"The Deep State" aka the American Intelligence Community

[old salt]

Salty keeps claiming that Comey leaked classified information. That's not what the IG found. He also keeps claiming that the issue rested on 'proving intent', but that's not what the IG found either, as the issue was instead whether classified information had actually been leaked or not. And the answer was fundamentally no. Indeed, the evidence showed that Comey took pains to exclude classified information from what was released.

He also tries to set up a false equivalency with Petraeus' errors (both mishandled sensitive and/or classified information), but Petraeus knowingly shared classified info with his lover. Not so Comey. I hope history treats Petraeus well, despite this error, but it was certainly more serious than Comey's. And, for our purposes though not the IG's, here's where intent does come in: Petraeus' intent had no honorable or patriotic aspect. Comey's did.

That said, the IG found Comey's actions deserving of sharp reprimand, as the rules and guidelines on how to handle sensitive (not classified) information were abused and that precedent needs to be rejected. I'm good with that.

You continue to inaccurately restate my positions. That is dishonest.

I clearly stated that the classified portion of what Comey shared with his lawyers was not disclosed to the public. The lawyer who leaked to the media only disclosed unclassified content. That does not absolve Comey from mishandling classified material & disclosing it to his friend & the lawyers who did not have security clearances or need to know. Comey's violation was the disclosure of classified material to unauthorized persons.
Comey's "leak" was the disclosure to his lawyer friend, which included a small amount of classified content.
This facilitated the subsequent leak to the media which did not include the classified content.

Reread my Petraeus post. I took pains to say that his case was similar to Comey's, not that their misdeeds were equal in magnitude.
I made that distinction because I anticipated that you would disingenuously say that I equated them, as you predictably did.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Like the Russian investigation....not enough there. We Good.

[old salt]

If you follow many of our fellow poster's discussions, it's pretty apparent that they are immensely cynical about how our system works, who pulls the strings, the dishonesty of politicians, the inherent badness of 'big government', etc. I could go on and on.

I don't think this started with Trump, though clearly he's tapped into and grossly stoked these deep seated levels of cynicism. DEEP STATE, FAKE NEWS, and the constant attack and disabuse on the rule of law...again, I could go on and on. But it didn't begin with Trump.

Looking back historically, I know that in my lifetime, assassinations, civil rights abuses, Vietnam falsehoods by the military brass as well as top civilian officials, and then Watergate crushed much of the idealistic views many of us had growing up. For my part, as a student of American history and world history, I remained stubbornly idealistic about the virtues of our 'system', imperfect as it is, the 'American experiment', relative to many other approaches throughout history. I made sense of the flaws of the system through the lens of several of our founders and their philosophical progenitors who recognized that people are not all inherently good, and such people, especially those in power, have the capacity to do great harm if not constrained in their exercise of power. This led them to insist on various such constraints, balances of power under the rule of law not men, and ways in which the system could evolve in response to abuses of power.

That's why the rise of the 'strong man', the authoritarian, is such an anathema to me.

However, from all that I can glean, many others took away a different lesson from various demonstrations of corruption leading to their cynicism. They've largely given up on what I still hold onto. They instead claim a false sort of patriotism that embraces MAGA and the strong man. They expect him to be dishonest, even revel in it, as long as he gives voice to their cynicism and, in many cases, their bigotries. Or lines their pocket, or at least promises to do so.

LandM,
Sure, being in the military might give one a sense of the rules on classified information, but most military rarely get anywhere near actual classified information, much less TS SCI. A whole lot of folks other than the military go through heavy security clearances and training that most military folks never do.

...& many of us who served in the military did hold TS/SCI clearance, did not take classified material home with us, did not disclose for political purpose, & know that what Comey did would have ended our careers & resulted in Court Martial.

I agree with the historical analogy to Watergate. IMHO, we have not seen an abuse of govt power of this magnitude since Watergate.
What you dismiss as cynicism, is alarm that govt officials (career or political appointees), would resort to such extreme measures for political purpose, & think they can get away with it.

If you're concerned about the rise of an authoritarian strong man, imagine what one could do if he had compliant govt officials who would abuse the powers of their position in the manner which we are now seeing revealed. ...& how a partisan media can provide cover, rather than scrutiny.

[old salt]

Like the Russian investigation....not enough there. We Good.

Strzok didn't text -- " not enough there, there."

He texted -- " No there, there."

