Jane Mayer of The New Yorker is a careful investigative reporter. Her most recent book is “Dark Money,” which explores the billionaires’ assault on democracy.
She wrote a post about James Comey and his decision to go rogue, breaking well-established policies at the Justice Department, not to make unsubstantiated accusations and not to meddle in elections.
She writes:
“Comey’s decision is a striking break with the policies of the Department of Justice, according to current and former federal legal officials. Comey, who is a Republican appointee of President Obama, has a reputation for integrity and independence, but his latest action is stirring an extraordinary level of concern among legal authorities, who see it as potentially affecting the outcome of the Presidential and congressional elections.
“You don’t do this,” one former senior Justice Department official exclaimed. “It’s aberrational. It violates decades of practice.” The reason, according to the former official, who asked not to be identified because of ongoing cases involving the department, “is because it impugns the integrity and reputation of the candidate, even though there’s no finding by a court, or in this instance even an indictment.”
“Traditionally, the Justice Department has advised prosecutors and law enforcement to avoid any appearance of meddling in the outcome of elections, even if it means holding off on pressing cases. One former senior official recalled that Janet Reno, the Attorney General under Bill Clinton, “completely shut down” the prosecution of a politically sensitive criminal target prior to an election. “She was adamant—anything that could influence the election had to go dark,” the former official said.
“Four years ago, then Attorney General Eric Holder formalized this practice in a memo to all Justice Department employees. The memo warned that, when handling political cases, officials “must be particularly sensitive to safeguarding the Department’s reputation for fairness, neutrality, and nonpartisanship.” To guard against unfair conduct, Holder wrote, employees facing questions about “the timing of charges or overt investigative steps near the time of a primary or general election” should consult with the Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division.
“The F.B.I. director is an employee of the Justice Department, and is covered by its policies. But when asked whether Comey had followed these guidelines and consulted with the Public Integrity Section, or with any other department officials, Kevin Lewis, a deputy director of public affairs for the Justice Department, said, “We have no comment on the matter.”
A former White House ethics attorney under Bush claims that Comey’s announcement is a clear violation of the Hatch Act. While Comey felt it was his duty to inform the people about Hillary’s emails, he felt no such obligation to comment on current investigations involving Trump. There is a current investigation to determine if the Trump campaign is connected to a group of Russian hackers. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/10/29/1588310/-Did-FBI-Director-Comey-Break-the-Law
Yes there is so lets see how non partison Comey was under Ashcroft
Daily Kos is a Democratic Party propaganda organ, and thus totally unreliable as a news source. You don’t need to take my word for it; a thorough review of the content (and the fact its owner refused to allow any posting critical of Clinton at one point) will provide sufficient evidence.
Other than the screams of the Democratic Party and some vague effort at support from the administration, there has been NO EVIDENCE provided to support the contention the Russian government is behind the hacks. None. Zip. Zilch. And Vladimir Putin has stated time and again the Russians don’t care who wins, as long as the winner is prepared to negotiate properly, which means treating them like equals instead of attempting to impose the US will.
Have the emails released so far been one-sided? Yes, and there are plenty of legitimate journalists who are disturbed by it. However, other than revealing what anyone who has had sufficient education in politics, civics and history already knows—politicians are corrupt and so behave corruptly—the emails haven’t shown anything likely to deflect committed voters from voting for Clinton.
And that last, of course, is exactly one of the major issues that’s getting lost in the hysterical cries of “The Russians are coming!” There is a vast body of the US public that has been woefully undereducated since the reforms started being applied. Coincidence? Maybe.
Elizabeth,
Since you don’t find The Daily Kos a credible source for the claim that the Russians hacked into the DNC emails, how about the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security?
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Friday formally accused the Russian government of stealing and disclosing emails from the Democratic National Committee and a range of other institutions and prominent individuals, immediately raising the issue of whether President Obama would seek sanctions or other retaliation.
In a statement from the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr., and the Department of Homeland Security, the government said the leaked emails that have appeared on a variety of websites “are intended to interfere with the U.S. election process.”
The emails were posted on the well-known WikiLeaks site and two newer sites, DCLeaks.com and Guccifer 2.0, identified as being associated with Russian intelligence.
“We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities,” the statement said.
Why is the hacking only directed at one candidate and one party?
Our intelligence agencies, which are nonpartisan, concluded that the government of Russia was responsible for the hacking.
