Why Am I Not Surprised

Jump to Last Post 1-1 of 1 discussions (55 posts)
  1. Live to Learn profile image81
    Live to Learnposted 5 months ago

    Justice Department concludes Comey violated the term of his employment agreement when he leaked classified memos.

    Leaking classified information. No charges recommended.

    Is anyone in Washington ever held accountable by the same standards used for the average citizen?

    1. Ken Burgess profile image90
      Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      To answer that question, obviously not.

      More proof that there is an 'elite ruling class'... which Trump was never really part of, Billionaire he may be, but he is still an outsider.

    2. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      "We found no evidence that Comey or his attorneys released any of the classified information contained in any of the memos to members of the media," the report found, adding that the former director's actions nonetheless "violated department and FBI policies and his FBI employment agreement."

      "Following his firing, Comey told a Senate committee that he authorized the release of some the memos' most explosive contents by asking an associate to provide the information to the New York Times."

      So he did not give it to the media, but to an associate who he then asked to give it to the media.  And that was all right, apparently.

      Yes, they play by different rules, don't they? 

      https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol … 890002001/

    3. crankalicious profile image91
      crankaliciousposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      The report concluded that no classified information was released.

      I find it nothing short of astounding that between Comey leaking a memo after the fact or the POTUS trying to use his influence to interfere with and end an investigation into one of his staff, people are more concerned with the former.

      However, it is a violation of FBI policy to keep records outside of the department. Normally in those situations, the employee is fired and should be fired. But I have to say, were I in the same situation where the POTUS had tried to persuade me to end an investigation and interfere with my job and I knew that POTUS to be a liar and somebody who would destroy records to protect himself, I would certainly keep something to prove I was telling the truth.

      So let me ask this: you're working a job. Your boss asks you to do something illegal. Do you trust your boss to tell the truth moving forward or do you keep a record to make sure you cover yourself if you're accused later on?

      1. promisem profile image97
        promisemposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        Trump's Justice Department isn't prosecuting a man that Trump fired and hates with a passion.

        Apparently it's much ado about nothing.

        1. crankalicious profile image91
          crankaliciousposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          Oh, but Promisem, it's the Deep State!

          1. promisem profile image97
            promisemposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            smile

      2. Live to Learn profile image81
        Live to Learnposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        You are right. I finished the article after posting. It first said classified then changed to sensitive. I saw another report that some of the information was classified later.

        But, considering the lies the left believes I don't think me saying classified is too huge a faux pas.

        As usual, I see a left leaner making excuses (not you) because......oh yeh. Trump is still alive so it must be ok for any one to do anything.

        1. promisem profile image97
          promisemposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          LOL. I wonder who you are talking about?

          Since you have opened that door again with clenched fists, I wonder if you can respond to my point about why Trump isn't prosecuting Comey.

          As always, I'm delighted to hear your independent perspective.

          1. Live to Learn profile image81
            Live to Learnposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Since you choose to lie about me previously, I'll decline.

            1. promisem profile image97
              promisemposted 5 months agoin reply to this

              Since you are grossly misrepresenting what I wrote previously, and refusing to accept responsibility for what YOU wrote previously, I accept your response.

              In return, please avoid making cheap shots in my direction when replying to other people. Thank you.

      3. Live to Learn profile image81
        Live to Learnposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        You make false assumptions. My entire point is, is anyone in Washington ever held accountable under the law, as is the average citizen. If all we had were the incident you cite and the one I sited, you might have a point.

        1. crankalicious profile image91
          crankaliciousposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          Maybe I missed something. What was the law Comey broke as cited in this particular story? He was fired from his job. Isn't that the appropriate punishment for violating the rules of your job?

          1. promisem profile image97
            promisemposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Yes, you are correct. Obviously, violating the law can lead to jail time while violating a policy does not.

            1. crankalicious profile image91
              crankaliciousposted 5 months agoin reply to this

              I'm more willing to discuss the destruction of government property as a serious violation of the law, for which Hillary Clinton or her people should have been prosecuted. The destruction of those emails was clearly illegal.

