the guise of, “How do you make something illegal, legal?”

          So is ‘by the book’ to now to include… ‘Gaming the System’ as a valid application of ‘Sources’ and ‘Methods’.

          I don’t know, “Let’s ask Archey.”

          Like

          • farrier105 says:

            If the theory I’m working on now is correct, the plotters got messed up when DERAY MCKESSON got hacked, exposing the plan to disrupt both national conventions in 2016, and stir riots all over US prior to election, “forcing” Obama to declare martial law, cancel the election, and stay in office longer. When McKesson got hacked, they had to come up with new plot on the fly. Some of the memos might be about those subjects. They had the disruptions of the conventions set:

            1. Publishing the DNC emails that exposed the hosing of Old Man Sanders caused a huge anti-Hillary demonstration that could have boiled over into violence, but Deray got hacked so it ended with only protesting.
            2. Violence at Trump rallies stirred by fake Bernie Sanders supporters pushing “Trump is a Racist” triggers.

            The plan was altered, but nothing has worked to date after the information about Deray’s hacking got suppressed by the MSM. The original plan was to keep Obama in office, not elect Hillary.

            Keep an eye on Michelle Obama. If she runs, keeping Obama is what they wanted all along, but DERAY GOT HACKED. I wonder who did it.

            https://personalliberty.com/is-attorney-general-lynch-participating-in-summer-of-chaos/

            Like

          • farrier105 says:

            “How do you make something illegal, legal?”

            One thing that must be done is documents have to APPEAR based on fact, or what you THOUGHT were the facts at the time you wrote them. Altering FD-302s was never confined to Russiagate. Goes on all the time, as implied by some of the comments of Sidney Powell. FD-302s are limited to facts, or what appear to be the facts, and no conclusions, theories, or speculations.

            Like

      • sturmudgeon says:

        “courses of actions” (although some of them may be “coarse”)

        Like

    • desperatelyseekingmelania says:

      There are many useful idiots in the media who swallowed the Russia conspiracy hook line and sinker and are still pushing it to this day. See Scarborough blaming Russians for Epstein’s death.

      It is possible that the good folks at CNN pushing this legal action honestly believe in their reeeesistance heart of hearts than inside Comey’s memos will be the damning smoking gun that ties Trump to the Russians.

      Never underestimate human stupidity

      Just throwing that out there as one possible explanation

      Like

      • mtk says:

        My thoughts exactly…

        cnn actually believes the cool aid they have drunk and that the comey memos would stear the resistance ship aright.

        Like

      • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

        I think people are WAY overthinking the CNN angle here:

        CNN filed this 2 years ago when they thought the memos would advance the collusion narrative….if they got them right away.

        Understand FOIA lawsuits……the “winner” does not get the prize EXCLUSIVELY…..
        The whole world does.

        So only ONE agency needs to file any given FOIA lawsuit.

        If CNN suddenly dropped their FOIA lawsuit (which at this point would look kinda dumb) about a hundred other folks would be right there to pick up where they left off…..most certainly Tom Fitton.

        So at this point two years later……CNN is in for a penny in for a pound.

        There can be no NEW RESISTANCE ANGLES in the memos or the declarations to worry about because
        1) They would ALREADY be in the Mueller Report
        2) The FBI wouldn’t be DESPERATE to keep them from getting out but would WANT THEM TO.

        And they are DESPERATE to the point of DEAD FISH ABSURDITY in not letting these be released.
        Whatever is in them IS NOT GOOD for the narrative, the FBI….or others.

        You can also be certain that whatever is in these HASN’T AGED WELL.

        Their context NOW is completely different VS the context they would have had then.
        Ex: How many times did Mueller (who took over Comey’s investigation) say a topic was “out of his purview” ?

        Be interesting to see if Mueller’s claim “JIVES” with Comey’s and Archey’s.

        Like

    • dawg says:

      But CNN has Comey on speed dial. And vice versa. Wouldnt they just consult on the contents of the declarations and if it revealed the coup, Comey would tell them to drop it?

      Like

      • mtk says:

        True, if the Comey memos are daming to institutional corruption, as you say “Why not just tell cnn to back off.”

        That is why I wrote…

        The second tract is this FOIA suit is that, “It is not cnn first rodeo into the gray area of the media vs the govt over material documents.”
        It can be reasonably argued that cnn knew the outcome over the comey memos would be in the government favor and was gunning for something else?

        The something else being the construct of the Archey Declarations.