Why would the Russians care? Trump is a big fan of Putin and has said he would neglect NATO (Putin’s goal) if the members of NATO didn’t pay up for our defense of them, that he didn’t believe Russia had invaded Crimea (it did), and that he would leave the Europeans to take care of themselves (Putin’s goal).
Trump even expressed the hope that the Russians would hack into Clinton’s email. He wasn’t joking. Or was he?
How is Wikileaks different from Watergate? The files of the DNC were stolen by GOP operatives. Is this different? Well, yes, this is on behalf of a foreign power. Why isn’t this the biggest issue in the campaign?
The emails show nothing corrupt. They show the chatter that occurs in the course of a campaign. If anyone hacked the emails of Sanders (no one did), they would show the same chatter. There is no smoking gun. There is just the outrage that Russian intelligence is trying to help Trump, who would be a “useful idiot,” to use Lenin’s term.
Diane: read that wording carefully. There is no evidence offered. Furthermore, “We believe” doesn’t mean anything. It’s standard government-speak. If they had any concrete evidence to support their “belief” why wouldn’t they say so? It’s not as if we’re talking matters of top security here.
And yes, I DO think the administration would stoop this low to support the Clinton campaign. That this kind of rhetoric is being thrown out at a time when the political situation worldwide is becoming increasingly belligerent is either blatant propaganda of the kind you and I heard throughout the ’50s and ’60s or the most irresponsible electioneering possible.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” — Josef Goebbels
Chomsky and Herbert exposed the collusion between the US government and the media 30 years ago. Nothing has changed.
Elizabeth K. Burton, you just described exactly why Comey is guilty of a Hatch Act violation.
““If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. ”
Comey has been telling a lie about Hillary’s “extreme carelessness”. He didn’t believe her at first when she and her staff explained that she was advised by Colin Powell NOT to use the state dept. e-mail. Later under oath, he was FORCED by the democrats on the committee to admit that for months he had in his possession e-mail evidence from Powell that Clinton was telling the truth about what he advised her but Comey had kept it hidden — presumably so that the slurs that Hillary was lying about Powell’s advice could become accepted fact.
Comey also didn’t believe Hillary when she and her staff explained that the kind of semi-classified “little c” e-mails that he found on her server have nothing to do with using a private e-mail account at all. Those types of e-mails get sent from “secure” servers to non-secure private accounts all the time, Clinton and staff told Comey, but he didn’t believe it.
So Comey checked the e-mail of Powell Cheney and Rice and lo and behold, it turns out even with the most cursory look at whatever few e-mails were left after the millions that disappeared, he found exactly what Clinton and her staff told her he would find. The exact same semi-classified e-mails that slip through the cracks because the top secret stuff is so minor that it doesn’t even warrant a “confidential” stamp at the top. Notice that Comey didn’t try to search for ALL the e-mails that Rove, Cheney and Powell had — he already realized he had misjudged and if he did that, he might find thousands of classified ones for all he knew. He was NOT going there. It was clear Hillary had committed no crime and he didn’t want to charge her because the first question his testimony would have elicited would have been “when you learned that Cheney, Powell, and Rice had committed the same crime, did you look to see how far it went or did you immediately close down the investigation?” And that could bring him up on charges of covering up for Republicans.
Comey’s problem came when Trump started losing big. He was getting pressure to do something and of course, he had known for weeks that Huma’s had done state department work on her home computer just as everyone else did. There was no reason to think there was anything beyond that, but after seeing Trump losing big and the Republicans down the chain going down with him, he wrote a letter that told Americans he had found new evidence of corruption. And then he gave it early to Chaffetz so he could quickly tweet that Comey had sent a letter saying he had new evidence of corruption. Comey knew that wasn’t true, but since his intention was that the American public believe something that wasn’t true, he remained quiet so that the impression that Chaffetz gave became widespread.
If Comey’s true intention was NOT to intentionally violate the Hatch Act, he would have done the obvious — made a very clear statement saying “the characterization that Trump, Chaffetz and other Republicans are giving of my letter are untrue and I have no evidence whatsoever of any wrongdoing.” If you want to make sure the mistake you made in mischaracterizing “evidence” and giving an early look to a political hack is corrected, you correct it. If the mischaracterization is what you intended because you wanted to influence the election, you stay silent. Comey stayed silent and that’s why he is guilty.
What has the FBI done on the Russian hackers to date?