    4. Don W profile image82
      Don Wposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      "James Comey Memos just out and show clearly that there was NO COLLUSION and NO OBSTRUCTION. Also, he leaked classified information . . ." (Donald Trump - April 19, 2018)
      https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta … 6401585155

      "We found no evidence that Comey or his attorneys released any of the classified information contained in any of the Memos . . . " (OIG Report, August 2019)

      Memos: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents … memos.html

      Report: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2019/o1902.pdf

      1. Live to Learn profile image81
        Live to Learnposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        Don, my primary beef is the lopsided disparity in what behaviors the average citizen is held to, what conduct the average FBI agent is held to and what those in power get away with. This wasn't an accident on Comey's part. It was calculated and premeditated. His behavior is outside of accepted practices and FBI regulations.

        If those in power can act at will, ignore anything they want, do as they wish, what's the point of law?

        1. crankalicious profile image91
          crankaliciousposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          Like this:

          https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/29/us/forme … index.html

          Seems to happen a lot for anyone in power.

          1. Live to Learn profile image81
            Live to Learnposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Exactly. I know the say is power corrupted, absolute power corrupts,absolutely.

            That isn't just a saying. It is more often true than not. I think those who are found guilty of abuse of power should be held to a higher standard. I don't understand why they are not.

            1. crankalicious profile image91
              crankaliciousposted 5 months agoin reply to this

              Money talks. People with money walk.

        2. Don W profile image82
          Don Wposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          "His behavior is outside of accepted practices and FBI regulations . . . If those in power can act at will, ignore anything they want, do as they wish, what's the point of law?"

          His actions broke FBI policy, not the law. As a result he was fired, losing both his career and his pension.

          What's more worrying to me is the fact that if he had professed his "loyalty" as demanded by Trump, and "let it go" with regard to Flynn, it's very likely that Trump would never have fired him. That's more concerning in my view.

          It's also worrying that a sitting president was so eager to pronounce that Comey (whom he saw as a political enemy) had leaked classified information, even before any formal investigation had been concluded. When in actual fact, Comey had done no such thing.

          So I agree with you, there are people in positions of authority currently getting away with all sorts of shenanigans. And while Comey has been penalized for his breaches of policy, it's not because the current administration has any interest in justice being done. It's because Comey refused to kowtow to Trump.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            I dunno.  CBS news tonight said he released classified information.  Now I don't know if he did or not - the news reporter was very clear on it.

            Somebody is either mistaken or hiding something.

            1. Live to Learn profile image81
              Live to Learnposted 5 months agoin reply to this

              My understanding from what I heard (haven't listened to all outlets) was some stuff was classified after the fact.

              1. Don W profile image82
                Don Wposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                Yes, the memo in question is memo 2, which Comey shared with his private attorneys. The report says Comey did not consider its content classified when he wrote it, and did not mark it as such. The FBI did a "classification review" after Comey was fired, and some of the content in memo 2 was classified as "confidential" after the fact. The report says Comey broke FBI policy because he did not immediately alert the FBI to the fact it had been shared with his attorneys after he learned the classification had been changed.

          2. Ken Burgess profile image90
            Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Don your whole statement is biased opinion and conjecture.

            Comey, Brennon, and the bunch that tried to support and cover them... these are the people who have been in D.C. for 25, 30 years.  They are corrupt as they come, their abuse of power and position is on an epic level.

            They believed they knew best, that this was their country to run as they wanted, and to change it as they saw fit.  Even long timers in Congress were afraid of what might happen if they got on the badside of the likes of Comey and Brennan.

            I remember two years ago watching MSNBC, and a prominent Senator was warning that when you mess around with those in the FBI or CIA bad things happen to you, in reference to Trump and his firing of Comey.

            Think about that for a minute without your hate filled bias Don.  A Senator, on a national news show, waxed on about how you shouldn't mess with the spooks of America if you know what's good for you, referencing the President.

