What happened to “let the prosecutors finish their job?” I’m pretty sure I heard that as a mantra for three years.
Not so much!
The New York Times should start making margaritas and pretzels, to go along with all of that delicious salt they’ve got pouring out of their eyes.
Here’s an alternate link.
Justice Dept. Investigating Years-Old Leaks and Appears Focused on Comey
An inquiry into years-old disclosures of classified information is highly unusual and leaves law enforcement officials open to accusations of politicizing their work.
They say “years old,” as if a crime that happened two and a half years ago is something you’re just supposed to ignore.
Weird how that standard only applies to liberals, huh?
Federal prosecutors in Washington are investigating a years-old leak of classified information about a Russian intelligence document, and they appear to be focusing on whether the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey illegally provided details to reporters, according to people familiar with the inquiry.
Again, “years old.”
The case is the second time the Justice Department has investigated leaks potentially involving Mr. Comey, a frequent target of President Trump…
It’s all politically motivated, I’m sure.
The timing of the investigation could raise questions about whether it was motivated at least in part by politics.
There you go.
…Law enforcement officials are scrutinizing at least two news articles about the F.B.I. and Mr. Comey, published in The New York Times and The Washington Post in 2017, that mentioned the Russian government document, according to the people familiar with the investigation…
2017? The Times is acting like this is ancient history.
…Mr. Trump has repeatedly pressured the Justice Department to investigate his perceived enemies.
Well, I’m glad James Comey at least didn’t do anything like that.
Julie Kelly points out something the New York Times’ Adam Goldman deliberately obscures:
There is a reason that James Comey’s leaks weren’t investigated in 2017, when they hit the press.
And that reason is: Because James Comey was head of the FBI.
So the Times is basically arguing that because James Comey didn’t order an investigation into James Comey’s leaks when James Comey leaked them, James Comey should be granted immunity.
By the way:
I wonder who it could be who is responsible for leaking this story about James Comey, which benefits James Comey, which offers up information probably known by James Comey, in order to make a public case for the absolute immunity to criminal prosecution oh behalf of James Comey.
Hmmm. The mind boggles! I’m sure there must be a simple answer, but damnit, I just can’t see it!
Remember, “Dude, that was like 2 years ago.”?
Of course, it was just a leak that contributed to the most high-profile and ill-conceived investigation of all time. Kind of a big deal.
Shuddup, How long has this time worn tradition of leaking classified information with no investigation been honored?
The guy was Running for President then won how could it possibly be political?
Comey a percieved political enemy of DT how did I miss that one?
How could it not possibly spawn another pointless non fruit bearing investigation.
But ya the next guy will be held accountable cause it just wasnt in the rules for Comey..
@kitt: Yet they want to see Trump’s taxes from 10 years ago. Wait… wait… wait… I’m getting a transmission from Greg already. It reads….
“Yeah, but THAT’S different!”