“Anybody who disagrees with me with me has to come back to Oct. 28 with me and stare at this and tell me what you would do,” Comey added. Would you speak or would you conceal?” he asked separately. “I could be wrong, but we honestly made the decision in those two choices and even in hindsight, and this has been one of the most painful decisions, I would make the same decision. I would not conceal that to Congress.”
>**Special pleading** is a form of fallacious argument that involves an attempt to cite something as an exception to a generally accepted rule, principle, etc. without justifying the exception.[1][2]
The lack of criticism may be a simple oversight (e.g., **a reference to common sense**) or an **application of a double standard.**
Wikipedia.Schiff is a man with a sense of purpose—and a skilled prosecutor.
He’s also right about Comey.
False dichotomy. Not speaking due to lack of data does not constitute “conceal”. I am certain it made Comey feel virtuous though, to frame it in those terms.
Huh.
There’s an awful lot the FBI tells congress that I don’t get told about. This wasn’t one of them.
How about “confirm” or “deny”? So now any unsubstantiated minor data point in a closed investigation becomes a disclosed fact before they’ve even confirmed the validity of the information?
Fuck, if this is the FBI, why not fire them all and use FOX news for our criminal justice investigations?
Door Number SPEAK
Door Number CONCEAL
I’m not an analyst of behavioral clues, but the fact that Comey got agitated (especially for an FBI official) when explaining his decision is very telling.
I didn’t get to see, can you give more details?
I would not conceal that to Congress.
And the end result was Chaffetz publicly tweeting about an ongoing FBI investigation which Comey was supposed to NOT COMMENT ON in the first place. Russia, in coordination with the Trump campaign and with willing assistance from the GOP and the FBI Director stole an election, not from Clinton, but from the American people.
Once Trump’s involvement with Russia has been thoroughly investigated and hopefully a Democratic House majority is in place, there needs to be an investigation and cleaning house of the FBI, starting with Comey. His record deserves a large black mark next to it for all of history.
“Really Bad” and “Catastrophic” eh?
As a Republican I’m sure thats exactly how he felt about the choice for President .
This question is aimed at a computer guru.
If I am at your house and borrow your computer to open my emails, what happens to the emails that I access. Are they inadvertantly downloaded to your computer? And what happens if I print those emails, besides giving me a hard copy? Also, what happens if I delete those emails? Are they still on your hard drive and can be found by someone, say the FBI, who is searching your computer? The press won’t look into this, and apparently the FBI did not either.
Agreed, but we know who gets to nominate who fills Comey’s shoes…
I too am hopeful of a Democratic Majority, but Even Comey is prety far down the list of folks to take down
The answer is “it depends”. But there are certainly situations where my using your computer will leave copies of pretty much everything I touched while using it.
The obvious tell for Comey is that – unless he was completely unaware of the abilities of his forensics people – the calculus he claims to have been applying wouldn’t have changed in the time it took to determine that everything on the laptop was, in fact, copies of stuff the FBI had seen before. So he could have waited a few days and been in the same situation, only with all of his uncertainties resolved. He’s lying about having to wait until after the election if there was something bad.
“Anybody who disagrees with me with me has to come back to Oct. 28 with me and stare at this and tell me what you would do,” Comey added. Would you speak or would you conceal?”
The FBI, like most law enforcement agencies, routinely conceals information about ongoing investigations.
Given the vast quantity of emails that the FBI had already been through, and the FBI conclusion that Clinton had not been abusing her right to withhold personal emails, there was a pretty good chance that nothing on Weiner’s computer would have legal implications for Clinton.
To take the extraordinary step to publicly reveal, just a few days before the election, that Weiner’s computer had some of Huma’s email files was a terribly reckless act. It went against DOJ policy, it went against common sense (reopen a closed investigation without first evaluating whether or not you have new evidence?), and it went against what should be a law enforcement agency’s instincts to keep cards close to the chest during the investigative phase of a matter.
For God’s sake, just investigate the ties to Russia and stop quibbling about anything related to Hillary Clinton.
I voted for her and I’m officially sick of her.
Take Orange Hitler down. Period.
“Real choice was to abide by DOJ policy or violate.”
Simple and clear. Go Schiff!
He raised his voice, made arm gestures, etc. - in other words, if he was a female, his behavior might have been called slightly hysterical.
I’m on a twitter feed with some Comey fans/apologists. Trying not to get into it with them because their support is key for #trumprussia, but they do seem oblivious to the standard DOJ policy of shutting up in such matters. The policy exists for a reason: to avoid bias and unintended consequences from influencing elections, which are the cornerstone of our Democracy. Comey really believes his actions were proper, justified if not mandated (though his animated style tells me that he’s searching for a real justification). But it’s also clear to me that many other people in his position would’ve gone the other way, complied with the DOJ policy and their actions wouldn’t have been questioned. The fact that he didn’t have a proper warrant, that he was going off of speculation about what was contained in the metadata rather than actually investigating it should’ve injected some caution, but it didn’t.
In other words, Comey’s choice was just that, a choice. The rule exists so that one person’s choice doesn’t influence an entire election, whether that choice was right or wrong.
All well said.