Did James Comey abuse his power?

[IceSpear]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/james-comeys-abuse-of-power/2016/07/06/7799d39e-4392-11e6-8856-f26de2537a9d_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-d%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So despite the fact that Comey was a good Republican who did his best to give a hatchet job to the Democratic nominee before announcing his findings that he couldn't indict her, the Republicans lash out at him as an idiot/liar/shill anyway! Hilarious.

#FireComey
#ComeyForPrison

[Santander]

The circumstances were exceptional. Yes, Comey indicted Clinton in the court of public opinion, which is undesirable, but he also has a duty to defend the reputation of the FBI. In a case in which there is such intense public interest and with the Lynch/Clinton meeting occurring the week before, everything he said would have been dragged into the public sphere anyway and the FBI's reputation would have been damaged. Obviously, the strategy appears to have backfired to some degree.

So no, he didn't abuse his power, because he has to balance multiple responsibilities as Director of the FBI. In retrospect, was it the right decision? That's debatable. By the way, Comey is no longer a Republican.

[136or142]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/james-comeys-abuse-of-power/2016/07/06/7799d39e-4392-11e6-8856-f26de2537a9d_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-d%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So despite the fact that Comey was a good Republican who did his best to give a hatchet job to the Democratic nominee before announcing his findings that he couldn't indict her, the Republicans lash out at him as an idiot/liar/shill anyway! Hilarious.

#FireComey
#ComeyForPrison

I think that for every one person who listened to any of the details of what Comey said, the only thing 10 people will remember is that Hillary Clinton was not charged with any crime.

Comey's comments are a one day story (already passed) and neither Rapist Trump nor the Republican Congress has the credibility with most voters to make the story last any longer.

[Mercenary]

He probably did go beyond what he shoild have done even though he didnt actually say anything inaccurate. It is bad mainly for the precedent it can set. He should have used any such comments in a private setting with Clinton and not in a pubc address.

I dont like Clinton but like Benghazi i think the email thing has always been a ridiculous witchhunt. It is like the GOP just concedes to her on the issues and so tries to find nonsense to go after her woth anyway.

[Hermit For Peace]

Interesting perspective. I like that Hillary has rebutted Comey's charges of her being "extremely careless". I like that she stood up for herself. And she addressed something that has been bothering me all along. If Hillary was "extremely careless" in the handling of the emails, then all the other people who exchanged emails with her must have been "extremely careless" as well, and they should also be examined for using poor judgment in sending Hillary "alleged" sensitive documents to her non-government email address. I haven't heard any detractor talk about going after those people for their recklessness and disregard for the "rules".

Why is it just Hillary?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/287066-clinton-refutes-fbi-charge-of-recklessness

[JRP1994]

Interesting perspective. I like that Hillary has rebutted Comey's charges of her being "extremely careless". I like that she stood up for herself. And she addressed something that has been bothering me all along. If Hillary was "extremely careless" in the handling of the emails, then all the other people who exchanged emails with her must have been "extremely careless" as well, and they should also be examined for using poor judgment in sending Hillary "alleged" sensitive documents to her non-government email address. I haven't heard any detractor talk about going after those people for their recklessness and disregard for the "rules".

Why is it just Hillary?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/287066-clinton-refutes-fbi-charge-of-recklessness

As soon as any of those other people run for President and make the case to voters that they're qualified, responsible, and careful enough to be trusted with nuclear codes and top-secret info on a daily basis, those people will be gone after too.

[Seriously?]

Cry me a river. Hillary! is lucky she isn't facing an indictment.

I have zero tolerance for the level of stupid Hillary! was in using a private server to host work e-mails to begin with. She deserved a lot more than a rebuke for this nonsense.

[dspNY]

He editorialized too much and opened himself up for the GOP to overreach and give him a hard time on Capitol Hill. He should have just written a dry, formal letter like Lynch did and left it at that

[Ebsy]

To the people who say that Comey admitted she committed gross negligence, he obviously did not, or she would have been indicted.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Interesting perspective. I like that Hillary has rebutted Comey's charges of her being "extremely careless". I like that she stood up for herself. And she addressed something that has been bothering me all along. If Hillary was "extremely careless" in the handling of the emails, then all the other people who exchanged emails with her must have been "extremely careless" as well, and they should also be examined for using poor judgment in sending Hillary "alleged" sensitive documents to her non-government email address. I haven't heard any detractor talk about going after those people for their recklessness and disregard for the "rules".

