"DOCUMENTS REVEAL JAMES COMEY ASSOCIATE LEAKED CLASSIFIED INFORMATION TO THE NYT"
Video transcript4:35
Again with John Solomon, editor-in-chief, founder, chief investigator of ReporterJustTheNews.com, revealing tonight that an FBI investigation uncovered the fact that Mr. Higher honor himself. James Comey routinely leaked classified information to The New York Times through an intermediary, a friend on the faculty of Columbia Law School. The sheer amount of leaking appears to be political, deep, dark, purposefully deceptive, in a myriad of ways, here with details, is investigative reporter, founder of JustTheNews.com, editor-in-chief. All right. Mr. Higher honor, years ago on this program I said you have the right to remain silent and you might want to use it. This is a very long piece that you have here. It is a worthwhile read. I'll let you sum it up, and then I want your conclusion on what you're finding here, because to me it's very damning. Well, what you find out is that James Comey decided not to work through the FBI press office when he wanted to change the narrative in Washington, burnish his reputation against attacks from Democrats, and try to sully Donald Trump's reputation. If you remember, Democrats were mad that James Comey let out of the bag just before the election that there might be some new evidence in the Hillary Clinton email scandal. Hillary blamed Comey for throwing the election. She blamed the Russians for throwing the election. She blamed everybody but herself for throwing the election for her. But Comey was trying to rehabilitate that. And so he had an intermediary, a Columbia law professor by the name of Daniel Richmond, who the FBI confirmed and interviewed. And Richmond said, yes, I used my relationship with a New York Times reporter named Michael Schmidt. He's one of the authors of the Pulitzer Prize-winning package that President Trump is now suing over. And my goal was to improve negative stories about James Comey and to set a narrative, i.e., set the Russia collusion narrative. This guy worked around the official channels of the FBI press office. And at one point, the FBI noted, you met with James Comey. He gave you access to classified information. A short while later, you had a conversation with that New York Times reporter, and he ends up reporting something that appears to be classified. Did you do it? He gives, I think, perhaps the most famous denial people will remember, since Bill Clinton says it depends what the meaning of the word is, is when he tried to obfuscate whether he had an affair with Monica Lewinsky, he says, I can say, I don't think I confirmed the information. I can say, with a discount, that I didn't give him the classified information. With a discount means you got to give me some room. It's an extraordinary moment. The FBI clearly had strong suspicions that this was a potential backdoor for information, maybe classified information, to get out to the media with James Comey's fingerprints on it. And they didn't go much further. They didn't put Comey before the grand jury. That we can tell. They didn't appear to put this gentleman, Daniel Richmond, before the grand jury. And like Adam Schiff, as we told you last night, here they have an eyewitness whistleblower who said, I was in the room, when he authorized leaks of intel, these end up being a dead end again. And it's another reminder of a dual system of justice that the Justice Department had the last six years. These are documents that were never given to Jim Jordan. Jim Jordan confirmed that to me today. And we're just learning, eight years later, because of what Cash Patel turned over, that the FBI had all the evidence of how the false narrative of Russia collusion was spread across this country, to the detriment of voters, to the detriment of President Trump's first campaign. And they did nothing about it. It's a credit to the FBI. It's a credit to Cash Patel. It's a credit to the people that are involved in sharing this information now with the public. Do you see legal jeopardy here? I think if Pam Bondi goes the grand jury route, that these are people that are going to be hauled before the grand jury. I want to remind people, most classified information statutes have a five-year statute of limitations. But there is a provision that extends it to 10 years if it's willing and knowing. And there is some pretty clear evidence of a strong apparatus put in place to make these leaks occur, according to the FBI documents. I think a grand jury could go back and try to compel testimony and find out if it rises to the level of criminality. Tomorrow, though, I think we're going to take people on a new destination, which is, how often did the FBI get blocked in trying to investigate Hillary Clinton corruption at the Clinton Foundation? You're going to be shocked by the answer. We'll have you back tomorrow. I'm John Solomon. This is unraveling very quickly. Thank you.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
Post from Truth Social
