Wither the FBI

What?

Suddenly renewed activity on an FBI Twitter account publicizing Freedom of Information Act releases has prompted an internal bureau review of the propriety of such activity so close to the Nov. 8 election, according to a source involved in the matter.

In emails obtained by Government Executive sent to an ex-investigative reporter who filed complaints, the deputy at the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility on Tuesday revealed that the complaint about possible political favoritism in tweeting has been referred to the FBI’s Inspection Division.

Here’s the story. Last week, the FBI’s FOIA account, which had been silent for over a year, started tweeting out documents relating to investigations of Donald Trump’s father, the Clinton Foundation and Clinton’s pardons. I admit that I was a bit bumfuzzled by why they would suddenly do this. And a lot of people felt, especially in the wake of the Comey letter, that the FBI was trying to influence the election by dishing dirt on Clinton.

In fact, the FBI has become a focal point of controversy over the last week, with wild and frequently anonymous claims that the FBI is massively pro-Trump, is trying to tip the election and despises Clinton along with counter-claims that the FBI is favoring Clinton by not recommending charges, holding back on critical documents that implicate her and dragging its heels on the e-mail investigation. My impression — and this is just me spitballing — is that there are politicized factions within the FBI right now, vying to craft a narrative. And journalists, eager for access, are lapping up whatever they’re saying.

This would be not be the first time the FBI has played politics. Under Hoover, the COINTELPRO program infiltrated and disrupted political groups they didn’t like. This culminating in spying on MLK, discovering he was cheating on his wife and sending him a letter urging him to kill himself. They’ve also played politics on a smaller scale, famously tarring Richard Jewell as a terrorist so that people wouldn’t be afraid of further attacks at the ’96 games (an accusation that almost certainly contributed to his death at a young age).

But this is the first time I’ve seen both side making credible accusations that the Bureau is trying to influence an election. This is … not good. This indicates Comey is either doing this on purpose or has lost control of his own bureau. I would say there should be an investigation, but, given the time constraint, that would mean either Clinton or Trump doing it, neither of whom can be trusted. Probably the best thing would be for Obama to appoint a bipartisan investigation team (comprised of former FBI officials or, better yet, former officials from another federal law enforcement agency) to figure out what’s going on here. Because the FBI should not be playing politics. They should be doing their damned job.

Comments are closed.

  1. richtaylor365

    But this is the first time I’ve seen both side making credible accusations that the Bureau is trying to influence an election.

    You will will have to flesh out the argument that the left is making “credible” accusations, it all sounds like posturing to me. You said it yourself in an earlier post, Comey had to correct the record and inform Congress that an otherwise “completed” investigation has now been re opened.

    Now we do have many  many examples of how Comey playing politics in favor of Hillary, to wit;

    1) Making a recommendation not to prosecute when that is not his job. His authority extends only to supervising and collecting pertinent facts to be presented to Justice Dept. lawyers for their determination of whether those collected facts justify a federal prosecution. It is not his job to announce before Congress ,”No reasonable prosecutor would seek to charge her with a crime”. In case you forgot all the lies made and all the laws violated;

    2) The premature immunities given to her 2 aides and the technician that destroyed over 30,000 emails in direct defiance of a court order.  If it was anyone else, here is how the process would go. Once the FBI learned that both Mills and Samuelson had classified information on their computers, grand jury subpoenas would be issued demanding the immediate surrender of those devices. But Hillary is special, so, her  staff members received immunity for giving up the devices, and outlandish promises where made to narrow the scope ( limiting the search of the devices) and to destroy the devices after the relevant date (relevant at that time only) was extracted.

    Factor in that Obama, on national TV, prior to the completion of the investigation, prejudged the investigation saying Clinton did nothing wrong, and that the subsequent email probe revealed 21 separate emails from the president to Hillary thru her unsecured server, where he used a pseudonym, the same emails that the WH ordered the FBI not to release under “executive privilege”, can’t get more cloak and dagger than that.

