IG Report Provides Prosecution Evidence For Indictment

Comey’s intent is showcased in this IG report excerpt that will be instrumental to get the Grand Jury to return an indictment.

James Comey as FBI Director lied, broke rules and regulations that set a bad example for all those under his command and led a coup! His violations jeopardized the agency’s ethos, the people’s trust in it and may have compromised our National Security.

The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report released earlier today on August 29, 2019 is an EXCERPT of a larger investigation report (coming soon) in respects to the origination of the Russia “Investigation”. As many cock their heads, sigh and shout in disbelief that he wasn’t prosecuted, people are missing what is being demonstrated in the report.

What crimes did he commit according to this teeny tiny section of a MASSIVE multi chapter report? In short, NONE.

What this small excerpt shows is that Comey was a horrible Director of the FBI, politicized his office, had complete disregard for rules and regulations as an employee of the federal government, mishandled classified information, leaked confidential information, lied and or withheld important information for his own interests, was untrustworthy and that demonstrates his INTENT. The latter being the most crucial element of this report in respects to Comey.

What did everyone miss? A LOT.

Origination of Russia “Investigation”

1. THE EXCERPT TELLS US THE OIG INVESTIGATION IS OVER

We all know that the OIG has been investigating every facet of the Russia Investigation-from start to finish. It’s origin is in early spring of 2016 when it was discovered that the exchange server of the DNC was mirrored via jump drive, what the DNC claims was a “Russian Hack”and it ends with Special Counsel turning in his report and closing the probe.

We expect that Chapter I will encompass, discovery of email “hack”, Seth Rich, Julian Assange, Crowdstrike’s unauthorized report or trail code fingerprint manufacturing, Awan Brothers, FBI involvement, the FBI acceptance of a report that is not by a federally approved vendor and so much more. That’s only Chapter I which covers only MAR 2016 to around early JULY 2016. Comey’s excerpt is towards the end of the investigation. Releasing this tidbit means: The investigation is over.

2. IT PROVES COMEY’S LEAKING WAS DONE IN ORDER TO APPOINT A SPECIAL COUNSEL

His testimony speaks for itself.

PAGE 49 of the REPORT

In other words… Comey led a coup.

3. IT TELLS US WHAT CHAPTER THIS BELONGS TO

Comey’s leaking and concealing information along with his actions after he was fired cover the period of JAN 2017 – JULY 2017. This excerpt is from the chapter that covers “SPECIAL COUNSEL APPOINTMENT”.

The Special Counsel was appointed BECAUSE Comey was fired. Comey himself admitted that he leaked the information in order to get a Special Counsel appointed. This is a concrete example that his actions were to satisfy his interests. According to an exclusive source, this excerpt of the report was the foundation to seek an indictment under seal for many individuals including one specific case that is currently in front of a Grand Jury discussing the communications before, during and after Comey’s dismissal respectively to the manifestation of the Special Counsel appointment.

What’s surprising is that a lot of people were involved with the selection of the special counsel. There were Senior Special Agents, High Level DOJ employees like the DAG, consultations with White House officials (some now gone) and even members of Congress. It seemed well planned.

Exclusive Source

4. Baker,Priestap, Unit Chief, Rybicki, Strzok & Page (Comey Crew) Covered for Comey

Comey’s team self-appointed themselves to determine if there was any classified information in any of the memos Comey drafted.

According to the OIG REPORT:

“Strzok characterized Baker, the Unit Chief, Page, and himself as “a logical subset to sit and go through” the Memos and review them for classification because these individuals had a lot of “history and experience of working investigations relating to…the disclosure of classified information,” …”including the Chelsea Manning disclosures, the Edward Snowden (??) matter, and the Clinton email investigation. Baker was one of the designated OCAs for the FBI.”

On June 1, 2017, they began “reviewing the memos” to classify them. This was after Comey was fired, after the FBI came to his house to collect all FBI related materials and after Comey had testified, BUT before the FBI found out he shared more than one memo. On June 8, 2017, Comey testified and was provided his memos that now had markings indicating Secret, Confidential or Unclassified on them which he never did.

The Comey Crew didn’t know he shared more than one memo. They were only aware of Memo #4 which was the foundation of the NY Times article. Comey intentionally withheld the fact that he shared more than one memo (Memo #4) from the FBI even after he realized they were deemed classified.

The report reiterates the claims the Comey Crew made describing their “rigorous” back and forth in their endeavors to appropriately classify the memos’ contents. This pony show was a sad attempt to give the impression that they were impartial but they were NOT, here is why:

7 memos, 3 were UNCLASSIFIED

MEMO 6: This “memo” described a meeting that he had with the President and then relayed the whole conversation to Acting Attorney General. Once information is shared in a telephonic non-classified cable/phone manner, even documented memorandum of call is almost NEVER classified unless the entire conversation was on a secure line.

MEMO 5: This “memo” was an email to Rybicki – not really a memo. It’s wording and statements sound like he was responding to an earlier communication or topic of interest. It almost seemed as if he was demonstrating events to satisfy some notion made to Rybicki earlier. Was he paranoid that the Trump administration knew what he did?

On February 27, 2017 Comey and Rybicki had a conversation in front of many of us in respects to how the President is constantly talking with Jim and that he suspected there was an investigation or something fishy in the way he is overly friendly. He (Comey) expressed the thought that there might be a whistleblower type leaker feeding back information.

