Thread: Comey reportedly told Sessions: Don't leave me alone with Trump

Comey reportedly told Sessions: Don't leave me alone with Trump

Published June 06, 2017
Fox News

Then-FBI Director James Comey asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions to keep him from being alone with President Donald Trump, The New York Times and Associated Press reported Tuesday night.

The Times, which first reported on Comey's request to Sessions, said it came after Trump had asked Comey in February to end an investigation into Trump's first national security adviser, Michael Flynn.

According to the paper, Comey pulled Sessions aside and told him that private interactions between the president and the FBI director were inappropriate. Sessions reportedly responded that he could not guarantee that Trump would not seek out Comey again.

The Times report, which cited current and former law enforcement officials, added that Comey did not specify his issue with Trump in the conversation with Sessions.

Separately, The Washington Post reported Tuesday that Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats told associates that Trump had asked him in March if he could intervene with Comey to get the FBI to back off the Flynn angle in its counter-intelligence probe of alleged links between Russian officials and the Trump campaign.

The latest revelations came out days before Comey makes a highly-anticipated appearance before the Senate intelligence committee — and as the White House and its allies craft a strategy aimed at undermining the former FBI Director's credibility. Both White House officials and an outside group that backs Trump plan to hammer Comey in the coming days for misstatements he made about Democrat Hillary Clinton's emails during his last appearance on Capitol Hill.

An ad created by the pro-Trump Great America Alliance -- a nonprofit "issues" group that isn't required to disclose its donors -- casts Comey as a "showboat" who was "consumed with election meddling" instead of focusing on combating terrorism.

The Republican National Committee has been preparing talking points ahead of the hearing, which will be aired live on multiple TV stations. An RNC research email Monday issued a challenge to the lawmakers who will question Comey. There's bipartisan agreement, the email says, that Comey "needs to answer a simple question about his conversations with President Trump: If you were so concerned, why didn't you act on it or notify Congress?"

Comey's testimony before the Senate intelligence committee marks his first public comments since he was abruptly ousted by Trump on May 9. Since then, Trump and Comey allies have traded competing narratives about their interactions. The president asserted that Comey told him three times that he was not personally under investigation, while the former director's associates allege Trump asked Comey to shut down the investigation into Flynn, who was fired as national security adviser because he misled the White House about his ties to Russia.

Democrats have accused Trump of firing Comey to upend the FBI's Russia probe, which focused in large part on whether campaign aides coordinated with Moscow to hack Democratic groups during the election. Days after Comey's firing, the Justice Department appointed a special counsel, former FBI Director Robert Mueller, to oversee the federal investigation.

Despite the mounting legal questions now shadowing the White House, Trump has needled Comey publicly. In a tweet days after the firing, he appeared to warn Comey that he might have recordings of their private discussions, something the White House has neither confirmed nor denied.

White House officials appear eager to keep the president away from television and Twitter Thursday, though those efforts rarely succeed. White House spokesman Sean Spicer said the president plans to attend an infrastructure summit in the morning, then address the Faith and Freedom Coalition's "Road to Majority" conference at 12:30 p.m.

"The president's got a full day on Thursday," Spicer said.

The White House had hoped to set up a "war room" stocked with Trump allies and top-flight lawyers to combat questions about the FBI and congressional investigations into possible ties between the campaign and Russia. However, that effort has largely stalled, both because of a lack of decision-making in the West Wing and concerns among some potential recruits about joining a White House under the cloud of investigation.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...ith-trump.html

LOL!! Oh my God, I knew from that Wednesday Hearing Comey is weird, he ain't right, he's a creepy strange person. And now we find out he's a wimpy, pansy ass to boot. He can't hold his own with President Trump? He's got to write "memos" about a President standing up for one of people against a federal politically-motivated Witch Hunt being run through the FBI, tell his friends at lunch who happen to be journalists all about his private conversation with the President of the United States, run to the Attorney General "don't leave me alone with Trump" ... the DIRECTOR OF THE FBI???? Honestly?? What would he do up against a criminal, a real one, run and hide in the ditch or behind a tree or lock himself in his home and peek through the curtains??!!

You know, people need to remember that it was Jim Comey who ordered the destruction of Martha Stewart and her company, busted all her shareholders who lost their investments, sent this wonderful woman to federal prison for "lying to the FBI", because in an interview, not under oath, she mis-stated that she spoke with her broker, Peter, when it may have actually been his male-assistant. I'm not even sure she ever knew the difference, she was on a cell phone at an airport in another country during the call. She went to federal prison for 9 months over this, and had to restart her company all over again when she got out. She was acquitted of the "insider trading" charge, jury found her guilty of that one. All Comey got was "lying to the FBI" about who she spoke with, the broker Peter, or his male-assistant, whatever his name is.

Why Americans give you the time of day after what you did to Martha Stewart is beyond me, that proved you are not a man of honor, you are not responsible, you have no judgment, you are not a good public servant, you are a petty menace and a pansy-ass from Creepy Town.

Why don't you explain to the public why exactly you were running a Witch Hunt against Michael Flynn through the FBI? No one still understands why you were investigating Michael Flynn. No one understands that at all. And frankly, the American People want the FBI chasing murderers, like ... who killed Seth Rich ....and terrorists and drug cartels. We don't want the FBI involved in our politics or our politicians unless they're murderers, terrorists or running drug cartels and there's a body, bodies or piles of drugs to show there's a crime that's been committed, it's called "habeas corpus", it's in the Constitution.

We don't want to pay the FBI to look for or create or manufacture "crimes", false suspicions, or ruin people's lives, reputations or businesses getting caught up for untold unknown reasons in these Witch Hunts. That's not the American system of justice.

You haven't even solved the JFK murder from decades ago (you know you framed Oswald with your phoney bullet match test that Texas A&M proved was wrong), yet you've got 150 agents running around trying to frame Trump Supporters for "TIES WITH RUSSIA"? There is no crime in having a tie with Russia. There is no crime in supporting a particular candidate or elected President. There is no crime in working to get elect that person either.

Judy wrote (excerpt):

You know, people need to remember that it was Jim Comey who ordered the destruction of Martha Stewart and her company, busted all her shareholders who lost their investments, sent this wonderful woman to federal prison for "lying to the FBI", because in an interview, not under oath, she mis-stated that she spoke with her broker, Peter, when it may have actually been his male-assistant. I'm not even sure she ever knew the difference, she was on a cell phone at an airport in another country during the call. She went to federal prison for 9 months over this, and had to restart her company all over again when she got out. She was acquitted of the "insider trading" charge, jury found her guilty of that one. All Comey got was "lying to the FBI" about who she spoke with, the broker Peter, or his male-assistant, whatever his name is.

What Martha Stewart suffered was all on her and her stock broker. Stewart got off easy and was awarded, under federal sentencing guidlines, the most minimum sentencing possible. Her and her broker, Peter Bacanovic, were convicted of obstructing justice, conspiracy and making false statements related to Stewart's suspicious sale of ImClone Systems stock. To say Stewart didn't deserve what she got is not accurate in my opinion. If you're going to do the crime, be prepared to do the time!

What false statements did she make? I'm only aware of one.

Originally Posted by Judy

Comey reportedly told Sessions: Don't leave me alone with Trump

Published June 06, 2017
Fox News

Then-FBI Director James Comey asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions to keep him from being alone with President Donald Trump, The New York Times and Associated Press reported Tuesday night.

LMAO!!!! This is too funny!

I liked Martha Stewart's performance as "Topless Martha" on SNL. Alright, I'm sorry. I'm in a joking mood today.

I adore Martha Stewart, such a wonderful woman, tries so hard to make everything nice for her customers and profitable for her shareholders. She is a remarkable person who has brought so much joy and beauty at affordable costs to Americans and I guess people around the world. To see her be a victim of a Witch Hunt by the FBI was disturbing then and all the years later, still is.

Originally Posted by Judy

I adore Martha Stewart, such a wonderful woman, tries so hard to make everything nice for her customers and profitable for her shareholders. She is a remarkable person who has brought so much joy and beauty at affordable costs to Americans and I guess people around the world. To see her be a victim of a Witch Hunt by the FBI was disturbing then and all the years later, still is.