        Tongue and cheek aside, yah right…
        comey and cnn were on the bat phone together ironing out the details.
        No!!!
        However the observation that, “The fbi/doj are still engaged in continued actions to protect the institutional corruption!”
        Are what?, “A figment of the conspiracy minded.”

        You don’t a road map to spell out the need and plan, there are many people within govt “Who’s sole value is built on the ability to identify and actualize political problems and requirements without the need to directly involve colleague s and superiors, or God forbid POLITICIANS!!!

        Like

      • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

        If CNN dropped this……
        Fitton or AP, WaPo, NYT, Reuters…..my granny…..
        would have picked it right back up from where they dropped it.

        Really no point for CNN to withdraw now.
        My guess is they won’t report much on their “victory” at all except on the ass end of their website.

        Like

  11. michael says:

    the doj and fbi corrupt and a disgrace. any good agents out there? hang your heads in shame

    Liked by 2 people

    • dallasdan says:

      I’m sure there are good agents “out there,” but by now I believe it is highly likely they have mentally accepted that for their own and their families’ best interests they must remain silent about the past and execute whatever orders, criminally inspired or not, they are given in the future. Institutional corruption owns them.

      Liked by 2 people

    • dawg says:

      The FBI, as a whole, have lost all benefit of the doubt. Where are the whistleblowers?

      Im sorry, but the “rank and file” of the FBI can kiss my ass.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. GTOGUY says:

    They are fighting the release because there are many embarrassing things in the memos, probably incriminating things too. Recall, one of the first records fight was over redaction’s to a document that later showed that McCabe spent $75K on a conference table.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Beau Geste says:

      Yep, “sources and methods” need to be protected as a matter of national security. If the Chinese and Russians found out that the FBI/DOJ had a conference table, it would be a dire, existential threat to our entire country.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. This is scathing. Some gems:
    “Now on reconsideration, the FBI says that it meant to argue something different.”
    “But wait, says the Bureau.”
    “This deficiency adds to the stack of reasons counseling against reopening this can of worms.”

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Guy-Blanc Déploré says:

    No lie that the opinion was a must-read. I can’t recall being quite that entertained by a legal document before.

    Yup, Judge is pissed, and I’m grinning from ear to ear.

    Like

  15. DiogenesVindicated says:

    I think we need to be careful of anything Comey wrote. Remember it was the Communist News Network that is pushing this release. I believe Comey wrote these memos as a CYA measure, knowing full well they would be come into the limelight some day. He would be clever enough to embed as much exonerating stuff as he could including fabrications and lies to send the eventual readers on wild goose chases to deflect and cover for his true intentions. He’s probably told CNN that there’s ‘gold in them thar memos!’.

    Like

    • Rob says:

      If what you think is true then some of the lies in Comey’s memos may be obvious to everyone, seeing that we have uncovered lots of previously undisclosed facts since they were written. This would call the reliability of all his memos into question.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Bad Bill Barr says:

      The more he wrote, all the more perjury traps were written.

      Liked by 1 person

  16. Keith D. Rodebush says:

    The IG has been slow-walking his report awaiting the outcome of this appeal. He may even wait to see if the full Comey memos come out. The report may need to be ‘tweaked’ if the public actually has access to the truth.

    Like

  17. Christian Warren says:

    Absent a corpse, is it plausible that Epstein used his own assets to escape and that the FBI is looking for him on his island?

    Like

    • farrier105 says:

      No. It is one place they would look and it is hard to get off an island. Besides, the Establishment knows were Epstein is if he is still alive. He is either dead, or “on ice.” Either way, the Establishment is behind it.

      Like

  18. Zy says:

    Just seems like a long matter of sorting out Comey’s lies from the coupsters lies from the media’s lies so this ruling is just entertainment.

    Like

  19. Christian Warren says:

    Wrong thread! I apologize.

    Like

  20. Jennifer Verner says:

    I think we can assume that anything damning in the Comey memos ended up in the Mueller report, and that Comey has leaked it to his lawfare buddies—which means that CNN knows too. So maybe this will backfire. Maybe Barr wanted It withheld until the IG report was released. Maybe what ends up being released will be much more damaging to Comey and company than the president.

    Like

  21. Jennifer Verner says:

    I think we can assume that anything damning in the Comey memos ended up in the Mueller report, and that Comey has leaked it to his lawfare buddies—which means that CNN knows too. So maybe this will backfire. Maybe Barr wanted It withheld until the IG report was released. Maybe what ends up being released will be much more damaging to Comey and company than the president.