            That collective crew in D.C. was so corrupt, so outside the law, they were guilty of all the things Trump has been accused of and more, in regards to Russia and anyone else.

            And proof of how totally corrupt the whole system has become, almost the entire body of the mainstream news (minus Fox) and Congress (minus a few standouts) turns a blind eye to it all, covers it up, and creates lies about those who are trying to expose it.

            I understand that they will never prosecute a former First Lady & SoS, they will never bring charges up on a former Head of the CIA, or the DoJ.

            That's how things work, once you are an insider no matter how many laws you break, no matter how much evidence is mounted up, they make it go away... you may be blackballed, but never imprisoned.

            But don't make up a bunch of BS about Comey being a good guy, or being a victim, honestly to anyone relatively familiar with the facts of this matter, your statement doesn't reflect well.

            1. Don W profile image82
              Don Wposted 5 months agoin reply to this

              "Don your whole statement is biased opinion and conjecture."
              *goes on to make a statement that's mostly opinion and conjecture*


              It's too ridiculous for words Ken. If you suspended your cult-like worshipping of Trump long enough, you might ask some sensible questions like:

              Why did Trump ask the Director of the FBI to pledge his "loyalty" to him?

              Why did a sitting president constantly contact the Director of the FBI to discuss individual cases on a one to one basis, which itself is a breach of protocol?

              Why was the Director of the FBI asked by the sitting president to "let it go" in relation to Michael Flynn, who was later convicted?

              Why did Trump, as a sitting president, pronounce that the FBI Director had leaked classified information to the media, as if it were a matter of fact, before any formal investigation had been completed?

              Unfortunately you're too busy promoting deep-state conspiracy theories to be concerned by any of that. Comey was found to have broken Department policy and has suffered the consequences. He is no longer in a position to breach any government policies, nor access classified information. Neither does he have a national platform. The same cannot be said of Trump. I know who I'm more concerned about, and it's not Comey.

              1. Ken Burgess profile image90
                Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this



                Indeed it is.  The point being, you think your conjecture is based on facts.  When in fact, it is based on things even less reliable than my perceptions.

                You base your opinion on questionable documentation and the word of the very person who is at the heart of these crimes.

                We have overwhelming evidence that there were a group of individuals within D.C. that were corrupt and criminal beyond question.  They themselves were the overseers and protectors of the Law, and they decided that they did not commit any crimes, or do any wrong.  Refusing each and every one of them to accept any blame, or to hold one another accountable. arrogant and indignant to the last.




                This shows your overwhelming bias, not mine.  Labeling me does not make it so.



                No, I actually rely on the actions and the very words of the individuals themselves to determine what went on.  You cherry pick your facts, and allow only those which suit your opinions to have any credibility.

                John Brennan: "Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of “high crimes & misdemeanors.” It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump’s comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin."

                “The nation is in a crisis in terms of what Mr. Trump has done and is liable to do. These are very frightening times.”

                Brennan is a primary character in creating the "dossier" used as evidence to create an investigation into Trump and all those who supported him.

                Brennan spent 25 years working for the CIA.  Held the highest positions of power within for over a decade.

                James Comey: “Our president must embody respect, and adhere to the values that are at the core of this country. The most important being truth. This president is not able to do that. He is morally unfit to be president,”

                When asked if he thought Trump were compromised by the Russians he once replied: "“Its possible." Then added.  "It is stunning, and I wish I wasn’t saying it, but it’s the truth,"

                Where would you like me to begin, to show the evidence that this crew was working together to cover one another's crimes from detection, to remain in power and to alter the results of the election?

                There are summary documents detailing interviews that FBI agents conducted with Bruce Ohr, a top DOJ official who is at the center of the scandal involving 'dossier'.

                These documents show that the FBI and DOJ were warned repeatedly by Ohr that ex-British spy Christopher Steele was virulently biased against the target of their investigation, Trump.

