Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director James Comey appeared before a U.S. Senate panel on May 3rd to defend his agency's conduct under his leadership during the 2016 elections:
Comey acknowledged that the realization the bureau could have affected the election's outcome left him feeling "mildly nauseous." But, he added, "honestly, it wouldn't change the decision." Comey has been transformed into an unusual kind of political celebrity over the past year, his decisions coming in for sharp criticism from almost every point of the political spectrum.
News reports have cited anonymous sources within the intelligence community casting him as too fond of the spotlight, despite his repeated insistence to the contrary. Whether he sought it or not, Wednesday's Senate Judiciary Committee oversight hearing was yet another center-stage moment for the FBI director. Cable networks carried virtually uninterrupted coverage of his testimony from the moment he took his seat before a scrum of news photographers.
Comey explained his reasoning behind the decision to inform Congress about Clinton emails discovered during an investigation into Anthony Weiner, and said that he had made the right choice. One event that factored into the decision and his earlier July 2016 announcement about the Hillary Clinton investigation was Bill Clinton's meeting with former Attorney General Loretta Lynch. At Wednesday's hearing, Comey faced criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike on topics including the FBI's delay in disclosing an investigation into the Trump campaign and the decision to not charge Huma Abedin for mishandling classified information. On the day before the hearing, Hillary Clinton blamed the FBI Director for her loss, while President Trump tweeted that "FBI Director Comey was the best thing that ever happened to Hillary Clinton in that he gave her a free pass for many bad deeds!"
Comey appeared to confirm that the FBI is investigating whether its agents leaked information to Rudy Giuliani, a Trump ally. He also took the time to denigrate WikiLeaks by calling it "intelligence porn", and alleging that WikiLeaks acted as a "conduit for the Russian intelligence services or some other adversary of the United States just to push out information to damage the United States". Here's what Julian Assange had to say in response. Comey did not confirm whether or not the government is planning to charge Julian Assange with crimes related to his organization's recent activities. CNN reported in April that the U.S. is preparing to charge Assange with... something, and CIA Director Mike Pompeo recently called WikiLeaks a "non-state hostile intelligence service".
Also at The Washington Post, CNN, and The New York Times (editorial).
Related Stories
The current Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Mike Pompeo, has described WikiLeaks as a "non-state hostile intelligence service":
Russian military intelligence used Wikileaks to distribute hacked material during the US election, he added. Earlier this month Wikileaks published details of what it said were CIA hacking tools. The FBI and CIA have launched a criminal investigation into the leak.
"WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence service," Mr Pompeo said, speaking at a Washington think tank. "It overwhelmingly focuses on the US, while seeking support from anti-democratic countries and organisations," he added.
Wikileaks responded by posting a screenshot of a tweet sent by Mr Pompeo last July, in which the then member of the House of Representatives referred to material contained in the Wikileaks release of Democratic party emails. The tweet has since been deleted.
Does that make the CIA a "state hostile intelligence service"?
Here's an extra story related to FBI Director Comey's questioning on Wednesday. It's a piece of "classified information":
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Senate committee that oversees the FBI, said publicly this week that the government paid $900,000 to break into the locked iPhone of a gunman in the San Bernardino, California, shootings, even though the FBI considers the figure to be classified information.
The FBI also has protected the identity of the vendor it paid to do the work. Both pieces of information are the subject of a federal lawsuit by The Associated Press and other news organizations that have sued to force the FBI to reveal them.
California's Feinstein cited the amount while questioning FBI Director James Comey at a Senate Judiciary Committee oversight hearing Wednesday.
Related: FBI vs. Apple Encryption Fight Continues
Seems Like Everyone has an Opinion About Apple vs. the FBI
Washington Post: The FBI Paid "Gray Hat(s)", Not Cellebrite, for iPhone Unlock
FBI Can't Say How It Hacked IPhone 5C
Researcher Bypasses iPhone 5c Security With NAND Mirroring
FBI Director James Comey Sacked
The Washington Post reports that:
FBI Director James B. Comey has been dismissed by the president [...] a startling move that officials said stemmed from a conclusion by Justice Department officials that he had mishandled the probe of Hillary Clinton's emails.
