Does the Comey Testimony Prove Illegal Meddling in 2016 Election?

It sure seems like the recent testimony from former FBI Director James Comey proves that something untoward was happening during the 2016 election campaign.

The only problem, for the Democrats and their friends in the media, is that it seems that the election meddling was coming from the Obama administration. In a recent op-ed at Investor’s Business Daily the editorial staff explains that the comments made by Comey about Obama era Attorney General Loretta Lynch exerting pressure on him over the Hillary Clinton investigation, seems to suggest that their was some foul play afoot.

When Lynch directed Comey to not call the investigation into Clinton an “investigation,” but to instead refer to it as a “matter,” it exposed a very troubling connection between the administration and the Clinton campaign. The word “matter” was the same word that the campaign had been using in the media in their efforts to downplay the bad behavior by their candidate. Meanwhile, the FBI was indeed conducting an investigation into the issue, but here was the Attorney General directing her lead investigator to downplay the investigation when speaking with the media. In fact, she was asking him to coordinate his language with the campaign and the only possible explanation would be because Lynch was attempting to help shield the Clinton campaign from the obviously bad P.R. blowback of an investigation.

Trending: Trump Takes Away Congress’ Annual Ribeye ‘Picnic’, Sends Steaks To…

From IBD:

At one point, (Lynch) directed me not to call it an ‘investigation’ but instead to call it a ‘matter,’ which confused me and concerned me,” Comey recalled. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department if we are to close this case credibly.”

Why Lynch would direct Comey to obfuscate about the nature of the investigation is pretty clear: Lynch hoped to get Hillary Clinton elected so that she could stay on as the nation’s top law officer. If Comey were talking up an “investigation” into a major party’s candidate, it wouldn’t look very good to the voters, would it?

Remember, Lynch had earlier in June consented to an impromptu face-to-face meeting with former President Bill Clinton in a jet on the Phoenix airport tarmac, right as the Justice Department was gearing up to look into Hillary’s questionable email habits, which may have exposed both U.S. secrets and undercover agents to Chinese and Russian hackers…

To be blunt, this all stinks badly. At the very minimum, Comey’s and Lynch’s actions are highly questionable and go much further toward “collusion” and an “obstruction of justice” than anything President Trump has done…

If Lynch did in fact turn the Justice Department into an “arm” of the Clinton campaign, it raises the inevitable larger and far more troubling question: Did President Obama know this? Did he approve of it? Was it his idea? Did anyone at the White House tell Lynch to soft-pedal the investigations? Was this all conducted in concert with the Clinton campaign? A yes answer to any of those would be devastating, for Obama, for Lynch and for Clinton.

If you’re president, it’s one thing to stump for your party’s candidate, quite another to direct the branches of government to favor one candidate over another, and then to lie about it. For the record, that’s a crime.


Read the entire piece at IBD.


Onan Coca

Onan is the Editor-in-Chief at Romulus Marketing. He's also the managing editor at, and the managing partner at Onan is a graduate of Liberty University (2003) and earned his M.Ed. at Western Governors University in 2012. Onan lives in Atlanta with his wife and their three wonderful children. You can find his writing all over the web.

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.