Exclusive FBI Source

MEMO 4: This “memo” could have been classified, at the very least, as confidential. In this memo he described the nature of a meeting the President held prior to his arrival and identified many people who were part of that meeting that he was attending. In this memo, he identified all individuals that sat in on a Homeland Security session, allowing other countries to know which departments and which types of people they would be able to target in order to garner effective espionage assets. Furthermore, in this memo Comey made it a point to highlight that the document was UNCLASSIFIED. It was almost as if he was planning to share the memo by identifying it within the body of the memo. Maybe to possibly let the appropriate members of the FBI (Comey Crew) know it was the one he disseminated to the NY Times? That in itself was very strange.

Why would you say NOTE|This is an unclassified document to yourself?

As far as we know, the Comey Crew had no idea that Comey had shared more than one memo. Comey had shared memos 2, 4, 6 and 7, two of which were classified as CONFIDENTIAL. Memo 6 was a record of non-secure conversation, Memo 5 wasn’t even a Memo and Memo 4 was self-proclaimed as an unclassified memo. The Comey Crew honored his request to not classify it, though many in the intelligence community would argue that identifying the departments and personnel present in a meeting pertaining to National Security would most like warrant discretion and at the very least marked classified. Our guess is that if they had known he shared Memo 2 they would have determined that to be unclassified too.

5. Strzok LIED to the OIG

We thoroughly read the report and discovered that the examination and classification of the MEMOS were done PRIOR to the testimony. In fact, it clearly states the process began on June 1, 2017 and ended on June 6, 2017. The report clearly notes that on June 8, 2017 while Comey was testifying, he received copies of each of his memos with the appropriate markings his original memos lacked.

Considering those facts why did Strzok and Baker claim that when they heard Comey state that he gave MEMO 4 to a friend from Columbia University they called Richman (cause they knew it was him) to tell him that the Memo may have classified information? They KNEW it did not. They deemed it to be unclassified, so why make that statement?

After that call, Richman called the FBI on June 12, 2017 to find out what the process was in collecting such a document and how “invasive” it may be. He was probably wondering if he would have to hand over his computer, email address info etc. He spoke with Priestap and the Unit Chief (Mary McCord?) and discussed his concerns. It was at that time that Richman expressed his concerns over the other memos – and divulged that he and another two attorneys had received them.

That means that Strzok may have perjured himself to the OIG because he claimed he knew about the other memos and attorneys no later than June 9, 2017 and provided a handwritten note to himself claiming this.

If that were true, that would mean that Strzok withheld that information from the Unit Chief and others for at least 3 days. Looks like Strzok may be lying again…this time to the OIG.

Comey had the audacity to tweet a “victory lap” but this battle just cost him the war.

His tweet is 100% true BUT he did provide classified information to people that did not have clearance to see it or a need to know.

This tweet is 100% false. This report demonstrates that he leaked the memo to the NY Times. It also indicates that he lied many times pretending he didn’t know or excusing himself in a crafty way.

Here is what we hear is going on. Currently, Grand Juries are examining to return indictments. These indictments are lacking behavior that indicates intent to obfuscate, intentional or repeat violations of rules and regulations as well as disregard for procedures and honesty. Defense is claiming that it is unlike them to violate the rules and has always followed them.

The public release of this report demonstrates INTENT. As for Comey it demonstrates: Intentional disregard for rules and regulations, obfuscating facts, intentionally concealing that he was in possession of documents he KNEW were property of the FBI, leaking information, disseminating classified information to people without a clearance and not taking responsibility for his actions. Simply put, he knew the rules but he didn’t care as long as he got a Special Counsel appointed.

Sources we have been speaking to have gone as far to say that Rod Rosenstein suggesting President Trump fire Comey was their plan all along in order to get a Special Counsel appointed.

The special counsel may have attempted or succeeded in deleting evidence, emails, and TEXTS and act as a roadblock to stymie the presidency until they successfully overthrew a duly elected president or were shut down.

Whatever the case may be this report proves that Comey is a liar, a leaker and a loser who was a horrific FBI Director. Being a loser, liar and leaker isn’t really a crime but we can agree that :

  • Intentionally signing FISA warrant applications with knowingly false information is.
  • Intentionally lying to Congress is.
  • Intentionally protecting the mastermind behind this coup is.
  • Intentionally lying to a FISA judge is.

In summary, this excerpt demonstrates that Comey intentionally withheld information, intended to get a Special Counsel appointed, obstructed an investigation and had personal interests that were politically motivated and evident in his actions as FBI Director and after he was fired. It demonstrates ill INTENT, which will be instrumental when he is indicted for the crimes he has committed.

His unapologetic self-righteous rhetoric while playing an instrumental part in the most obnoxious and unapologetic coup against a duly elected president in U.S. history is a crime against the people in itself.

The investigation is OVER. Why is the Report NOT released?

You can’t have information that is currently being heard by Grand Juries public until the indictments returned are unsealed. Judging from this release we expect indictments to be popping like popcorn in the next couple of weeks.

It’s Criminal when it’s INTENTIONAL.

Tore is a nationally syndicated talk radio host that airs live M-F 12-2PM EST on Red State Talk Radio and a contributor for LauraLoomer.US.

You Might Like