Thread by @JohnWHuber

Now that we've finally seen the @Comey memos, its time to ask if the federal government was violating at least the spirit of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) AND getting backed up in its stonewalling *by a FISC Judge*

THREAD

Background: After @Comey was fired as @FBI Director, and he revealed the existence of his "memos", several news organisations immediately asked the FBI/DOJ for access to the Comey Memos via a FOIA request. These included @cnnbrk, @JudicialWatch, @USATODAY and @DailyCaller

The FBI/DOJ denied this, so the news organisations filed various lawsuits. Eventually these were consolidated into a single lawsuit, heard by D.C. Circuit and FISA court Judge, James E. Boasberg. He denied the request Feb 2 2018

An interesting fact about the case. @TGowdySC said prior to the Comey Memos being released that "nobody outside of Congress" had seen them (except those Comey had given them to, i.e. his friends & Special Counsel Mueller).

But that's not true: *Boasberg also saw all the memos*

Boasberg:

1. Privately reviewed ALL of the Comey Memos

2. Received a sealed affidavit from David W. Archey (Peter Strzok's replacement under Mueller)

3. Heard a sealed "proffer" from Michael R. Dreeben (a rockstar lawyer for Mueller; argued 100+ cases before The Supreme Court)

But its the reason for denying the public release of the memos that's a problem. The feds asserted there was "no logically divisible" section of ANY of the memos that could be released, even redacted. Boasberg agreed: "no portion" could be segregated. Not a word. Not even a comma

Now at the time, it was hard to know if this was true. The Comey Memo's were secret and mysterious, with only @Comey choosing who to give them to, and who to leak to. Or, in @Comey terms: have a friend "describe them" to a major news organisation (er, still a leak, sorry Jim)

But the US public have now seen virtually all of the content of the Comey Memos. Which raises a few questions. Example: why couldn't THIS "memo" have been released by Boasberg? Unclassified, innocuous, hardly any detail, reciting a quick phone conversation with @realDonaldTrump?

Or these sections? Boasberg claims they show the memos "level of detail, which supposedly goes to whether they are credible and persuasive. I don't think they are much different than you'd find in someones book or memoir (and such details didn't make Michael Wolff credible)

Or this section? The @nytimes had quoted the memos as describing @realDonaldTrump as talking about "putting reporters in jail". That was leaked DELIBERATELY out of context, as @Comey AGREED with Trump, even laughing and volunteering to "put a head on a pike"!

Leaking the sentence in the memo that makes @realDonaldTrump look like a tyrant is ok, but leaking THE VERY NEXT SENTENCE that shows @Comey agreed & actually laughed is a threat to the Mueller investigation and/or national security? Mr. Boasberg, you should explain why. Good luck

Or these innocuous comments about @DevinNunes and irrelevant comments about Jordan?

I'm not going to speculate what Mueller's team may have said to Boasberg to get him to go along with such tortured reasoning, but I have a feeling whatever it was may become significant in the months ahead

Finally, THIS part from Boasberg's ruling on @Comey's credibility may be important, as since the Memos were released it's hard to argue that his credibility has improved -if anything it has plummeted.

Why wouldn't @TheJusticeDept vouch for @Comey to the court?

/END