FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: 202-646-5188
May 10, 2018
Judicial Watch: Emails Show FBI Advised Comey to Consult with Mueller’s Office Prior to June 2017 Testimony
(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch today released new emails from the Department of Justice (DOJ) showing that former FBI Director James Comey was advised by FBI officials in May 2017 to consult with Special Counsel Robert Mueller prior to testifying before any congressional committees regarding Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election and his firing as FBI director.
According to numerous news reports, Comey met directly with Mueller previous to his June 8, 2017, testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Sources said that Comey’s opening statement and subsequent testimony were coordinated with Mueller.
At the hearing, Comey revealed that he had intentionally leaked material from a memo allegedly documenting a meeting with President Trump in order to help assure the appointment of a special counsel.
I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. 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 DOJ and FBI have stated that Comey’s leaks were unauthorized and compared the disclosures to Wikileaks.
The documents obtained by Judicial Watch are the first to reveal that high-ranking FBI officials helped Comey coordinate his testimony with Mueller.
Judicial Watch obtained the documents in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the DOJ on January 31, 2018 (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-00220)). The lawsuit was filed after the DOJ failed to respond to an August 14, 2017 FOIA request seeking:
On May 17, 2017, Comey received notices to appear before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee.
An email chain dated May 18 and 19, 2017, with the subject line “Future testimony” shows then-FBI Chief of Staff James Rybicki, then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and Assistant Director Gregory Brower, Comey and others discussing Comey’s upcoming testimony:
In this chain, on May 18 at 6:30 pm, Comey wrote to Rybicki to confirm that he had accepted the invitation to testify before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) but declined the invitations from the Senate Judiciary Committee and House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee.
Comey also writes: “Last, would you please tell OGC [Office of the General Counsel] that I would like to be able to review any documents authored by me or on which I am copied that will be produced to SSCI in connection with my testimony and would like the opportunity for that review before I testify?”
An email from a redacted sender, apparently Comey, to Rybicki dated May 19 at 11:49 am reads:
Jim
I just got off a call with Senators Burr and Warner. They would like to have a hearing next Wednesday at which I testify, first in open session and then in closed, if necessary. I asked them not to announce it until I check with FBI/DOJ to see if you want to discuss anything before they do that. I told them I had asked for guidance on any institutional prerogatives and for the opportunity to review any documents FBI has produced that relate to me. I told them I would communicate with them by the end of the day to either ask them to hold announcing the Wednesday hearing or go ahead.
Many thanks.
Jim
On May 19 at 2:10 pm, Rybicki writes back:
Director: We just met to discuss the requests outlined in the two emails below. Before responding the General Counsel has asked me to confirm that you have discussed with the attorneys representing you, and that you are comfortable discussing these issues with us rather than communicating through your counsel.
On May 19 at 3:02 pm, a redacted sender, likely Comey, responds to Rybicki: “Yes and yes.”
Also in this chain, on May 19 at 4:11 pm, Rybicki writes to McCabe, FBI Deputy Director David L. Bowdich, former FBI General Counsel James A. Baker, Brower, Elizabeth Beers and other redacted names:
Please see a DRAFT response to Director Comey (below). I will hold pending further direction….
Director:
In response to your emails below we have consulted with executive management here, including the General Counsel, and recommend the following:
1. That your counsel convey any acceptance or declinations to invitations to testify directly to the Committees.
2. That your counsel consult with Special Counsel Mueller to determine the timing of any such testimony and,
3. The Office of General Counsel stands ready to discuss with you in consultation with the Department of Justice and the Special Counsel, institutional privileges or prerogatives that may be presented by any such testimony.
“These documents show that James Comey, who was fired by the president, nevertheless had easy, friendly access to the FBI as he prepped his infamous anti-Trump testimony to the Senate,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This collusion led to Comey’s attacking President Trump and misusing FBI records as part of a vendetta against the president.”