[a fan]

I believe OS makes the case pretty well - Comey knew what he was doing and knew how to skirt the rules - he is not a BOY Scout or patriot - he is and has been an attention seeker. Imagine someone who thinks he is so important that he decides to LEAK information. Man, walk down the street and speak to John McCain - that would have started an investigation.

Says who?

Just as Hillary did, Trump and Co. put Comey in an impossible situation.

How does Comey go to McCain? What's McCain going to do with the info? Could use it as a political weapon. Could sit on it until it's of use to him. Could do nothing. Comey has no way of knowing.

Gang of 8? Same. Especially since Comey couldn't know who else is involved. You know-----like McConnell and the "coincidental" appearance of a Russian aluminum plant in Kentucky.

And what would you be thinking if you were Comey and caught Flynn lying to both Pence and the American public about discussing sanctions??? You'd be thinking "what the F is going on around here??"

Comey did what Deep Throat did. And how long did it take folks to figure out who that was?


And you boys are forgetting that the Republicans and Dems have no teeth, and aren't doing a thing to handle this situation, and Comey knows this. What do I mean by that?

Simple: how is it that two guys who sat down in Trump Tower to meet with a Russian freaking spy, plainly showing that their morals are lacking, and that they are available for every spy and diplomat in the world for all kinds of shady dealings....STILL out there doing the governments business??

Kushner & Trump Jr.. How the firetruck are Republican voters, and the Gang of 8 NOT demanding that they be removed from power?? That tells you all you need to know about the feckless Gang of 8.

And to top it all off, you've got millions of Republican voters not just waving all this through---they're CHEERING this behavior every step of the way.

Comey did the only thing he could. And to call him out for immoral or unethical behavior is just LAUGHABLE given the context. Sorry, mate, that ship left the harbor years ago. Let me know when Kush and Trump Jr. are gone, and when Trump gives up his financial holdings.

It's about American first, right?

Riiiiiight.

[a fan]

Like the Russian investigation....not enough there. We Good.

Strzok didn't text -- " not enough there, there."

He texted -- " No there, there."

Right. They just TRIED to get help from the Russians, and were too stupid to succeed. So who cares, right?

It's all cool, G. Keep defending this.

You have a choice: either Comey and Trump's crew are both guilty of horrendously unethical behavior, or neither are.

Pick one.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Like the Russian investigation....not enough there. We Good.

Strzok didn't text -- " not enough there, there."

He texted -- " No there, there."

K

[Trinity]

“I argued - and still believe - that Hillary Clinton was guilty of gross negligence with sensitive and classified material. Compared to what President Trump did, however, she was a steely-eyed guardian of our national technical secrets.” Tom Nichols

[LandM]

TLD
I remember leaving ND locker room after beating them 3 in a row. ND fans lined up with beers, wine and liquor saying they could now fire Faust walking. I guess they thought we were the JV team. The following year the boys in blue competed for NC. Pretty arrogant.

MD
I had a TS/SCI and for my six years active almost 90%did. You had to have a Secret to graduate from the Academy. Not sure you are factually correct in your assumptions. Everyone I interacted with through 3 jobs had a clearance and there was a need to know. Keep the rules the same for all and no issues.

Comey and Clinton are just as big of scumbags with the handling of classified info.

[Typical Lax Dad]

TLD
I remember leaving ND locker room after beating them 3 in a row. ND fans lined up with beers, wine and liquor saying they could now fire Faust walking. I guess they thought we were the JV team. The following year the boys in blue competed for NC. Pretty arrogant.

MD
I had a TS/SCI and for my six years active almost 90%did. You had to have a Secret to graduate from the Academy. Not sure you are factually correct in your assumptions. Everyone I interacted with through 3 jobs had a clearance and there was a need to know. Keep the rules the same for all and no issues.

Comey and Clinton are just as big of scumbags with the handling of classified info.

I hate ND. They can’t lose enough for me. Faust was way in over his head. Holtz did a good job. You may have played against another cousin that was a DB at ND. Not sure he overlapped with Faust.

