Connect with us

EP

Here’s The Evidence That Former FBI Director Comey Likely Perjured Himself in Congressional Testimony, You Decide

ICYMI: Despite answering House investigators’ questions with “I don’t remember” 71 times, “I don’t know” 166 times and “I don’t recall” 8 times, former FBI Director James Comey may still have found room to perjure himself with the few answers he did give.

Two months ago former FBI General Counsel James Baker revealed during Congressional testimony that he had been receiving information from Michael Sussmann, a lawyer for Perkins Coie.

As general counsel, Baker answered directly to Comey.

This admission is significant because Perkins Coie was the law firm that retained Fusion GPS and former British spy Christopher Steele on behalf of the Clinton Campaign and the DNC.  

Christopher Steele was the author of the now infamous dossier that remains unverified to this day and appears to be nothing more than opposition libel.

Equally important is the fact that the involvement of Perkins Coie does not appear to have been disclosed to the FISA Court. The controversial dossier produced by Steele would later be used by the FBI as the primary evidence used to obtain the FISA warrant on Page.

The dossier was, and remains, unverified to this day but it has served as the single most important data set presented to the FISA court for four separate surveillance warrants.  And James Comey’s signature certified the evidence presented to the court as true, not maybe true.

And certainly not “unverified” as Comey testified to Congress in January 2017 after he had signed at least one FISA application.

It’s hard to envision Comey’s version that, in what has to be the single most significant FBI investigation of his, or any previous director’s tenure, he doesn’t remember, doesn’t know, or was never informed and never asked about the granular details of everything that was unfolding under his watch.

Keep in mind that while making these assertions he had signed a FISA application affirming, under penalty of perjury, that he knew and verified the underlying evidence.

Last Friday, it appears that Comey again misrepresented the truth about his past sins while under oath in closed-door testimony.

Comey testified that as FBI Director, he never knew that Steele worked for a political opposition research firm hired by a law firm paid by the Democratic National Committee. (p. 112).

That bit of testimony may come back to bite Comey following the revelation by investigative journalist John Solomon

That there is a known email chain that is the “most damning evidence to date of potential abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).” It proves the FBI knew that there were “intelligence community concerns about the reliability of the dossier used to support” the FISA application.

The emails also show that officials who participated in the email chain were aware that Christopher Steele had spoken to the media about the dossier. Reporter Michael Isikoff’s Yahoo article had been published on September 23, 2016 and obviously Steele had been his source. Yet, it didn’t stop them from using the Isikoff article as corroboration for Steele’s dossier in their FISA Court application in a process called “circular intelligence reporting.”

The email chain spans the period from early to mid October 2016 in the days leading up to the first FISA application – the one that Comey signed.  Comey was a participant in that email chain in which senior FBI and DOJ officials question the veracity of the dossier, the basis for the application.

Congressional investigators, some of whom have viewed these emails, have added this to the list of evidence that are asking President Trump to declassify.  

The walls are closing in on James Comey.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

To Top