Former DOJ spokesman blasts Comey after email letter

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Willtell
The question is why Comey did this.

There’s no way he was obligated to throw this into an election cycle by any law or rule.
Did he inform his superiors?

I think seeing so much terrible Clinton-related info coming out of WikiLeaks, day after day, after day, finally made FBI Director Comey realize that he made a mistake by declaring Hillary an innocent, short-circuiting, dummy. He does not want to go down in history as one of President Hillary Clinton's "ENABLERS", after she is indicted on past and future crimes.

Director Comey knows that he can stop this criminal in her tracks, and save the country from years of embarrassment on the world stage.

I think it is far more likely that the open rebellion in the FBI against the Director and McCabe in the aftermath of the Director failing to move for prosecution of Mrs. Clinton combined with the outrage of retired FBi agents feeling Comey had completely destroyed the reputation of the FBI has pushed Comey to get out in front of this and cover his backside by doing what he is legally bound to do.

The Real Deal

WillTell as usual with his usual reporting skill reports on the real deal of the Hillary email fiasco below
www.newsweek.com...

The truth is much less explosive. There is no indication the emails in question were withheld by Clinton during the investigation, the law enforcement official told Newsweek, nor does the discovery suggest she did anything illegal. Also, none of the emails were to or from Clinton, the official said. Moreover, despite the widespread claims in the media that this development had prompted the FBI to “reopen” of the case, it did not; such investigations are never actually closed, and it is common for law enforcement to discover new information that needs to be examined.

As of Friday night Comey had only said the bureau is seeking to determine whether these newly discovered emails involved classified material.
The FBI found the new evidence during an unrelated inquiry into former Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner regarding an allegation that he sent illicit, sexual text messages to an underage girl in North Carolina. In the course of that investigation, agents seized a laptop computer Weiner shared with his wife, Huma Abedin, a longtime Clinton aide who has already been questioned by the FBI during its investigation. The bureau found the emails now being examined on this shared device, which agents obtained some time ago.

This new evidence relates to how Abedin managed her emails. She maintained four email accounts—an unclassified State Department account, another on the clintonemail.com domain and a third on Yahoo. The fourth was linked to her husband’s account; she used it to support his activities when he was running for Congress, investigative records show. Abedin, who did not know Clinton used a private server for her emails, told the bureau in an April interview that she used the account on the clintonemail.com domain only for issues related to the Secretary’s personal affairs, such as communicating with her friends. For work-related records, Abedin primarily used the email account provided to her by the State Department

a reply to: Kapriti

He was not legally bound to do this


He created this hole he dug for himself by catering to the political whims of the GOP


He made himself their puppet willingly

a reply to: Kapriti

And yet another possibility is they found Huma's CYA dirt stash against Hillary. All of the other reasons don't make as much sense to me.

Comey couldn't have possibly thought doing this 11 days before an election would work out very well for him. Something very significant pushed this result. Huma's CYA dirt file on HRC makes more sense, imo.

We shall see.

Why are Democrats now saying that the Clinton E-mail/Server investigation was never CLOSED? On July 6, 2016, the U.S. Justice Department said that the case was formally "CLOSED".

Loretta Lynch Says The Investigation is officially CLOSED: www.cbsnews.com...

Is it somehow painful to know that a criminal investigation into aspects of Hillary Clinton's life has been re-opened? What difference does it make what terminology is used?

After Donald Trump is President, there will be many more investigations into Hillary, the Clinton Foundation, Bill stealing from their family charity, Benghazi.. and MORE.

originally posted by: carewemust
Why are Democrats now saying that the Clinton E-mail/Server investigation was never CLOSED? On July 6, 2016, the U.S. Justice Department said that the case was formally "CLOSED".

Loretta Lynch Says The Investigation is officially CLOSED: www.cbsnews.com...

Is it somehow painful to know that a criminal investigation into aspects of Hillary Clinton's life has been re-opened? What difference does it make what terminology is used?

