Now we know why Comey hired Fitzgerald, to keep him from testifying against him. Comey gave him his classified memos.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/...s-say.html

I don’t think attorney-client privilege operates to protect an accomplice.

so much crookedness.

Homey still thinks he’s the most clever guy in the room.

He’s gonna clever himself right into a series of felony charges.

Best he dummy up, and quick.

I'll laugh my ass off if Fitgerald gets Scooter Libby'ed. Talk about f'ing kharma.

(04-27-2018 10:35 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don’t think attorney-client privilege operates to protect an accomplice.

You seem to know a lot about being classified so I assume at some point Fitzgerald was cleared to see classified information. At his former position he had to be cleared so it's possible he's still has his clearance?

(04-27-2018 11:03 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 10:35 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don’t think attorney-client privilege operates to protect an accomplice.

You seem to know a lot about being classified so I assume at some point Fitzgerald was cleared to see classified information. At his former position he had to be cleared so it's possible he's still has his clearance?

I'd think unlikely. From what I understand, he's been in the private sector for years.

(04-27-2018 11:05 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 11:03 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 10:35 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don’t think attorney-client privilege operates to protect an accomplice.

You seem to know a lot about being classified so I assume at some point Fitzgerald was cleared to see classified information. At his former position he had to be cleared so it's possible he's still has his clearance?

I'd think unlikely. From what I understand, he's been in the private sector for years.

One thing is for sure even if Richman was cleared to look at classified information. He leaked it and that is a crime. One other thing that should be very clear. Comey conspired with Richman on the leak. I assume Richman can't use the defense.....

I did not know

Because I'm 100% sure to be cleared to see classified information rules were shown to him and he signed something stating he understood them.

Anyone agree that it's looking like Comey is capable of doing weasel moves?

That's not how this works meme

(04-27-2018 11:03 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 10:35 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don’t think attorney-client privilege operates to protect an accomplice.

You seem to know a lot about being classified so I assume at some point Fitzgerald was cleared to see classified information. At his former position he had to be cleared so it's possible he's still has his clearance?

Having a clearance doesn't mean you have access to everything up to that clearance level. There are two prongs that must be met.

1) Clearance.
2) Need to know.

Sharing information with someone who does not have need to know is roughly equivalent to sharing it with someone who has no clearance.

I held a TS for 22 years, but there was lots of TS, and even secret or confidential, information that I could not see because I had no need to know it. For example, I had access to the nuclear launch codes for two years because I was communications officer on a ship that carried nukes, and would therefore be one of the people required to verify a nuke launch order. When I left that ship, I still had my TS, but no longer had any need to have access to the nuke launch codes.

It's possible he still had a clearance (I kept mine for 18 years in the reserves). But demonstrating a need to know would be problematic.

(04-27-2018 12:43 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 11:03 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 10:35 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don’t think attorney-client privilege operates to protect an accomplice.

You seem to know a lot about being classified so I assume at some point Fitzgerald was cleared to see classified information. At his former position he had to be cleared so it's possible he's still has his clearance?

Having a clearance doesn't mean you have access to everything up to that clearance level. There are two prongs that must be met.

1) Clearance.
2) Need to know.

Sharing information with someone who does not have need to know is roughly equivalent to sharing it with someone who has no clearance.

I held a TS for 22 years, but there was lots of TS, and even secret or confidential, information that I could not see because I had no need to know it. For example, I had access to the nuclear launch codes for two years because I was communications officer on a ship that carried nukes, and would therefore be one of the people required to verify a nuke launch order. When I left that ship, I still had my TS, but no longer had any need to have access to the nuke launch codes.

It's possible he still had a clearance (I kept mine for 18 years in the reserves). But demonstrating a need to know would be problematic.

I have held a SECRET clearance for 9 years and have not once seen any classified documents. I only used it once to get into a reading room library down in San Antonio to meet with an AF PM and evaluate requirements in an RFP, but I never accessed the classified network while there. If I did, I wouldn't have been able to leave with my notes, which I judged was more important than reading a bunch of technical gobblygook I wouldn't have understood anyway.

(04-27-2018 12:43 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 11:03 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 10:35 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don’t think attorney-client privilege operates to protect an accomplice.

You seem to know a lot about being classified so I assume at some point Fitzgerald was cleared to see classified information. At his former position he had to be cleared so it's possible he's still has his clearance?

Having a clearance doesn't mean you have access to everything up to that clearance level. There are two prongs that must be met.

1) Clearance.
2) Need to know.

Sharing information with someone who does not have need to know is roughly equivalent to sharing it with someone who has no clearance.

I held a TS for 22 years, but there was lots of TS, and even secret or confidential, information that I could not see because I had no need to know it. For example, I had access to the nuclear launch codes for two years because I was communications officer on a ship that carried nukes, and would therefore be one of the people required to verify a nuke launch order. When I left that ship, I still had my TS, but no longer had any need to have access to the nuke launch codes.

It's possible he still had a clearance (I kept mine for 18 years in the reserves). But demonstrating a need to know would be problematic.

I came here to say the very same thing, but I see someone else with a clue already beat me to it.

People seem to believe all things gov works the way it works in movies.