    In fact, the FBI has become a focal point of controversy over the last week, with wild and frequently anonymous claims that the FBI is massively pro-Trump

    Do you have any links or any evidence to support any of that? Everything that I’ve read, 99% of the FBI is dedicated apolitical law enforcement folks that just want the opportunity (without political interference) to do their jobs. Now, Justice, that is a different animal altogether, populated by political appointees specifically hired to be good soldiers and toe the party line.

    Under Hoover

    Isn’t it funny that according to the left narrative, Comey was Elliot Ness one day and J Edgar Hoover the  next. From Louis Freeh on, the FBI has been exemplary and apolitical, until now.

     

     

     

     

     

    Thumb up 0

  2. richtaylor365

    Yeah, dedicated hard working investigators get a bit surly when they put in the hours, gather the evidence, find demonstrable criminality and expect justice to be done, then have the rug pulled out from under the. Sure they’re pissed, you would be too, they all can see that Hillary was given special treatment and it flies in the face of everything they thought about their beloved agency.

    Thumb up 0

  3. AlexInCT

    You will will have to flesh out the argument that the left is making “credible” accusations, it all sounds like posturing to me.

    This.

    The only thing the left has been doing is provide cover and the veneer of legitimacy to the people that have turned this into a banana republic after they left no more doubt that some people are above the law, and political enemies are always guilty of being Hilter.

    Besides, I hear that there are many career FBI people that are furious their agency has been corrupted and now is beholden to a political stooge of Obama’s running the DOJ and the Clinton crime syndicate.

    Thumb up 0

  4. Hal_10000 *

    I think that an anonymous FBI source tipped off Fox news to three stories that they now admit were total bullshit makes one wonder what’s going on.  I defended Comey informing Congress of the investigation. Can’t defend him the agency is leaking garbage information to the media like this.

    Thumb up 0

  5. richtaylor365

    Lets unwind this “total bullshit”as you put it, here is what he said;

    “Barring some obstruction in some way, they believe they [the investigations] will continue to likely an indictment,” he told Brit Hume. On Thursday morning he clarified that asserting an imminent “indictment” was “inartfully” phrased.

    “That just wasn’t ‘inartful.’ It was a mistake, and for that I’m sorry,” Baier told Fox’s Jon Scott on Friday. “I should have said, ‘They will continue to build their case.’ Indictment obviously is a very loaded word, Jon, especially in this atmosphere.” He clarified that prosecutors, not FBI investigators, make the decision whether or not to pursue an indictment based on the evidence.

    This may be “inartful”, but it certainly is not total bullshit, they (the investigators) believe they have (or will have) sufficient evidence for an indictment. Sure, Justice could take a look at all the evidence and say ,”F@ck You!!!! no way in hell is my boss going to allow such an action”, and then not indict.

    On Friday Baier clarified that he had spoken to “one source” with “certainty that the server had been hacked by five foreign intelligence agencies.” He confirmed that there were still no “digital fingerprints” to prove such a breach had occurred, but noted that the FBI was operating under the working assumption that the server had been hacked.

    Same thing, the source says with certainty that her emails were hacked. The source did not provide any proof of this (not yet anyway) so for now, for now, it is just an unsubstantiated leak, nothing more. But since this is still an active investigation, no evidence of such a breach has been provided, yet. It could be that they have it but have not released it, waiting for the culmination of the entire investigation. So no, your assertion of Total bullshit has not been proven.

    makes one wonder what’s going on

    Seems pretty clear to me, Comey has a mutiny on his hands. I do not condone leaking, especially stuff leaked piece meal without evidence, but it is rather obvious what is going on, dedicated investigators are pushing back because they have the goods on Hillary but their boss will not back them.

    Thumb up 0

  6. richtaylor365

    Hey, Hal, OT but the Rolling Stone verdict came out today. You have done great work in the past on this, thought you might want first crack at a post. I was pleased with the verdict, BTW.

    Thumb up 0

  7. AlexInCT

    Wow. And the right screeched about Hillary’s campaign getting a debate question in advance, which is nothing at all compared to this.

    Like I told some idiot last night when he told me he still, despite knowing Hillary was a crook and all that other bad shit, was voting for her: if they had a video of Hillary outright eating children’s hearts right out of their chests after sacrificially killing them in whatever demon she worships name, people like this would still vote for her, because their fantasies of how bad the other people are are way worse.