Previously:
Clinton Told FBI She Relied on Others' Judgment on Classified Material
FBI Recommends No Prosecution for Clinton
F.B.I. Director James Comey Is Fired by Trump
President Trump has fired FBI Director James Comey:
President Trump has fired the director of the F.B.I., James B. Comey, over his handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails, the White House said Tuesday.
[...] Under the F.B.I.'s normal rules of succession, Mr. Comey's deputy, Andrew G. McCabe, a career F.B.I. officer, becomes acting director. The White House said the search for a new director will begin immediately.
I never liked Comey (see this cluster of stories), but I doubt there will ever be an FBI Director I like.
Related:
We're Stuck With Comey
Earlier in the day...
(Score: 2, Redundant) by Gaaark on Friday May 05 2017, @11:33AM (1 child)
Hate against wiki-leaks and Snowden, etc, but Trump, Hillary, Wasserman-shitz, etc get a pass.
Sheeesh.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Friday May 05 2017, @04:03PM
Yes, the FBI should be investigating the DNC. The content of the emails is far more relevant and revealing than the act of releasing them.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @12:14PM (8 children)
Why does he consider effecting the election by revealing criminal wrongdoing of a candidate bad?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Friday May 05 2017, @01:11PM (5 children)
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Friday May 05 2017, @02:46PM (4 children)
Is there any really independent institution in America? or any system at all for that matter?
If politicians really want they usually can and will control institutions but they are there for a reason and soon reality and Murphy gives free lessons.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday May 05 2017, @02:54PM (3 children)
Might be part of Comey's extended ego trip. He thinks that he is leading an agency that is the last line of defense against terrorism, drugs, mass/police shooters, the dark web, the failure of democratic institutions, etc.
"Look at me! I tell the hard truths to Democrats and Republicans alike! I make the hard decisions! The FBI is not a corrupt mass surveillance agency!"
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday May 05 2017, @04:07PM (2 children)
More likely is that he is being blackmailed. That usually is the biggest motivator in this business. All those closets are up to the roof in skeletons.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday May 05 2017, @07:32PM (1 child)
Yep. You could tell when he was giving his speeches around that time he was scared shitless, as if there were literally a sniper's barrel pointed at his head from atop the balcony, like Principal Skinner in the Pretzel-Wagon episode of the Simpsons.
It could even be something simple, such as his involvement in HSBC, an organization which also laundered drug cartel money and was involved in the finances of some involved in 9/11, if the Wikileaks-hosted Stratfor e-mails (specifically the one that says the Jews did it) are to be believed. For somebody in his position even knowingly turning a blind eye to such activity means involvement.
Of course, Obama's justice department was run like prohibition-era Chicago, so it was wise of Comey to tread lightly, lest he be on the wrong end of a Chicago Typewriter*.
* The Thompson Submachine gun
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @07:56PM
Well, you gotta remember, once the democrats lost their slave trade, they had look elsewhere for fundage. So they turn to organized crime. They really do run the show like gangsters, using worker gangs (now called 'unions') and flexibly enforced regulations to shake down small business (oil, mining, transport, entertainment), engage in gun/drug running, you name it. They are mean motherfuckers, and you should read their followers in the net, extremely tyrannical. Everybody is wagging the dog here. The democrats own the republicans. That contract was signed in '68. They are *bigger than U.S. Steel!*
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @09:53PM
Wikileaks simply leaked material that should have been available to the general public anyway, yet that doesn't stop partisan retards from endlessly complaining it. If voters looked at that information and decided not to vote for Clinton, that is not the fault of Wikileaks or anyone else, as it was their own personal decision. Even if Russia was involved, the information should've been public anyway. Always blame the whistleblowers and not yourself for being/appearing evil (like with the bias against Sanders).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 06 2017, @12:17AM
Why does he consider effecting the election by revealing criminal wrongdoing of a candidate bad?