This was no "Witch Hunt", Martha Stewart's greed got the best of her. She's not in the business to bring joy, beauty, or affordable products to the world, she's in business to make money. She's just lucky she didn't get whacked with 20 years in prison.

What Martha Stewart Did Wrong

By Covering Business May 15, 2012
By Julia Leite
Columbia Journalism School ’12

On December 27, 2001, media mogul and celebrity homemaker Martha Stewart sold her stake in the biotech company ImClone. Two days later, the company’s stock dropped 16 percent when the Food and Drug Administration said it had rejected the ImClone’s main drug, Erbitux, for cancer treatment. Stewart had owned 4,000 shares of ImClone. By selling just before the FDA’s announcement, she avoided losses of $45,673, a tiny fraction of her net worth, which Forbes had estimated at $700 million just six months earlier. However, that trade would end up being one of the defining actions of her career – and the one that landed her in a federal prison.

Stewart was not the only ImClone investor who avoided heavy losses ahead of the FDA’s decision. On the same day she placed her trade, Sam Waksal, ImClone’s chief executive, had sold a $5 million stake, along with his daughters’ full holdings in the company.

For regulators, catching Waksal for insider trading was simple. A CEO selling a large block of his company’s stock just days before a significant regulatory announcement is an obvious red flag. Waksal himself said later in an interview with “Dateline” that his case was easy and that “the Securities and Exchange Commission had me.”

Stewart’s case was more complicated. She had made a timely sale, but that wasn’t enough to accuse her of insider trading. To do that, the government would have show Stewart traded while in possession of information that was nonpublic and material – something that is not widely known and that a regular investor would consider important in making a decision about a trade.

Of course, Stewart wasn’t exactly a regular investor. She was a friend of Waksal, which could have meant he had told her about the FDA’s decision and that she had sold her stock based on that information. But Waksal hadn’t told her about the decision. He hadn’t spoken to Stewart at all that day.

There was another link between Stewart and Waksal. They shared the same broker at Merrill Lynch, Peter Bacanovic. Although neither Bacanovic nor his assistant, Doug Faneuil, knew about the Erbitux decision, both knew that Waksal was trying to dump his stock. And they warned Stewart about it.

That Stewart knew Waksal was selling his stock but not the reason behind the sale complicated the insider trading case against her. Knowing about the FDA decision would qualify as nonpublic and material. Just knowing the CEO was trying to sell $5 million worth of his shares was nonpublic information, but on its own, would it have made a difference to a run-of-the-mill investor? For the SEC, the answer was yes. The agency requires insiders like CEOs to disclose trades of company’s stock to the public.

For the SEC to build an insider trading case against Stewart, it also would have to show that her transaction violated some duty to refrain from trading on the information in question. Stewart did not have such a duty herself. She wasn’t on the Imclone board of directors and had no official ties to other insiders like Waksal. She had merely traded on a tip. However, she knew Bacanovic had breached his duty as a broker when he told her about Waksal’s trades.

The nuances in Stewart’s case ultimately drove the government to back down from charging her with insider trading. Instead, it focused its case on the lies she told to cover the trade. When questioned by the SEC and the FBI in the months following her trade, Stewart said she had no knowledge of Waksal’s trade and that she had sold on a standing agreement with her broker to sell if shares traded below $60. Bacanovic corroborated the story, but his assistant Faneuil eventually came forward and revealed the truth, furthering the case against Stewart. Later, Stewart’s own assistant, Annie Armstrong, testified that Stewart had tried to change a record of Bacanovic’s phone message to her about ImClone.

To the jury in Stewart’s trial, it seemed clear she had lied. “This is a woman who pays attention to details… I mean that’s her life, to pay attention to a lot of details. And she knew what was going on with her portfolio,” jury member Rosemary McMahon said in an interview with “Dateline” in 2004.

The defense argued that Stewart was too rich to worry about a few thousand dollars and that she and Bacanovic were too smart and sophisticated to make such obvious mistakes and get caught, but that argument failed to convince the jury.

