Skip to content

On Comey

2016 October 31
by Ian Welsh

If “She’s not being investigated/charged any more” was in the public interest, then “She’s being investigated again due to new information” is also in the public interest.

Either Comey should never have commented, or he should have commented both times.


If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

 

20 Responses
  1. October 31, 2016

    I see you are an agent of VLADIMIR PUTIN!!!!
    ~

  2. November 1, 2016

    Even under the Bush administration, Comey has never led me to believe he was his own man. His action has to be in part from heavy pressure from a Party whose presidential candidate is going to cost them dearly this November unless they can pull something out of the hat that will help them with House and Senate votes

  3. Ivory Bill Woodpecker permalink
    November 1, 2016

    Hardly an “agent”, Thunder Dude; merely a useful Puritan.

  4. Peter* permalink
    November 1, 2016

    The Clintonite damage control hotshots are trying but seem to be failing to deflect attention away from the import of this investigation and keep people looking at personalities and procedures. One Clintonite site is even trying to indirectly link Comey with the Russians which shows how panicked and feeble they are.

    This is not about the FBI or Comey but about the Red Queen and the arrogant morons that surround her. Podesta wasn’t hacked but gave his password away to phishers and now the FBI has found evidence that there may be or are classified documents on some weirdo perverts computer thanks to the RC’s sloppy first mistress.

    I think people outside the chattering class are realizing that these are not the people anyone should trust with state secrets or anything else.

  5. realitychecker permalink
    November 1, 2016

    @ Peter

    “some weirdo perverts computer thanks to the RC’s sloppy first mistress.”

    Hey, leave me out of it. Not guilty, not guilty lol.

  6. Hugh permalink
    November 1, 2016

    My take is that Comey sees Trump as a threat to the state and so has been running damage control for Clinton on her emails. The first time he commented, it was to give her a Get Out of Jail Free card and to so taint the ground that no further investigation could be undertaken against her in the future with the evidence on hand. His comments would be a three-day wonder (which they were) and then Hillary’s triumphant march to the throne would be back on track (which it was).

    I have always maintained that Clinton’s corruption and grifting, and that of her inner circle, have always been remarkably unsubtle, unsophisticated, and in your face. Huma Abedin is no innocent in this. She is Clinton’s right hand, and not only in on the con but its Chief Operating Officer.

    Those emails did not magically appear on her husband’s computer. They got there because she put them there. 650,000 emails at between 5k and 10k per email comes out to 3-6 gigabytes. On today’s hard drives not all that much but still equivalent to 4 or 5 thousand novels. She and Wiener probably had separate accounts/logins on the computer so Wiener would not necessarily have known what was in Abedin’s account. And even if he was technically the SysAdmin he might not have known how to access the account or bothered to look in it. Depending on how she downloaded these emails, it would have taken cumulatively several minutes to a few hours depending on source and connection speeds. But here’s the thing. Putting them on Wiener’s computer would allow her to declare to the FBI that she had submitted all relevant materials from “her” devices. A purely Clintonian parsing, sort of like Bill’s famous line about “It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

    It was just an accident and karma that her useless husband would get caught up in an FBI investigation of his own. And that’s what caused the problem not just for Abedin (lying to the FBI) but for Comey. You see Abedin’s trove was much larger, intact, and untainted. It is a fair question whether Abedin or Comey shat in their pants more over this revelation. Comey had to announce the existence of this archive because if he didn’t, it would get leaked anyway. Damage Control 101 says that if you can’t stop the release of something, the best option is to manage the release. And that is what he has done.

    Of course, if Clinton wins the election, this will not stop her from throwing Comey under the bus. He already is being thrown under it. I think she is personally devastated that she will have to throw Abedin under the bus as well but she will do it. The only question is when she does, will it be enough. I doubt it.

  7. Ché Pasa permalink
    November 2, 2016

    Comey is as thoroughgoing a rat-bastard as has ever headed the FBI — which is all of them.

    Whether he’s running interference for La Clinton is purely speculative. But he has a long record of questionable actions, and FBI as an institution has an even longer record of deplorable and highly political actions which serve to support a ruling clique and have brought untold harm to countless individuals and organizations who have dared to question the legitimacy of that clique.

    The intense speculation over what’s in those “newly discovered” emails is largely irrelevant.

    What we’ve learned in all these months and years of email controversy is that there is essentially no privacy/security wrt to email, should authorities or others wish to pry. This is not new information — we’ve known for how long now that NSA and no doubt other agencies and interests are not only capable of hoovering every email everywhere, but they’ve been doing it for years. We have little or no defense against it. Although we may have accounts that we think are secure, they probably aren’t and everything we do online is ultimately an open book to those who wish to read it.

