The FBI heads firing was inevitable

James Robbins:
...
In fact, Comey had been a dead man walking for some time. He was a director without a constituency. He had tried to strike a balance in a sharply divided political environment and wound up alienating both sides. He had to go.

Democrats blame him for Hillary Clinton’s election loss. Just last week Hillary Clinton said that if the election were held Oct. 27, she would have been the president — that is, the day before Comey’s dramatic note to Congress that he had reopened the FBI’s investigation into her alleged mishandling of classified information through her bootleg email server.

Then two days before Election Day, Comey said “never mind.” The FBI had hastily reviewed the 49,000 potentially relevant emails it had found on a laptop owned by disgraced former congressman Anthony Weiner, and nothing there changed its conclusions from the previous July when he had called out Clinton for lying but did not recommend prosecution.

Whether this roller coaster ride had an impact on the election is one question, but Comey’s seemingly erratic behavior so close to an election was quite another. I was at a meeting with some senior members of the law enforcement community when Comey backed off the investigation and they expressed utter bewilderment at what he was doing. It went beyond how this would affect Comey’s career or his reputation; he was potentially tarnishing the bureau itself. And for all this, Comey said he had no regrets.

Republicans have never bought into the story line that Comey cost Clinton the election. And they fault him for not recommending criminal prosecution of Clinton for her alleged misdeeds. But their main complaint was that he gave the Russia story more weight than it deserved. In March, Comey revealed that there had been an active counterintelligence investigation on “the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government, and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts.”

This was an unprecedented admission, and it might have been an attempt on Comey’s part to make it politically difficult to fire him. Clearly, not difficult enough. And while Comey said he had “no information that supports” the idea that President Trump had been “wiretapped,” the full nature of the surveillance that Trump’s campaign and administration have been subjected to has yet to be revealed.
...
What was striking to me after the firing was how many former officials of eh FBI supported the move.  Some also saw Comey as a drama junky going back to his days in the Bush administration.

If the firing did nothing else it should how Democrats are willing to turn on a dime seeking political advantage from his not being fired to doing the same on his firing.  They are becoming a party of shrinking credibility.  This prompted President Trump to unleash one of his tweets:
"Cryin' Chuck Schumer stated recently, 'I do not have confidence in him (James Comey) any longer.' Then acts so indignant. #draintheswamp," Trump tweeted around 10:45 p.m. Tuesday.
I expect to see a series of Youtube videos of before and after statements by Democrats.  Here is one example of the liberal media before and after statements.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Another one of those Trump stories Ted Cruz warned about

Iraq says civilian casualties in Mosul caused by ISIS booby trap, not US air strike