Jump to content

Doing the POLITICO Rag - FBI director James Comey


Recommended Posts

In July, the FBI concluded its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email practices—and Comey decided, with political and public curiosity at a fever pitch, to cast aside Justice Department policies that reserve for prosecutors the sole discretion to file or decline criminal charges.

 

Instead of consulting with his colleagues, he called a news conference that caught even the attorney general by surprise. Before banks of television cameras, he delivered a show-stopping performance that at once legally exonerated and publicly excoriated the Democratic nominee for president.

 

What Comey should have done, by many accounts, was handle the Clinton probe like any other routine inquiry: provide confidential recommendations to prosecutors, release a strictly factual statement noting that the investigation would be closed, and resist external pressures to inappropriately air the FBI’s findings outside a court of law. According to Akerman: “This is probably one of those [rare] cases where you would want there to be an announcement that no charges would be brought, based on the investigation. But to say anything beyond that is completely improper. And… what he's done has raised all kinds of innuendo.

 

Rules and norms exist precisely because of extraordinary cases like Clinton’s, after all—not despite them. Respecting these constraints would therefore have been the right—and, by virtue of the political outcry it would have provoked, even the courageous—thing to do...

 

...what he's done has raised all kinds of innuendo...?

HA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In July, the FBI concluded its investigation into Hillary Clintons email practicesand Comey decided, with political and public curiosity at a fever pitch,*1.( to cast aside Justice Department policies that reserve for prosecutors the sole discretion to file or decline criminal charges.)

 

Instead of consulting with his colleagues, he called a news conference that caught even the attorney general by surprise. Before banks of television cameras, he delivered a show-stopping performance that at once legally exonerated and publicly excoriated the Democratic nominee for president.

 

What Comey should have done, by many accounts, was handle the Clinton probe like any other routine inquiry: provide confidential recommendations to prosecutors, release a strictly factual statement noting that the investigation would be closed, and resist external pressures to inappropriately air the FBIs findings outside a court of law. According to Akerman: This is probably one of those [rare] cases where you would want there to be an announcement that no charges would be brought, based on the investigation. But to say anything beyond that is completely improper. And what he's done has raised all kinds of innuendo.

 

Rules and norms exist precisely because of extraordinary cases like Clintons, after allnot despite them. Respecting these constraints would therefore have been the rightand, by virtue of the political outcry it would have provoked, even the courageousthing to do...

 

 

 

 

...what he's done has raised all kinds of innuendo...?

HA!

*1. ....with this scenario, Comey was to bring his findings to the Justice Dept. and it was the Justice Dept. that was to decide to indict or not to indict.

.......Comey let them all off the hook.....

 

.....he fooled no one.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...