Search
Archives
Categories

Archive for the ‘FBI’ Category

During his testimony, Jim Comey admitted that President Trump had the right to fire Comey. Comey also admitted that President Trump had the right to instruct the then-FBI Director to stop his investigation into Gen. Flynn. We know from this transcript, during Sen. Rubio’s cross-examination that Sen. Rubio said “He said, ‘If one of my satellites’ — I imagine, by that, he meant some of the other people surrounding his campaign — ‘did something wrong, it would be great to know that, as well”?

At that point in Mr. Comey’s testimony, it’s pretty clear that President Trump wasn’t interrupting the FBI investigation. Later in Mr. Comey’s testimony, Mr. Comey admitted that he’d sent some information to friend of his so his friend could leak the information to the NYTimes and trigger the appointing of a special counsel.

Here’s what I’m questioning. President Trump wasn’t attempting to hinder Mr. Comey’s investigation. Further, Comey’s a skilled litigator so he knows that many elements of obstruction of justice aren’t present. Gregg Jarett wrote comprehensively about the required elements of obstruction in this article. Specifically, Jarrett wrote “Felony obstruction requires that the person seeking to obstruct a law enforcement investigation act ‘corruptly.’ The statute specifically defines what that includes: threats, lies, bribes, destruction of documents, and altering or concealing evidence. None of that is alleged by Comey.”

I’m questioning Mr. Comey’s integrity because he’s testified that President Trump acted within his authority when the president terminated Comey and because the required elements of obstruction don’t exist.

If that’s true, then what’s Mr. Comey motivation for pushing for a special counsel? President Trump acted lawfully. He certainly didn’t threaten or bribe investigators. He certainly didn’t destroy documents or conceal evidence. At some point, shouldn’t people admit that there’s nothing here? Alan Dershowitz seems to think that we’ve reached that point:

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

After reading Clarice Feldman’s article, it’s clear she’s on the right track. Anyone that Mueller asks to testify should immediately demand to know what the underlying crime is that Mueller is investigating. If Mueller refuses to tell them that basic information, that person should immediately assert their Fifth Amendment rights.

Further, that person’s attorney should tell Mueller that this pattern will continue until Mueller states publicly what the underlying crime is. That attorney should make this statement publicly, preferably on TV. That way, Mueller will be put on the spot. If Mueller doesn’t state what crime he’s investigating, then the people will know that he’s conducting a fishing expedition. The minute that’s exposed, he and Jim Comey become laughingstocks.

At that point, they’ll also turn into discredited DC political operatives.

Why shouldn’t they be exposed? Comey and Mueller aren’t patriots. They’re political hacks. They haven’t earned and maintained that reputation. They might’ve been patriots at one point but they don’t fit that description anymore. It’s time they’re put to rest.

Technorati: , , , ,

According to Jim Comey’s testimony, Comey said “I don’t think it’s for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct,” Comey said. “I took it as a very disturbing thing, very concerning, but that’s a conclusion I’m sure the special counsel will work towards to try to understand what the intention was there and whether that’s an offense.”

That investigation shouldn’t last long. There’s nothing for Trump to obstruct. Just because CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin breathlessly insists that Trump obstructed justice doesn’t make it so. Toobin said, in a heated debate with Prof. Dershowitz, that Watergate established the standard for obstructing justice. Apparently, Toobin can’t read a statute. Greg Jarrett, in this article, proved that he care. In this article, Jarrett said “The law demands much more than that. Felony obstruction requires that the person seeking to obstruct a law enforcement investigation act ‘corruptly.’ The statute specifically defines what that includes: threats, lies, bribes, destruction of documents, and altering or concealing evidence. None of that is alleged by Comey.”

Further, Nixon obstructed justice in Watergate, which was an investigation into a verified crime: the break-in of the DNC Headquarters in the Watergate Hotel. There isn’t a verified crime yet committed in the Russia collusion case. That alone eliminates the possibility of obstruction of justice. This exchange between Sen. Risch and former Director Comey settles that score:

Later in his article, Jarrett explains what obstruction of justice is:

The president’s statement is not an order or mandate. It is not even a “request,” though Comey insists he understood it to be.  But even if we construe it as such, it is not enough to constitute obstruction. Not even close. There must be a “corrupt” act that accompanies the directive.

