By Phil Edmonston
FBI DIRECTOR James Comey knows better. When an investigation is opened, the FBI must shut up and either indict or drop the probe.
That´s been the protocol since J. Edgar Hoover illegally wiretapped Martin Luther King´s philandering and played the tapes to the amusement of the Kennedys and Hoover´s male cronies.
This was followed by an anonymous FBI letter sent to King suggesting he should commit suicide rather than accept the Nobel peace prize.
I am in favor of government transparency, but not when it collides with basic human rights, or interferes with an election, a violation of the 1938 Hatch Act.
The public announcement of the dropping of the Hillary Clinton emails probe should have been left to the Department of Justice and accompanied by a ´no comment´, rather than Comey´s lengthy obiter dictum.
As for the Anthony Weiner computer files, Comey had no mandate to disclose the launching of that investigation or to qualify the files as ´pertinent´ to Clinton but not necessarily ´significant´.
FBI and government rules forbid Comey´s showboating described above.
It creates a trial by innuendo and can weaken a prosecution via the intimidation of witnesses, destruction of documents, or the disappearance of the defendant.
More generically, in A Man for All Seasons, Sir Thomas More responds to the argument that government lawbreaking can be justified for the greater good. More countered: “And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you—where would you hide, the laws all being flat?
Who Can You Trust?
Not politicians, not the FBI, and not even the RCMP.
I´ve never mentioned this before, but when I ran for Parliament in 1988, my staff discovered that the Conservative incumbent had accepted bribes and was influence peddling.
I turned the information over to the RCMP, campaigned on national issues and lost.
After that election, I was asked by my campaign volunteers to call a press conference to put pressure on the Mounties.
I refused on the grounds that the RCMP were the most capable to judge the validity of our evidence, and if the bribes couldn´t be proven, we would have ruined a man´s reputation for political gain.
I didn´t know that Prime Minister Brian Mulroney had asked the RCMP to delay the search warrant execution during the previous election. Not on a question of principle, but to save his House Conservative majority.
In effect, the RCMP and Mulroney had ´rigged´ the election.
After the election, with the Prime Minister´s House majority assured, my opponent resigned, was arrested by the RCMP, sent to jail, and fined $25,000.
I was elected in the ensuing by-election with almost 70% of the vote. This confirmed that my decision to put principle over politics was the right one.
However, had I known the Prime Minister was ´fixing´ the investigation and election with the complicity of the RCMP, I would have put the Mounties feet to the fire and demanded full disclosure.
Prediction: Within a few months, no matter who is elected, James Comey will be gone. Ostensibly—´for the good of the Bureau.´
Phil Edmonston is Chair of Democrats Abroad, Panama
== As long as he follows the Constitution == OK, let's test your commitment to the Constution a second time. The NYT on Nov. 14 says the biggest ethics issue is related to a provision of the Constitution called the Emoluments Clause, which prohibits any government official from taking payments or gifts from a foreign government, or even from sharing in profits in a company that has financial ties to a foreign government. “Mr. Trump has had business deals with foreign governments or individuals with apparent ties to foreign governments, including multimillion-dollar real estate arrangements in Azerbaijan and Uruguay. His children have frequently traveled abroad to promote the Trump brand, making trips to Canada, the United Arab Emirates and Scotland. Closer to home, the Bank of China is a tenant in Trump Tower and is a lender for another building in Midtown Manhattan where Mr. Trump has a significant partnership interest. “Doing business with a foreign corporation, be it in Azerbaijan, Turkey or Russia, if is it owned in part or controlled by a foreign government — any benefit that would accrue to Mr. Trump could well be a violation of the Emoluments Clause of the United States Constitution,” said Kenneth A. Gross, a political ethics and compliance lawyer in Washington.
Frankly I just don't care. My primary concern is the safety of the American people and we should do whatever it takes to keep them safe.
== As long as he follows the Constitution. == The Constitution defines treaties as the supreme law of the land. Reagan signed, and the US Senate ratified, the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. A key article states that “no exceptional circumstances whatsoever…may be invoked as a justification for torture.” The Convention defines torture and also binds signatories to “undertake to prevent…other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, which does not amount to torture.” So not only is torture banned, but cruel treatment that stops short of torture as well. The American system is based upon inalienable rights, which the Constitution is designed to protect. Torture is associated with repressive regimes, not with societies that respect human rights. The case for limited government is weakened when those making it ignore or defend torture, complaining only about big government when someone proposes spending taxpayer dollars to help people.
I wholeheartedly approve of water boarding. If that doesn't work I would secretly do anything else it would take to get the job done. Political correctness be damned I would do what ever it takes in order for us to "win". I'm like Trump, I'm sick of losing. When you are dealing with people who routinely cut the heads of their opponents for no reason whatsoever do you think I would honestly care what we do to them.
I agree. Let's see if you do. The Constitution states that treaties shall be the supreme law of the land. The US has ratified the Geneva Conventions and the treaty against torture. Yet candidate Trump says he wants to use torture "much worse" than waterboarding. Since you support the Constitution, can I assume you would oppose violating the treaties by engaging in prohibited torture?
As long as he follows the Constitution.
In other words, you're on board no matter what he does.
Not really. I would expect he would turn it all over to his new Attorney General and see where the chips fall. At least he will have made the attempt. Frankly I would rather see the whole thing stall until he is in office so Obama doesn't have the opportunity to pardon her. That would sure be a travesty of justice.
It sounds as if you will be disappointed if The Donald goes back on his word to "lock her up!"
