• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Waiting…
    Sweet Sue on Context
    riverdaughter on Context
    Sweet Sue on Context
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Context
    riverdaughter on Context
    riverdaughter on Context
    Sweet Sue on Context
    Sweet Sue on Context
    Sweet Sue on Context
    Alessandro Machi on We should be shocked.
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on This sounds familiar
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on We should be shocked.
    Bernard Jenkins on This sounds familiar
    Sweet Sue on Opioids
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    October 2017
    S M T W T F S
    « Sep   Nov »
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728
    293031  
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Assassination Works Only Under Two Circumstances
      For years, decades even, America has had a policy of assassination. Americans believe that if you kill the leaders, you kill an organization. This is delusional. It only works when it almost isn’t necessary. How many times has American killed the #2 man of the Taliban? Did killing Osama stop Al-Qaeda? Assassinating Yamamoto in WWII […]
  • Top Posts

Comey, the sequel.

James Comey was prepared to exonerate Hillary Clinton last July and drafted a letter stating this. He did this after interviewing Clinton’s aides and before interviewing Clinton herself.

But Trump is hopping mad because it looks like Comey’s investigation was ending without a long term prison sentence, which is what everyone who either voted for Trump or didn’t vote at all was expecting.

Now, there are two conclusions you can draw from this. The Republican conclusion is that Comey wasn’t thorough enough and was failing to get with the plan to keep the email story front and center indefinitely.

Observing what happened shortly thereafter, where Comey had an unprecedented press conference condemning her highly irresponsible treatment of a handful of post email classified documents out of over 50000 emails sampled, it sure looks like someone applied partisan pressure on him to make the whole thing look like much more serious than it actually was.

You *could* conclude, as many Republicans did, that there had to be something there and Comey needed to go back and find it.

The other perfectly logical conclusion is that after he interviewed the aides, he determined that no laws were broken, nothing out of the ordinary happened that hadn’t happened before and there was no reason to keep the investigation open. That is a very plausible explanation. AND it has the benefit of being the least complicated explanation based on the facts.

But he trashed her anyway and then wrote that stupid letter just before the election and her lead vanished in a puff of smoke but no fire.

The pressure on him to make her look bad must have been intense. But he wouldn’t protect a law abiding citizen like Clinton the way he protected John Ashcroft back in the Alberto Gonzales days.

You got to wonder why he did it. Did he feel like he owed Republicans? Are there rogue elements in the FBI and why did he think it was Ok to go around his boss or her deputy Sally Yates?

Probably another case of not taking women seriously. The pressure was on and he decided to make a unilateral decision than have to sit in some kind of meeting with two women trying to come to a consensus or worse yet, have one of them tell him what to do.

Yeah another completely plausible scenario.

Advertisements

8 Responses

  1. Fuck Comey! That is all I got.

  2. And we have to point out that everyone of their mfers in the current WH is using private email server and emails and sent classified material. Hillary’s was a private server, dedicated and protected while these mfers are using trump organization server which is neither protected nor dedicated. Maybe that is a feature and not a bug for these corrupt mfers. Lock them up!

    • Yep, I was thinking about the same thing. Essentially, if there were any Republicans with legitimate differences, they have lost their voice to crazy Russians, once everyone ignores those comments.

      • From the comment thread of the Wonkette story to which I linked:

        Here’s the thing: I realized some time ago that the very POINT is the simple fact that it’s impossible to tell the difference between a Russian troll, a vicious little algorithm, and a real Republican voter.

        That’s it in a nutshell right there. The fact that you can’t readily distinguish a Russian making mischief for Mother Russia from a Republican sharing his actual “philosophy” tells you everything you need to know about Republicans.

        THIS SO MUCH.

  3. ‘Are there rogue elements in the FBI?”
    Duh!!!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: