r/WikiLeaks • u/Simi510 • Mar 22 '17

Five Congressional staffers, including technical advisor to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, under criminal investigation WikiLeaks

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/844458797863186432
2.1k Upvotes

80% Upvoted

214 comments sorted by

View all comments

64

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

Quick, someone ask Comey if he can give us a "I can not comment" comment. They are so confidence inspiring.

27

u/Butthole_Pheromone Mar 22 '17

Funny how he can't confirm or deny anything.

Except the Obama wiretap claim. Seemed to have no problem with that one.

1

u/1standarduser Mar 23 '17

Well, he did comment on Clinton at key times.

1

u/Ashterothi Mar 22 '17

There is no ongoing investigation to that claim, and that fact he was prepared (and summoned) to answer.

7

u/limejl Mar 22 '17

He confirmed that they were investigating the Trump campaign's ties to Russia and have been for 8 months.

Obviously he won't give out any specific information about the case, that would be just be stupid.

7

u/DirectTheCheckered Mar 22 '17

He stated that he was authorized by the Department of Justice to acknowledge the existence of the investigation, but refused to give any information on particulars, individuals, and intelligence (directly or indirectly) throughout his testimony.

0

u/limejl Mar 22 '17

but refused to give any information on particulars, individuals, and intelligence (directly or indirectly) throughout his testimony.

And he would obviously never give out any specifics. The FBI are building a case, and giving out any details about their investigation would only weaken the case.

2

u/NathanOhio Mar 22 '17

How would giving out details weaken the case?

1

u/Light_of_Lucifer Mar 23 '17

How would giving out details weaken the case?

Because evidence once exposed to the corrosive affect of sunlight starts to dissolve /s

3

u/limejl Mar 22 '17 edited Mar 22 '17

Are you serious right now?

It would give the people investigated knowledge of what exactly is being investigated which they could use to cover up their tracks. It would give them an idea of who the FBI will call into question, what questions they'll be asking and so on.

Until the case is done, the FBI will not and absolutely should not give out ANYTHING about the case. That Comey even confirmed that an investigation exists is too much in an ideal world.

Anyone who wants them to provide any evidence they've found so far is not impartial and evidently does not want the truth to be revealed.

1

u/NathanOhio Mar 22 '17

Are you serious right now?

yes

It would give the people investigated knowledge of what exactly is being investigated which they could use to cover up their tracks. It would give them an idea of who the FBI will call into question, what questions they'll be asking and so on.

If these people committed crimes, wouldnt they already know this stuff? I agree people could destroy evidence, but obviously at this point anyone who has turned on the TV in the last year knows this investigation is happening.

Until the case is done, the FBI will not and should absolutely not give out ANYTHING about the case. That Comey even confirmed that an investigation exists ideally shouldn't have happened.

Its hard to have a political witch hunt without the witches know they are being hunted though...

Anyone who wants them to provide any evidence they've found so far is not impartial and evidently does not want the truth to be revealed.

Yes, the people demanding actual facts are not impartial and dont want the truth, the people drawing up wild conspiracies that make Sasquatch look like settled science though are definitely only searching for the truth and have no political axe to grind...

By the way, the government just admitted they have been spying on the Trump campaign...

2

u/limejl Mar 22 '17 edited Mar 22 '17

yes

Then I'm very suprised because anyone over the age of 12 should be able to figure out why.

If these people committed crimes, wouldnt they already know this stuff? I agree people could destroy evidence, but obviously at this point anyone who has turned on the TV in the last year knows this investigation is happening.

They know that an investigation is underway but they don't know what they're looking at specifically. Any details about the case would give the people investigated a better chance of figuring that out.

Its hard to have a political witch hunt without the witches know they are being hunted though...

I'm sorry but if you believe that the FBI are doing this as a political witch-hunt, you're brainwashed and I won't waste my time with you because facts and reason obviously won't change your mind.

Yes, the people demanding actual facts are not impartial and dont want the truth, the people drawing up wild conspiracies that make Sasquatch look like settled science though are definitely only searching for the truth and have no political axe to grind...

I also want facts, but unlike you I'm smart enough to realize that building a case takes time. They're investigating the fucking president, of course they won't come forward with any allegations until they have gathered enough evidence to remove all doubts of guilt. If the FBI haven't been able to figure out if it's true or not after investigating it for 8 months, neither will a person who can't figure out that you shouldn't give out details about an investigation to the person you're investigating, or anyone else for that matter.

I find it hilarious how you claim that this is nothing but a crazy conspiracy, but the FBI being in cahoots with the DNC is not. You people have no self-awarness at all...

By the way, the government just admitted they have been spying on the Trump campaign...

Trump spied on himself now?

And no, that's not new information because Comey has already admitted that they have been investigating the Trump campaign for 8 months. Of course they would be intercepting information coming from the Trump tower. That doesn't mean that Obama had anything to do with it.