    Like

    • doofusdawg says:

      The memos will probably show a very conflcted Comey contemplating the extraordinary measures taken to watch a presidential candidate who might be a Russian asset.

      The problem is the origin date of the Misfud set up is and was well before the alleged beginnings of the counter intelligence investigation. Good luck spinning that.

      The only way out for the conspirators is to show they had reason to worry about Trump much earlier than stated. And the only way they could have become suspicious is through the illegal 702 searches. What to do… what to do.

      Like

      • One thing that the conspirators never considered is that every access to these databases is permanently recorded. We know who searched, when they searched, and what they searched for. We also know if the data was exported to a thumb drive. If there were “illegal searches,” we know what they are.

        Like

        • doofusdawg says:

          I’m curious who signed the memorandum of understanding allowing for the third party access. Holder/Mueller… Holder/Comey or Lynch/Comey. Would be a hoot if it was Yates/Comey.

          Like

  22. BigTalkers says:

    For over two years now I’ve suggested to my Dem friends their party actively support full disclosure to get this huge scandal behind them.

    That’s what the GOP did during Watergate, and a short four years later they won back the White House.

    Obviously, however, the Democrats have chosen to try to ride this mess out instead, which I believe poses significant risk to the future of their party.

    ¡Hasta la vista, mi amigos!

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Bruce Berkson says:

    Barr did step in. That’s why they hung the case out to dry by using barely literate (legally) agents instead of lawyers to file these motions.
    btw this is the most thoughtful and for the most part respectful comments section I’ve ever read.

    Like

  24. thedoc00 says:

    One thing to keep in mind while assessing AG Barr, he did not and does not have the luxury of picking his staff. While I do not mean to defend him, ignore what appears to be potential shortcomings, et al, under the current set of Fed Employment Regulation he is hamstrung.

    DoJ, FBI and the other agencies under the supervision of the DoJ are still jam packed with 8 years of Obama and 8 Years Bush hires in the rubber meets the road positions. To get rid of them is impossible unless they commit a major infraction or are in an appointee slot. Then again, even the appointees are subject to the litmus tests applied by the Republican Party that DO NOT include anything related to National Interest nor President Trump. This complicates AG Barr’s job far more than any other factor. AG Barr has no clue on level of cooperation he can expect to execute anything and is forced to weed out the untrustworthy one job at time. So, on that note I am willing to give him more latitude and it even has me looking at former Acting AG Whittaker in a different light.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Beau Geste says:

      Exactly, Doc. But Barr can clear many out who are crooked and need security clearance for their positions. Their “leaking”, and other corrupt behavior should disqualify them from “clearance”.

      Like

      • thedoc00 says:

        If it is on AG Barr to do all the work, then DoJ and all associated offices will continue in this fashion until he gets critical mass of trusted supervisors in place to assume the staffing job. In that case, do not count on him getting much accomplished in anything approaching even a snail’s pace.

        This is a prime example of the damage being wrought by McConnell and the GOP, via not allowing the President to appoint staff for the nearly the entire Executive Branch of Government, with his own people. This includes judges as well. The President has had to live with judicial selections who help the GOP and necessarily his cause.

        Like

  25. Alan Reasin says:

    I find it interesting that with 63 million voters being screwed by the deep state’s soft coup attempt, with many of the players identified, the streets are quiet except for the Antifa and Progressives at Tucker’s and McConnell’s houses. We deplorables are a patient lot, it seems. I do wonder when the straw will drop on the camel’s back. Shays Rebellion, against the Articles of Confederation weaknesses allowing the states to drift towards nation status, gave us the 1789 Constitution we so love. What will it take to return our country to a more reasonable state where the people are sovereign and the government is more subservient. We seem to have a bureaucracy filled with evil, unAmerican Aaron Burr types.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. Steven Andros says:

    Yaaaawn….

    Anyone going to get indicted as a result of this?

    Sorry… that was a poor attempt at a joke.

    Like

  27. Caius Lowell says:

    But what about “sources and methods” that impact national security?
    Correction: DNC corrupt “sources and methods” that impact Democrat security?

    Like

  28. ozymandiasssss says:

    I looked at PACER today and it seemed to say there is an opposition motion deadline in a couple of weeks, so my impression is these documents won’t get released until then, at a minimum.

    Like

  29. Lester Smith says:

    Comey claims trump eats steak covered in ketchup. Red ketchup, communists red, communist red. The smoking gun Trump loves ketchup, ketchup is red hence trump loves Russia impeach impeach impeach.

    Like

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