In a free and just society, our very lives depend on our leaders. We live with one party or another running the country, back and forth with policies we “hope” are good for the country at large. But we expect and deserve honesty, transparency, and above all – fairness and equality under the law.
When someone in the chain of governance fails and changes the rules, we’re in trouble – whether we recognize it, know it or not. When someone, on either side of the isle, decides that their way is the best way instead of our constitution and set of laws and rules, we’re diverting from our path of freedom and heading toward tyranny.
This was the course, not necessarily established but, played out by James Comey in his quickly call presser, potentially to change the political landscape. The biggest road sign on his downward journey was his news conference in July last year. Everyone, especially Republicans, waited on the edge of their chairs, hands clasp, and holding their breath as 13 minutes of a stinging indictment; damaging in-depth details of Clinton’s legal shortcomings were expounded with specificity for all the world to witness and judge:
- “Of the 30,000 emails returned to the State Department, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent.”
- “The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related emails that were not among the 30,000 emails that had been returned by Secretary Clinton State in 2014.”
- “None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system.”
- “There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.”
- “We assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.”
All nicely packaged and wrapped up like a July 4th patriotic present with a last minute reprieve stating that:
- “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
I’m truly thinking that he meant to say ” that no reasonable [Democratic] prosecutor would bring such a case.” For when legal scholar after legal scholar lists the crimes committed, the national security rules broken, the incompetence, malfeasance and misfeasance in high office and then no one pursues the obvious…. it’s enough to think we’re being conned. (Or Comey’d)
The intrusion into the election process was not professional and should not have happened for any reason and… to be fair should never be done by either party. But when you do interject yourself into the process by accusing, then excusing criminal acts, when the whole investigation is tainted with a tarmac meeting between the nation’s highest LEO and the husband of the investigation’s subject, with leaks and rants by every political hack on the planet… time to regroup.
The final straw in this bazaar stageplay is the Director’s decision to not just be an investigator, but an un-elected, un-appointed prosecutor performing duties not in his job description. When you state out of place:
- “As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.”
This is where things fall apart because the FBI’s job, and only job, is to gather facts, present them to the Dept of Justice, and THEY decide yea or nay on the legal appropriateness of charges. But of course when the leader of that dept. has poisoned the water with her quiet, almost secret meeting…. everything deserves higher review and scrutiny. And keep in mind, this meeting would have gone unknown except for an aware local TV reporter in Phoenix who thought the occurrence was strange, recorded it and reported it.
Hillary and the Dems celebrated the absolution and acquittal, while Repubs couldn’t believe their collective ears. And it’s been reported that many non-partisans observers — and even friends of Comey — noted that his veneer of “independence” was shattered after the matter.
As long-time Comey friend and former co-worker Andrew McCarthy writes in National Review:
“The independence of law enforcement is critical, but at times he seemed to redefine ‘independent’ as beholden to only those institutional guidelines he subjectively judged worthy of following.”
After the comments, former Department of Justice spokesperson Matthew Miller bemoaned on Twitter that the Comey presser was “outrageous”:
“Absolutely outrageous presser by Comey. DOJ/FBI is supposed to speak in court. If it won’t make statements in court, it shouldn’t make them.”
Lewis Schiliro, a former FBI agent of 25 years, told Politico that Comey “undermined his status by holding a news conference” just days before the election and that he was doomed from the start:
“He brought the bureau into a political situation when it ought not to be. That’s not the place for the FBI,” said Schiliro. “I think Comey was trying to play investigator and prosecutor, and putting both hats on was a drastic mistake on his part.”
“His press conference ought to have been two sentences: ‘The FBI has concluded its investigation. The facts of the matter have been presented to the Department of Justice for a prosecution decision.’ Thank you very much and walk off,” Schiliro added. “That’s the way it’s done.”
Many say the timing and nature of Comey’s firing are suspect. Many more reflect on the unfair, bitter end to an otherwise distinguished career in government, it seems the crisis for Comey began when he stepped outside his rightful role at the FBI and into the fire storm that was the 2016 election.
That was the moment where Comey should have been let go. But it was left up to Trump to deal with it and make the decision – one that MANY Democrats wanted but now decry, and one that Hillary might have done on day one, and so…. here we are again: Accusing, divisive, inefficient politics as usual.
The glaring appearance of Trump eliminating his accuser on the Russia investigation will be fodder for the “D’s” for some some time, but if people let the facts come out, watch the quality of a replacement, see the final results in all this mess, we trust that the confidence in the rule of law, the process of justice will be reestablished and ultimately prevail.
I find it mildly amusing that Dems refuse to recognize the president’s ability and right to change his mind with updated facts, but can’t see their own shift and stutter from one irrational position to another, thinking their latest rant is the only possible position to ever be taken on their behalf.
Through the turbulent storm of Trump’s reign, possibly and hopefully the end game will show that American is great again, law and order has been restored, and we can move the country forward with a better economy, a safer country, and an equality in the application of justice for all; politician and citizen alike.
PS – I find it all so interesting and telling that since Nov, 2016, everything of question has become a constitutional crises. Where were these historical geniuses during the last 8 years?