U.S President: Donald Trump

Originally Posted by Damien

It's not so much any 'info' he claims to have but the fact he is lashing out at all that's interesting I think.

Indeed.

In other news, it's been revealed, Comey leaked Classified Memos, marked either 'Top Secret', or 'Confidential', to his friend, Professor Richman.

Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the House of Judiciary, has sent a letter to Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein...

WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley is today raising questions about when the memos memorializing interactions between former FBI Director James Comey and President Trump were classified and the chain of custody for the classified memos.

After a review of the seven memoranda created by former Director Comey, it is now clear that four are marked classified at various levels of sensitivity. Former Director Comey reportedly provided copies of four memos to Columbia Law School Professor Daniel Richman. If true, that would mean at least one disclosed memo contained information now-marked classified.

In his letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Grassley asks about the chain of custody of the memos, when they were marked classified and by whom. Grassley also asks what steps the Justice Department has taken to determine if any classified information was provided to Professor Richman and whether such a disclosure violated department rules or policy.

In order for the Committee to further assess this situation, please respond to the following in writing by no later than January 17, 2018:

1. Has the Justice Department or FBI in fact determined that any of the memoranda Mr. Comey sent Professor Richman contained classified information? If so, what steps were taken to retrieve and safeguard the information?
2. Which of the seven memoranda the FBI made available for the Committee’s review did Mr. Comey give to Professor Richman?
3. When did Mr. Comey give Professor Richman the memoranda?
4. At the time that Professor Richman received the memoranda, were any marked as classified?
5. At the time that Professor Richman received the memoranda, did any contain classified information, regardless of markings?
6. Please explain the method by which Mr. Comey transmitted the memoranda to Professor Richman. If the transmittal was electronic:
7. Please provide the account information that Mr. Comey and Mr. Richman used.
8. Please describe what steps the FBI has taken to recover all copies of any classified memoranda that might reside on computers, servers, or at other locations.
9. Have you initiated an investigation into the matter of whether Mr. Comey improperly disclosed classified information by providing these memoranda to Professor Richman? If so, what is the status of the investigation? If not, why not?
10. Has there been any review of whether the disclosure of the memoranda by Mr. Comey was otherwise improper, such as whether it violated his employment agreement or any Department rule or policy? If so, what is the status of the review? If not, why not?
11. When did the FBI mark the four memoranda as classified, and who made the classification decision?
12. As noted above, it has been reported that Professor Richman returned the memoranda to the FBI.[7] If so, on what date did this occur?
13. Did anyone from the FBI or Special Counsel’s Office discuss with Professor Richman this Committee’s request for copies of the memos? If so, please provide all records related to any such communications.
14. Does Professor Richman still have possession of any of the memoranda or copies?

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Please contact Patrick Davis of my Committee staff at (202) 224-5225 if you have any questions.

Sincerely,



Charles E. Grassley
Chairman
Committee on the Judiciary

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news...memos#_ftnref2

The 'now' marked classified needs to be clarified. Were they classified at the time he passed them on? (which reading the thing is question 4)

[1andrew1]

Will be interesting to see if Trump is successful in getting the book banned.

A lawyer for President Donald Trump is seeking to halt the publication of an explosive new book that claims to have insider information on the Trump White House.
Attorney Charles J Harder instructed the book's publisher to “immediately cease and desist from any further publication, release or dissemination of the book," in a letter seen by the Washington Post. Mr Harder says he is pursuing possible libel charges against the book's author.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a8141931.html

He won't get the book banned....

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Damien

He won't get the book banned....

The publishers must be quite confident too or they wouldn't have given the press review copies a week before publication.

It should be banned, it's full of total BS. But it won't be and it's too late any way, advanced copies are out there.

But the claims being made in the book are absolute cobblers.

One of the debunked claims is that Tony Blair is suppose to have met with Kushner back in February 2017 and told him the UK has spied on Trump. This is a claim both Tony Blair has denied today and GCHQ in the past. The meeting was also to get Trump to give Tony Blair a Middle East diplomatic role. I think it is very far fetched that Blair would do this.

Another claim the book makes is that Trump goes to bed at 6.30pm in the evening to eat cheese burgers. I mean wtf, this is pure parody, this is made up BS to drive up sales.