For example, if the president had said, “Bury whatever incriminating evidence you have, exonerate Flynn, and terminate the investigation of him entirely… or I will fire you.” That is, arguably, obstruction. It includes two corrupt elements –a threat and concealing evidence. However, this is not what happened.

That doesn’t mean Mueller will wrap up the investigation quickly. That isn’t what special prosecutors usually do. Still, barring additional proof of corruption, I’m confident of saying there is no obstruction of justice here.

Today’s biggest loser in the Comey spectacle was Jim Comey. Comey came across as a spineless wimp at times. He was especially wimpy when a) he didn’t stand up to Loretta Lynch after her meeting with Bill Clinton on a tarmac in Arizona and b) he didn’t resign when Lynch told him to characterize the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton as a matter, not an investigation.

Further, Comey admitted that he leaked a memo to a Columbia professor, who then leaked the memo to the NY Times. Besides that, Comey called President Trump a liar. He also admitted that he leaked the memo to the Columbia professor to get a special counsel named against President Trump.

Other than that, Comey had a fine day testifying to the Senate.

Loretta Lynch was yesterday’s other major loser. After her meeting with Bill Clinton on the tarmac in Arizona, it’s clear that she became a recruit for the campaign. She told then-FBI Director Comey to not refer to the Clinton campaign investigation as an investigation. Lynch told him to use the term “matter” instead:

According to this article, Comey leaked his notes to the press through a friend to the press to get an independent counsel named:

Comey, who was fired by Trump on May 9, revealed during his testimony that he had a friend, later identified as Columbia University Law Professor Dan Richman, leak contents of his private memos to the media in hopes of prompting the “appointment of a special counsel.”

Many of DC’s talking heads said Trump took a hit Thursday. While he took a few minor hits, it was Comey and Lynch, especially Comey, who sustained the hardest hits.

According to this article, President Trump has nominated “Christopher A. Wray, the former assistant attorney general in charge of the Justice Department’s criminal division, to be the next FBI director.”

According to the article, “Wray headed up the Justice Department’s criminal division from 2003 to 2005 under President George W. Bush and is currently a litigation partner at the DC-based law firm King & Spalding, where he chairs the firm’s Special Matters and Government Investigations Practice Group.”

Democrats will have to think twice about their strategy on Wray because he “was unanimously confirmed by the Senate in 2003 to lead the Justice Department’s criminal division, where he oversaw several high-profile investigations, from the Enron scandal to the Justice Department’s response to terrorism in the wake of 9/11.” Democrats insisted that the next FBI director be from the law enforcement field.

They quickly rejected Joe Lieberman, (I-CT), when his name was floated as a possible replacement for Director even though he was the Democrats’ nominee for VP in 2000. Since then, the Democratic Party has moved steadily left. Moderates like Lieberman aren’t tolerated.

Technorati: Donald Trump, Christopher Wray, Jim Comey, FBI, Department of Justice

According to this article, Hillary Clinton’s supporters are blaming her defeat on FBI Director Jim Comey. That isn’t surprising but it isn’t the truth, either.

According to the article, “Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, communications director Jennifer Palmieri and other Clinton aides sought to provide explanations during a private conference call Thursday with supporters of the Democratic nominee for a loss that to many came out of nowhere. They were pressed on the call for answers and insight from supporters stung by the surprise loss. At one point on the call, Podesta noted that Comey is the guy ‘who we think may have cost us the election,’ according to one Clinton surrogate who relayed details about the call to The Hill.”

During a recent interview with Bret Baier, Trey Gowdy demolished Podesta’s arguments, saying that Jim Comey didn’t tell Hillary to use a private server. Nor did he tell Ms. Abedin not to turn over all of her emails. Chairman Gowdy finished, saying that “God knows that he didn’t tell Anthony Weiner to send sexually explicit texts to allegedly underage people.” This video tells the tale:

Hillary lost because she was the worst presidential candidate they’ve nominated since I started voting for presidents in 1976. Al Gore and John Kerry were terrible, too, but they didn’t have the ethical and potentially criminal baggage hanging over them like Hillary did.

Let’s be clear about something. Hillary would’ve lost this election by 8-12 points if not for the media’s propping her up for the last eighteen months of the campaign.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This article reminded me of something I’d hoped I’d forgotten forever. The article reminded me that the Clintons are the original Alinskyite administration. Seriously, long before Tony Rezko had corrupted the Obamas, the Clintons were painting their political opponents as political boogeymen.

