Just a few short months ago, the liberal mainstream media could not heap enough praise on to FBI Director James Comey. He was a man of integrity and honor. No one seemed to care it wasn’t his job to publicly exonerate Hillary Clinton or for that matter, give the DOJ a recommendation regarding prosecution.
The media and democrats worshiped Comey with choruses of “Hosannah” after he closed the email case on Hillary. Today, those praises have turned to shouts of, “Crucify him, crucify him.”
Several pieces from the Washington Post demonstrate how blatantly partisan the media truly is. First, they published several articles attacking the Republicans for their reaction to Comey’s announcement.
Trending: Science is Settled
“IF REPUBLICANS believe the FBI director is corrupt and political, they should have the gumption to say so. Instead, many have insulted James B. Comey with slimy implications and underhanded threats since Tuesday, when he announced that he would not recommend charges against Hillary Clinton relating to her use of a private email server while secretary of state.”
“Republicans didn’t just disagree with Comey’s decision, or demand new investigations, which is their right. They alleged that the justice system is rigged and corrupt. This doesn’t hurt Comey or even Clinton as much as it undermines a building block of civilized society: the rule of law.”
Within weeks, with the noose removed from around Clinton’s neck, the Washington Post could be a little more truthful and objective.
Clinton is cherry-picking statements by Comey to preserve her narrative about the unusual setup of a private email server. This allows her to skate past the more disturbing findings of the FBI investigation
Apparently Comey did have some damning evidence against Hillary. Since the FBI closed the file, the media could act like they were being impartial regarding Hillary’s statements.
That is until last Friday. Now that Hillary’s head is back on the chopping block, it is not the Republicans defying democracy, but the sainted Comey himself.
Decades ago, the (justice) department decided that in the 60-day period before an election, the balance should be struck against even returning indictments involving individuals running for office, as well as against the disclosure of any investigative steps. The reasoning was that, however important it might be for Justice to do its job, and however important it might be for the public to know what Justice knows, because such allegations could not be adjudicated, such actions or disclosures risked undermining the political process. A memorandum reflecting this choice has been issued every four years by multiple attorneys general for a very long time, including in 2016.
This is the horrible sin that Comey committed. He broke their code. Regardless of the evidence and the seriousness of the offense, if a candidate makes it within the 60-day window before the election, they get a free pass – period.
It is understandable there needs to be some caution concerning legal action right before an election. However, this involves the next potential President of the United States. More importantly, this is not a fresh case. Comey’s actions relate to new information regarding a previous investigation. To not share such crucial evidence just because of timing would be down right immoral. When is a better time? Hours before her inauguration as President?
Within hours of the story breaking, a Democrat PAC filed a complaint against Comey claiming he was trying to sway the election. As a lifelong Republican, they allege Comey is going after Hillary for political reasons. Their argument implies that the justice system is rigged and corrupt. The PAC, by the way, is called the Democratic Coalition Against Trump. No ulterior political motive there.
The Clinton Campaign began circulating a letter asking federal prosecutors to criticize Comey. To keep focus off of Hillary, others are now vilifying Comey for going against Loretta Lynch.
The mainstream media’s world is in a tither because Comey stepped out of line. He put justice above the Democrat party. It’s like the media doesn’t care about the rule of law.
[score]Harry Reid[/score] (D-NV) excoriated Comey in a letter, also accusing him of trying to affect the election. His letter reeked of slimy implications and underhanded threats. He even insinuated Comey may have broken the law. Much like in 2012 when Reid implied Mitt Romney broke the law by supposedly not paying taxes. When asked years later if he regretted lying about Romney, Reid said, “No, I don’t regret that at all,” adding, “Romney didn’t win, did he?” If anyone knows about affecting elections, it would be Harry Reid.
To be fair, Comey’s recent letter is unprecedented and unusual. However, so was his original press conference advising the DOJ not to move forward with Hillary’s case. For the FBI to recommend not filing charges, especially after just reviewing a list of offenses, was also unprecedented and unusual. But then again, isn’t everything about this election unprecedented and unusual?
But that’s just my 2 cents.