Chuck,
There is supposedly an investigation but no report yet
They have emptied out the loony farm. You thought Trump was alone. So who does he pick as assistant attorney general . Comey
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/01/29/statues.htm
Interesting that my extensive comment on this Jane Mayer article submitted a few minutes ago has still not appeared yet. And my attempt to post it again showed that I “had already posted that comment”?! Btw, my lengthy comment explains the collusion & corruption of the #DNC & Dem party & #HIllary campaign with investigative links so doesn’t fit this narrative. Is it censorship?
A comment you submitted a few minutes ago has still not appeared yet? Very intriguing indeed!
it happens and usually corrects it self, patience
Lucinda,
I never saw your comment.
Let me remind you. This is my blog and I am under no obligation to post any comment I find offensive.
Diane –
My comment to this post was informative and not offensive. You are afraid to allow for reasoned debate, perhaps? Btw – I am NOT a #Trump troll and you know that as I typed in #JillnotHill in my post.
I supported @BernieSanders in the stolen Dem primary and had linked the Democracy Lost investigative report produced by non partisan Election Justice USA in July 2016 in my comment to this.
Does this sound familiar> Throw your bodies on the machinery.
NYGreatPublicSchools @NY_GPS 11 Sep 2013
@DianeRavitch quotes Mario Savio! Throw yr bodies on the machinery and make it stop! #eduelection #Edchat
Peace-out Teach.
Lucinda,
I have had several Trump trolls on the blog. They always begin by saying they supported Bernie or they support Jill, but the purpose of their comment is to suppress Hillary’s vote by repeating Trump talking points. Jill is polling at 1%. I don’t ever censor readers known to me, but I am very suspicious of the Trump trolls and refuse to allow them to use my blog to support this fascist.
We face a genuine crisis as the possibility of President Trump grows real. That is the end of ROE v Wade, gay rights, civil rights, efforts to curb climate change, and a new (or old) era of torture, racism, misogyny, etc.
Go ahead. Vote for Jill Stein. Good woman. Get ready for foul-mouthed President Trump and hope he never has a chance to grab you by the ……
Lucinda,
Bernie never said the primary was stolen.
Throw your body on the machinery doesn’t mean Elect Donald Trump. That will make the machinery of repression stronger.
I referred specifically to education, not the political system. Opt out. Refuse the tests. Stop the destruction and privatization of public schools and the teaching profession. If Trump is elected, public schools are finished.
Thank you for your response, I have been reading your blog now since 2008 and although I don’t comment much – or hardly ever – I consider myself a long-time subscriber. So you can easily check your subscribers lists and know that I am NOT a #Trump troll.
In fact, I do mostly agree with your analysis and commentary on the perils and pitfalls of the Neo-Lib/Neo-Con attacks on US education as you have evolved or moved left in the past decade.
Like all others who share information on blogs that they follow – I often attempt to share info. and links that I feel will be useful to the conversation at hand. I believe that you blocked my comment because it is completely relevant to the issue of support for Hillary’s candidacy and throws the established Dem party in a very bad light.
All I was asking is for you and your readers to check out the investigative report “Democracy Lost: A Report on the Fatally Flawed 2016 Dem Primaries” on the stolen 2016 Dem primary and to watch Greg Palast’s excellent investigative documentary “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy” on voter suppression tactics and illegal E-voting manipulations in US elections.
So – yes – elections can and have been rigged in US history. Lying or dissembling by the #MSM about rigged elections never occurring does not serve our democracy and shows we are all just gullible fools to the easily hacked E-voting corp owners and establishment manipulators today.
As an aside, you probably don’t remember – but as the Archivist for the UFT for many years – I put together a history conference at NYU to celebrate the founding of the early Teachers Union, the later Teachers Guild and the 1960 founding of the UFT. You spoke with AFT Pres Albert Shanker on a discussion panel at that same conference and I was very happy that you and he had agreed to participate. The video tapes of that conference are now in the Wagner Labor Archives at NYU.
Finally, saying that Bernie Sanders has never publicly questioned the Dem primary is a moot question. It is well-known that he would have lost his Dem seniority and rankings in the Senate if he had gone up against the Dem/Clinton political machine. You can @wikileaks for all those details.
Bernie never questioned the integrity of the vote while it was occurring. You insult him by saying that he kept quiet about vote rigging so he could win a committee chairmanship
Lucinda,
Either Trump or Clinton will be elected on November 8. No one else. I take it you will be okay with President Trump.
It’s happened to me also on many comments which were non controversial. There’s a glitch somewhere. Your comment may pop up later, unexpectedly.