Newt Gingrich was the Clinton’s first boogeyman. Dick Armey was the Clintons next boogeyman. Tom DeLay was the final boogeyman of Bill Clinton’s administration. They taught the Democratic Party how to paint conservatives as boogeymen. During the Obama administration, Democrats painted ALEC, the Club for Growth, Americans for Prosperity, the TEA Party and, most importantly, the Koch Brothers as political boogeymen.

Before she’s even been elected, Mrs. Clinton is attempting to paint FBI Director Jim Comey as the latest boogeyman. That’s the Clinton’s habit. The Clintons understand that they’re seen as sleazy people. That doesn’t bother them a bit because they’re comfortable with rolling around in the mud. That’s who they are. That’s who they associate themselves with.

In the 1990s, after President Clinton got caught with his pants down, literally, Hillary dispatched Jim Carville to intimidate Paula Jones. Carville’s now-infamous line was “If you drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you’ll find.”

Trey Gowdy, quite possibly the sharpest person in Congress, isn’t buying into Mrs. Clinton’s attempts to tarnish Dir. Comey’s reputation:

Here’s part of what Rep. Gowdy said in response to the Clinton campaign’s attempt to paint Dir. Comey as the villain:

GOWDY: Yeah, that’s an old trick, Bret. Blame the cops. If you’re being investigated, you blame the cops. Jim Comey is not responsible for a single one of the facts at hand. He didn’t tell her to use a private server. He didn’t tell Huma not to turn over all of her devices. And God knows he didn’t tell Anthony Wiener to allegedly send sexually explicit texts to allegedly underage people so Comey’s not responsible for any of this. The timing is a direct and natural consequence of decisions that Hillary Clinton made. So I get that Podesta is upset. Bret, remember that he didn’t even know about the email situation and then he thought that it had been taken care of by Cheryl Mills and Patrick Kennedy so I get that he’s frustrated. He’s just frustrated at the wrong person.

Mrs. Clinton established the home-brew server to hide emails from FOIA requests. If Mrs. Clinton hadn’t insisted on hiding public information from the public, none of this would have become an issue. Period. She would’ve coasted to the White House if not for this email scandal.

It’s a given that the Clintons will use Alinsky’s tactics to push their way through their scandals. Their habit is to make things about the boogeymen they’ve created, not the boogeymen they are.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This article highlights what happens when a campaign gets caught with its pants down. Actually, it’s happening because a pervert married to one of the campaign’s top people got caught with his pants down. But I digress.

The truth is that there’s tons of blame to go around in the aftermath of the FBI’s announcement that they’re re-opening their investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s email scandal. One staffer was upset with Mrs. Clinton. That anonymous staffer was quoted as saying “I’m livid, actually. This has turned into malpractice. It’s an unforced error at this point. I have no idea what Comey is up to but the idea this email issue is popping back up again is outrageous. It never should have occurred in the first place. Someone somewhere should have told her no. And they didn’t and now we’re all paying the price.”

How do you say no to a mean-spirited, manipulative, corrupt bitch intent on hiding information? Good luck with that.

After the FBI news broke on Friday, the campaign seemed resigned to Trump and other Republicans campaigning on the email issue in the final days of the race. “In the short term at least, this does provide Republicans with something they can all hang their hat on, at a time when they’ve been fighting with each other so much — so that can have a salutary effect by shoring up the GOP base and distract from the daily drama around Trump himself,” one longtime Clinton adviser said.

I don’t know who’s sleazier — Wiener or Mrs. Clinton. If that question doesn’t turn your stomach inside out, nothing will.

This is a good place to stop at:

It’s Huma Abedin’s computer. Shouldn’t she know what’s on her laptop? If the Clintonistas are upset, they need only look at each other.

James Comey has notified the appropriate committees that he’s re-opening his investigation into Hillary Clinton. According to the article, “FBI Director James Comey wrote in a letter to top members of Congress Friday that the bureau has ‘learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation.'”

The letter was sent to Sen. Ron Johnson, chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Rep. Jason Chaffetz, the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, as well as ranking members of those committees. Rep. Devin Nunes, the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Rep. Robert Goodlatte, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and Sen. Charles Grassley, the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, also were sent this letter.

