President Obama To James Comey: “We Don’t Operate On Innuendo”
[guest post by Dana]
What a difference a day or two makes. On Monday, the White House stressed that President Obama didn’t believe James Comey had any untoward motives in announcing that the FBI was re-opening their investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails and also reaffirmed the president’s belief in Comey’s professionalism:
“I’ll neither defend nor criticize what Director Comey has decided to communicate to the public about this investigation,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said in Monday’s press briefing.
In an effort to stay neutral on the topic, Earnest said, the White House will continue to be “scrupulous” in “avoiding even the appearance of political interference” in the investigation entrusted to the Department of Justice and the FBI.
He also said that President Barack Obama doesn’t think Comey is trying to sway the presidential race.
“The president doesn’t believe that Director Comey is intentionally trying to influence the outcome of an election,” he said. “The president doesn’t believe that he’s secretly strategizing to benefit one candidate or one political party.”
And though he would not weigh in on Comey’s letter, Earnest said Obama maintains a high opinion of Comey and has confidence in his ability to do his job.
“Director Comey is a man of integrity, he’s a man of principle, and he’s a man of good character,” Earnest said.
This morning it was a different story. During an interview, President Obama cast aspersions on Comey’s decision to re-open the investigation:
“I do think that there is a norm that when there are investigations, we don’t operate on innuendo. We don’t operate on incomplete information. We don’t operate on leaks. We operate based on concrete decisions that are made.”
The president noted that Comey himself decided not to recommend criminal charges against Clinton for mishandling classified information on her private email server as secretary of State.
“When this was investigated thoroughly the last time, the conclusion … was that, you know, she made some mistakes but that there wasn’t anything there that was, you know, prosecutable,” Obama said.
But here’s the thing: 650,000 newly discovered emails found on a newly discovered device belonging to the spouse of Hillary Clinton’s staffer top-aide and body woman is not “innuendo,” no matter how hard the president tries to spin it.
So what could have happened in a few short days that would compel the president, who we were told believed Director Comey to be a man of integrity, principle, and good character and in whose professionalism the president was confident, to now accuse that same Director Comey of operating on “innuendo”? What could have happened that would cause the president to decide he would no longer remain “scrupulous” in “avoiding even the appearance of political interference” in the investigation?
–Dana
So much for being scrupulous …
Dana (d17a61) — 11/2/2016 @ 10:05 amThey only operate on innuendo when the innuendo benefits them. Then, like a drunken pony express rider, they ride whatever innuendo or rumor or outright lie that is benefiting them at the moment with gusto. When they ride that one into the ground they mount a new, fresh one and carry on.
They don’t operate on innuendo? Sweet smokin’ Moses.
Harry Flashman (14076b) — 11/2/2016 @ 10:37 am… you know, like meeting clandestinely on a tarmac with the target’s spouse.
… or prematurely announcing you’ve made conclusions before the investigation has ended.
… or lying about sending emails to the very account in question.
You know, THOSE types of norms.
SaveFarris (3c0029) — 11/2/2016 @ 10:45 amMemo to: POTUS
Subject: PUTZ
Stop being one.
Maudie caused this mess.
Maudie used the secret server.
Maudie is solely responsible.
“There are mistakes and mistakes. The margin for error is narrow here. There’s too much loss of life and property damage possible.” – Captain DeVries [Tom Tully] ‘The Caine Mutiny’ 1954
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/2/2016 @ 10:49 amIn you endo, too, Obama!
nk (dbc370) — 11/2/2016 @ 11:02 am“Marc Rich Pardon Enabler and Current DOJ Overseer of Hillary Email Investigation… Was Feeding Hillary Campaign “Heads Ups” About Email Investigation While a Justice Department Employee
—Ace
Kadzik has of course been appointed to oversee control and quash Comey’s investigation into Hillary’s emails.
He certainly seems to be very informed on the matter.
“Ironically”, that is the same Peter Kadzik who has proven his “impartiality” in multiple WikiLeaks emails including this newly released bombshell in which Kadzik provides a very helpful “heads up” about Hillary’s email server investigation. This is what Kadzik emailed to John Podesta (via gmail) on May 19, 2015:
There is a HJC oversight hearing today where the head of our Civil Division will testify. Likely to get questions on State Department emails. Another filing in the FOIA case went in last night or will go in this am that indicates it will be awhile (2016) before the State Department posts the emails.