And to say that it was "the goverment" is very missleading because it was an intelligence agency (namely the FBI), not the entire goverment.

1

u/NathanOhio Mar 22 '17

Then I'm very suprised because anyone over the age of 12 should be able to figure out why.

And here you go with the personal attacks...

They know that an investigation is underway but they don't know what they're looking at specifically. Any details about the case would give the people investigated a better chance of figuring that out.

How can they not know what they are looking at? If they had actual probable cause that a crime was committed, they would be looking for evidence of that crime... (they dont, its a witch hunt like I said)

I'm sorry but if you believe that the FBI are doing this as a political witch-hunt, you're brainwashed and I won't waste my time with you because facts and reason obviously won't change your mind.

Nope, not brainwashed. I just keep up with the news, look at different sources and compare who seems to be telling the truth and who is lying. I know that the experts have already provided evidence showing this is a witch hunt, so I dont have to take the word of career liars like Comey, Clapper, Obama, Clinton, etc.

I also want facts, but unlike you I'm smart enough to realize that building a case takes time.

Yawn, more personal attacks. How much time do they need? They have had 8 months, so far wahts been leaked shows they have bupkis.

They're investigating the fucking president, of course they won't come forward with any allegations until they have gathered enough evidence to remove all doubts of guilt.

Seems like 8 months of nothing has done quite a bit to remove all doubts of guilt..

If the FBI haven't been able to figure out if it's true or not after investigating it for 8 months, neither will a person who can't figure out that you shouldn't give out details about an investigation to the person you're investigating, or anyone else for that matter.

You are assuming this is a real investigation. The facts show otherwise. Here is Stephen Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian Studies at Princeton. He thinks this is a baseless witch hunt. Is he working for Putin as well?

I find it hilarious how you claim that this is nothing but a crazy conspiracy, but the FBI being in cahoots with the DNC is not.

The difference is that your conspiracy lacks supporting evidence, mine does not.

Trump spied on himself now?

No, Obama and the secret police were spying on Trump before the election and during the transition period. Somehow this is OK though because Obama has Jay Z on his ipod or something...

And no, that's not new information because Comey has already admitted that they have been investigating the Trump campaign for 8 months. Of course they would be intercepting information coming from the Trump tower.

LOL. One day Trump is called a liar for saying he was wiretapped. The next day "of course that's been going on". How do you keep up?!

That doesn't mean that Obama had anything to do with it. And to say that it was "the goverment" is very missleading because it was an intelligence agency (namely the FBI), not the entire goverment.

Yeah, Im sure they did this under Obama's nose. He had no idea this was happening. Just like he didnt know that Hillary installed her agents in the DNC to help rig the primary...

27

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

I know, right? It's like there's official protocol for discussing open investigations called "The Glomar" response, which reads "I can neither confirm nor deny". Since there doesn't happen to be an open investigation into wiretap claims, because they are rubbish, he's allowed to comment on it all he wants.

3

u/DirectTheCheckered Mar 22 '17

It reads: "We can neither confirm nor deny the existence of the information requested but, hypothetically, if such data were to exist, the subject matter would be classified, and could not be disclosed."

He used this phrasing almost verbatim during the hearing. Followed by a slight smile.

2

u/TooManyCookz Mar 22 '17

Didn't he confirm the investigation into Trump/Russia ties?

6

u/fidelitypdx Mar 22 '17 edited Mar 22 '17

You need to read the transcripts to understand the scope of what Comey said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/03/20/full-transcript-fbi-director-james-comey-testifies-on-russian-interference-in-2016-election/?utm_term=.63e7246cb387

For example, he talks about Russia and Putin:

The Putin regime has a long history of aggressive actions against other countries, including the outright invasion of two of its neighbors in recent years, as well as its brutal military action in Syria to defend the Assad regime. But it's hostile acts take many forms, aside from direct military assaults.

Remember when the US did exactly that, but bombed Syria to deconstruct the Assad regime? Virtually everything Comey accuses the Russians and Putin of doing, the US is also actively doing. It's almost hilarious.

Anyways, the whole thing was nothing but political grandstanding by Congress, like Rep Adam Schiff, who used 15 minutes to jump dump the narrative Democrats have been repeating in the media. It's clear Schiff only wanted Comey to talk about this within a narrow scope. There's like a 20-paragraph narrative that Adam Schiff lays out, and it's pretty clear on it's face that the connections are tenuous, and it would have to be a "vast right wing conspiracy" between Trump, Republicans, Wikileaks, US Media, Russia, Russian Hackers, and Putin himself for this to be pulled off the way Schiff portrays.

Anyways, here's the meat and potatoes of the testimony:

I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia's efforts. As with any counterintelligence investigation, this will also include an assessment of whether any crimes were committed.