Women, Alcohol Abuse
And 4 Coping Skills For Recovery
A recent study that showed even moderate alcohol consumption can take years off your life not only attracted a lot of media attention, it also caused other studies about drinking to seem even more worrisome, especially with their findings about women.
We aren’t talking about harmless social sipping with friends here, and as the nation observes Women’s Health Care Month in May it’s worth exploring the growing negative role that alcohol plays in the lives of American women.
“My favorite line of all time is: ‘I don’t drink that much,’ ” says Dr. Soroya Bacchus (www.soroyabacchusmd.com), a psychiatrist and author of How to Detox Yourself from Alcohol.
“Sometimes the people who say this are right; they really don’t drink that much. More often, though, people say this to make themselves feel better about how much they do drink.”
Just last year, a study published by JAMA Psychiatry reported that more Americans are drinking high amounts of alcohol, and some of the greatest increases are among women.
In addition, about 5.3 million women in the United States drink alcohol in a way that threatens their health and safety, according to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
For those women, just trying to get sober won’t fix the fundamental problem that caused them to drink too much to begin with, Bacchus says.
“I don’t care about sober,” she says. “I care about healthy. No one drinks or uses drugs in a vacuum. Usually there is an underlying mental disorder that causes and worsens the alcohol or drug use.”
It’s important that women with serious drinking problems seek medical assistance so they can detox in a safe manner, Bacchus says. Detoxification from alcohol has more complications from withdrawal than any other drug, and the death rate for alcohol withdrawal is between 5 and 8 percent, she says.
Even after detoxing, Bacchus says, a therapist can help women develop healthy psychological coping skills to avoid a relapse.
Among the ways they can do that include:
“The goal is to replace the negative coping mechanisms of addiction with the healthy coping mechanisms of recovery,” Bacchus says. “You need your mind and body working in harmony so your soul can be at peace.”
About Soroya Bacchus, M.D.
Soroya Bacchus, M.D., (www.soroyabacchusmd.com) author of How to Detox Yourself from Alcohol, is a triple board-certified psychiatrist specializing in addition and psychosomatic medicine. She has treated patients with addiction issues for 22 years. She has been interviewed on such television shows as Good Morning America and has been quoted in the New York Times, the Huffington Post and other print and online publications.
=========================
United States Issues First-Ever WTO Counter Notification Against India’s Market Price Support
(Washington, D.C., May 9, 2018)— U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue today announced that the United States submitted a counter notification in the World Trade Organization (WTO) Committee on Agriculture (COA) on India’s market price support (MPS) for wheat and rice. Filed on May 4, 2018, this is the first ever COA notification under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture regarding another country’s measures.
“The United States expects our trading partners to comply with the reporting requirements they agreed to when joining the WTO,” said Ambassador Lighthizer. “Accurate reporting and improved transparency of these programs is an important step in ensuring that our trading partners are living up to their WTO commitments and helps achieve more market-based outcomes through the multilateral trading system.”
“American farmers are the most productive and competitive in the world, and with free and fair trade, they always do well in the international marketplace,” Secretary Perdue said. “India represents a massive market, and we want greater access for U.S. products, but India must be transparent about their practices. For trade to be free and fair, all parties must abide by their WTO commitments.”
Based on U.S. calculations, it appears that India has substantially underreported its market price support for wheat and rice. When calculated according to WTO Agreement on Agriculture methodology, India’s market price support for wheat and rice far exceeded its allowable levels of trade distorting domestic support. The United States expects a robust discussion on how India implements and notifies its policies at the next COA meeting, which is scheduled for June 2018.
Background:
On May 4, 2018, the United States submitted a counter notification in the WTO Committee on Agriculture on India’s market price support for wheat and rice – based on publicly available information. The United States has identified several areas of potential concern with India’s notification of its market price support for rice and wheat. These include issues with the quantity of production used in market price support calculations, the exclusion of state-level bonuses from calculations of applied administered prices, exclusion from India’s notifications of information on the total value of production (VoP) of wheat and rice (information necessary to assess compliance with WTO commitments), and issues with currency conversions.
###