As we also reported previously (see below), prior to joining the DOJ, Kadzik was the attorney of Marc Rich, whose records the FBI released yesterday, as well as Podesta; in faat, the Clinton campaign chairman infamously wrote that Kadzik was a “fantastic lawyer” who “kept me out of jail.”
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/366639.php
Colonel Haiku (ce04df) — 11/2/2016 @ 11:11 amOne of the bestest things in this last week before the vote is Hillary Clinton reverting to that “ack ack” voice of hers that is eerily close to the alien voices in Tim Burton’s “Mars Attacks!” movie. OMG.
Colonel Haiku (ce04df) — 11/2/2016 @ 11:16 amI don’t know why Obama felt the need to open his mouth but I doubt it has to do with any polling. Clinton isn’t slipping and the final grudging consolidation to Trump is not curing suburban white women of their completely justified antipathy.
Rick Ballard (bca473) — 11/2/2016 @ 12:39 pm@7. You noticed that, too; “…and YOU… yes YOU, Haiku! Take out garbage!”
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/2/2016 @ 12:39 pmThe President is acting stupidly.
All that Comey did was announce that there’s an investigation. And just like any other investigation into X, Y, or Z — there’s no “innuendo.”
An investigation doesn’t imply impropriety or guilt. It’s merely the process for determining impropriety or guilt.
Team Democrat was just telling us all summer that Comey is a paragon of virtue and integrity.
Maybe they fear illary’s got something to hide.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/2/2016 @ 12:43 pm… and then there’s Maude.
“I accept the responsibility but not the blame. Let me explain the difference. Those who are to blame lose their jobs. Those who are responsible do not.” – Richard Nixon [David Frye] ‘Richard Nixon: A Fantasy’ LP, 1973
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/2/2016 @ 12:47 pmtrump is surging in the poll! hillary slimmers are getting desperate. when they start attacking green party candidate jill stein you know they are loosing. in 2000 they did the same to ralph nader but didn’t work then either.
polecat (306996) — 11/2/2016 @ 12:57 pmNothing’s going to come of this. Comey simply pulled the Huma-mails away from other prying eyes and into the safety of the original counter-intel task force that is unlikely to discover anything new. This is the same way Bubba’s AG, Janet Reno, used to open an investigation, run out the clock, and then waive it away after saying we took a hard look but only a partisan would still believe there’s anything to see. They’re not investigating scandalous behavior – they’re managing it. Only voters on November 8 can stop it.
crazy (d3b449) — 11/2/2016 @ 12:59 pmWhat is so pathetic about Obama’s attack on Comey is, if he really believes Coney is trying to influence the election or up to no good, the. he should just fire him. Why play games??
Dana (d17a61) — 11/2/2016 @ 1:06 pmright blair hull and jack ryan, the ones whose divorce records were leaked, would appreciate that statement, so would the late gerald walpin, of the americorps investigation, which involved his good friend, kevin johnson,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/2/2016 @ 1:11 pmHe’s just using Comey as a chew toy. Firing Comey would create a bigger controversy. Comey’s running cover for the Clintons and their friends as he’s done for years and Obama knows it. Remember the classified email trail leads repeatedly to POTUS and who knows how many other prinicipals.
crazy (d3b449) — 11/2/2016 @ 1:20 pmI’m with crazy – there should be a t-shirt.
ThOR (c9324e) — 11/2/2016 @ 1:21 pm“Why play games??”
Dana,
How many emails from Obama to Clinton or vice versa should we guess are involved? He doesn’t really stink of Clinton at the moment and he may want to try and keep it that way. Firing Comey really doesn’t help. He’s turning on the smoke and fog machine in an effort to minimize the outcome of further investigation. He may even be dumb enough to believe no copies have been made yet.
Rick Ballard (bca473) — 11/2/2016 @ 1:36 pmI believe the term of art is: getting their stories straight.