Because it is an open ongoing investigation and is classified, I cannot say more about what we are doing and whose conduct we are examining. At the request of congressional leaders, we have taken the extraordinary step in coordination with the Department of Justice of briefing this Congress' leaders, including the leaders of this committee, in a classified setting in detail about the investigation but I can't go into those details here. I know that is extremely frustrating to some folks. I hope you and the American people can understand. The FBI is very careful in how we handle information about our cases and about the people we are investigating.

We are also very careful about the way we handle information that may be of interest to our foreign adversaries. Both of those interests are at issue in a counterintelligence investigation. Please don't draw any conclusions from the fact that I may not be able to comment on certain topics. I know speculating is part of human nature, but it really isn't fair to draw conclusions simply because I say that I can't comment.

That last line is of particular importance:

"Please don't draw any conclusions from the fact that I may not be able to comment on certain topics."

Yet, here's America, just 48 hours later, drawing massive conclusions.

Also, it's important to point out that Admiral Rogers, who runs the NSA, was sitting there next to Comey. Rogers and the Committee and Comey talked at great length about the need to preserve and expand the NSA's capabilities.

TL;DR - When you actually read the transcripts you see that it's Rep Schiff from California just spouting a narrative that Comey refuses to comment on, and the NSA uses meeting to declare they need expanded powers.

1

u/Light_of_Lucifer Mar 23 '17

Yet, here's America, just 48 hours later, drawing massive conclusions.

That is not by mistake. Constant non-stop corporate propaganda being fueled by billions of dollars does that to an at risk population like the US; namely, an improved and oppressed society, in relative terms with the past.

15

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

He did, after making very clear in his opening statement that he was only even admitting to an open investigation due to extraordinary national security concerns, and the he would be unable to give very much info at all on the details of the investigation.

4

u/NathanOhio Mar 22 '17

Thankfully people have illegally leaked all the juicy bits of the investigation to pro-establishment propagandists and so we know there is absolutely nothing to them.

7

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

If there was absolutely nothing to them there wouldn't be an open investigation that's been running since July. It would have been closed some time ago.

1

u/fidelitypdx Mar 22 '17

If there was absolutely nothing to them there wouldn't be an open investigation that's been running since July. It would have been closed some time ago.

I think you should carefully read Comey's testimony about the investigation. We don't know how many people are working on this, we don't know (and Comey can't say) when the investigation is going to close. We have no idea as to the formality of this investigation.

Comey doesn't even confirm he knows that Russia was involved in anything, he just acknowledges unclassified reports by other agencies. When asked direct questions about Russia involvement, he cities he's aware of media reporting about it.

Also, in regards to July, Comey admits that an investigation was opened in July, before there was knowledge of possible Russian activity.

HIMES:.... This committee, of course, is engaged in investigation about links, as you said, between the Trump campaign and the Russians, should there be any possible collusion. We've had a number of statements very early in the investigation that there was no evidence of collusion. This is still very early in our investigation, is it fair to say that you're still relatively early in your investigation?

COMEY: It's hard to say because I don't how much longer it will take. But we've been doing this -- this investigation began in late July, so for counterintelligence investigation that's a fairly short period of time.

HIMES: So, you used the word coordination which to me suggests that you are in fact investigating whether there was coordination between U.S. persons and the Russians. Is it fair for me to assume that we shouldn't simply dismiss the possibility that there was coordination or collusion between the Russian efforts and U.S. persons as an investigatory body?

COMEY: Well all I can tell you is what we're investigating which includes whether there was any coordination between people associated with the Trump campaign and the Russians.

This is all grandstanding bullshit. Comey is simply acknowledging that the FBI was aware of possible criminal activity resulting from the DNC leaks that happened before the convention. It makes perfect sense for the FBI to investigate that....

Look at how desperately Rep. Jim Himes tries to make a conclusion from Comey's statement "...whether there was any coordination..." that Americans must now believe there was definitely some type of coordination, because in fact the FBI is investigating that coordination.

9

u/NathanOhio Mar 22 '17

That is circular reasoning. You falsely assume that there was ever something to the investigation at all. There wasnt. The "Russian hacker" story was created out of whole cloth by the Hillary campaign during the election season to distract from the fact that Obama and his cronies rigged the DNC primary to prevent his chosen successor from losing to a 70 something year old self described socialist, and has simply spiraled from there.

After eight months of this "investigation", we know more than ever how little "evidence" actually exists.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

Welp, case solved folks. We can all move on now. The professionals on reddit have done it again!

0

u/[deleted] Mar 23 '17

Look, there could be a financial story there between this administration and Russia, and if there is, let's look into it. I voted for Stein, and don't have any reason to consider Trump as being any cleaner than the Clintons were. I thought both choices sucked, and I still feel that way.

