If I understand the tidbits of news now emerging in the newspapers and on cable news, FBI Director James Comey pursued his investigation of Hillary Clinton's emails on the basis of a bogus "email" produced by Russian intelligence and inserted into a drop of hacked emails. Comey did so knowing that the email was bogus, thereby almost certainly throwing the election to Trump, and then Trump fired him.
Can this all be true?
Wouldn't knowingly pursuing a case based on initially fraudulent evidence throw out the entire case?
ReplyDeleteE.g., if a cop enters a home without just cause, permission, or a warrant, then builds a case from inside that home that X is a drug dealer, isn't any attempt to prosecute X going to be thrown out?
Yes, but that wasn't the point at issue. The story is complicated. Check it on line.
ReplyDeleteThis is what I found, and I'm not sure how it does or doesn't impact my question:
ReplyDelete"The Russian intelligence at issue purported to show that then-Attorney General Lynch had been compromised in the Clinton investigation. The intelligence described emails between then-Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and a Clinton campaign operative suggesting that Lynch would make the FBI investigation of Clinton go away.
In classified sessions with members of Congress several months ago, Comey described those emails in the Russian claim and expressed his concern that this Russian information could "drop" and that would undermine the Clinton investigation and the Justice Department in general, according to one government official. Still, Comey did not let on to lawmakers that there were doubts about the veracity of the intelligence, according to sources familiar with the briefings. It is unclear why Comey was not more forthcoming in a classified setting.
Sources close to Comey tell CNN he felt that it didn't matter if the information was accurate, because his big fear was that if the Russians released the information publicly, there would be no way for law enforcement and intelligence officials to discredit it without burning intelligence sources and methods."
Unidentified sources. No evidence made public. Just trust us.
ReplyDeleteBill Maher, the other night, went on a rant about how the famous 17 intelligence agencies confirmed Russian hacking into our elections. He was livid. "It's fact. It's science. You cannot dispute it."
"The MSM [main stream media] has so enjoyed claiming that the Russian “meddling” allegations are the consensus judgment of all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies that a blind eye and a deaf ear have been turned to Brennan and Clapper contradicting that beloved groupthink. In recent testimony, Clapper and Brennan acknowledged that the Jan. 6 report alleging Russian “meddling” was actually the work of hand-picked analysts from only four agencies – the Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation under the oversight of the DNI’s office. But that fact continues to be ignored by the MSM, with the Post on Wednesday castigating Trump for refusing 'to fully accept the unanimous conclusion of U.S. intelligence agencies.'"
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/05/24/getting-trump-with-the-new-mccarthyism/
This is baffling. The alphabet soup of security agencies has produced no evidence whatsoever. The Democrats have not denied the authenticity of the leaked emails. The US interferes in elections anywhere and any time it pleases. Israel interferes in US elections all the time. The hypocrisy and folly of this whole Russia-gate furore, and the earnestness with which the media and public participate, has us who look on from the outside utterly bemused. Is the US Establishment is in the throes of a nervous breakdown, or engaging in internecine strife however foolish they look and whatever the cost in America's standing in the world, or what?
ReplyDeleteIt's quite simple. (1) The majority who voted against Trump are seizing on anything that might get rid of him. Many of the things they've tried (racism, misogyny, corruption, incompetence, etc. etc.) don't seem to work. (2) The Russian connection does have some potential, because many people who grew up in the US during the Cold War (particularly the Republicans whose votes are needed) have strong negative associations with the Russians.
ReplyDeleteInternecine strife? Sure. Nervous breakdown? Maybe. But the underlying logic is clear: find something that will get rid of Trump. Or perhaps even better, help to take over the Congress in 2018.
Kate
ReplyDeleteBy the rules, Trump won. So, on behalf of those who didn't win, the alphabet soup of security agencies are seizing on anything to get rid of him. Hmm. Is that how democracy now works in the US? It used to be the US applied this sort of democracy only to others.