    The wonder is that so many of our rulers and their lackeys — who should be fully aware of the fact that pretty much any online action is observable and accessible to the security state as well as many others — nevertheless use email accounts with apparent abandon. And in the case of Huma, they store huge numbers of emails. To what object though? If they’re in a sensitive or powerful position, why do they do this?

    So far, what’s been revealed of the Clinton emails is sausage-making and inner circle chit-chat. If we didn’t already know this is how government works at the higher levels, now we do. It’s much like the Snowden revelations of domestic and international surveillance. We should have and would have known it was going on if we were paying attention. Confirmation was appealing, but there really hasn’t been any significant change in the behavior of the agencies involved despite all the outrage and outcry at the confirmations.

    Nor do I expect any significant change in the sausage-making of our ruling class because of the revelations of the Clinton/Podesta emails. No, instead, they might become even more in-your-face about it, because they sincerely believe there’s nothing we can or will do about it.

    Certainly focusing on electoral politics is not going to change it.

    Changing the actors at the top does not change the system within which they operate.

    The whole thing is rotten to the core, and that’s the problem we’ll ultimately have to deal with.

  8. realitychecker permalink
    November 2, 2016

    I’ve got to say, what really and truly amazes me is the revelation of how many Americans are proclaiming their heartfelt belief that the American people, who only get real input into the system on Election Day, should make that ballot decision without knowing whether they are voting for a criminal or not.

    Consent of the governed, we hardly knew ye . . .

    Democracy, R.I.P.

    Let me remind, for those who think there should be no revelations of facts near election time, that the New York Times withheld the story about Bush’s illegal wiretapping so as to not influence the 2004 election.

    I guess all you good lefties out there approve of that travesty as well?

    There is no consent of the governed without knowledge of the relevant information, PERIOD. Back to basics, please–that what we call a “reality check.”

    And yes, that means the so-called DOJ “policy” to not influence elections with information is only rational if one believes the People should have to vote while blindfolded.

  9. Peter* permalink
    November 2, 2016

    @CP

    I wonder why you think people should join you in your despair and withdrawal to wait for some mythical future time when they will be allowed to address ‘ the problem we’ll ultimately have to deal with’.

  10. Peter* permalink
    November 2, 2016

    @CP, cont.

    Who is this ‘we’ you represent? All I see is atomized people and diverse groups but these people can join in some limited sabotage of the system next week if they choose to. It may not be much but it may be the last opportunity for this type of direct rejection of the status quo.

  11. Ché Pasa permalink
    November 2, 2016

    ‘Sabotage the system’ ‘direct rejection of the status quo’

    You’re living in a dreamworld if you think that voting for Trump — or anyone else — will do that, because it won’t. You do not sabotage or reject the system by participating in it. That should be axiomatic.

    I’ve said that Trump is a conman, and he’s obviously found his perfect marks. His ascension to the White House, if it happens, will result in the replacement of one faction of the powerful with another, not the blowing up of the System that institutionalizes a neoLibCon status quo. How it’s used and who it favors and disfavors will change somewhat, but the System itself will endure, and the status quo of slaughtering brown people and fleecing the rubes will continue without let up.

    Essentially the same situation will continue with Clinton back in the White House.

    We the Rabble have essentially no control over it; our electoral system is purpose designed to ensure that’s the case.

    There are plenty of ways to sabotage the system and reject the status quo. Monkeywrenching is still possible. In the meantime, voting for one or the other of these “flawed” candidates isn’t one of the ways to do it.

  12. Peter* permalink
    November 2, 2016

    @CP

    Let me know when you get your Monkey Militia mobilized to fight the status quo. Right now today there are tens of millions of rubes, wankers, despicables and regular folks ready to march, walk, shuffle or waddle to the voting pens to try to stop the disease of Clintonism from spreading and with a few million more volunteers it could happen.

    Electing Trump or debating what he might or might not do as president is not the important topic right now but defeating the Red Queen along with her quislings and backers, the majority of the status quo, is paramount. Even if this is just a symbolic act of resistance it would be sweet and refreshing to see these Clintonites and their Queen humiliated and dismissed.

  13. Hugh permalink
    November 2, 2016

    I agree with Ché Pasa. It is the reformist’s fallacy that you can reform a thoroughly corrupt system. It is like buffing a turd. At the end of the process, it’s still the same shit you started with. Lesser evilism is even worse. It doesn’t give you something better. It gives you more shit. If you want to know the face of despair and political impotence, it is choosing and defending lesser evilism.

    The point here is not to throw up our hands and surrender. It is to understand the nature of the fight. When the system is rotten, you do not temporize with it. You do not prop it up. And you do not validate it in any way. (So good-bye to lesser evilism.) You replace it. This is the opposite of despair. It is taking on the work that needs to be done.