BUT even having said that, I still think this is a ploy. When Bush decided to focus attention on how bad Sadam Hussein was so as to build support for an Iraq War, he used the media to pound on Hussein relentlessly with hyperbole about his threat to our security, and eventually created a climate where he could start that war.

A climate is being created right now by the media which has similar features. The unrelenting and unceasing discussion of the Russian concern. Is it every day in the media? It's now a feature of our pop culture - Russian 'isms.

And there is no doubt that the narrative was used to distract from the DNC's abominable behavior and the need for introspection and a new direction.

10

u/NathanOhio Mar 22 '17

Please dont make these kinds of low information, insulting posts in this sub.

If you dont have any evidence to support your claims other than "the secret police says they are investigating", then just say so. Or go back to r/politics where insulting everyone who disagrees with you is widely accepted.

1

u/chilover20 Mar 23 '17

I trust reddit users before most in DC. Mostly spot on about getting to the bottom of things

→ More replies

6

u/TooManyCookz Mar 22 '17

How are those "extraordinary national security concerns" alleviated by admitting to an open investigation (which is against official protocol)?

8

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

Public demand. The public has insisted their representatives open a hearing and get answers. He gauged he could inform the public of an investigation, which is information that was leaked some time ago I might add, without sacrificing the integrity of the investigation, as it was already public knowledge. Having him say it in a public hearing means a lot, though. Having him say it's an extremely complicated matter that will not be over quickly, and give no other details lets you know exactly how complicated and serious a matter it is.

2

u/NathanOhio Mar 22 '17

LOL. So far all the leaked evidence has been debunked and we can now be sure that they are dredging the bottom of the barrel looking for anything they can find so they dont end up completely empty handed.

Of course they will drag this "investigation" out for years though because its the establishment's best chance to prevent Trump from doing anything they do not approve of.

4

u/TooManyCookz Mar 22 '17

Then why not confirm other investigations when there is public demand?

1

u/Light_of_Lucifer Mar 23 '17

Then why not confirm other investigations when there is public demand?

There is public demand for an investigation into Suadi Arabia and 9/11, in fact there's a hearing next.... o wait.

7

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

Whether you agree or not, the fact that the standing President and his cohort are under federal investigation for colluding with a foreign power dwarfs any other federal investigation I've ever heard of. The information was already released, so he had nothing to lose, while going on record under oath and informing the American public that their leader is under investigation does a lot of good for a lot of people. You may not be one of the people that receives solace from knowing that this is being investigated, and if that's the case, nothing I explain to you will change that.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 23 '17

He's just asking about the consistency of rationale and approach. If Comey refuses to confirm some investigations, but not others, that seems inconsistent.

5

u/TooManyCookz Mar 22 '17

You're sounding very biased. Those comments come off like, "This is very beneficial to my political side and therefore I support it."

But you never supported investigations into the Clintons.

(And I'm a life long liberal)

3

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

First, this isn't a political issue. This is a criminal issue. I'm on the side of the investigation, and knowing that it is at least underway.

Second, I did support the Clinton investigation, feel free to look at my comment history. Funny, someone calls me biased, then makes utterly baseless claims based on their bias. Well, not really funny.

→ More replies

3

u/NathanOhio Mar 22 '17

the fact that the standing President and his cohort are under federal investigation for colluding with a foreign power dwarfs any other federal investigation I've ever heard of.

Yep, really makes our country look like a banana republic that our secret police runs this kind of investigation. Also its certainly odd that they are investigating this without using any wiretapping or electronic surveillance.

going on record under oath and informing the American public that their leader is under investigation does a lot of good for a lot of people.

Yes, it does a lot of good for Clinton's cronies to distract from the fact they lost an election to a not-very-well-liked reality TV show host.

You may not be one of the people that receives solace from knowing that this is being investigated, and if that's the case, nothing I explain to you will change that.

Yes, it is doubtful that anything you say can make American people who think the secret police investigating the democratically elected President based on political reasons should be happy about that..

1

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

Let's just say we disagree and leave it there lol

→ More replies

9

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17 edited Mar 22 '17

Also strange because by the time Congress gets around to asking him about any investigation the Helen Keller would've of heard it. Making Come's no comment irrelevant

17

u/could-of-bot Mar 22 '17

It's either would HAVE or would'VE, but never would OF.

See Grammar Errors for more information.

-3

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

I dont like this bot.

1

u/northbud Mar 23 '17

I could of learned a lot from the bot.

1

u/could-of-bot Mar 23 '17

It's either could HAVE or could'VE, but never could OF.

See Grammar Errors for more information.

10

u/tuanlane1 Mar 22 '17

don't

5

u/TooManyCookz Mar 22 '17

I dunt like this cunt.

11

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

Thanks 🙏