There are numerous reasons, but one which may make it clear is that the FBI was also investigating the Trump campaign for illegal activity (e.g. taking campaign funding from foreign sources, yes that is illegal). Was that ever revealed in 2016, or indeed before Trump was sworn in? No.
Imagine you Abe in a class who told the teacher everything bad that Bill does, but never tattled on Charlie no matter what he does? Is Abe just helping the teacher out, or is Abe picking on Bill? I would suggest it's the former.
Likewise, the FBI was biasing the election in favor of Trump, just like Wikileaks, and the allegedly-Russian hackers.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Snotnose on Friday May 05 2017, @02:35PM (2 children)
So it's not bad enough HRC had classified info on her personal email server, but Huma was forwarding classified email to Weiner? And none of these people are sitting in jail right now?
Yep, it's an us and them situation in the country nowdays.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Friday May 05 2017, @02:40PM
Laws are for little people.
That's why George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, the Clintons, the NSA, the CIA, and most of Wall Street aren't in jail.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @05:51PM
Trump! Trump! Trump!
Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up!
(Score: 4, Informative) by GlennC on Friday May 05 2017, @02:38PM (4 children)
Director Comey appears to have shed a light on the fact that both "Democrats" and "Republicans" are lying corrupt corporate whores who wipe their backsides with the Constitution.
This is a problem for the people in that the majority of voters view the politicians and parties they back in much the same fashion as NASCAR drivers and sports teams. They think that "their guy" can do no wrong, and the "other guys" are to be defeated at any cost.
The result is what we have now. I suspect that things will get significantly worse before it gets better, if it ever does get better.
Sorry folks...the world is bigger and more varied than you want it to be. Deal with it.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Friday May 05 2017, @02:51PM (3 children)
I'm coming to believe that's why revolutions actually happen. It's not because everyone can't see things are broken and must change, because they do. It's because the keepers of the status quo cannot change. They might recognize change is needed. They might know revolution is coming if changes are not made. But their narcissism and sociopathy do not allow them to accept that they are the problem, that they are what must go. So they accelerate their theft and other crimes, hoping to skip town before everything falls apart on them. It's only when they're put up against the wall to be shot that they pipe with pleas and admissions that "mistakes were made."
All that they deserve and will get. But the piece to be solved is the back half of the revolution. So often the ones who lead them are not very nice people, and re-create the same power structure, only with them at the top. Nothing gets better for humanity.
We need a successor to democracy that does a much, much better job at correcting the fatal flaw of government: corruption and greed.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Friday May 05 2017, @04:08PM (2 children)
For what it's worth, Plato, not exactly a fan of democracy, described government going through a cycle that looked like:
- Anarchy, in which nobody is in charge. That works until somebody becomes powerful enough to take over, and you get
- Monarchy, in which one person is in charge. That works until the masses get upset enough to revolt, and you get
- Democracy, in which the majority of the people are in charge. That works until a cabal is formed that distracts the majority while running things for their own benefit, and you get
- Oligarchy, in which a small group of people are in charge. That works until they screw up badly enough that the system collapses, and you're right back to Anarchy.
The USA has been effectively an oligarchy for a couple of decades at least, with around 3000 people [opensecrets.org] wielding enough political cash (over $100,000) to control the entire political system. The political system does nothing remotely similar policy-wise to what the general population wants, but mirrors the wishes of those 3000 people nearly perfectly.
My suggestion: Start reading up on anarchist theory, because you're going to need it.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday May 05 2017, @07:44PM
PffffhahahaHAHAHAHAWWWWW.
You think those noisy American iPhone-buying consumerist "anarchists" are going to do anything but collapse to the fetal position and cower once real anarchy comes to America? The ones who will survive will be the ones who already live out on compounds and homesteads and pay for their food and shelter with guard-duty or helping till the fields -- you know, all those "racists" nobody likes -- and they don't inherently dislike government but believe that this one has failed them, and they'd be right to believe that.
Bullshit leftist theories are splintering and killing the anarchist movements before they grow -- Everything and everybody is racist, 50 different genders and pronouns nonsense, intimidate and attack commoners rather than rally for change at the government level, etc; and then after a hard day's protest of rabblerousing, yelling, and breaking shit; they get to retreat to the comfort of their parents' basements or trust funds.