                The FBI and DOJ ignored the warnings of bias and actively concealed it from the FISC. They never advised the judges that the information contained in the “dossier” was “unverified.”

                The court was never told that Ohr’s wife helped cultivate some of the research used against Trump. The FBI and DOJ represented to the judge that Steele was “reliable” when they knew he was not.

                And this coincides with Comey holding a press conference on July 5th and clearing Hillary Clinton despite admitting that she broke the law by mishandling classified information on numerous occasions.

                On this same day, Comey’s FBI held a secret meeting with Steele (dossier author) in London and opened the Russia investigation into Trump.

                For months, Comey’s FBI and Ohr held secret meetings with Steele and other Clinton-connected officials in the government.  While all of this was taking place, Comey admittedly told Trump on three separate occasions that he had not broken the law and was not under investigation.

                But behind Trump’s back, Comey was investigating the president.

                "I thought there's no way ... I'm not going to get fired, because I'm in charge of the Russia investigation. The president's not going to fire the FBI director who's handling the Russia investigation."

                Comey seemed to believe that he was untouchable, and would eventually be able to sabotage the President from within his Administration.

                From the start, these characters knew the charges against Trump were fabricated lies.  They knew Clinton had committed crimes of all variety and covered for her time and again.

                This isn't about Trump.  This isn't about his Presidency.  This is about an out of control cabal in D.C. that were convinced they were the only ones who knew how to run this country, and worked to influence who would become the next President.

                1. Don W profile image82
                  Don Wposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  There's two things I want to address here Ken. 1. conjecture, 2. your deep-state conspiracy.

                  1. Conjecture

                  "The point being, you think your conjecture is based on facts."

                  Something based on facts would, by definition, not be conjecture. That's a contradiction in terms. Aside from that, I think it fair to say using conjecture to complain about conjecture is self-defeating. Sadly you don't seem to recognize that. E.g:

                  "You base your opinion on questionable documentation and the word of the very person who is at the heart of these crimes."

                  Unless you have evidence that categorically proves Comey's memos are inaccurate, your suggestion that the accuracy is doubtful is just conjecture. Likewise, your suggestion his actions were a "crime" is just conjecture too. Also, when someone says Trump committed obstruction of justice, you shout "innocent until proven guilty". Yet here you are saying Comey committed a crime as if it's a matter of fact, even though he hasn't been convicted of anything.

                  This suggests you think conjecture is okay when it supports Trump, but not okay when it supports people viewed as Trump's political enemies; that it's okay to say certain people committed crimes as if it's a fact, but not okay to say the same about Trump.

                  And this is just one sentence from your comment Ken. If I deconstructed the whole comment, highlighting all the the hypocrisy, bias and untruths, almost no sentence would remain untouched.

                  In short Ken, you have no moral high ground with regards to bias or conjecture. You are sitting in the largest of proverbial glass houses, apparently sucked in by the cult of personality that is Donald Trump. I can't help you with that Ken, but if you want me to point every bit of conjecture, hypocrisy, or unsubstantiated argument in your future comments, I can gladly try my best to do that for you.

                  2. Deep State

                  "We have overwhelming evidence that there were a group of individuals within D.C. that were corrupt and criminal beyond question."

                  If you're referring to the House and Senate, I agree, though I'd draw the line at suggesting criminality without examining a specific allegation.

                  If you're referring to the FBI, then no Ken, what we have is the fact that you and some others have such a cult-like devotion to Donald Trump that you are willing to: 1. ignore any wrongdoing by Trump and his associates and label investigations into that as nothing more than a "witch hunt"; 2. exaggerate anything that even looks like wrongdoing by anyone viewed as Trump's political enemy; and 3. simply fabricate wrongdoing (see Trump's tweet that Comey leaked classified information to the press, which the OIG report confirms is untrue).

                  "Where would you like me to begin, to show the evidence that this crew was working together to cover one another's crimes from detection, to remain in power and to alter the results of the election?"