Why is it just Hillary?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/287066-clinton-refutes-fbi-charge-of-recklessness

The other people aren't running for US president. Your candidate may be better then trump, but she isn't flawless.(No tax increases for middle class, believing Palestine can go f##k itself, backing a coup of a democratically elected leader in Honduras that plunged the country into violence and chaos, in general often acting like a neocon when foreign policy comes up.)

[psychprofessor]

I gurantee you Colin Powell and Condi Rice received classified email on their non-classified servers. In Powell's case, he was using an AOL address.

As we can see, career politicians at the State Dept were corresponding and forwarding Hillary emails with confidential or sensitive materials in the body of the email. These aren't people that Hillary just appointed - they are life long state dept officials. If they did that with Hillary, are you trying to tell me they didn't do that with previous Secretary of State appointees?

If an audit was done on Powell and Rice's non-classified emails, I would bet my life there would also be some sensitive materials there. And Powell even admits he no longer has his emails - they disappeared.

[Hermit For Peace]

Just another witch hunt, before the elections this time. But any time is a good time for a witch hunt when it's Hillary.

[SillyAmerican]

To the people who say that Comey admitted she committed gross negligence, he obviously did not, or she would have been indicted.

No, he said she committed gross negligence, then said he wouldn't recommend indictment; that's what's got people scratching their heads.

I agree with Rudy Giuliani's summary of what happened -- it's hard to square...

[Desroko]

To the people who say that Comey admitted she committed gross negligence, he obviously did not, or she would have been indicted.

These people are illiterate, or lying, or both. Given the diction and coherence of their posts here, none of the options would be surprising.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b.-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

Given the unique, politically sensitive circumstances, he needed to explain to the world that the FBI did see the plain facts (that HRC did something incredibly improper) that nevertheless did not merit criminal prosecution.

Comey did a good job. I'm sorry that your idol acted improperly, Ice, but them's the breaks.

[moderatevoter]

I gurantee you Colin Powell and Condi Rice received classified email on their non-classified servers. In Powell's case, he was using an AOL address.

As we can see, career politicians at the State Dept were corresponding and forwarding Hillary emails with confidential or sensitive materials in the body of the email. These aren't people that Hillary just appointed - they are life long state dept officials. If they did that with Hillary, are you trying to tell me they didn't do that with previous Secretary of State appointees?

If an audit was done on Powell and Rice's non-classified emails, I would bet my life there would also be some sensitive materials there. And Powell even admits he no longer has his emails - they disappeared.

Rice never used email.

I believe they found a total of two classified emails on Powell's account, and they were classified at the lowest level of classification.

But, as has been said over and over again, and as Comey reiterated in the hearing last week, what Powell and Clinton did really aren't that comparable.

[Kingpoleon]

Headlines: "Former Republican fails to indict Hillary."

Hillary Supporters: What a power hungry Republican!

[Beet]

I gurantee you Colin Powell and Condi Rice received classified email on their non-classified servers. In Powell's case, he was using an AOL address.

As we can see, career politicians at the State Dept were corresponding and forwarding Hillary emails with confidential or sensitive materials in the body of the email. These aren't people that Hillary just appointed - they are life long state dept officials. If they did that with Hillary, are you trying to tell me they didn't do that with previous Secretary of State appointees?

If an audit was done on Powell and Rice's non-classified emails, I would bet my life there would also be some sensitive materials there. And Powell even admits he no longer has his emails - they disappeared.

Rice never used email.

Her aides did, and classified information was found on those emails.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Powell never provided all of his e-mails, or even tried to, so investigators were only able to search fragments of his records. Had they looked at more, they very well might have found more.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Had he recommended a prosecution based on a poor case and Clinton was acquitted after being forced to drop out of the presidential race, it would have been malpractice at historic levels. He still did everything he could to damage her, including dragging out the investigation to ensure maximum public interest and then unprofessional personal editorial remarks outside the scope of his job as investigator.

[Panda Express]

How would people react if Hillary made Comey her VP?

[IceSpear]

I see a lot of people in this thread didn't read the article.