(Score: 4, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Friday May 05 2017, @10:58PM
Actually Plato's progression [mit.edu] was more like:
(1) Aristocracy (in Plato's ideal world, ruled by philosophers), degrades through miscalculation of good "breeding" for the next generation (I mean literally "bad math," because Plato believes in a sort of numerological method for determining when good and bad births happen). It degrades to...
(2) Timocracy, a society governed by honor, rather than reason. The infatuation with honor leads to unnecessary war and "secret" longings for wealth and other personal interests, over the communal good. The accumulation of wealth and goods from this ambition, spoils of war, personal interests, etc. leads to...
(3) Oligarchy, government by a rich ruling class. Honor is no longer a driving force, but merely accumulation of wealth and power. The leaders create policies to make themselves richer and keep the poor poor. They restrict social mobility and desire to keep the "underclass" permanent, no longer allowing the poor to join the ranks of the ruling class. The class warfare leads to further social divisions, and the poor begin acting badly, turning to crime, theft, etc. to try to get ahead. Eventually the wealth-seeking of the ruling class combined with their bad parenting and bad decisions of spoiled children causes wealth and power to be lost for foolish reasons, eventually degrading to...
(4) Democracy, government by everyone. In more extreme versions of class warfare in an oligarchy, this may come about from violent revolution and expulsion of the oligarchs. It might also, in Plato's world, be conceived as government by no one, since his "democracy" seems to rapidly degrade into something like anarchy. Everyone has "freedom" and there are no rules, so everyone does as he likes. Everyone follows his own desires, destroying a sense of communal policy. It all sounds and looks good, but eventually democracies undermine their own systems of laws, which can be changed on the whims of the populace. The internal warfare among classes and individuals escalates, eventually devolving to...
(5) Tyranny. Having lost their way and no longer having effective leadership, goals, or communal purpose, the ignorance of the masses causes them to follow any "protector" who might emerge. Within the democracy, various groups (especially businessmen) gain power and lose it, but they contribute more and more corruption, leading to dissolution of laws, and eventually leading to calls for trials and impeachments of the corrupt leaders. The "protector" who claims to solve these problems for the masses is actually a very bad man (since all men in the democratic society have lost the true way of philosophy and are solely driven by internal desires), but the ignorant masses only listen to his false promises and small victories he gives to the poor. The people cheer on this protector and give away their power to him, until he becomes absolute ruler. Having no discipline or principles (because of his origin in a democratic state), he becomes a tyrant. An an Orwellian twist, excessive freedom has led to slavery.
Plato's view of democracy was pretty negative, but if you had lived through his lifetime, you'd know why. But he was right that democracies both before his time and subsequently have frequently devolved into tyrannies, particularly when some crisis emerges and the populace elects a leader who promises some good things, but ultimately is intent on consolidating his own power. Populism descending to tyranny is arguably a major failure of the Roman Republic, the rise of Hitler, etc. And Plato isn't unique in his criticism -- basically almost all the extant Greek writings we have are more critical of Athenian democracy than approving. Athens did some pretty bad stuff under democratic rule, too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @03:08PM
If WikiLeaks are so bad perhaps doing the 1984 thing and car jacking with intent to kill should maybe be avoided?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @06:47PM
He announced the find of H's emails on the Weiner-laptop. Then after about a week he announced nothing of significance was found after a cursory review. Why didn't he do the week of cursory review FIRST, before announcing it?
(Score: 3, Funny) by bzipitidoo on Friday May 05 2017, @08:03PM
Comey's actions very probably changed the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election. J. Edgar Hoover did a lot of bad stuff, but I haven't heard he ever blatantly influenced a national election the way Comey did. To make a very, very public splash the week before an election, and then it turns out he exaggerated, hugely, made a lot of smoke where there wasn't a fire, you have to wonder what the F the guy was thinking. Was he putting his job security ahead of the national interest, figured Trump wouldn't dare dismiss him if he wasn't in fact grateful to him?
Obama should have dismissed Comey, just for starters.