BOMBSHELL: Comey's lawyers agreed believing the testimony would be essentially public

I've discussed before that Comey and others are hiding behind classification rules and the fiction of a continuing investigation exception to protect themselves from answering dangerous questions. That's why Congress insisted that this testimony be taken behind closed doors. But Comey's lawyers seem to think that the agreement between Comey and Congress precludes such topics, effectively making the setting public and defeating the point of a closed hearing.

The full exchange is below the fold. The whole transcript is here.

Transcript of Comey's testimonyMr. Ratcliffe. What did the FISA application that you signed on October 21st of 2016, aver in terms of probable cause for a warrant on Carter Page?
Ms. Bessee. Congressman, he can only respond to information that's not classified or that's been put out there in the public. If there is something that he can look at, because, as you know, part of that -- parts of that application is classified.
Mr. Ratcliffe. I was told that -- that the Director didn't want to review any classified information today and that he came here without any provisional clearances because he didn't want them, but yet he was prepared to answer any questions that may pertain to classified information. Is that incorrect?
Mr. Kelley. That is incorrect. We were told in advance that this would not deal with anything law enforcement sensitive or classified information.
Mr. Ratcliffe. Who told you that?
Mr. Kelley. House counsel. Not so much who told me, so much as a representation made before a United States district judge.
Mr. Meadows. So, Mr. Chairman, I would recommend that there are two different statements that the attorney just made. One was classified; the other was law enforcement sensitive. I can't imagine that House counsel would have inadvertently agreed to that. We need to check with Mr. Hungar and make sure that we're consistent with that.

Chairman Goodlatte. We'll do that. The House counsel's position is very clear, that the Congress does not recognize an ongoing investigation prohibition on answering questions. We do obviously recognize a classified, and we're prepared to create that environment, if necessary, to ask that question in that environment.

This entry was published Sat Dec 08 18:04:24 CST 2018 by TriggerFinger and last updated 2018-12-08 18:03:48.0. [Tweet]

comments powered by Disqus

Related Categories

Subscribe to Atom Feed

I am not a lawyer, and nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice.

This site is run on custom blog software and is being actively developed. Please be forgiving of errors.

This website is an Amazon affiliate and will receive financial compensation for products purchased from Amazon through links on this site.