The key part of Director Comey’s letter is the second paragraph, which says “In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation. I am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday and I agreed that the FBI should take proper investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether these emails contain classified information, as well as assess their importance to our investigation.”

Here’s the text of Director Comey’s letter:

As much as I’d like to see the FBI recommend Hillary for prosecution, I’m still skeptical that’s what will happen. First, it’s virtually impossible for me to picture the FBI doing the right thing. Let’s be honest, too. There’s verified proof that Hillary sent classified information via her private server. Regardless of what happens with the investigation, this will have an impact on down-ticket races. Here’s a copy of the letter Marco Rubio just sent Patrick Murphy, his challenger:

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Based on information revealed during Hugh Hewitt’s interview of Jim VandeHei, Jim Comey’s reputation is shot. At the start of the interview, Hewitt stated “Jim, I want to read the beginning of an email I got from a former AUSA, assistant United States Attorney, who I’ve known for many, many years, absolutely legit guy, and have been tracking down bad guys for a long time. He’s married to an FBI agent. It reads, ‘Now that the contents of that first FBI summary have been released, my wife tells me that Comey has lost all credibility in the FBI. Remember he’s a DOJ veteran, not a Bureau veteran, and that makes a difference with the troops. My wife, a 25-year agent, tells me that since that document became public, and based on what’s in there Comey decided to not recommend prosecution, his name among the agents is dirt. The most practical reason for that feeling is that they all know stories about agents or other federal employees who have befallen similar circumstances, and some have been prosecuted while just about all others have been fired. And the issue with the missing Blackberrys, IPad, AND the Apple Laptop and Thumb drive that had ALL her archived emails on them, is just unbelievable to agents who work on matters involving classified information.’ I, Jim VandeHei, have heard this complaint over and over again. I held all the clearances in the Reagan years. And I always said the short end was if I left anything in my desk, I’d be disciplined. If I took it home, I’d be fired. If I gave it to someone, I’d be prosecuted. Have you heard this refrain yourself?”

VandeHei’s response was telling:

It’s interesting that you say that, and I think, yes, is the answer. And I think where the disconnect is, is are you in a military family? And do you know people in a military, or in your case, people who are in the Justice Department or the FBI? I have two brothers-in-law who are serving, and I was in a wedding this past weekend in Kerrville, Texas, where lots of Marines were there. And people who would be inclined, I think, several that I was talking to, to be inclined to support Hillary Clinton, and the only thing that they focus on, and the reason that they could never find themselves voting for her, is this very reason. They either themselves or know other people who have been sanctioned or had issues for doing far, far less than what they believe Hillary Clinton did with classified material. And I think if you’re not talking to people in the military, if you don’t have family members in the military, you don’t have deep enough appreciation for how much focus they put on this, and how much they tie it to your character and to your performance.

It’s clear that Comey’s reputation with the rank-and-file investigators is irretrievably tarnished. Once you destroy your credibility, it’s virtually impossible to regain it. If it’s possible, it’s only possible to retrieve it over time and by constantly being honest. Trust isn’t rebuilt overnight.

Considering all the times Comey afforded Mrs. Clinton extra-special treatment, which is brilliantly documented in Ben Shapiro’s article, there’s little reason to think that Mr. Comey conducted a legitimate investigation:

According to new documents from the FBI’s investigation of Clinton, the agency was fully aware that Clinton lied when she said she set up a private server in order to utilize one Blackberry device; she used 13 mobile devices and two phone numbers. The FBI knew that Clinton’s aides destroyed old Blackberrys by cracking them in half or hitting them with a hammer. The FBI knew full well that Clinton had passed classified information over her private server; she admitted that she didn’t even know how classified information worked, instead stating that she thought the “C” appearing at the top of documents probably had something to do with alphabetizing files. The FBI recognized that Clinton wiped her server after a New York Times article revealed her private sever and email use; that she brought her Blackberry into a secure State Department area; that she never turned over nearly 18,000 work-related emails; that she discussed an undercover asset on the server and put his family in danger; and that she refused to take Blackberrys from the State Department out of fear they could be discoverable under Freedom of Information Act requests.

Based on this information, it’s clear that the fix was in. That’s why Dir. Comey’s reputation is shot.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,