    The problem isn’t with those of us that point out Hillary is a monster and a disaster waiting to happen, but with people that will give her a pass regardless of what she does, because they want to believe the other guy is worse, regardless of the evidence to the contrary.

    Hence Hal’s comment that these things are bullshit regardless of the evidence, and your idiotic comment, which is more of the same.

    Thumb up 0

  8. ilovecress

    Like I told some idiot last night when he told me he still, despite knowing Trump was a crook and all that other bad shit, was voting for him: if they had a video of Trump outright eating children’s hearts right out of their chests after sacrificially killing them in whatever demon she worships name, people like this would still vote for him, because their fantasies of how bad the other people are are way worse.

    The problem isn’t with those of us that point out Trump is a monster and a disaster waiting to happen, but with people that will give him a pass regardless of what he does, because they want to believe the other woman is worse, regardless of the evidence to the contrary.

    Thumb up 3

  9. richtaylor365

    The problem isn’t with those of us that point out Trump is a monster and a disaster waiting to happen, but with people that will give him a pass regardless of what he does, because they want to believe the other woman is worse, regardless of the evidence to the contrary.

    There is sooooooo much wrong with this paragraph I don’t know where to begin.

    1) “Trump is a monster and a disaster to happen” (false equivalency, indeed). Many say the same thing about Hillary. Ad hominems to the extremes are useless when comparing 2 substandard candidates.

    2) Who is giving him a pass regardless of what he does?  Our 2 big Trump supporters here are Alex and Icon, where have they ever said he is the greatest thing since sliced bread? Where have they ever given him a pass? Their support is based almost entirely on the alternative. Where has anyone, even his staunchest supporters in the media, when confronted with a another Trump blunder, where has anyone said, “He’s great, isn’t he? That is exactly the type of behavior I emulate and teach my kids”?

    3)”Because they want to believe the other guy is worse”, are they wrong? Square that circle.

    4) “Regardless of the evidence to the contrary”, a totally subjective premise if I ever heard one. That may be your opinion, fair enough, but you have no empirical proof of this, or if you do, please present it, all this evidence you speak of that proves beyond all doubt that Trump would be worse.

    Thumb up 0

  10. ilovecress

    1) “Trump is a monster and a disaster to happen” (false equivalency, indeed). Many say the same thing about Hillary. Ad hominems to the extremes are useless when comparing 2 substandard candidates.

    Rich – that was completely my point (snarky I know!) I just took what Alex wrote, and changed the name to reflect what HRC supporter are saying.  I could use your reply to respond to Alex’s post.

    Thumb up 1

  11. richtaylor365

    Rich – that was completely my point (snarky I know!) I just took what Alex wrote, and changed the name to reflect what HRC supporter are saying.

    I walked into that one, didn’t I? I didn’t read Alex’s comment.

     I could use your reply to respond to Alex’s post.

    My above comment mostly stands, ad hominems in the extremes are useless with these 2 candidates.

    But there is one difference. The deficiencies Trump has are recognized by many in his party, hence the never-Trump popularity within the party, hence many many in the party will not support Trump or back him, causing a major fissure. No such blow back exists within the Democratic party for their candidate, there is no Never-Hillary movement within their party. We understand bad behavior  and recognize it as such, but it seems no matter how much corruption is uncovered, the rank and file dems all enthusiastically back her and toe the party line. None have come out publicly saying they are embarrassed for their candidate (like we have), and never ever do you see a reporter shove a microphone in front of them, asking if they will down vote Hillary given the latest scandal, like they do all the time with Republicans.

    As for who would be worse, it’s all relative, I guess, but I certainly have my POV.

     

     

     

    Thumb up 0

  12. ilovecress

     No such blow back exists within the Democratic party for their candidate, there is no Never-Hillary movement within their party.

    Bernie. Sanders. Dude – there totally is. Two of the most lefty podcasts I listen to are the Young Turks and The Jimmy Dore show (they’ll make your head explode) – and they’ve been never Hillary from the start. The conversations in these circles are exactly the same as the ones that you’re having – namely whether or not to hold your nose and vote for HRC. The difference I grant you is that the establishment DNC hasn’t been this way (to say the least), but look at how much they’ve had Bernie out on the trail trying to undo what he started. The main theme in all the liberal chatter this weekend has been bed-wtting about Blacks and Millenials sitting this one out, or Bernie Bros lifting the Greens up to 5% at the expense of a Trump presidency.

