Judicial Watch: Emails Show FBI Advised Comey to Consult with Mueller’s Office Prior to June 2017...

Judicial Watch ^ | May 10, 2018 | Tom Fitton

[jazusamo]

Full title: Judicial Watch: Emails Show FBI Advised Comey to Consult with Mueller’s Office Prior to June 2017 Testimony

(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch today released new emails from the Department of Justice (DOJ) showing that former FBI Director James Comey was advised by FBI officials in May 2017 to consult with Special Counsel Robert Mueller prior to testifying before any congressional committees regarding Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election and his firing as FBI director.

According to numerous news reports , Comey met directly with Mueller previous to his June 8, 2017, testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Sources said that Comey’s opening statement and subsequent testimony were coordinated with Mueller.

At the hearing, Comey revealed that he had intentionally leaked material from a memo allegedly documenting a meeting with President Trump in order to help assure the appointment of a special counsel.

I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. Didn’t do it myself, for a variety of reasons. But I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.

The DOJ and FBI have stated that Comey’s leaks were unauthorized and compared the disclosures to Wikileaks.

The documents obtained by Judicial Watch are the first to reveal that high-ranking FBI officials helped Comey coordinate his testimony with Mueller.

Judicial Watch obtained the documents in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the DOJ on January 31, 2018 ( Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-00220)). The lawsuit was filed after the DOJ failed to respond to an August 14, 2017 FOIA request seeking:

• All records of communications between the FBI and Comey prior to and regarding Comey’s testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on June 8, 2017.
• All records of communications between the FBI and Comey relating to an upcoming book to be authored by Comey and published.
• All records, including but not limited to forms completed by Comey, relating to the requirement for prepublication review by the FBI of any book to be authored by Comey with the intent to be published or otherwise publicly available.

On May 17, 2017, Comey received notices to appear before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence the Senate Judiciary Committee , and the House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee.

An email chain dated May 18 and 19, 2017, with the subject line “ Future testimony ” shows then-FBI Chief of Staff James Rybicki, then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and Assistant Director Gregory Brower, Comey and others discussing Comey’s upcoming testimony:

In this chain, on May 18 at 6:30 pm, Comey wrote to Rybicki to confirm that he had accepted the invitation to testify before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) but declined the invitations from the Senate Judiciary Committee and House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee.

Comey also writes: “Last, would you please tell OGC [Office of the General Counsel] that I would like to be able to review any documents authored by me or on which I am copied that will be produced to SSCI in connection with my testimony and would like the opportunity for that review before I testify?”

An email from a redacted sender, apparently Comey, to Rybicki dated May 19 at 11:49 am reads:

Jim

I just got off a call with Senators Burr and Warner. They would like to have a hearing next Wednesday at which I testify, first in open session and then in closed, if necessary. I asked them not to announce it until I check with FBI/DOJ to see if you want to discuss anything before they do that. I told them I had asked for guidance on any institutional prerogatives and for the opportunity to review any documents FBI has produced that relate to me. I told them I would communicate with them by the end of the day to either ask them to hold announcing the Wednesday hearing or go ahead.

Many thanks.

Jim

On May 19 at 2:10 pm, Rybicki writes back:

Director: We just met to discuss the requests outlined in the two emails below. Before responding the General Counsel has asked me to confirm that you have discussed with the attorneys representing you, and that you are comfortable discussing these issues with us rather than communicating through your counsel.

On May 19 at 3:02 pm, a redacted sender, likely Comey, responds to Rybicki: “Yes and yes.”

Also in this chain, on May 19 at 4:11 pm, Rybicki writes to McCabe, FBI Deputy Director David L. Bowdich, former FBI General Counsel James A. Baker, Brower, Elizabeth Beers and other redacted names:

Please see a DRAFT response to Director Comey (below). I will hold pending further direction….

Director:

In response to your emails below we have consulted with executive management here, including the General Counsel, and recommend the following:

1. That your counsel convey any acceptance or declinations to invitations to testify directly to the Committees.
2. That your counsel consult with Special Counsel Mueller to determine the timing of any such testimony and,
3. The Office of General Counsel stands ready to discuss with you in consultation with the Department of Justice and the Special Counsel, institutional privileges or prerogatives that may be presented by any such testimony.

“These documents show that James Comey, who was fired by the president, nevertheless had easy, friendly access to the FBI as he prepped his infamous anti-Trump testimony to the Senate,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This collusion led to Comey’s attacking President Trump and misusing FBI records as part of a vendetta against the president.”

###

[qaz123]

I’m aware.

Is it a requirement that the AG needs to be a lawyer?

The FBI Director doesn’t have to be an agent.

CIA Director doesn’t have to be a spy.

Sec of State doesn’t have to come from the Diplomatic Corps, nor do any Ambassadors.

Fitton would go thru there like wrecking ball, which is exactly that we need. And, even though he’s not a lawyer, he probably knows more about the law, than most of them. And, then he can bring in some of his most trusted associates to help him out.

[yesthatjallen]

I didn't read this article

Didn't JW, many months ago, say that had something like 46/47 hard drives with stuff on them?

Whatever happened with that?

