CNN [this is dedicated to those who claim the criticism of Comey is a left wing conspiracy]
Alberto Gonzales
Republican former US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on Monday slammed the FBI director's recent actions in the investigation into Hillary Clinton's email server.
He called Comey's actions an "error in judgment" and said he is "somewhat perplexed about what the director was trying to accomplish here."
Gonzales said Comey's letter Friday informing lawmakers that the FBI is reviewing new emails potentially related to its investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server as secretary of state breaks from long-standing Justice Department practice. The protocol is not to comment on investigations and to stay silent on politically sensitive matters less than 60 days from an election.
"You don't comment on investigations because commenting on the investigation may jeopardize the investigation. And that's the box that he's put himself in, because people are now calling for more information -- for release of the emails," Gonzales told CNN's John Berman and Kate Bolduan on "At This Hour."
He was the third former attorney general to recently and publicly criticize Comey.
Gonzales, who served in the George W. Bush administration, said Comey wouldn't have been misleading voters by withholding the news until after November 8.[...]
Eric Holder
Former Attorney General Eric Holder also criticized Comey's decision Monday. Writing in The Washington Post on Monday, Holder called Comey's decision "incorrect."
Obama's first attorney general said Comey's letter to Congress announcing a review of the new emails was "a stunning breach" of law enforcement protocol and one that carried "potentially severe implications" during a presidential campaign.
"I served with Jim Comey, and I know him well. This is a very difficult piece for me to write. He is a man of integrity and honor. I respect him. But good men make mistakes. In this instance, he has committed a serious error with potentially severe implications," Holder wrote.
"It is incumbent upon him -- or the leadership of the department -- to dispel the uncertainty he has created before Election Day. It is up to the director to correct his mistake — not for the sake of a political candidate or campaign but in order to protect our system of justice and best serve the American people." [...]
Michael Mukasey
Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey also slammed Comey's decision in a Wall Street Journal op-ed. Mukasey, who served under George W. Bush after Gonzalez, called Comey's original decision in July not to indict the Democratic presidential candidate "unworthy." He described the decision as one to "accede to the apparent wish of Obama that no charges be brought against Clinton."
As such, he claimed this earlier move makes Comey's letter to Congress irrelevant.
"Regardless of what is in the newly discovered emails, the current Justice Department will not permit a grand jury to hear evidence in this case. And because only a grand jury can constitutionally bring charges, that means no charges will be brought," Mukasey wrote. "Which is to say, we know enough to conclude that what we don't know is of little immediate relevance to our current dismal situation."
Mukasey criticized (and still criticizes) him even more strongly for his first decision. Had Comey sought prosecution, as he should have, he would not have had the need to do this today, but as things stand, he really had no choice.
ReplyDeleteOf course, the one truly at fault is Hillary Clinton, who, in her arrogance and dihonesty, did her business on a private server, lied about it, and destroyed much of the evidence of her crimes. A shout out to Abedin as well, who apparently lied to the FBI and withheld this computer.
For those who imagine that Comey's act is part of a right-wing conspiracy, you might find it interesting to note that the FBI is investigating the Clinton Foundation, and apparently has been doing so for some time:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wsj.com/articles/laptop-may-include-thousands-of-emails-linked-to-hillary-clintons-private-server-1477854957
Of course, DOJ is resisting, but that's b/c they are corrupt Clintonites.
the issue is not the first time around it is the second time around that is a problem. There is no need as was pointed out by Mukasey
ReplyDeleteLet's just say that the new evidence includes a "smoking gun" email, and that after the election Ms. Clinton will be indicted and forced to resign.
ReplyDeleteUnder that hypothetical situation, better to burst the blister before the election than after.
let's suppose that there is no smoking gun and Clinton loses the election
ReplyDeleteThe present accepted practice is to avoid the above - even if it results in getting indicted later
Sure there's a need, assuming that he knows about or suspects that there is something big-league in these emails, as is a near certainty. By refusing to prosecute when it was deserved, he very much affected the election. He therefore owes it to the public to inform them of new developments. Furthermore, simply choosing to remain quiet about something truly disqualifying also affects the election. Can you imagine the public outcry when it later emerges that he sat on this? People would presume, with cause, that the fix was in. He really had no choice but to go public.
ReplyDeleteso why do these people disagree with you?
ReplyDeleteI can't speak for them, nor do I feel the need to.
ReplyDeleteAre you going by the CNN story you've linked to, or by the former AG's actual statements. The statement is quite relevant, because anyone reading Mr. Mukasey's Op-Ed walks away with a far different impression of his position than the one described by CNN. Have a look yourself: http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbi-directors-dishonorable-choice-1477863402
ReplyDeleteBecause they are Republicans in name only, mainstream media, Obama's lapdogs, etc. etc. etc.
ReplyDeleteYou haven't learned the drill yet?
Just posted his full statement from Wall Street Journal. The only thing added is that he seems to think that Comely did this to save Clinton from prosecution and thus win the election for Clinton - rather than help Trump.
ReplyDeleteWhat he does say regarding the appropriateness of Comely's intervention is the same thing as the left wing "slime" have been saying
Accepted practice?! This is American politics. The only accepted practice is to do what you can get away with. That's been the MO of the Clintons for decades. Mr. Comey has the backing of President Obama. He can pull this off unscathed.
ReplyDeleteHeck -- even some of the the "Greatest Gadolim in America" teach this Derech.
BTW, a statement by Eric Holder is not exactly proof of anything not being a left-wing conspiracy. He is the poster boy for leftist hacks.
ReplyDeleteI posted this comment above, but it's relevant here too:
ReplyDeletea) In the full article posted above, Mukasey does not say, contrary to what you claim, that Comey's statement is the reason Clinton will not be charged. Rather, the reason is that the DOJ will not empanel a grand jury. This has nothing to do
with Comey's statement, and everything to do with the pro-Clinton bias
(read, corruption) that unfortunately infects the DOJ.
b) Mukasey agrees that at this point, having made his original poor decision not to recommend charges, Comey had no choice but to inform Congress of his
decision to continue the investigation. The quote: That choice—to
follow the sovereign’s wish—left Mr. Comey facing only further dishonor
if he did not disclose the newly discovered emails and they leaked after
the election.