[Hermit For Peace]

Interesting perspective. I like that Hillary has rebutted Comey's charges of her being "extremely careless". I like that she stood up for herself. And she addressed something that has been bothering me all along. If Hillary was "extremely careless" in the handling of the emails, then all the other people who exchanged emails with her must have been "extremely careless" as well, and they should also be examined for using poor judgment in sending Hillary "alleged" sensitive documents to her non-government email address. I haven't heard any detractor talk about going after those people for their recklessness and disregard for the "rules".

Why is it just Hillary?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/287066-clinton-refutes-fbi-charge-of-recklessness

As soon as any of those other people run for President and make the case to voters that they're qualified, responsible, and careful enough to be trusted with nuclear codes and top-secret info on a daily basis, those people will be gone after too.

But that doesn't excuse their alleged recklessness and poor judgment in this matter. If these emails were so top secret and classified and important, then all the players in this drama need to be called out along with Hillary, as well as the entire department needs to be examined for allowing this type of situation to occur in the first place.

Sorry but singling out Hillary is simply a witch hunt.

[SillyAmerican]

Interesting perspective. I like that Hillary has rebutted Comey's charges of her being "extremely careless". I like that she stood up for herself. And she addressed something that has been bothering me all along. If Hillary was "extremely careless" in the handling of the emails, then all the other people who exchanged emails with her must have been "extremely careless" as well, and they should also be examined for using poor judgment in sending Hillary "alleged" sensitive documents to her non-government email address. I haven't heard any detractor talk about going after those people for their recklessness and disregard for the "rules".

Why is it just Hillary?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/287066-clinton-refutes-fbi-charge-of-recklessness

As soon as any of those other people run for President and make the case to voters that they're qualified, responsible, and careful enough to be trusted with nuclear codes and top-secret info on a daily basis, those people will be gone after too.

But that doesn't excuse their alleged recklessness and poor judgment in this matter. If these emails were so top secret and classified and important, then all the players in this drama need to be called out along with Hillary, as well as the entire department needs to be examined for allowing this type of situation to occur in the first place.

Sorry but singling out Hillary is simply a witch hunt.

Actually, I completely agree with you here: if the handling of sensitive information is a big deal, it's a big deal across the board. Me, I'd bring charges against anyone who viewed email messages containing classified information who did not have the proper clearance level to do so. Either this is important or it's not; needless to say, I believe it's important...

[Hermit For Peace]

Interesting perspective. I like that Hillary has rebutted Comey's charges of her being "extremely careless". I like that she stood up for herself. And she addressed something that has been bothering me all along. If Hillary was "extremely careless" in the handling of the emails, then all the other people who exchanged emails with her must have been "extremely careless" as well, and they should also be examined for using poor judgment in sending Hillary "alleged" sensitive documents to her non-government email address. I haven't heard any detractor talk about going after those people for their recklessness and disregard for the "rules".

Why is it just Hillary?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/287066-clinton-refutes-fbi-charge-of-recklessness

As soon as any of those other people run for President and make the case to voters that they're qualified, responsible, and careful enough to be trusted with nuclear codes and top-secret info on a daily basis, those people will be gone after too.

But that doesn't excuse their alleged recklessness and poor judgment in this matter. If these emails were so top secret and classified and important, then all the players in this drama need to be called out along with Hillary, as well as the entire department needs to be examined for allowing this type of situation to occur in the first place.

Sorry but singling out Hillary is simply a witch hunt.

Actually, I completely agree with you here: if the handling of sensitive information is a big deal, it's a big deal across the board. Me, I'd bring charges against anyone who viewed email messages containing classified information who did not have the proper clearance level to do so. Either this is important or it's not; needless to say, I believe it's important...

Well there you go. I agree with your agreement of my post.

[IceSpear]

I'm bumping this since Sanchez was nice enough to remind me about it.

Any Democrats/lefties who thought Comey was "nonpartisan/fair/reasonable/respectable/a great public servant" are dumber than a bag of rocks.

[Person Man]

I'm bumping this since Sanchez was nice enough to remind me about it.

Any Democrats/lefties who thought Comey was "nonpartisan/fair/reasonable/respectable/a great public servant" are dumber than a bag of rocks.

#LockHimUp