ThOR (c9324e) — 11/2/2016 @ 1:43 pmNo, he didn’t.
He was saying no conclusions shoudl be drawn by voters, or by the media, or he was talking about the possibility of bringing charges.
He wasn’t criticizng Comey or the FBI – he was making an observation.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 11/2/2016 @ 2:23 pmhttp://www.nationalreview.com/article/441668/hillary-clinton-fbi-investigation-protocol-complaints-are-double-standard
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 11/2/2016 @ 2:26 pmfbi poofterboy comey is slimy and corrupt
slimy corrupt an cowardly
food stamp should call him out for putting the pig above the law
it’s the right thing to do for america
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/2/2016 @ 2:27 pm*and* cowardly i mean
happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/2/2016 @ 2:27 pmCBS and the New York Times, and probably most of the media, are spinning this as Obama criticizing Comey. It probably comes from Clinton World contacting reporters, but as Ann Althouse says, Barack Obama did not do that.
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2016/11/i-got-played-by-nyt-headline-is-obama.html
It may be President Obama was roped in by the Hillary Clinton campaign into saying things that could be misrepresented as criticizing what Comey did.
Sammy Finkelman (3fda43) — 11/2/2016 @ 4:36 pmKudos to Tucker Carlson for showing Nina Easton and Charles Lane for the mopes they are… that there’s been no actual proof that the Russian government is behind Wikileaks, that journalists are charged with reporting facts, not speculation and for asking what’s important here… Speculation about that or determining if what has seen the light of day is The Truth?!?
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/2/2016 @ 5:06 pmI guess they’d call that Rope-a-Dope, Sammeh.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/2/2016 @ 5:07 pmAs will be in Thursday’s Wash Post, turns out Comey had known about the 650,000 emails for two weeks before sending his letter to Congress. So was he sitting on this to help Clinton?
Comey big mistake was to conclude the case was not strong enough to file. This is always the job of the prosecutor. A cop can take a case to the DA and recommend no filing but it is the DA that makes the decision to reject the case or ask for more investigation. Comey did the bidding of Lynch when he decided to reject the case.
Secondly, every case has issues about intent. You can never pull someone’s brain out and hook it up to a machine and get concrete evidence of intent. It is always proven by circumstantial evidence. Also, you only should have to prove the intent to do the act that breaks the law, not actual intent to break the law.
This is the most corrupt administration in the history of the US.
AZ Bob (f7a491) — 11/2/2016 @ 5:50 pm#24 Sammy, it’s very interesting how you infrequently ascribe bad intent to Democrats when they get caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 11/2/2016 @ 5:57 pmYou always explain away their malfeasance as a result of being forced, coerced, or having no other alternative.
on the positive side, lane did fire stephen glass, on the negative, back in the 80s, on the central american beat, he came up with one of the data points that gary webb would recycle a decade later,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/2/2016 @ 5:58 pmSammy is very insightful. Of course democrats have shown us corruption all the time, but for the most part they are tyrants because they are convinced of their good intentions. That’s the worst kind because you can’t reason with that. Same thing is happening to the GOP. Principles shrinciples! Let’s just win!
Dustin (ba94b2) — 11/2/2016 @ 6:04 pmYes, I’ve noticed that, CS. Dems are usually sans guile in Sammeh’s world. It can all be explained away.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/2/2016 @ 6:10 pmit’s what they dubbed the limbaugh theory, no malfeasance no policy failure is ever attributed to obama, because of the journolist and the rest of the risotto tray crew running interference for him, there is at least two administration officials, who were preventing this investigation from coming to full fruition but he pretends he’s above it all,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/2/2016 @ 6:14 pmof course, axelrod and the nazgul, robert mccain uncovered, operated totally through innuendo, in the 2008 campaign, as did the future white house counsel, who directed a stream of bogus ethics complaints,
narciso (d1f714) — 11/2/2016 @ 6:21 pmok, now I’m really confused, so this capers character is now the fall guy, lynch’s replacement as us atty,
http://www.wsj.com/articles/secret-recordings-fueled-fbi-feud-in-clinton-probe-1478135518
narciso (d1f714) — 11/2/2016 @ 6:33 pm