FBI Director James Comey « to Be Investigated »?

In-depth Report:

The disturbing truth about democracy in America: There is none – not from inception, not now, FBI Director James Comey’s investigation of Hillary’s mishandling of classified State Department documents one of countless examples.

In July, he whitewashed her clear criminality, serious enough to send ordinary people to prison – compromising national security by maintaining classified State Department documents on her private email server, along with lying to the FBI and Congress, a perjurious offense.

At the time, Comey said “(i)n looking back at our investigations into the mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts” – despite clear indictable evidence discovered.

Democrats and supportive media scoundrels praised his action – Hillary’s campaign spokesman Brian Fallon saying:

“We are pleased that the career officials handling this case have determined that no further action by the department is appropriate. As the secretary has long said, it was a mistake to use her personal email and she would not do it again. We are glad that this matter is now resolved.”

After Comey’s October surprise, London’s Guardian said it learned “he placed himself in the crosshairs of a federal inquiry into whether he has interfered in an election…”

The federal Office of the Special Council (OSC) neither confirmed nor denied if it intends investigating Comey for possible Hatch Act violations – prohibiting pernicious political activities.

Law Professor Richard Painter filed a complaint with the office. Its spokesman Nick Schwellenbach said “(i)n general, OSC opens a case after receiving a complaint,” investigations taking from days to months, depending on the nature of the issue and its complexity.

If the OSC finds Comey in violation of Hatch Act provisions, it’s up to the president to decide what, if any, action should be taken.

On Monday, House House press secretary Josh Earnest said Obama considers him “a man of integrity, a man of principle, and he’s a man of good character” – while admitting “(h)e’s in a tough spot, and (he’ll have to) defend his actions in the face of significant criticism…”

“But I’ll neither defend nor criticize what director Comey decided to communicate to the public about this investigation,” Earnest added.

If Hillary succeeds Obama, she’ll likely want Comey replaced, despite his 10-year appointment running until September 2023. Charging him with wrongdoing under the Hatch Act seems unlikely. Proof of intent to interfere in electoral politics is required to hold someone culpable under the law, a hard case to make against Comey based on what’s known so far.

Former FBI official Ed Shaw said he’s in “a no-win situation. He’s made everybody mad at him.” According to his allies, “stay(ing) silent before an election in the face of potentially significant developments in the Clinton case would invite a torrent of Republican congressional hearings,” the Guardian explained.

“To speak publicly of an explosive investigation, particularly before establishing relevance, is to insert the FBI into the election days before the vote.”

A Final Comment

Hillary’s email scandal is a gift that keeps on giving for political opponents. On October 31, Judicial Watch (JW) released new State Department documents – revealing email exchanges of classified information between her and top aide Huma Abedin on an unsecure server, saying:

“Judicial Watch today released 323 pages of new Department of State documents, including previously unreleased email exchanges in which Clinton and top aide Huma Abedin sent classified information over Clinton’s clintonemail.com unsecure email system.”

“According to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemptions cited in the documents obtained by Judicial Watch, three of the Clinton-Abedin email exchanges contained material ‘classified to protect national security.’ “

“Also included in the newly obtained documents is an additional instance of the State Department doing special favors for a high-dollar Clinton Foundation donor.”

“And the documents include instances of the distribution by State Department officials of Clinton’s government schedule to members of the Clinton Foundation staff.”

“The documents contain not previously turned over to the State Department, bringing the known total to date of such emails uncovered by Judicial Watch to 238 new Clinton emails (not part of the 55,000 pages of emails that Clinton turned over to the State Department).”

“These records further appear to contradict statements by Clinton that, ‘as far as she knew,’ all of her government emails were turned over to the State Department.”

“The new records include three separate Clinton-Abedin email exchanges withheld in part from Judicial Watch under the State Department’s ‘B1’ FOIA exemption, applying to ‘Information that is classified to protect national security.’ “

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled « Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III. » http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Center of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]