At least Li K and Fred were also wrong about Clinton winning. Now I wonder if President Trump will keep his word and sic a special prosecutor on her to put her in jail?
Thought you might find this site interesting if you don't already have it. http://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/index.php
It tells a lot about the Progressive neediness. They just want to be loved. At least it gives old Garlic breath a cohort with whom he can commiserate. It should be fun watching these two make internet love regardless of the outcome of the election. Yes life will go on regardless of the vote but it would do my heart good to watch America elect a non-politician as a start to political reform in our great country. The only thing that would feel better would be to see the list of people heading for jail on the other side. Thank God that after today we will have a verdict at least in the election process. The other verdicts will depend on who wins.
Hey, looks like you have a few new "friends". One, in particular likes to give himself up-votes (not mentioning any names, but his initials are Li Kennedy). Richard, you should try looking at Prog posts up-voters -- tells a lot of their ideology (versus factology of Conservatism; which is why you can never win an argument with a Prog -- all feelings and no brain) and the ego to go with their feelings. jajaja
If there was ever a twinkle in Robert Mugabe's eye - it would be whilst viewing a Hillary event. Zimbabwe could learn a lot from her brand of corruption. Brunnhilde is practicing the high notes as we speak…..
Tempest in a tea pot? I have a grip. I'm concerned for my family today and not what happens a century from now. This globalism concept will diminish productivity in the world as we take from the productive and give to the non-producers. This is a whole other conversation and not germane to the above article other than to highlight Hillary's support for a New World Order. I am ready to go back to the U.S. being the greatest country in the world and to dominate in all that we undertake. For that it takes leadership and not crony capitalism. Once again you have failed to defend her positions on anything nor do you even want to touch her political malfeasance.
Hey, you are a learned person. Look up what ecological fallacy means, an I hope you'll understand. The world has been here for millions of years, and will be here for millions more after you and I have long gone. I say again, you are getting exercised over a tempest in a tea pot. Get a grip.
The Newsroom self-appointed political analyst always chimes in with predictable BS and false analogy. Consider him an expert on all subjects and consume as comic relief. He knows what he knows and is knowledgeable about everything else. He fully supports the most deplorable racist candidate for US President in recent history. He does get a grip daily and offers a gripe or two. We will all be watching and monitoring election reports tomorrow night.
I was actually waiting for you to defend your position. Crickets.
What...do you have to have the last word? No problem. Go for it.
You are so right and I must apologize to the vast army of ilks out there for equating them with you. The pigeon analogy is far more accurate.
Just can't get that excited about your opinion of me (and my ilk).
Once again not one defense of Hillary's behavior just more spin over to Trump. Not a problem but you are a total waste of time. You have elevated yourself to being a Pigeon on a chess board. You strut around the board knocking over the chess pieces pretending you are winning the game when in reality all you are really doing is shitting on the board. I often wonder what the average IQ of a Hillary supporter is. Probably not much more than single digit.,
Sounds like you are completely mesmorized by T's lies. But saying it doesn't make it so. This is not T's America. It's the folks of my ilk's (as you so eloquently put it) America.
Ecological fallacy? Is that the best you can do? What does that even mean. Great defense of her. You supporters are just like her. You make "statements" and that's about it. Why don't you defend her position on murder in the womb as long as it affects the mother's health. For that matter how about defending her stance on murder in the womb period. How about defending her taking money from foreign powers in exchange for political favors. She is still being investigated by the FBI for those issues. How about defending her, Bill and Chelsea taking money from the "foundation" for personal enrichment. Really is this who you want leading our great country and setting an example for our children. As least Trump in spite of his foibles has raised a fine family and all are successful on their own without having to steal from we paupers who simply play by the rules.
Hey, be cool. The world is not going to end when Hillary Clinton wins. You keep believing in your ecological falacy. Get a grip.
If wasteful spending were a crime, Obama would be doing time for Solyndra. Or for the pallets of cash he sent to Iran. Or, etc...
So you are ok with all of Hillary's peccadillos (I'm trying to be kind)? You get the government you ask for. As for me I don't want any part of her fraud, corruption, pay to play and destruction of human life (late term murder) that she represents. Trump may not be perfect but be honest if you are able to. Even if Jeb Bush or any of the other Republicans would have acceded to this point you would still prefer the fraudulent Hillary because with you and all her supporters it is strictly ideological. If successful you and others of your ilk will lead to the destruction of society in the world as we know it today. Be prepared it isn't going to be pretty. At my age I won't be around long enough to suffer from it but my children and grandchildren will and I love them more than you apparently care for yours.
Dream on! There is absolutely no way that Trump will win.
The DOJ is the final deciding entity. Hence, no charges on both witch hunts. Conspire all you wish. Trey Gowdy should be in jail for wastefull spending.
But the premise is incorrect. The FBI can't indict. Only a grand jury can. And only Comey's boss, Loretta Lynch in the Department of Justice, can convene a grand jury. She won't do her job. Comey gets the blame for the cover-up of Hillary's crimes which he has no power to prosecute. Perfect!
Unless we get a new apolitical Administration (Trump) nothing will change and it will be dirty politics as usual. The U.S. under Clinton leadership will be a throw back to third world politics the world has not experienced since Manuel Noriega complete with the killing of its adversaries. As to Comey his mistake was to not prosecute her in the first place due to political influence. Every American with a brain knows she is as guilty as sin and we don't need the FBI to sort that out for us. Hopefully the electorate will come to the right conclusion.