[LandM]

TLD,
I graduated in 84 - interesting sitting in a bar in Syracuse about 18 years ago and the brother of the kicker who my friend hue bob Funk blocked the kick (his old man was a Huey pilot). I remember looking over and seeing Faust on a knee pretty much praying - it was wet. Touchdown Jesus staring down at you - awesome. Blocked field goal and we walk out with the W. Fast forward my lawyer is still arguing that we never beat ND 3 in a row and a guy leans over, we talk, he lived in the neighborhood and his brother was the kicker. It is a small world. Boy has this brought some memories back. Good joke:
Your at a party with 1,000 people, how do you know the ND graduate - wait - wait - he will tell you

afan,
My humble opinion is if Comey had spoken to McCain (lots of bad blood there) or gone to the Speaker or Senate or the Supreme Court it would have looked allot better. Unfortunately out here you have a few folks who held the TS/SCI and in my case I had to sign a piece a paper for 5 years after I was officially out that stated I would not divulge what I knew - I was trying to figure out what I knew that everyone in the free world did not know Keep the rules, whomever the person and position the same and no one will will bit$h

[a fan]

afan,
My humble opinion is if Comey had spoken to McCain (lots of bad blood there) or gone to the Speaker or Senate or the Supreme Court it would have looked allot better. Unfortunately out here you have a few folks who held the TS/SCI and in my case I had to sign a piece a paper for 5 years after I was officially out that stated I would not divulge what I knew - I was trying to figure out what I knew that everyone in the free world did not know Keep the rules, whomever the person and position the same and no one will will bit$h

If I were in Comey's position, I would have followed the rules. One of my favorite TS/conflict of interest stories involves my aunt. She worked for the Dept. of Energy as a lawyer for her entire career. Over Xmas one year, I lazily asked her if she knew of any grants were available from the DoE for our nearly pollution free brewery. She angrily told me that I could look at the DoE website, and told me, in so many words, to never put her in a position like that again. Left the table that night with a whole new respect for that woman.

Philosophy degree from U Chicago, JD from Georgetown....could've worked anywhere, but heard Kennedy's call to serve her country. We were lucky to have her....and I can't imagine having to sit on the other side of the aisle with that woman in a courtroom!

THAT is the way I would handle this stuff. But that doesn't mean that I don't get why Comey did what he did.


And again: why are we all over the messenger who, so far, broke no laws-----instead of focusing on the message? Why are we allowing, for example, Kush and Trump Jr. to serve when they are CLEARLY morally and ethically compromised? You boys want to take TS and serving our country stuff seriously.....yet we allow those two to dirty our name every day they are working out there?

[Typical Lax Dad]

TLD,
I graduated in 84 - interesting sitting in a bar in Syracuse about 18 years ago and the brother of the kicker who my friend hue bob Funk blocked the kick (his old man was a Huey pilot). I remember looking over and seeing Faust on a knee pretty much praying - it was wet. Touchdown Jesus staring down at you - awesome. Blocked field goal and we walk out with the W. Fast forward my lawyer is still arguing that we never beat ND 3 in a row and a guy leans over, we talk, he lived in the neighborhood and his brother was the kicker. It is a small world. Boy has this brought some memories back. Good joke:
Your at a party with 1,000 people, how do you know the ND graduate - wait - wait - he will tell you

afan,
My humble opinion is if Comey had spoken to McCain (lots of bad blood there) or gone to the Speaker or Senate or the Supreme Court it would have looked allot better. Unfortunately out here you have a few folks who held the TS/SCI and in my case I had to sign a piece a paper for 5 years after I was officially out that stated I would not divulge what I knew - I was trying to figure out what I knew that everyone in the free world did not know Keep the rules, whomever the person and position the same and no one will will bit$h

He was class of ‘83 so you definitely played against him.

[old salt]

And again: why are we all over the messenger who, so far, broke no laws-----instead of focusing on the message? Why are we, for example, allowing Kush and Trump Jr. to serve when they are CLEARLY morally and ethically compromised? You boys want to take TS and serving our country stuff seriously.....yet we allow those two to dirty our name every day they are working out there?

Trump Jr does not serve. Based on reporting -- Kushner does not hold a SCI. How go you propose we disallow them ?
Specific proof plz. The whistleblower that Rep Cummings & the media are basing their accusations upon did not provide evidence as to why they should be disallowed. Cumming's went quiet after the official that granted Kushner's clearance gave his comm a deposition.

[a fan]

The should be disallowed because they met in Trump Tower with a spy, breaking what I used to think were ethical rules that a child could understand. They don't know right from wrong, and have broadcast this fact to fascist governments all over the world, making them ripe for the picking. I lost track of where Trump Jr. was in the world, so my mistake if he's not overseas, overtly working for the Trump empire.

Guys like you USED to flip out over stuff like that Tower meeting. Now? "Who cares, that's not illegal", is your answer.

