Watching MSNBC this AM between 7 and 7:30, I saw that notoriously pro-Obama/Clinton network rip Hillary and Obama over the Comey “nothing to see here much” investigation. “Joe” was especially critical, joined by his girlfriend, Mika. They were harder on this Comey-Obama-Hillary fiasco than even FOX in segments on the two networks I saw. (Of course after 2 or 3 news cycles, it’s “old news” for MSNBC and “time to move on, noting no doubt that Trump is most to be feared . . . Watch for it.)
But this is, to me, is a most interesting tidbit from the MSNBC segment. My assessment of Comey, pre-press conference, is well-known, by regular readers.
Virtually all of his exploits which created his fabled “no-nonsense, standup guy, truth and justice, blah, blah” were in opposition to and defiance of Bush and Republican administrations.
But this one I overlooked, somehow: ” Comey contradicted Gonzales in 2007 testimony into the investigation over the mass dismissal of U.S. attorneys, stating that the Justice Department “in my view, is run by political appointees of the president.”
This may be Comey’s most blatant attempt to ingratiate himself with the press and Democrats (and Clinton?). We all recall that Gonzalez wound up being forced by media hammering to resign because he fired 7 US Attorneys for failure to prosecute, I believe, vote fraud cases. Those US Attorneys were Clinton appointees retained by GW Bush when he came into office. It was well-known at the time that Clinton, unlike Bush, fired all GHW Bush-appointed US Attorneys when he came to power.
No doubt just a small fact that “Big Jim” overlooked.
Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales laced into FBI Director James Comey on Wednesday after Comey announced that the agency would not recommend that a case be prosecuted against Hillary Clinton in the investigation into her use of a private email server as secretary of state.
(snip)
The most surprising aspect, Gonzales added, was Comey’s statement that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
“That is not his job,” Gonzales said of Comey, with whom he has a checkered history.
(snip)
Comey’s job, Gonzales continued, “is to do the investigation, present the evidence and maybe privately, as a former prosecutor, give his assessment as to whether or not to move forward or not.”
“To say that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case, means that if anyone dares disagree, that you’re unreasonable,” Gonzales said.
In the event that Attorney General Loretta Lynch were to decide she wants to move forward with the case, which Gonzales acknowledged as “unlikely,” such an action would be perceived as “unreasonable.”
We intend to post a co;lection of links regarding the Comey decision and its implications.
DLH
