by Kelly Cohen | Jun 12, 2017,

Fired FBI Director James Comey raised serious questions when he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee that he was the source of leaked memos to the New York Times.

"My judgment was I needed to get [the memos] out into the public square," Comey said. "So, I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. I didn't do it myself for a variety of reasons, but I asked him to because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel."

The issue of whether doing so actually makes Comey a "leaker" of government information is not a black and white one.

Some have accused Comey, who gave the information as a private citizen, of violating U.S. Code 793 of the Espionage Act.

According to ethicist Kelly McBride, vice president at the Poynter Institute, the word leak "doesn't have a proper definition." She told the Washington Examiner the Espionage Act doesn't apply to leaking information to journalists.

"As an ethicist, it's not a clear violation of the law that say's you can't leak confidential information, because it wasn't declared confidential," McBride explains.

And, should the Department of Justice under Attorney General Jeff Sessions decide to go after Comey?

"It would be a hell of a stretch," McBride said, noting the information in the memo was neither confidential or classified.

However, there may be a legal footing to stand on.

According to the FBI's employment agreement, Comey could be in both civil and criminal jeopardy if he did not get written authorization to release his personal notes from conversations with the president.

According to the two-page agreement, last revised in 2015 under Comey, the former FBI head could have violated numerous provisions.

"All information acquired by me in connection with my official duties with the FBI and all official material to which I have access remain the property of the United States of America. I will surrender upon demand by the FBI, or upon my separation from the FBI, all materials containing FBI information in my possession," reads paragraph two.

This means if Comey had followed FBI protocol, he would have had to surrender the information he leaked when he left the agency.

Paragraph 3 states FBI employees are prohibited from releasing "any information acquired by virtue of my official employment" to any "unauthorized recipient without prior official written authorization by the FBI."

Jason Zuckerman, principle at Zuckerman Law in Washington, D.C., said Comey had a "First Amendment right to leak information about what he reasonably perceived as unlawful conduct" by Trump.

Zuckerman, who also served as senior legal adviser to the special counsel at the U.S. Office of Special Counsel — an independent agency that protects federal employee whistleblowers — told the Washington Examiner that the word leak "is not a legal term, and I think it causes needless confusion."

"Federal employees have the right to blow the whistle to the media. Indeed, the Whistleblower Protectoin Act protects lawful disclosures about waste, fraud and abuse," Zuckerman said.

Zuckerman said Comey did not leak classified or highly sensitive information.

"Instead, he was leaking contemporaneous notes of what he reasonably perceived to be criminal conduct, i.e., obstruction of justice or an improper attempt to influence an investigation," he explained.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/is-jam...article/2625589
***********

The "Nothing Burger" continues.

The only "crime" that Comey felt Trump had committed, the supposed crime that led to the leaked memo, was when he shared his "hope" that Comey would drop the Flynn investigation. Comey's response was akin to saying "I'll get you back for firing me!" and that accusation was his best shot. Pretty pathetic. TM

this one was in Pookie's Toons today...