So my answer is: because Republican voters like you value policy over integrity and morals: nothing. We should do nothing about Kush. Or, if you prefer: cheer him on. Hooray, Kush!!

[old salt]

The should be disallowed because they met in Trump Tower with a spy, breaking what I used to think were ethical rules that a child could understand. They don't know right from wrong, and have broadcast this fact to fascist governments all over the world, making them ripe for the picking. I lost track of where Trump Jr. was in the world, so my mistake if he's not overseas, overtly working for the Trump empire.

Guys like you USED to flip out over stuff like that Tower meeting. Now? "Who cares, that's not illegal", is your answer.

So my answer is: because Republican voters like you value policy over integrity and morals: nothing. We should do nothing about Kush. Or, if you prefer: cheer him on. Hooray, Kush!!

Nobody is cheering him on. I ask again, how do you propose he be disallowed ? Do you think any (R)'s or Conservatives are advising Trump that it's a good idea for Kushner to serve or to hold a security clearance. Despite 3 years of investigations, media digging & whistle blower accusations, the specific wrong doing necessary to disqualify him has not been brought forward. Rep Cummings gave up on it after deposing Kline.

[a fan]

For Republican leadership to grow a spine and demand he be removed. Simple. And for that to happen, Republican voters like you need to tell your reps when a line has been crossed.

Or Hannity and FoxNation. If they called for Kush's head, Trump would remove him immediately. Instead, what do we get? We have to wait a decade to wait for the book to come out, detailing all the damage he's doing.

The list of "things it's ok for the next President to do" is about 100 miles long, and growing with each passing day Trump is in office......

[a fan]

Nobody is cheering him on.

BTW, what do you think those 80%+ approval ratings for Trump among Republicans are doing, if not cheering?

[MDlaxfan76]

Salty keeps claiming that Comey leaked classified information. That's not what the IG found. He also keeps claiming that the issue rested on 'proving intent', but that's not what the IG found either, as the issue was instead whether classified information had actually been leaked or not. And the answer was fundamentally no. Indeed, the evidence showed that Comey took pains to exclude classified information from what was released.

He also tries to set up a false equivalency with Petraeus' errors (both mishandled sensitive and/or classified information), but Petraeus knowingly shared classified info with his lover. Not so Comey. I hope history treats Petraeus well, despite this error, but it was certainly more serious than Comey's. And, for our purposes though not the IG's, here's where intent does come in: Petraeus' intent had no honorable or patriotic aspect. Comey's did.

That said, the IG found Comey's actions deserving of sharp reprimand, as the rules and guidelines on how to handle sensitive (not classified) information were abused and that precedent needs to be rejected. I'm good with that.

You continue to inaccurately restate my positions. That is dishonest.

I clearly stated that the classified portion of what Comey shared with his lawyers was not disclosed to the public. The lawyer who leaked to the media only disclosed unclassified content. That does not absolve Comey from mishandling classified material & disclosing it to his friend & the lawyers who did not have security clearances or need to know. Comey's violation was the disclosure of classified material to unauthorized persons.
Comey's "leak" was the disclosure to his lawyer friend, which included a small amount of classified content.
This facilitated the subsequent leak to the media which did not include the classified content.

Reread my Petraeus post. I took pains to say that his case was similar to Comey's, not that their misdeeds were equal in magnitude.
I made that distinction because I anticipated that you would disingenuously say that I equated them, as you predictably did.

I see, you were just comparing them as "similar" without making clear that they're actually quite different. But nah, you don't want folks to think that "similar", without clear distinction, means "equate". Or my term "trying to set up a false equivalency".

And you want to hide behind that???

That's what seems "disingenuous" to me.

The IG had a very different finding re Comey than was found about Petraeus, and for darn good reasons...and not needing to go to "intent".

You keep repeating that Comey committed what would be understood as criminal, the disclosure of classified information, more particularly the knowing disclosure of classified information. That's NOT what the IG found. "Mishandling" sensitive information is another matter altogether. Not to be taken lightly, but not criminal.

Others are interpreting what you have said, the same as I am, including your various acolytes on this thread.

I won't call it or you "dishonest", but your word "disingenuous" does feel on point.

[MDlaxfan76]

Nobody is cheering him on.

BTW, what do you think those 80%+ approval ratings for Trump among Republicans are doing, if not cheering?

The crowds at his rallies are certainly "cheering". Pretty disgusting.