"DOCUMENTS REVEAL JAMES COMEY ASSOCIATE LEAKED CLASSIFIED INFORMATION TO THE NYT"
Video transcript 4:35
Again with John Solomon, editor-in-chief, founder, chief investigator of ReporterJustTheNews.com, revealing tonight that an FBI investigation uncovered the fact that Mr. Higher honor himself. James Comey routinely leaked classified information to The New York Times through an intermediary, a friend on the faculty of Columbia Law School. The sheer amount of leaking appears to be political, deep, dark, purposefully deceptive, in a myriad of ways, here with details, is investigative reporter, founder of JustTheNews.com, editor-in-chief. All right. Mr. Higher honor, years ago on this program I said you have the right to remain silent and you might want to use it. This is a very long piece that you have here. It is a worthwhile read. I'll let you sum it up, and then I want your conclusion on what you're finding here, because to me it's very damning. Well, what you find out is that James Comey decided not to work through the FBI press office when he wanted to change the narrative in Washington, burnish his reputation against attacks from Democrats, and try to sully Donald Trump's reputation. If you remember, Democrats were mad that James Comey let out of the bag just before the election that there might be some new evidence in the Hillary Clinton email scandal. Hillary blamed Comey for throwing the election. She blamed the Russians for throwing the election. She blamed everybody but herself for throwing the election for her. But Comey was trying to rehabilitate that. And so he had an intermediary, a Columbia law professor by the name of Daniel Richmond, who the FBI confirmed and interviewed. And Richmond said, yes, I used my relationship with a New York Times reporter named Michael Schmidt. He's one of the authors of the Pulitzer Prize-winning package that President Trump is now suing over. And my goal was to improve negative stories about James Comey and to set a narrative, i.e., set the Russia collusion narrative. This guy worked around the official channels of the FBI press office. And at one point, the FBI noted, you met with James Comey. He gave you access to classified information. A short while later, you had a conversation with that New York Times reporter, and he ends up reporting something that appears to be classified. Did you do it? He gives, I think, perhaps the most famous denial people will remember, since Bill Clinton says it depends what the meaning of the word is, is when he tried to obfuscate whether he had an affair with Monica Lewinsky, he says, I can say, I don't think I confirmed the information. I can say, with a discount, that I didn't give him the classified information. With a discount means you got to give me some room. It's an extraordinary moment. The FBI clearly had strong suspicions that this was a potential backdoor for information, maybe classified information, to get out to the media with James Comey's fingerprints on it. And they didn't go much further. They didn't put Comey before the grand jury. That we can tell. They didn't appear to put this gentleman, Daniel Richmond, before the grand jury. And like Adam Schiff, as we told you last night, here they have an eyewitness whistleblower who said, I was in the room, when he authorized leaks of intel, these end up being a dead end again. And it's another reminder of a dual system of justice that the Justice Department had the last six years. These are documents that were never given to Jim Jordan. Jim Jordan confirmed that to me today. And we're just learning, eight years later, because of what Cash Patel turned over, that the FBI had all the evidence of how the false narrative of Russia collusion was spread across this country, to the detriment of voters, to the detriment of President Trump's first campaign. And they did nothing about it. It's a credit to the FBI. It's a credit to Cash Patel. It's a credit to the people that are involved in sharing this information now with the public. Do you see legal jeopardy here? I think if Pam Bondi goes the grand jury route, that these are people that are going to be hauled before the grand jury. I want to remind people, most classified information statutes have a five-year statute of limitations. But there is a provision that extends it to 10 years if it's willing and knowing. And there is some pretty clear evidence of a strong apparatus put in place to make these leaks occur, according to the FBI documents. I think a grand jury could go back and try to compel testimony and find out if it rises to the level of criminality. Tomorrow, though, I think we're going to take people on a new destination, which is, how often did the FBI get blocked in trying to investigate Hillary Clinton corruption at the Clinton Foundation? You're going to be shocked by the answer. We'll have you back tomorrow. I'm John Solomon. This is unraveling very quickly. Thank you.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.