                  Thanks for asking. Create a thread; present a piece of evidence; say what you think it proves; people can decide if they think it proves what you say it does; present another piece of evidence. Only reliable sources though. No right-wing (or left-wing) blogs etc. Look forward to seeing your evidence.

                  "This isn't about Trump.  This isn't about his Presidency.  This is about an out of control cabal in D.C. that were convinced they were the only ones who knew how to run this country, and worked to influence who would become the next President."

                  The individuals in this "cabal" of evil spies, whose day job is literally to operate in secret, haven't kept their conspiracy very secret, or hidden it very deep have they Ken. Was getting the Director of the FBI to email his ultra secret, deep-state memos to his personal lawyers the opening gambit in some dastardly complex plot that's now in motion Ken?

                  Or is it more likely that this is just  about ordinary people, who've spent years working in service of their country, doing their best to figure out what to do in the face of the extraordinary, unprecedented sh1t show that is the current presidency? A unique situation which none of the current policies or rules anticipated.

                  Seriously Ken, stop swallowing everything those right-wing blogs give you. Those sites are rotting your brain.

                  But you know what, I stand by what I said, if you'd like to start a "deep-state" thread and present your evidence, feel free. I promise to take it seriously, and not write any satirical responses. I'll be on my best behavior. Fair warning though, I will highlight any assertion you make in that thread that is hypocritical, unsubstantiated, or demonstrably untrue. I can't say fairer than that. Again, I look forward to seeing all your evidence Ken.

                  1. Ken Burgess profile image90
                    Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this



                    That response presented evidence, which you completely ignored.

                    So no, I won't waste the time creating a thread, besides, I am sure there is an article or two I wrote long ago on related topics, feel free to go read them.

                    You keep pushing that labeling effort you have going... " cult-like devotion to Donald Trump"  and try to tie everything back to it.

                    Once you swallow the bait put out there, that Trump is a Russian Puppet, KKK and White Supremacist, etc. then anything anyone does or has done to try to ruin his reputation, campaign, Presidency, etc. is allowable, even laudable.

                    That blinds you to the actions of those who had held power in D.C. for a decade or longer doing what they could to remain in power, to protect Clinton from her illegal activities, and to ruin the opposition (Trump) so that he could not win the Presidency, and when he did, so they could destroy him from the inside.

                    The efforts of Comey, Brennan, Strzok, etc. their words and actions are matter of record.  Their efforts failed. 

                    Whether Trump is a good President or not, is another matter entirely.

                    You don't see it that way. 

                    It seems you cannot see past Trump, and anyone who does, must be a supporter of Trump in your mind.

      2. Ken Burgess profile image90
        Ken Burgessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        https://abc7ny.com/politics/watchdog-co … s/5500716/

        The Justice Department declined prosecution of James Comey after the agency’s internal watchdog found that the former FBI director gave memos containing classified information to a friend.

        Comey wrote at least nine memos following conversations he had with President Donald Trump.  He provided some of his memos to Daniel Richman, a Columbia law professor, with instructions to share some of the information with The New York Times.

        Comey testified on June 7, 2017 that his goal in giving documents to Richman was to prompt the appointment of a special counsel to take over the FBI’s investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government. The maneuver worked, as Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel on May 17, 2017.

        Comey is also  the one responsible for clearing Hillary Clinton of her various Classified information violations and other assorted charges. 

        Isn't it a great system, one of the D.C. insiders (ruling elite or whatever label you want to attach) breaks a bunch of laws and someone else in the establishment lets them off the hook, clears them of all crimes.  And then someone else lets that person off the hook, for all the crimes they commit, and so on, and so on.

        But hey, so long as someone says they didn't do enough to bring them up on charges, that's all that matters.

        1. Readmikenow profile image95
          Readmikenowposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          Ken,

          I'm absolutely fascinated that a director of the FBI has the authority to not bring charges against someone like Hillary Clinton.  Under every OTHER administration, it is a decision of the Justice Department.  Loretta Lynch was head of the Justice Department at the time.  She didn't even comment on how James Comey overstepped his boundaries. It was as if she didn't care that he was doing her job.

