Has the FBI ever publicly scolded a candidate or former government official before?

[lapucelle]

Does the FBI have a history of doing this?
If not, what entitles James Comey to do it today?

[fleabiscuit]

1. He might have felt he could righteously spank a women. Grrrrr.... eom

[lapucelle]

4. Who does he think he is?

Ted Cruz?

http://fusion.net/story/253438/ted-cruz-hillary-clinton-spanking-sexism/

[scscholar]

2. If it was a male candidate, would he have done the same?

That is the question we should all be asking ourselves several times a day until he is punished for what he has done.

[CBGLuthier]

3. WTF?

Man I am sick of all these bullshit claims of sexism.

[lapucelle]

11. We had a very unusual public statement by an FBI director.

Maybe Comey was simply employing Clinton rules or maybe he feels entitled to editorialize for some other reason.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/when-the-media-play-by-clinton-rules/

[PeaceNikki]

14. Poor you.

[trumad]

15. Whaaaaa

[PatSeg]

27. I really don't know

if in this instance, there was any sexism involved, but as a woman I can tell you that sexism is alive and well. We will see much more of it in the next few months. Women candidates are pretty much always treated differently than their male counterparts and judged for things that men rarely are. Donald Trump's hair is a very rare exception!

[DonViejo]

31. Who has made a "bull shit claim of sexism?"

[Hiraeth]

51. Me too

[hughee99]

9. Yes, SEXISM!

What should Comey be punished for?

[lapucelle]

20. Here are the rules concerning Office of US Attorney media announcements and press conferences.

https://www.justice.gov/usam/usam-1-7000-media-relations#1-7.400

1-7.550 - Concerns of Prejudice is an interesting read.

My question is whether the director was justified in impugning Mrs. Clinton's character or competence given the fact that there was a recommendation that no charges be filed.

Can anyone remember the FBI ever doing this before?

[hughee99]

37. Do you believe this statement was made without the knowledge or approval of the Justice Department?

I have seen no evidence to suggest that. The DoJ has not claimed that. The Administration has not claimed that. (as far as I know). It was a prepared statement that I'm sure went through many hands before being made public.

Comey and the justice department are in line on this issue. Comey isn't recommending prosecution and Justice isn't going to prosecute, so concerns that this statement will prejudice a pending prosecution are not relevant.

[lapucelle]

41. I don't know, but

Comey did state at the outset that nobody else knew what he was going to say.

"This will be an unusual statement in at least a couple ways. First, I am going to include more detail about our process than I ordinarily would, because I think the American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest. Second, I have not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government. They do not know what I am about to say."

Here's the transcript.
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b.-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

[lapucelle]

47. And I'm a little puzzled by Comey's behavior.

Even he himself admitted: " I am going to include more detail about our process than I ordinarily would, because I think the American people deserve those details."

What made him think he had license to cherry pick facts that would impugn someone's character and competence and feed them to a hungry press? Is that ethical? Is it advisable?

Comey clearly didn't get the results he would have liked from the exhaustive investigation, so he presented information that supports a Republican narrative. I think that today Comey was extremely careless in his handling of very sensitive information. He should step down.

[ciaobaby]

52. Interesting

"I think that today Comey was extremely careless in his handling of very sensitive information. He should step down."

Now where have we heard this before ?

[hughee99]

48. Fair enough. I don't believe this wasn't cleared with the DoJ first, but if what he says is true

he's not following stated protocol, and he's commenting on an ongoing investigation, which is usually a big no-no. The only way I can see that he can be telling the truth and isn't violating Justice Department policies is if Lynch gave him pre-approval to announce his findings to the public, but she could really only do that if she knew she wasn't going to prosecute already (Comey definitely couldn't have made this statement if the DOJ were going to prosecute).

The way this whole thing was handled is very shady, but still, I don't see the sexism that seems so apparent to others.

[arthritisR_US]

21. I think your point is very valid.

Collin Powell went before the UN with a presentation of lies and his emails concerning the run up to those lies and the aftermath have never been investigated. To date, it is my understanding that not one email of his has ever been submitted for scrutiny. It appears transparency only becomes an issue if the target is a woman.

[Else You Are Mad]

35. I disagree.

I don't think this has to do with Hillary being a woman. I think this has to do with the fact that Hillary is a Clinton and nothing more.

[arthritisR_US]

40. I think it's both. I think her being a Clinton solidifies their their

witch hunt.

[Else You Are Mad]

43. I dunno.

There is a lot of sexism out there but I just don't see it here.

[arthritisR_US]

44. I do and I remember its inception when Bill was Govenor. nt

[840high]

39. Yes he would have.

[Marr]

42. God, I *really* hope the Clinton campaign can come up with something better than

'clap or you hate women' before November. Trump will absolutely destroy her if that's all she's got.

[Else You Are Mad]

46. I agree.

Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of sexism being thrown at Hillary but if after every negative point that is brought up against Hillary is responded to with 'well that is because sexism' or 'at least she isn't trump' will get very old and will be ignored come November because of it being over used.