After Donald Trump is President, there will be many more investigations into Hillary, the Clinton Foundation, Bill stealing from their family charity, Benghazi.. and MORE.

Because they are desperately trying to spin it as a non event. If the case was never closed they can claim today's letter is a nonevent and nothing has changed.

Remember the clintons are the ones who tried to change the definition of what "is" is on the Monica scandle.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: Kapriti

He was not legally bound to do this


He created this hole he dug for himself by catering to the political whims of the GOP


He made himself their puppet willingly

You are wrong.

Once making a report of findings to Congress regarding an investigation he is mandated to inform the heads of Congressional committees of the change in status to the investigation. After an initial survey of the new information relating to the case indicates sufficient cause for FBI action then the FBI Director is obliged to notify Congress.

originally posted by: carewemust
Why are Democrats now saying that the Clinton E-mail/Server investigation was never CLOSED? On July 6, 2016, the U.S. Justice Department said that the case was formally "CLOSED".

Loretta Lynch Says The Investigation is officially CLOSED: www.cbsnews.com...

Is it somehow painful to know that a criminal investigation into aspects of Hillary Clinton's life has been re-opened? What difference does it make what terminology is used?

After Donald Trump is President, there will be many more investigations into Hillary, the Clinton Foundation, Bill stealing from their family charity, Benghazi.. and MORE.

Loretta Lynch only speaks for the position of her department. In reality very few FBI cases are closed and archived in comparison to cases which remain in an open holding pattern pending new information.

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: carewemust
Why are Democrats now saying that the Clinton E-mail/Server investigation was never CLOSED? On July 6, 2016, the U.S. Justice Department said that the case was formally "CLOSED".

Loretta Lynch Says The Investigation is officially CLOSED: www.cbsnews.com...

Is it somehow painful to know that a criminal investigation into aspects of Hillary Clinton's life has been re-opened? What difference does it make what terminology is used?

After Donald Trump is President, there will be many more investigations into Hillary, the Clinton Foundation, Bill stealing from their family charity, Benghazi.. and MORE.

Because they are desperately trying to spin it as a non event. If the case was never closed they can claim today's letter is a nonevent and nothing has changed.

Remember the clintons are the ones who tried to change the definition of what "is" is on the Monica scandle.

I think you're saying that Democrats are attempting to limit the "shock value" of today's story? Considering that they believe the public is gullible and stupid, I can understand why they're playing that card.

It's interesting that several of the MSM are issuing stories, saying that Hillary was having a terrible week, and this totally wiped out any advantage over Trump she enjoyed 5 days ago. Before today, I don't recall reading any of the MSM saying that Hillary was having a "terrible week".

Example: www.washingtonpost.com...

I guess they weren't planning on mentioning how Trump was gaining quickly on Clinton, and WikiLeaked info was taking it's toll. But today, Comey broke the dam, and they had to tell the truth.

a reply to: Willtell

My my, someone's seemingly quite distraught over the FBI "investigating". It's in their name you know.

originally posted by: stinkelbaum

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad

“Comey refused to even tell Congress if FBI was investigating Trump camp for Russia hack, but regular updates on Clinton are apparently A-ok,”

Correct me if I'm wrong, but investigating Trump over alleged Russia hacks makes zero sense. Talk about a bias stance.

a potential us president being a puppet of russia would normally be investigated.
however, with everything presumably released via russia on clinton and, her opponents numerous rape charges, this isn't a normal cycle.

Puppet of Russia? Why because Wikileaks is ripping Hillary apart? Trump has no ties to Wikileaks if you went by facts. Hillary is being nailed to the wall by Wikileaks and all her enemies she has churned up over the years of treating people like crap and being the backstabbing lawyer/politician she already is.

