Former FBI Director James Comey must be held accountable for his actions.

Since the beginning of the Justice Department's investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private internet server, we've been treated to a parade of politicians, journalists, and analysts, all trying to spin the mess into a political weapon.  Occasionally we would get a glimpse of a well-groomed bureaucrat here and there, stuck in the unenviable position of trying to answer questions without sharing classified information.  Most of us were introduced to former FBI Director James Comey sometime in the summer of 2016, which speaks highly of his ability to stay out of the spotlight, considering the number of high-profile investigations in which he was involved.  In my experience, anyone with that level of authority who has been able to avoid becoming a familiar face, is doing something right.

How things have changed for Mr. Comey.

During the Hillary Clinton investigation, Comey was put under a tremendous amount of pressure by Congressional Democrats, who were acutely aware of the damage the controversy was causing her presidential campaign.  Although the left will claim otherwise, fro the most part, the GOP let the investigation evolve and expand on its own, as new revelations provided room to grow.  Many Democrats believe that Comey's decision to publicly announce new developments in the investigation during the presidential campaign eventually cost Clinton the election.  Clinton has echoed that allegation, along with her list of at least thirty-six other "reasons" that Donald Trump unfairly won the election.  At the time, Comey was vilified by Democrats on Capitol Hill, amid the usual calls for investigations you usually get when two or more Democrats are in the same room.  It was obvious to me that Comey took the accusations to heart, and this once stoic, professional bureaucrat allowed himself to become personally involved.

When Donald Trump arrived in DC, he made the decision to keep James Comey on as Director of the FBI.  The Justice Department and the Bureau had become highly politicized during the Obama Administration, and Trump thought it was important to keep some level of continuity, especially as ongoing investigations were concerned.  For anyone who might need a reminder, when I recall the last eight years of the Department of Justice, I think of the "Fast and Furious" debacle, the decision not to investigate the IRS audit targeting controversy, the choice by Congress to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt, and the "coincidental" meeting on the Phoenix Airport tarmac between Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton, whose wife at the time was the subject of an ongoing Justice Department investigation.  During the eight years of the Obama Administration, which include three years with James Comey as the Director of the FBI, the Bureau had a crisis of personnel, as highly-respected, experienced Special Agents and Supervisory Special Agents were choosing early retirement or just flat-out quitting.  Off the record, the decision to leave usually involved the politicization of the Justice Department.  Just how would this "politicization" reveal itself?  Possibly with the request for FISA authority to conduct surveillance and listen-in on phone conversations being conducted by Russian authorities.  The never-ending leaks are another example of what can happen when a sensitive government agency has been seeded with political appointees and activists.  When President Trump and his advisers realized the level of politicization in the FBI, and the probability that one investigation after another sans justification would be focused on his Administration, he used his authority to make a change in Bureau management.  No doubt President Trump was also considering the possibility that the investigation of his campaign staff and Russian contacts would continue as long as the distraction negatively impacted the Trump Agenda.  Keep in mind that no evidence has yet been discovered which implicates anyone in the Trump campaign with Russian espionage activities, but for some reason the investigation goes on and on and on.

The one surprise Comey saved just for me was his admission to leaking classified information.  Comey claims that once he realized he was getting the ax, he decided to pass notes from his private conversations with President Trump to a college professor, with instructions that she share the notes with the press.  His justification?  Comey asserts that he was concerned Trump might squash the Russia investigation, therefore the public release of the notes might force the naming of a Special Counsel.  What a load of horseshit.  Everyone with even a modicum of political common sense knows that Comey released his notes in order to "get back" at President Trump.  Who would have envisioned that the top Law Enforcement Officer in the country, the person who is tasked with locating and prosecuting persons who leak classified information, would openly admit to Congress that he had knowingly shared classified information with an acquaintance for the express purpose of delivering that information to a journalist?