    What the Clinton server as well as the DNC, Podesta, and Clinton/Abedin emails demonstrate is a culture of entitlement and secrecy, with draconian rules and laws for us and impunity for them. They show not a blurring but the complete trampling of the line between personal gain, the Clinton Foundation and speaking fees, and public office, the State Department, epitomized by Abedin’s simultaneous, coordinating jobs at both.

  14. different clue permalink
    November 3, 2016

    One of Sic Semper Tyrannis’s commenters offered the conditional if-then prediction that if Trump wins, Obama will give Clinton and perhaps others involved a full, free and total “Ford pardons Nixon” type of pardon. And if Clinton wins, all investigations will be stopped.

    Several months before Comey Statement Number One, Colonel ( Retired) Pat Lang predicted that if Comey decided to recommend against prosecution . . . that the “law-and-order” type people at the mid levels of FBI would start leaking the material out of rage at a politically motivated coverup-standown by their superiors.

    Might versions of that be what is happening?

    If Clinton wins, many people at strategic keypoints throughout the Law Enforcement and Intelligence Communities will “go Snowden” on the Clintonites with every bit of material in their possession.

  15. Peter* permalink
    November 3, 2016

    @DC

    Col Mustard occasionally writes something that isn’t fantasy but I doubt what we have just seen has anything to do with his opinion.

    The Clinton/email server investigation was set up as a PR exercise with the outcome predetermined because it was limited to ‘Intent’ not the facts. Comey tried to explain this in his statement and later that they weren’t allowed to pursue the Red Queens public lying only what she said to them. The fact that the RC mishandled classified documents was reported but trumped by the ‘intent’ requirement. There wasn’t much of anything for the enraged investigators to leak about that wasn’t already known and reported. Even if the renewed investigation finds classified documents on Weiner’s computer the fact that she had classified documents on her private server was reported already but intent was never proven.

    The reports/leaks I have seen, as yet unverified, point to an ongoing investigation of the Clinton Foundation outside the influence of the DOJ that may soon produce recommendations for RICO felony charges. The Weiner Files may have already revealed important evidence for this investigation and Comey’s report and statements may be preparation for the much bigger announcement.

    This is a Lock Her UP story while the email scandal was at most a slap on the wrist for misbehavior tale.

  16. different clue permalink
    November 3, 2016

    The reality-basedness of someone’s theoretical and analytical framework is revealed by the percent of their predictions come true . . . and what percent true they come.

    “Him that is not surprised when the future comes, lives very close to the truth”.

    — John L. King

    We shall see who is not surprised over the next few-couple years.

  17. Hvd permalink
    November 3, 2016

    It should be noted that this is a strict liability offense. Intent is irrelevant.

  18. Peter* permalink
    November 3, 2016

    @DC

    CBS is now reporting on the story I mentioned above about the Clinton Foundation investigation and the finding of related emails. The internal conflict or rage at the FBI is over this investigation not the server scandal.

    I think I hedged my wishful thinking above enough so that it isn’t a prediction which I try to avoid. I’ve followed and noted the Col’s many predictions on the Syrian war especially since the Russians arrived and most if not all have missed the mark and none have come true.

  19. different clue permalink
    November 5, 2016

    @Peter*,

    If I had my own computer and endless hours of screen-time I could do a granular analysis of every prediction the Colonel and Other Guest Posters have made about the Syrian war and compare all these predictions to detailed records of events . . . . and see what percent of come-true there is or isn’t.

    Since I don’t have such time, all I can go on is my memory. In basic general I remember the Colonel predicting that the “moderate opposition” would get weaker and more irrelevant with passing time as the more-heavily supported and more-willing-to-fight jihadi forces grew stronger. That happened.

    I think he has also predicted that the R + 6 will get the rebellion ended in West and Middle Syria eventually and when the fighting stops Assad will remain President of a Government of the Syrian Arab Republic covering a lot of territory. I don’t remember whether he or others have predicted that the SAR forces will eventually retake the entirety of Syrian territory or not. But if the fighting stops with Assad in control of the economically and geographically important parts of Syria after the fighting has stopped, then that will be a basic prediction-come-true. We won’t know till it is all over one way or another.

  20. Peter* permalink
    November 5, 2016

    @DC

    You do have a fantastic and creative memory but I recall the Col repeatedly describing the so called moderate rebels as mythical Unicorns and then reverting to the Assad/Putin nomenclatura to describe all the rebels as Jihadist/Terrorists and foreigners.

    I’ve read most of his play by play descriptions of the major battles of this war since the Russians arrived and they all start the with the same trash talk and Nazi military jargon predicting imminent and crushing victory over the rebels which never quite materializes. He has finally admitted that the SAA forces are weak and ineffective and once gave a niggardly compliment to the rebels for ‘learning’.

    I haven’t looked but he and his band are probably pre-celebrating an Axis forces victory in Aleppo where the rebels are already raining on their parade.

Comments are closed.