When FBI Director James Comey announced Tuesday that Hillary Clinton wouldn’t be charged for sharing classified emails on her private server, many wondered if she was getting preferential treatment from the FBI. Some raised questions about Comey’s interpretation or perhaps even evasion of the law.
This wasn’t the first time his legal judgment has been questioned.
In 2013, Senator Rand Paul single-handedly held up Comey’s entire confirmation process, demanding the FBI answer a question about drones and warrantless surveillance.
Paul wanted to know if the government had used drone to surveil citizens without a warrant. The senator would not let Comey’s confirmation proceed until the FBI answered his questions.
The FBI responded that it had carried out exactly ten of the types of surveillance missions Paul was concerned about, explaining that in their view, the Fourth Amendment did not apply in those missions’ circumstances.
“I disagree with this interpretation,” Paul said. “However, given the fact that they did respond to my concerns over drone use on U.S. soil, I have decided to release my hold on the pending FBI director nominee.”
Vice’s Grace Wyler wondered about the questions Paul had raised in a story titled “What the FBI’s Letter to Rand Paul Says About the Bureau’s Domestic Drone Use”:
Like most explanations of the government’s drone policies, the letter raises more questions than it answers, namely: How many times did the FBI fly drones in each of these cases? For how long? What information was gathered from these drone flights? What kind of drones did its agents use, with what kind of cameras? And why were drones, rather than regular old manned aircraft, used in these cases?
[…]
Presumably, some of these questions are answered in the classified addendum provided to Sen. Paul. But for now, the public still knows relatively little about how, why or when the FBI uses drones.
“One thing we do know, however, is that the FBI doesn’t need a warrant to use drones for domestic surveillance,” Wyler also noted.
Related: The FBI’s refusal to prosecute Hillary Clinton is a travesty of justice
Some wondered if the senator famous for filibustering over civil liberties would filibuster Comey too. He didn’t.
The U.S. Senate voted to confirm Comey as FBI director on July 29, 2013. The vote was 93-1.
#1: Gatlin To: A K A Stone (#0)
If he had recommend an indictment, she would have been pulled and Biden would have run. I don’t think Trump could have beaten Biden. Biden would have been a less flawed candidate and with the majority of voters going with the Democrats in the past, then he would have won.
Again, I see Comey as “knowing exactly what he was doing and for a reason.” He laid the case out so specifically, point by point. Then I see him as “thinking”….I am giving you anti-clintonistas all the ammunition you need and it is more than enough. Now, Donald and you Pubs, take it and use it. Have at her …
Comey did not take questions, which he normally does. He has been invited to the House tomorrow to answer questions. He immediately responded that he would be there. So, instead of answering questions to a few reports and that being shown on TV….he will now have a much better platform to “lay it all out again.”
Comey will take a beating for what he did, but I do believe what he did was to Trump’s advantage and Hillary’s extreme disadvantage.
At this time, I go with Newt as second on the ticket. I think that would be one ass kicking combo.
Just my thoughts….what do you think?
Gatlin posted on 2016-07-06 15:58:46 Reply Private Reply
#2: Hank Rearden To: Gatlin (#1)
I think you believe the FBI should base its decisions on how they'll benefit one politician over another, rather than enforce the law after enumerating dozens of felonies committed by the old hag, and that you're happy they chose to support YOUR politician.
Hank Rearden posted on 2016-07-07 17:28:29 Reply Private Reply
#3: tpaine To: Gatlin, and all his canary dupes, -- Y'ALL (#1)
It's very amusing that you imagine Biden would beat Trump. -- Hillary has millions of near fanatical followers, -- Biden does not, as he can barely inspire even Bernies buffoons.
And all he did was repeat his ludicrous concept that while he could recommend NO prosecution, he could not recommend ANY OTHER resolutions.
Comey gave Hillary and the administration the perfect excuse to attempt to sweep this under a rug. -- He, and they, and dupes like you will fail.
I think you're one of the neo-conservative clowns that will do damn near anything to 'get along'. Thinking like yours has lead us down the road to socialism.
tpaine posted on 2016-07-07 18:23:50 Reply Private Reply