During his opening remarks to the Congressional Committee, Comey claimed he was angry with President Trump, because of Trump's alleged criticism of the FBI's rank-and-file officers.  Sorry, but I have to call horseshit once again.  A review of the statement Trump released to announce Comey's termination, makes it clear that all and any criticism was reserved for Comey.  President Trump rightly expressed concern regarding the effectiveness of the FBI with Comey in charge, and in no way maligned the hard work being done by Bureau personnel.  At the end of the day, Comey's appearance before members of Congress only reiterated what the Trump Administration has been saying from the beginning.  No persons involved with the Trump Campaign colluded with Russian officials during the 2016 presidential campaign.  The mainstream media, which continues to prove that "anything goes" in the war against the Trump Administration, was unable to spin Comey's appearance into the Russian espionage narrative, so they've moved on to Plan B, which is to introduce the world to "Trump the Obstructionist".  The talking points must have been prepared quickly, because I noticed the term "obstructionist" on the websites of the NY Times and the Washington Post, and heard it on MSNBC and CNN.  The media is a formidable opponent, folks, as they answer to no one, and can print whatever allegation comes to mind, as long as it comes from an "unnamed source".  To demonstrate that respect for the rule of law is paramount in today's FBI, the Department of Justice needs to make an example of James Comey, and prosecute the former Director for providing the media with classified information.  Since he's admitted his guilt, this case should be open-and-close, which would go a long way to discouraging potential leakers in the future.      

Okay, Eric, just what is your problem with Hillary Clinton?

I've had more than a few friends and readers comment lately that my attacks on Hillary Clinton have become more frequent, and appear to be almost personal.  Its true I have been commenting on Hillary  regularly; she's running for president and her supporters should expect more attention.  But I would be disengenuous if I tried to comvince folks that my issues with Hillary Clinton are only related to the 2016 Presidential Election.  You see, I've spent my fair share of time as a Civil Servant.  In 1995 I became first an Inspector and then a Special Agent with the Immigration and Naturalization Service.  In 1999, I was hired by the Central Intelligence Agency.  I have lived in DC, and discovered more about the Federal Government than I thought possible.  As an Immigration Officer, I experienced the immigration issue first-hand; as a CIA officer, I worked with many different branches of the government, including the Department of State, the Justice Department, and the Department of Commerce.  Early on, it became clear to me that many of the problems of government can be dropped at the feet of both major political parties.  Senators and Representatives of both parties are obliged to start campaigning for their next term almost as soon as they arrive in DC.  Lobbyists have infested the Capitol Building on both sides of the aisle, which explains the seemingly insurmountable problem with Entitlements.  Regarding Hillary Clinton, my time as a Civil Servant closely coincided with her time inside The Beltway.  I remember when the Clintons left DC in the year 2000, and I remember her returning as a Senator from the State of New York.  Part of the time that Clinton was Secretary of State, I was working overseas very closely with State Department personnel.

I am very comfortable discussing Hillary Clinton's record as a Senator and her time as Secretary of State, but I've already made that argument on this blog.  Ironically, its not the New Start Treaty, Benghazi, or the Clinton Foundation that fuels my lack of respect for Hillary Clinton.  My core issue with Hillary is one of trust, or the lack thereof.  Hillary Clinton, unlike her competitor, has chosen to be a representative of the people of the United States, therefore she should expect to be held accountable.  In all the time that Hillary Clinton has been known to me, she has never been accountable to anyone or anything.  During her husband's first-term in the White House, Hillary Clinton drummed-up negative information on the existing White House Travel Office, just so she could replace the former employees with her friends and supporters.  The former staff of the White House Travel Office were summarily fired, and left to their own devices.  In comparison to other scandals, this one probably doesn't rank very high, but it provided the American people with a preview of the kind of elitist, "ends-justify-the-means" kind of personality we have been dealing with.

I don't know what bothers me more, the dishonesty or the lack of accountability.  Take for example the Congressional Hearings on Benghazi: Hillary loudly proclaimed that as Secretary of State, she was accountable for what occurred.  Then she launched into a blame-game, during which she did everything but accept responsibility.  What the American people wanted to hear was:

 "The Benghazi incident was a terrible reminder that our men and women working in warzones are always at risk.  We did not do a good enough job protecting our people, and because we didn't, four brave young heroes made the ultimate sacrifice for their country.  It is my job to investigate what went wrong and to make sure it doesn't happen again."

Instead, we saw blame flung in every direction, with some Hillary supporters going so far as to blame Ambassador Chris Stevens for being in Libya when he should have known the dangers involved.

Now, in the middle of a presidential campaign Hillary is finding it impossible to be honest.  FBI Director Comey did NOT say that he believed Hillary Clinton had been honest in her public statements regarding her email server.  Obviously this mess imvolved reams of classified material, and she knows it.  In a fair world, Hillary Clinton would not be running for president.  If she wins, we will be in the unenviable position of having a president with access to Top Secret and SCI information, who would not successfully pass a routine background investigation!  But Hillary's ego and her obsession with power will keep her in the game, no matter how much damage it causes.