[ProtectOurFreedom]

Good Lord this stinks to high heaven.

"...high-ranking FBI officials helped Comey coordinate his testimony with Mueller."

MUELLER is guilty of COLLUDING with the FBI to get their stories straight! Why keep the Trump investigation going when it is HE who did the colluding?

There's a reason why every single detective TV show shows the detectives keeping the suspects separated - prevents coordinating stories and let's them play them against each other.

When are the indictments handed down?

[ProtectOurFreedom]

Isn’t he the greatest?!! One of the few true investigative and honest journalists not on the payroll of DNC. I love his dogged pursuit of the bastards and his filing of all the FOIA requests.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

He vigorously defends the Constitution unlike all the swamp bastards who lied when they took the oath to defend it. That’s good enough for me. It would be better if AG were not a lawyer IMO.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

Keep hammering away, Judicial Watch!

You’re doing the heavy lifting that no one else seems to want to do!

*BUMP*

MAGA! :)

[jazusamo]

Back atcha BUMP! :^)

[soozla]

I don’t think Fitton is an attorney....as a matter of fact, I KNOW he’s not, as he has said as much.....he just has great attorneys surrounding him, I’m sure!!

[qaz123]

OMG....You KNOW he’s not an attorney.

I NEVER SAID HE WAS.

As someone stated before, he’s not an attorney, so, does the Attorney General need to be a lawyer? I don’t know, SmartyPants, you tell me, that as a political appointee, does the AG need to be a lawyer. Because, as I stated earlier, than the FBI Director needs to be an agent. The CIA Director needs to be a spy. Secretary of State and all Ambassadors NEED to come from the Diplomatic Corps, etc, etc, etc, etc.

I believe that it was none other than Donald J Trump, who wrote, don’t ever be afraid to hire someone more talented or smarter than you are. In other words, hire them for their talents and intelligence and when they’re done, let them move on to the next person that is willing to pay.

As for Fitton, I don’t care that he’s not a lawyer. Is Session’s prosecuting cases? No. He has lawyers that work for the DOJ doing that. Some are probably great attorney’s, too. Hmmmmm...that kind of sounds similar to something I just read about a guy that surrounds himself with great attorney’s.

On a side note, I’m betting he knows a lot more about being an attorney than most attorneys. Same goes for paralegals. They’re the ones doing all the grunt work for the lawyers, after some time, they know as much or more.

[Libloather]

My question - if President Trump colluded with Russia, why does Mueller have to ask him ANY questions? It should be in the bag...

[Tunehead54]

Perhaps related ... you don’t have to be a lawyer to be a United States Supreme Court Justice but all have been IIRC.

The ABA always “rates” nominees qualifications level but a president and the Senate could ignore their opinions entirely.

[jazusamo]

Yep...That turkey doesn’t have to ask President Trump questions about collusion because he knows there wasn’t any but he wants to ask him questions so he can trick POTUS on a phony perjury charge or find ANYTHING he might be able to charge him with.

[Liz]

Mueller is being hounded by panicky Democrats. The losers built their 2918 strategy on their success at
removing Trump.They need something....anything....to get back their mojo.

[Liz]

(hat tip Victor Davis Hanson)

After Trump won, the super-confident Deep State had the power to either stop, remove, or delegitimize Trump and his presidency....

Obama’s apparat quite imaginatively pulled out all the stops:

<><>implanting Obama holdover appointees all over the executive branch;

<><>filing lawsuits and judge shopping;

<><>organizing the Resistance;

<><>pursuing impeachment writs;

<><>warping the FISA courts;

<><>weaponizing the DOJ and FBI;

<><>attempting to disrupt the Electoral College;

<><>angling for enactment of the 25th Amendment or the emoluments clause; and,

<><> unleashing Hollywood celebrities, Silicon Valley, and many in Wall Street to suffocate the Trump presidency in its infancy.

All of it indicative of the Third World mentality the Halfrican brought to the presidency. The scurrilous T/W tactic of using the power of government to attack and suppress people who get in their way.

[nicollo]

I just got off a call with Senators Burr and Warner.

This SOB Warner needs get exposed, over and over. He's as dirty in this as anyone in the Senate, including Reid and McCain. And he's still standing.

[confederatecarpetbag]

Interesting perspective. Perhaps you are right. I never thought of a non-lawyer for AG. An outsider would definitely be an out-of-the-box move, typically Trumpian.

Doubt Fitton would get confirmed though. The first objection would be lack of a law degree. You could make book on it

[confederatecarpetbag]

Have we ever had an AG that wasn’t a lawyer? Hard to imagine a non-attorney taking over as the nation’s most important attorney.

That would be like appointing a lawyer to run the chief investigative agency.

Oh wait...

[WASCWatch]

Getting confirmed as the US AG might not be easy for a non-attorney, but there is no requirement.

There is also no requirement to be an attorney in order to qualify to be a justice on the USSC.

[soozla]

http://qa.answers.com/Q/Does_the_attorney_general_have_to_be_a_lawyer

If being an attorney is NOT a requirement for becoming Attorney General, and Tom Fitton is not a lawyer, I agree, Fitton would be an awesome choice. He gets the job done, as he has proven over and over again!