The Democrats’ hysteria over the latest twist in the Hillary Clinton mishandling of classified information scandal is entertaining to watch. One of their themes is that former hero James Comey was warned not to let Congress know that the FBI’s investigation had been reopened. Today’s Minneapolis Star Tribune headline made me laugh out loud:
He was warned not to meddle–by Loretta Lynch! When Comey let Hillary skate, despite overwhelming evidence of her guilt under the applicable federal law, that wasn’t meddling. But when Comey told Congress that, contrary to his earlier testimony, the investigation was no longer considered to be over–that’s “meddling in politics.”
As for the Democrats’ claims that Comey’s letter to Congressional committees was unprecedented and contrary to DOJ policy against public discussion of pending criminal investigations, the whole situation with Hillary’s off-the-books email system is unprecedented. Has the FBI ever before carried out a criminal investigation of a presidential nominee in the midst of the campaign? No.
Some might cite Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh’s October 1992 re-indictment of Caspar Weinberger as a precedent, but that case was entirely different. Walsh was a Democrat.
As for DOJ policy, if Loretta Lynch can discuss the FBI’s investigation with Bill Clinton, surely the FBI director can discuss it with Congress.
But whom am I kidding? Everyone knows that mere “policies” don’t apply to high-ranking Democrats, let alone the Clintons.
More to the point, however, Comey did not, in the first instance, make public comment on a pending investigation. While the investigation was going on, the FBI remained silent. It was when the investigation was over and the decision had been made not to charge Mrs. Clinton that Comey publicly explained, and then was called before a Congressional committee to testify about, his rationale.
That action, which was publicly applauded by the Democrats, led directly to Thursday’s communication with Congressional committee chairmen. Comey wrote to tell them that his testimony, under oath, that the Clinton investigation had been concluded was no longer accurate, in view of the newly-discovered emails.
One can agree or disagree with Comey’s course of action, but to denounce it as unprecedented meddling in politics, in violation of DOJ policy, is, in my view, silly.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.