You can also keep repeating what the liberal MSM keeps saying, but Trump hasn't been convicted of rape charges unless that argument is only good for Hillary now. Plus all the allegations against Trump of rape are highly skeptical at best, especially due to the timing and ties to certain people they have. If Hillary would've just followed the laws in place she wouldn't be in this hot mess she has put herself in anyways. But to continually blame all her issues as if its Trump's fault is laughable and will only even be considered by other bias posters like yourself that have a deep hatred towards Trump.

a reply to: Willtell

Comey's internal memo to FBI staff clearly proves HE DID NOT INTEND to influence the election. He specifically stated he was trying to strike a 'balance' in consideration of the election.

Strategic move, IMO. Now he has the Hillary defense.

On the other hand, if Comey releases all the details of the emails, in question, because Hillary has demanded it...then he would be actually trying to influence the election.

Hillary's demands are going to make it impossible for him to cave.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: Kapriti

He was not legally bound to do this


He created this hole he dug for himself by catering to the political whims of the GOP


He made himself their puppet willingly

Actually, if Hillary would've just used an authorized server like any other average American would do in a government position, then she wouldn't have to worry about any of this mess. But instead, she chose to risk national security by setting up a personal server. We don't even want to get into reasons why someone would violate the law to bypass national security measures.

a reply to: Willtell

Really Willtell, it doesn't come to mind that is all about dirt and corruption that at this point happens to benefit the opposition.

Actually Comey has done a great favor to the American public before heading to the polls, they have the right to know how dirty their candidates are and how they blatantly deceive with lies and deception the public.

Is about time.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: Willtell

Really Willtell, it doesn't come to mind that is all about dirt and corruption that at this point happens to benefit the opposition.

Actually Comey has done a great favor to the American public before heading to the polls, they have the right to know how dirty their candidates are and how they blatantly deceive with lies and deception the public.

Is about time.

How dirty they are?

What happen to innocent until proven guilty?

People, Hillary and Trump are entitled to a fair trial

This is supposed to be a civilized country not a banana republic where a mere allegation can decide your guilt

So I see little good in what Comey did unless we want to become a fascist country where people are guilty based on allegations


And since he’s universally condemned you have little support from the realm of truth, justice, logic, reason or what’s right

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Then why do experts universally condemn what he did?


He influenced the election in averse of Justice department established policy NOT to intervene in elections with things like what he did within 60 days of them

He did it in 11 days.


So where your logic?

originally posted by: Willtell
How dirty they are?

What happen to innocent until proven guilty?

People, Hillary and Trump are entitled to a fair trial

So I see little good in what Comey did unless we want to become a fascist country where people are guilty based on allegations

And since he’s universally condemned you have little support from the realm of truth, justice, logic, reason or what’s right

Well...Comey is entitled to a fair trial, too. Yet here you are, condemning the man without truly knowing what he has or why he did it.

Yes, he arguably broke with protocol here, but I before I condemn him, I want to give the man a chance to make his case. If there is strong evidence of criminal activity directly tied to Hillary, then I think he was fully justified in his actions. The public has a right to know that before they vote. If this turns into a big nothing, then you're probably right. In any event, what's done is done and all we can do now is wait and see what he and the FBI produce.

originally posted by: Willtell
So where your logic?

It's the same logic the FBI used to close the server investigation, in July, without recommending indictment.

Comey explained what his intent was...to inform, to fulfill an obligation to update Congress. His intent was not to influence the election.

P.S. 'Experts' do NOT universally condemn his decision. Case in point: Obama.

ETA: Also, the Hatch Act is not a criminal statute, it's an administrative constraint. Most likely, he gets a slap on the wrist, and that's the worst case scenario.

a reply to: Willtell

Willtell,

From what I understand, having had a little time to review the case, it seems as if Mr Comey was under an obligation to inform Congress of goings on, and did so. That communication, which some might argue should have been between himself and Congress, was leaked by someone, or found its way to the press. There is a difference between the man putting out a big sign at his office saying "One of your candidates is under investigation, guess which one!", and sending communications to the authorities alerting them to the situation, which, but for its being leaked to the press somehow, would have been utterly legitimate for him to do.