“We thought there was going to be more from the defense,” Jonathan Laskin, another jury member, told “Dateline.” “We almost were hoping they would put up more of a fight or something or give us more to chew on, but it wasn’t there.”

Stewart was sentenced to five months in prison, plus five months of house arrest and two years of probation for lying, obstruction of justice and conspiracy. Bacanovic was also found guilty on all charges, except forging a document as proof of the stop-loss agreement he had claimed to have with Stewart.

It could have been worse. The U.S. attorney had also charged Stewart with securities fraud, claiming she had defrauded investors in her own company by repeatedly stating she was innocent. Securities fraud carries penalties of up to 20 years in jail. Stewart was fortunate the judge dismissed those charges.

Insider trading, the charge ultimately dropped by the government, also carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.

With so much evidence and a jury so convinced of the guilt of the defendants, it is not clear why the government did not charge Stewart with insider trading. The government had proven Stewart had material, nonpublic information about the company and that she had traded her Imclone shares based on that information.

The government had also made the case that Stewart knew she was doing something wrong. First, long before she became America’s most famous homemaker, Stewart had been a broker herself, so she knew Bacanovic couldn’t inform her about what his other clients were doing. Second, she would not have had a reason to lie if she thought it was a cookie-cutter trade.

One reason the government may have backed off is that the U.S. attorney’s office may not have wanted to risk setting a bad precedent for other insider trading cases based on tips. There was also no clear precedent for Stewart’s case, so charging her with insider trading would have meant testing new boundaries of the law.

The extra media attention also could have helped Stewart dodge the extra charge. Stewart was an A-list celebrity, and the trial would be highly publicized and scrutinized. The U.S. attorney may not have wanted to risk an unusual case under those conditions. One of the defense’s arguments was that Stewart was being prosecuted only because she was a celebrity and that the prosecutors wanted to make their careers by taking her down. In fact, Stewart’s celebrity may have worked to her advantage, leaving prosecutors and the U.S. attorney’s office more reticent in building their case.

Although the Justice Department decided not to charge Stewart with insider trading, the SEC pursued a case against her. At the time, Stephen M. Cutler, the SEC’s director of enforcement, said “it is fundamentally unfair for someone to have an edge on the market just because she has a stockbroker who is willing to break the rules and give her an illegal tip.”

Without admitting or denying the accusations, Stewart settled with the SEC in 2006, agreeing to pay a fine of $195,000 (four times the amount she had avoided in losses on ImClone’s stock, plus interest) and stepping down as director of her company for five years. Bacanovic also settled, paying a little more than $75,000 in penalties.

Lying to avoid losses of $50,000 – 0.007 percent of her estimate fortune – ended up costing Stewart much more. Although she made a comeback after her prison term, her incarceration remains a stain on her illustrious career. And had she been charged with insider trading and not just covering it up, the stain could have been much worse. For Sam Waksal, an insider trading conviction meant seven years in prison.

“Never break the law. Never lie to the U.S. government,” Waksal said on “Dateline.” “And if you’ve broken the law, don’t talk to the U.S. government.” That advice could have saved Martha Stewart from a forced hiatus. Instead, she had to learn from prison that even if the government doesn’t charge you for breaking securities laws, it does not appreciate being lied to.

http://coveringbusiness.com/2012/05/...art-did-wrong/

Her little measley $60,000 stock deal was on an option schedule. NO INSIDER TRADING.

This was absolutely a WITCH HUNT by Comey and John Ashcroft against a successful woman. NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.

Did the broker tip her off without her knowing, sure possibly. But Martha wasn't even in the US, she was on a cell phone at an airport in a foreign country. Like with all her achievements and money at that point, she's worried about this stupid little stock deal? He calls to remind her of her option, this is what you pay brokers to do, you say sure, go ahead sell it, she makes a little profit and that's it. Did he have inside information? I don't know. Maybe. But it was not connected to her, her option was up regardless. They went after her because her name was Martha Stewart.

Well, she showed Comey. She served the time, she rebuilt her business, and made money all over again. Comey's been fired by Donald J Trump, and rightly so. Comey is Mr. Creepy.

Comey became a political hack for the Clintons a long time ago during the Whitewater investigation.