Sorry, I will not post comments that repeat Trump’s lies about Clinton. Too many Trump trolls appearing lately who never posted before. Any regular reader who hate Hillary can say what they want but no trolls wanted
Where was this investigative reporter when the Director made a statement saying that ms Clinton did nothing that was worthy of an indictment?
That was as much of a political move as what the current situation is.
However, there are more wins for Clinton in this than there are losses. Unless there is something so drastic that comes out of these messages.
Rudy,
So far the emails have been a big fat zero.
Sorry.
No, they have not been a big “0.” It was a political choice not to prosecute Cinton, which the Director of the FBI, by the way, had no business making. Two generals are convicted on the same “carelessness.”
Like I said, more possible wins for Clinton than losses. But you did not answer my question…
How did you feel about Colin Powell’s private email server or the W. Bush administration’s “loss” of 22 million (MILLION) emails covering the course of the Iraq War? How many thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died because of false claims about @weapons of mass destruction”? War crimes trials?
Makes no difference. This is current. Tossing in red herrings does not change the issue. Apart from that, Clinton was, according to the WP instructed at least three times in proper procedures. Each time these instructions were ignored. On purpose. Not out of ignorance, but design. If it was ignorance, she really does not come across as someone who should be president!
Rudy, the emails pale in significance compared to Trump’s ignorance, inexperience, racism, and lack of character. Almost Every newspaper in the country has endorsed Clinton, including papers that always endorse Republicans. Like the Houston Chronicle, the Arizona Republic, and the Dallas Morning News.
“Given that we don’t know the significance of this newly discovered collection of emails, I don’t want to create a misleading impression.” What does Comey think he’s doing by revealing their existence?
For now it’s impossible to know Comey’s motives, but his stated explanation sounds very feeble.
I think that Comey gave into Trump’s bullying. Comey did not want to be subjected to even more wrath after the election, when Trump lashes out against all his purported and fantasized enemies.
This is exactly why we can’t have a bully-in-chief. Donald Trump clearly does not believe in a society of laws. To him, “law and order” means insults, threats, politically-motivated charges, and personal vendettas.
Donald Trump must be kept out of the white house. He is truly dangerous, and Comey’s outrageous conduct is example of what can happen.
Comey wants to control the presidency. He knows it is difficult to fire him and can hang these emails over Clinton’s head for years.
No Democrat complained when Comey announced that Clinton would not be indicted. Was that not clearing the way for Clinton? He made an announcement that was not his to make – but no Democrat was upset with him for doing that.. Why not?
Rudy,
Comey said in July that “no reasonable prosecutor” would find grounds to prosecute Clinton.
Now he violates Department of Justice rules to influence the election, without having seen the emails and acknowledging they may be of no significance.
Nope, Comey is finally coming clean. He was trying to stop the flow of FBI resignations and inside turmoil over his earlier decision to not pursue her. It’s really very simple – as SecofState Hillary Clinton violated essential US recordskeeping laws. See> Retired CIA Officer Charles Faddis is persuasive – Hillary broke federal records laws that prevent her from holding office and should send her to prison for her criminal behavior in ignoring these laws> http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/303499-hillarys-emails-matter-a-retired-cia-officer
Thanks for the link Lucinda!
Lucinda Manning,
Comey finally came clean!? That’s ridiculous. He didn’t give any specific idea about his intention in his recent letter. The case he brought up this time is Anthony Weiner’s sexting scandal, which has little or no connection to her emails(and some news sources state it DOES NOT) than Benghazi and other cases. Even though Comey made his decision out of his conscience, it’s just too little too late. He could have started as early as 2013, if he really thought private email investigation has merit, instead of flipflopping on data privacy for years. He missed the opportunity at right time because of his poor judgement.
Well, today the unified narrative of Comey as unprecedented bad guy seems to have run up against President Obama’s assessment of Comey as reported in Politico today.
“”The president’s assessment of his integrity and his character has not changed,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters during the daily briefing. “The president does not believe that Director Comey is intentionally trying to influence the outcome of an election. The president does not believe that he is secretly strategizing to benefit one candidate or one political party.”
Looks like everyone is not on the same page. “Is this going high or is this going low?” this reader asks to distract herself from the coming renewed assault on public education from both parties. Another feud breaking out in the open?
“That man” seems to be taking a different tack with his 2013 appointee who has a term that lasts ten years.
Meanwhile President George W. Bush’s ethics officer has filed suit against Comey for violating the Hatch Act, which bars federal employees from taking action to influence elections