    The ironic thing is that both the left wing blogosphere and the right wing blogosphere are saying the exact same thing, just with the names switched.

    “I wish that we’d nominated a more liberal/conservative candidate that didn’t have so much corruption baggage, but I guess I’ll have to vote for Clinton/Trump because trump/Clinton will mean the end of the country as we know it.”

    Thumb up 1

  13. richtaylor365

    Bernie. Sanders. Dude – there totally is. 

    Cress, I’m not talking about the primaries. Has Sanders once, just once ever said ,”Ya know, I’m really pissed how I was treated, how the DNC rat f*cked me from the start, and I’m not sure I can either support or vote for Hillary”, the answer is a categorical NO.

     

      The conversations in these circles are exactly the same as the ones that you’re having – namely whether or not to hold your nose and vote for HRC.

    Again, that is not what I’m talking about. This is not about dissatisfaction with their candidate and them holding their nose while pulling the lever. There is a large portion of the GOP (remember the National Review piece?) that will not vote for Trump, nose holding or not. This is what is absent across the isle. Give me one notable dem who has come out publicly saying they will not vote for Hillary, just one.

    Thumb up 0

  14. ilovecress

    Fair point. I does exist with voters though. But also supports your point. I think I heard that Trump was only getting around 80% of registered replublicans (compared with in the 90s for Romney). not sure what it is for HRC, but I’ll bet it’s higher.

    Thumb up 0

  15. ilovecress

    Yep – that’s exactly what I mean. This was actually a big moment after months of him saying that he wasn’t sure he could. The fact that the host of the Young Turks has to actually announce he’s going to vote for the democrat shows you how unpopular she is….

     

    Thumb up 0

  16. richtaylor365

    So when I post youtube videos of Chris Matthews, Bill Mahers, Jon Oliver, Rachel Maddow, Al Sharrpton, and a dozen offer dem pundits , all endorsing Hillary and saying they will vote for Hillary, this somehow confirms your premise that there is great division within the democratic party?

    Everyone to a man, falls in line like good soldiers, seems pretty monolithic to me.

    Thumb up 0

  17. ilovecress

    Fair enough – the Dems got their preferred candidate. I guess the split is in more the ‘non establishment’ figures.

    (By the way, this has been far too civil Rich. Could you refer to me as a liberal fucktard or something – I’m worried we might lose our Thunderdome ™ status… ;-) )

    Thumb up 0

  18. CM

    I saw something this morning which suggested Trump was pulling more Dems than HRC was pulling Republicans. Might have been somewhere specific. Have read 3 million things since, will try to find it.

    Thumb up 0

  19. CM

    Here: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/has-trump-already-lost-nevada/

    “The early vote numbers don’t guarantee the polls are wrong. Being a registered Democrat doesn’t necessarily mean you’re going to vote for Clinton. If Trump is winning more registered Democrats than Clinton is registered Republicans, the early vote data in Nevada may not mean what we think it means. Indeed, some Nevada polls (though not all) show Trump getting a higher percentage of self-identified Democrats than Clinton gets Republicans”

    Thumb up 0

  20. richtaylor365

    (By the way, this has been far too civil Rich. Could you refer to me as a liberal fucktard or something – I’m worried we might lose our Thunderdome ™ status… ;-) )

    I never was a big proponent of Thunderdome, prefer these types of exchanges. It’s hard (for me) to call someone a cock gobbling mongoloid shit burger when I don’t know him personally.

    Barrons (a sister publication of the WSJ) predicts a 10% drop in the market the first day ( global markets will be worse) if Trump wins. Now that Comey has done his job, absolved Hillary of all crimes, it is now a forgone conclusion, can’t wait for the whole thing to be over.

    Thumb up 0

  21. AlexInCT

    The problem isn’t with those of us that point out Trump is a monster and a disaster waiting to happen, but with people that will give him a pass regardless of what he does, because they want to believe the other woman is worse, regardless of the evidence to the contrary.

    Hah hah hah. What evidence would that be Cress? Seriously Clinton is a monster, suffering from dementia, can’t tell the truth even when it would benefit her, and is so corrupt she makes Charles Manson look like a decent chap, but you find that Trump is worse? Really? Talk about Solipsism.

    America is about to elect one of the most corrupt people, after she was shown, twice, that she was above the law. That’s gonna end up far worse than anything Trump can do on his worse day. This country is doomed. It will be destroyed from within by the most despicable bunch of people ever to walk the earth, but hey TrumP is bad!

    Thumb up 0

  22. CM

     It will be destroyed from within by the most despicable bunch of people ever to walk the earth

    It’s impressive how you constantly find new ways to demonstrate how deranged you’ve become.

    Thumb up 1

  23. Starving Writer

    But there is one difference. The deficiencies Trump has are recognized by many in his party, hence the never-Trump popularity within the party, hence many many in the party will not support Trump or back him, causing a major fissure. No such blow back exists within the Democratic party for their candidate, there is no Never-Hillary movement within their party. We understand bad behavior  and recognize it as such, but it seems no matter how much corruption is uncovered, the rank and file dems all enthusiastically back her and toe the party line. None have come out publicly saying they are embarrassed for their candidate (like we have), and never ever do you see a reporter shove a microphone in front of them, asking if they will down vote Hillary given the latest scandal, like they do all the time with Republicans.

    Spoken like somebody who has never seen the #JillNotHill hashtag.  There is a large contingent of Democratic supporters who were extremely upset about the fact that the DNC primaries were rigged in Hillary’s favor, and have vowed to not vote for Hillary.  Some of them switched to Jill Stein.  Some of them switched to Gary Johnson.  Some of them have vowed to write in Bernie Sanders.  And some of them have switched over to Trump.

    That is one of the reason why I’m somewhat disappointed with Gary Johnson’s campaign this year.  Between the “Never Trump” movement and the “Never Hillary” movement, this was the absolutely PERFECT year to demolish the corrupt two-party system, and Johnson blew it with that “Aleppo” gaffe.

    Thumb up 0

  24. Starving Writer

    Just to be clear, I’m talking about the rank and file voters, not about the establishment elite.  One of the smartest things Hillary did was to promptly ensure that Bernie Sanders endorsed her at the DNC.  This is something Trump couldn’t do with Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich at the RNC.  Hillary was able to get the establishment Democrats behind her (obviously, since she was the establishment’s choice from Day One), and that helped to lessen the impact of the splinter within the Democrats.

    This is the biggest reason why Hillary will win on Tuesday.

    Thumb up 0

  25. richtaylor365

    Spoken like somebody who has never seen the #JillNotHill hashtag. 

    Spoken like somebody who has no concept of numbers. What is Stein pulling, 2%? So much for your “large contingent”.

    Stein was never a Democrat and Johnson was a Republican, so linking their supporters as disenfranchised democrats looking for an alternative is beyond dubious.

    This was my presented premise, practically all (99%) of the Never-Hillary folks are Republicans, this is not the case with Never-Trump, which is populated by millions of Republicans dissatisfied with their own nominee.

    Just to be clear, I’m talking about the rank and file voters, not about the establishment elite.

    That’s great but impossible to quantify. No, my challenge was to provide one name of a recognized Democrat that is in the public eye and has publicly acknowledged he (she) will not vote for Hillary. I know they are out there, but so far ALL the rank and file democrats have fallen in line like good soldiers, none embarrassed by their nominee , embarrassed enough to take a stand.

     

    Thumb up 0

  26. Hal_10000 *

    So Comey announced today that there was nothing new in the e-mails. So, of course, the Democrats are screeching. The FBI worked round the clock to try to get this cleared up before the election and it wasn’t good enough for the Clinton whiners.

    Thumb up 0

  27. AlexInCT

    So Comey announced today that there was nothing new in the e-mails.

    We found nothing no to ignore this time, so we are back to ignoring the many crimes committed, just like we did before? My buddy that lost his security clearance and spent time in jail wants a do-over…

    Thumb up 0

View Mobile Site