Wolff claims he had unvetted access to the President and the West Wing, which Sarah Sanders has said tonight is total nonsense, access to the President is strictly limited and repeated requests, at least 14 requests were denied for Wolff to interview Trump.

Originally Posted by Mick

It should be banned, it's full of total BS. But it won't be and it's too late any way, advanced copies are out there.

America has far weaker libel laws than we do. Very hard to ban books/newspapers in America. Even in the UK though this would be allowed. You're traditionally fine writing books about politicians because it looks bad for politicians to try and suppress it. Cameron never sued over the book about him that contained the pig story even though a lot of that was clearly dubious.

How would you even ban it? You can't ban something for not being true with the evidence being the President says it isn't.

One of the debunked claims is that Tony Blair is suppose to have met with Kushner back in February 2017 and told him the UK has spied on Trump. This is a claim both Tony Blair has denied today and GCHQ in the past. The meeting was also to get Trump to give Tony Blair a Middle East diplomatic role. I think it is very far fetched that Blair would do this.

I agree but my understanding is that the book doesn't claim this but quotes someone else saying it/suggesting it (I would have to read the passage). Also for the bugging thing I think the story is saying Blair told Trump there were newspaper reports of it rather than passing off any inside knowledge he had.

Another claim the book makes is that Trump goes to bed at 6.30pm in the evening to eat cheese burgers. I mean wtf, this is pure parody, this is made up BS to drive up sales.

Again. Is he claiming that first hand or reporting gossip? That makes a difference.

Wolff claims he had unvetted access to the President and the West Wing, which Sarah Sanders has said tonight is total nonsense, access to the President is strictly limited and repeated requests, at least 14 requests were denied for Wolff to interview Trump.

It depends what 'unvetted access' is defined as. However it's clear he did have several interviews with the staff and a '5-7 minute' conversation with Trump himself: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...s-trump-322289

From the Politico link

Sanders echoed the president’s response in downplaying the significance of Bannon’s role.

“And I think in the actions that Steve took, the president was clear that it didn’t have a lot of influence on him or the decision-making process throughout his time at the White House,” she said Wednesday.

Seems unusual that the President's Chief Strategist (which was a new role specially created for Bannon) didn't have a lot of influence on the President or his decisions - what was his job, then?

He was also designated by presidential memorandum as a regular attendee to the National Security Council's Principals Committee, a Cabinet-level senior interagency forum for considering national security issues - again, why, if he didn't have a lot of influence?

Originally Posted by Hugh

From the Politico link Seems unusual that the President's Chief Strategist (which was a new role specially created for Bannon) didn't have a lot of influence on the President or his decisions - what was his job, then?

Hard to say. The White House released this video of him helping to inform foreign policy in the Oval Office though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZOF9q5fzfs

---------- Post added at 20:59 ---------- Previous post was at 20:55 ----------

By the way Trump trying to ban the book is going to do no harm at all to it's sales figures. I wouldn't be surprised if he is getting a sneak commission on it.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Mick

It should be banned, it's full of total BS. But it won't be and it's too late any way, advanced copies are out there.

It probably is full of BS Mick. But Trump is getting a dose of his own medicine from his own ex-spin Dr.

What go's around comes around.... Hard to feel sympathy.

Unvetted access to me means, repeated and unchecked access. I would suggest the Secret Service have strict protocols on who gets to meet the President, even in the White House, not to mention a journalist, of which Trump has issues with most of them any way.

The fact the book author has a historical nature to distort what people have said and misquote people.

He says he has tapes, let’s hear them. I find it interesting they are not out there as of yet, if they actually exist and this story on the book is 24 hours old now.

The publisher has moved the release forward to tomorrow: https://twitter.com/MichaelWolffNYC/...23092357128194

No chance at all of it being banned now.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Damien

The publisher has moved the release forward to tomorrow: https://twitter.com/MichaelWolffNYC/...23092357128194

No chance at all of it being banned now.

I've ordered it on Amazon, so i'd better not be disappointed

$20 on Amazon, I wouldn’t pay 50p for it and I will still get to know what’s in it by end of weekend.

Originally Posted by Mick

$20 on Amazon, I wouldn’t pay 50p for it and I will still get to know what’s in it by end of weekend.

I walk into Waterstones and read the last page of novels. Suckers.