Comey’s motions to dismiss being filed Monday
| Dashing new version | 10/18/25 | | heady half-breed cruise ship | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | heady half-breed cruise ship | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/18/25 | | vengeful kitty place of business | 10/18/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | heady half-breed cruise ship | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/19/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/20/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/20/25 | | buck-toothed walnut dysfunction | 10/20/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | buck-toothed walnut dysfunction | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/20/25 | | Concupiscible parlor blood rage | 10/21/25 | | Dark provocative rigpig | 10/20/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | Dark provocative rigpig | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | Dark provocative rigpig | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | Dark provocative rigpig | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | buck-toothed walnut dysfunction | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | buck-toothed walnut dysfunction | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | electric bright international law enforcement agency | 11/03/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | vengeful kitty place of business | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/21/25 | | vengeful kitty place of business | 10/21/25 | | Dashing new version | 10/30/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/03/25 | | Emerald goyim | 11/04/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/03/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/03/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/03/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/03/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/03/25 | | flatulent sandwich dilemma | 11/04/25 | | vengeful kitty place of business | 11/03/25 | | electric bright international law enforcement agency | 11/03/25 | | vengeful kitty place of business | 11/04/25 | | Razzle-dazzle casino | 11/03/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/03/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | Emerald goyim | 11/04/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/04/25 | | vengeful kitty place of business | 11/04/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/04/25 | | vengeful kitty place of business | 11/04/25 | | overrated galvanic rehab partner | 11/04/25 | | diverse den water buffalo | 11/03/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/03/25 | | big slippery toaster | 11/03/25 | | zombie-like yellow boistinker | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/04/25 | | Flirting shrine | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | Flirting shrine | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | Flirting shrine | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | overrated galvanic rehab partner | 11/04/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | talented chocolate trump supporter point | 11/04/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | Flirting shrine | 11/04/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | overrated galvanic rehab partner | 11/04/25 | | zombie-like yellow boistinker | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | overrated galvanic rehab partner | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/04/25 | | Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office | 11/04/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/05/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/06/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/13/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/13/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/13/25 | | flatulent sandwich dilemma | 11/13/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/13/25 | | flatulent sandwich dilemma | 11/13/25 | | Fragrant Striped Hyena Crackhouse | 11/13/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/13/25 | | cowardly apoplectic milk coffee pot | 11/13/25 | | Dashing new version | 11/17/25 | | .,,,.,,,.,:,..::,,...,:,...,:,,..:,.:.::,. | 11/19/25 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 20th, 2025 11:11 PM Author: Dark provocative rigpig
I think he's guilty by how difficult the actual paragraph refuting the facts is to parse.
It seems to me he's arguing that - even though Cruz in that line of questioning asks if Comey ever authorized leaks about Trump - Comey's response was that he stands by his statements in 2017 - but those 2017 statements were about leaks about Hilary
It seems like Comey is sort of ceding that he authorized leaks about Trump, but is arguing in the Cruz exchange that he never lied about it, because he just spoke in riddles that actually referred to Hillary.
Is that right?
---------
The indictment focuses on testimony that Mr. Comey gave in response to questioning by
Senator Ted Cruz at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the Crossfire Hurricane
investigation. See Oversight of the Crossfire Hurricane Investigation: Day 3, Hearing Before
the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, 116th Cong. (Sept. 30, 2020), During that hearing, Senator Cruz described how, during 2017 testimony before the Senate
Judiciary Committee, Mr. Comey had denied “ever authoriz[ing] someone else at the FBI to be
an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton
Administration.” Excerpt of Transcript of Oversight of the Crossfire Hurricane Investigation:
Day 3, Hearing Before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, 116th Cong., at 11 (Sept. 30 2020) (“Crossfire Hurricane Oversight Transcript”), Exhibit C. Senator Cruz then asserted that
Andrew McCabe, who previously served as Mr. Comey’s Deputy Director of the FBI, “publicly
and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to the Wall Street Journal and that [Mr. Comey
was] directly aware of it, and that [Mr. Comey] directly authorized it.” Id.
Senator Cruz asked Mr. Comey “[w]ho’s telling the truth?” Mr. Comey responded: “I
can only speak to my testimony,” and “I stand by . . . the testimony you summarized that I gave
in May of 2017.” Id. Senator Cruz followed up by asking: “So, your testimony is you’ve never
authorized anyone to leak. And Mr. McCabe when if he says contrary, is not telling the truth, is
that correct?” Id. In response, Mr. Comey stated: “Again, I’m not going to characterize
[McCabe’s] testimony, but mine is the same today.” Id.
The indictment misstates the exchange between Senator Cruz and Mr. Comey. Senator
Cruz asked Mr. Comey to affirm or deny prior testimony that he authorized “someone else at the
FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about . . . the Clinton Administration.” But
Hillary Clinton was not elected, and Senator Grassley’s original questioning in 2017 related to
the “Clinton investigation.” See FBI Oversight Transcript at 5, Exhibit B. The indictment
nonetheless mischaracterizes Mr. Comey as stating that he “had not ‘authorized someone else at
the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports’ regarding an FBI investigation concerning
PERSON 1,” ECF No. 1 at 1 (emphasis added). Thus, the indictment replaces Senator Cruz’s
reference to the “Clinton Administration” with a reference to “PERSON 1” (Hillary Clinton) and
misleadingly attributes statements to Mr. Comey that he did not in fact make during his
September 30, 2020, testimony.
