The Worm Turns – Clinton Campaign No Longer FBI Fan

It wasn’t long ago that Hillary’s minions were singing the praises of FBI chief James Comey after he declared that Mrs. Clinton’s email conduct did not warrant criminal prosecution.  In fact, despite the FBI’s conclusion that she had displayed “extreme carelessness”, her supporters proclaimed that the decision not to charge was vindication.

Imagine, then, the shock felt when the worm turned – Comey declared that the Democratic nominee was being investigated once more.  The former glowing reviews of the FBI head were promptly reversed.  It’s amazing to think that a person can possess a high sense of integrity and a keen sense of judgment at one moment and that such attributes will disappear just a few months later.

But maybe the transformation isn’t with the person but rather with the people whose evaluation of the conduct is based not upon it’s propriety but, rather, whether it supports one’s “side”.  And, in fairness, such bias is not confined to the left side of the political divide.

 

Yet the media can usually be counted on to give more prominence to its side of the story.

So why did James Comey announce – a week and a half before election day -  that additional emails were to be examined?

Hillary Clinton and her surrogates pounced on the FBI’s statement as “unprecedented” (and implicitly improper) since the Department of Justice’s protocol bars action involving political candidates within sixty days of the election date.  True.

But last July, events were also unprecedented when the FBI chief decided that the Agency investigation had not uncovered evidence sufficient to charge Mrs. Clinton with a criminal violation regarding her treatment of government secrets.  That was odd since the Justice Department is responsible for making federal prosecution decisions, not the Federal Bureau of Investigation.  Further, Comey explained that, nonetheless, “extreme recklessness” had been displayed by the former secretary of state.

That, too, was peculiar since the relevant U.S. statute includes “gross negligence” as a violation.  (Extreme recklessness does not qualify?)  [See The Sensible Conservative blog of 7/10/16.]

Perhaps the simple answer was that Mr. Comey was trying to right a previous wrong.

Unprecedented?  What part of this election year hasn’t been?