[loyalsister]

5. Another view

Maybe it is to her advantage. Maybe his public "talkin' to" will satisfy and quiet people who were calling for indictment?

[karynnj]

8. Though I doubt it is to her advantage, it may be seen as a summary statement

It is certainly not an accomplishment.

[loyalsister]

17. good point

I just kind of see it as a statement of finality. "It was stupid, the FBI is over it."

[TipTok]

6. Which parts were factually incorrect?

[fleabiscuit]

24. The parts that were speculation. eom

[TipTok]

56. Such as....

[karynnj]

7. Has any nominee ever been investigated by the FBI?

I think this is the best the Clinton team could have gotten - and what I think almost everyone expected. She herself has admitted this was a bad idea and it has cost her a lot of grief.

I think he had to put out a full statement of what he found and then the conclusion. There is very little new here. In terms of impact - I suspect it is a minor Clinton gain. The statement is tough and it contradicts many things her team claimed, but the key important thing is that there will be no indictment. I suspect that this result is close to what was already factored in.

[lapucelle]

12. Al Gore in 2000

was deposed under oath by the FBI concerning campaign contributions.

[karynnj]

19. I had forgotten that -- contributions in 1996 nt

[PeaceNikki]

16. It's a safe bet that J. Edgar Hoover investigated Harry Truman, Adlai Stevenson,

John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Hubert Humphrey and lots of other lefties.

[karynnj]

18. Likely I agree - but not publicly on a known issue nt

[The Second Stone]

57. Hoover investigated everyone left and right until he got dirt on them

that he could blackmail them with if it became necessary. It's hard to imagine he got shit on Truman or Stevenson that was true.

[spanone]

10. there's special hatred for all things Clinton.

[B2G]

13. He was summarizing the investigation findings.

That is what they found.

Did you expect him to sing her praises?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. Were you as happy as I was with Director Comey's pre-emptive No-Bill?

Thank you in advance.

[B2G]

38. I am not happy about any of this.

I don't see how anyone could be.

[Hiraeth]

53. +1

[lapucelle]

23. I was expecting Comey to do what the FBI normally does.

Nothing more, nothing less.

[fleabiscuit]

25. I would expect him to leave his speculation at home. nt

[uponit7771]

28. No, just expect him to be objective about criminal findings and not his opinion

[muntrv]

26. J. Edgar Hoover probably did.

[underpants]

29. It was a political attack by a guy with serious butt hurt.

He knew this was his only chance to try her and it served as a bonus to offer mouth words to keep this nothing burger alive on the press.

[Adrahil]

30. I thought the statement was reasonable enough...

I think it's clear that Clinton and her team were careless. But it did not rise to the level of a crime. That's pretty much what he said.

[ThePhilosopher04]

32. Considering he gave her a free pass, not sure what you're complaining about.

[Marr]

45. +1, apparently dodging an indictment isn't good enough.

He was supposed to genuflect and thank her for the opportunity to practice his investigation skills.

[lapucelle]

49. When someone who didn't commit a crime doesn't get charged,

is that considered a free pass? What an interesting and privileged perspective on justice and the law.

For my part, I find it troubling that a conservative-leaning government official armed Trump and company through unethical speculation.

I find it ironic that it was Comey (who himself was hacked this year and whose department is currently being sued for carelessness that led to the murder of several people) who did the tut-tutting.

[PJMcK]

54. Agree with you about the irony

Director Comey had to make a public statement. After all, they usually never comment on an investigation that turns up empty; new evidence might come to light in the future.

But this case is unique since it involves a candidate in a presidential election. In this case, a "no comment" from the FBI would be a serious comment. Because the Attorney General has sort of withdrawn from the case, Director Comey had to make the public statement.

His editorializing, however, was improper and I hope he feels good about himself tonight. He's probably already looking for a new job because he's not going to like the new boss come next January.

[madamesilverspurs]

33. Comey has a sad.

He was also part of the team that failed to indict either Clinton during the Whitewater 'scandal'.

That makes the score: Clinton 2, Comey 0

[MohRokTah]

34. Your extreme concern is well noted. eom

[floriduck]

36. Does this post mean that it's not enough to have the FBI decision clear Hillary of any charges, but

Last edited Tue Jul 5, 2016, 03:19 PM - Edit history (1)

you also aren't satisfied with the verbiage used to clear her of criminal charges? Aren't you just satisfied that you can now put this behind you and focus on getting Clinton elected? It's like stages of grief- first everyone was relieved and now its on to some vindication emotion.

The election is 4 months away. To me anyway, that is more important that word parsing of the Director of the FBI.

[lapucelle]

50. Comey shouldn't be doing the Republican's work for them.

[alc]

55. he said other people who do similar things may be charged in the future

I think his "public scolding" was intended to be enough punishment to still punish others in the future.