8
Further, the indictment omits Senator Cruz’s words that explicitly narrow the focus of his questions to Mr. McCabe and misleadingly implies that the questioning related to Mr. Richman.
In fact, Mr. Comey’s September 2020 exchange with Senator Cruz made no reference
whatsoever to Mr. Richman, who ultimately appears in the indictment as PERSON 3. Instead,
the context of the exchange confirms that Senator Cruz was asking about leaks by Mr.
McCabe—indeed, Senator Cruz asked Mr. Comey whether he or Mr. McCabe was “telling the
truth.” In other words, the indictment presents an inaccurate description of the testimony at the
heart of this case.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5787602&forum_id=2Elisa#49363208)
|
 |
Date: October 21st, 2025 12:57 PM Author: Dark provocative rigpig
If Cruise says "Do you say today that you never leaked information about the Trump investigation"
And Comey responds "I stand by my September 5, 2022 statements."
But his September 5, 2022 statements were about his statements about sandwiches - isn't that sort of a lie?
Also, seems in this case his lawyers are reverse engineering this to not be a lie, and in the moment Comey probably thought he was saying he never leaked info about Trump.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5787602&forum_id=2Elisa#49364016) |
 |
Date: October 21st, 2025 8:58 PM Author: Dashing new version
yes but if you read this subthread the quotemo is conceding that they don’t even have him on lying
anyway this is all academic since this case is getting dismissed on a pretrial motion
also Trump’s ID lawyer US atty is going to be disqualified:
https://x.com/kyledcheney/status/1980725171142168668?s=46
but I think Comey would rather win on his selective/vindictive prosecution motion so the charges get dismissed with prejudice
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5787602&forum_id=2Elisa#49365074) |
 |
Date: November 3rd, 2025 11:13 PM Author: electric bright international law enforcement agency
"Comey's argument is just saying he dodged the question."
Which means Cruz is a shitty cross-examiner. Just because a witness doesn't answer your question doesn't mean the witness lied.
Cruz: "Have you ever authorized classified information to be leaked to the Press?"
You: "I stand by my previous statement from July 1, 2022"
July 1, 2022 statement: "Goddamn I love a nice hard, veiny penis in my mouth!"
You didn't lie. You simply didn't answer the question and Cruz sucks at getting a clear answer.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5787602&forum_id=2Elisa#49399780) |
Date: November 3rd, 2025 9:47 PM Author: Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office
DOJ responds. turns out that Comey used Richman to leak leak leak. my speculation on xoxo was that Comey would get this dismissed pre-trial because the questions and answers are somewhat vague. we'll see.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71459120/138/united-states-v-comey/
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5787602&forum_id=2Elisa#49399506) |
 |
Date: November 3rd, 2025 11:28 PM Author: electric bright international law enforcement agency
Espionage Act only makes it illegal to disclosed "National Security" information, which is clearly defined in the statute.
The charge against Comey is that he lied to Congress about authorizing someone to disclose information about the Clinton Investigation to the Press.
Not, did Comey leak memos about Trump trying to force him to drop the Flynn investigation.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5787602&forum_id=2Elisa#49399808)
|
 |
Date: November 4th, 2025 9:31 AM Author: Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office
as i understand it the focus is more on the question asked than the answer Comey gave.
we can now plainly see what we deeply suspected: Comey was a nearly non-stop leaker to the NYT and especially to Michael Schmidt (who was a lackey). Comey's mouthpiece was a Columbia Law professor named Richman who became a special employee of the FBI basically so Comey could leak through Richman.
if the questions posed to Comey are construed as "did you authorize any leaks?" then Comey plainly lied. Comey authorized leak after leak and used Richman to do them. but if the question is construed more narrowly (which is plausible, frankly) then Comey might not have lied.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5787602&forum_id=2Elisa#49400552) |
Date: November 4th, 2025 11:49 AM Author: Dashing new version
Sounds like the DOJ is trying to pull some shenanigans in the related Halligan disqualification case, judge not having it
https://x.com/meiselasb/status/1985751848595394924?s=46
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5787602&forum_id=2Elisa#49400968) |
Date: November 4th, 2025 6:45 PM Author: Citrine well-lubricated really tough guy box office
Megyn Kelly breaks down why the Comey testimony to Grassley was clearly perjury. the statute has run on that. so Cruz asked a question to Comey to try to get Comey to reiterate the perjury. unfortunately Cruz then interjects an McCabe issue. but Comey says "mine is the same today." which might literally mean "my testimony is the same today as it was before Grassley." but Cruz's poor technique muddies the water.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg9jfVsL8HI
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5787602&forum_id=2Elisa#49402033) |
Date: November 19th, 2025 12:14 PM
Author: .,,,.,,,.,:,..::,,...,:,...,:,,..:,.:.::,.
lol Haligan never even got an indictment
https://x.com/krassenstein/status/1991185424790790298?s=46
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/james-comey-doj-case-hearing-11-19-25?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5787602&forum_id=2Elisa#49443818) |
|
|