    5. Don W profile image82
      Don Wposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      I have a question on this topic that doesn't relate to a specific reply, so I'm replying to the opening comment.

      The conclusion of the report says: "In a country built on the rule of law, it is of utmost importance that all FBI employees adhere to Department and FBI policies, particularly when confronted by what appear to be extraordinary circumstances  . . .".

      I agree.

      My question is, what should a Director of the FBI do if the current president tries to exert undue influence over an ongoing investigation (regarding Michael Flynn). But that Director also genuinely believes the DoJ can't be trusted to do anything without external pressure because it's operating as the president's personal law firm; and he genuinely believes the party that controls both the House and Senate (this was 2017), including the Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, can't be trusted to do anything either?

      What should the Director of the FBI do in that circumstance? Comey chose to put the information into the public domain, rightly or wrongly. What should he have done? What would you have done?

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        In the scenario you have laid out there is nothing legal, ethical and moral that he CAN do.  The answer, then, is to walk away clean and put it all behind him.  Perhaps a public statement as to why he's leaving?

        1. GA Anderson profile image92
          GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          If this can be considered a matter of conscience, a good man's conscience, and that conscience sees harm to his nation, would you really advocate walking away clean?

          If so, I can't agree. Besides the "for evil to flourish . . . " quote I mentioned to Don, your response seems to be one that would fit those three monkeys; "See no evil . . .  etc."

          If you felt the situation really had national interest implications is that the stance you would take? Since "normal" had long since passed, wouldn't you have the courage of your convictions?

          GA

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Which is why I stated a public statement as to causes of quitting might be in order.  But I do find that acting immorally is not a matter of conscience, for conscience IS our moral guide. 

            But if it really had national interest implications, far beyond merely working with a President I didn't like, I might go public as well.  If it were to start a war, for example.  Not liking the President, even not agreeing with the moral implications of what he was doing, is insufficient to violate my own morals.  IMO.

            1. GA Anderson profile image92
              GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

              If you were in Comey's shoes,  it sounds like your option of making a public statement is essentially what Comey did. albeit via a leak.

              I understand that not liking a president or his policies is not a justification for violating your morals, but, what if you felt it went beyond that? What if you felt a real danger to your country. Would that be a moral justification for his actions?

              Of course, I could be all wrong. Comey could be a part of the 'Deep State', but at this point, I don't see that. I see a man acting on conscience.

              One determining factor was his, (as previously mentioned), 11th hour Hillary announcement that very well could have influenced some voters to vote for Trump. If he was totally an anti-Trump tool, then he would not have done that.

              I do understand I am out on a limb with my perception of Comey as an honest man, but until shown otherwise, there is no other place I can be.

              GA

      2. Live to Learn profile image81
        Live to Learnposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        What should he do? Show integrity by abiding by the terms of his employment. I'll hold judgement on the rest until the next report comes out. But, if his conduct was as many are saying he had no integrity, no moral compass and wasn't in a position to 'do the right thing' since it appears he chose not to do the right thing at every turn and may not have the intelligence to know right from wrong.

        1. GA Anderson profile image92
          GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          I have a different opinion of Comey. I think you are wrong.

          If his motives were suspect because of party, then the reopening of the Hillary investigation comment at the 11th hour should put the "party" motivation to rest.

          So if his actions weren't party-driven, what motivation is left? It must be either an action of conscience or a deep-state move.

          Can you think of a different motivation? Before you answer that, review Comey's pre-FBI director and FBI director history. I don't think you will find anything that would taint him with that deep-state or party affiliation.

          GA

          1. Live to Learn profile image81
            Live to Learnposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Did I say it was party motivated.  Nope.

            As I said.  I'll withhold judgement until the other report is released,  but if any that many are speculating is true,  he's an ass who thought his personal opinion took precedent over the will of the American people. And was willing to peddle lies to get his way.

            1. GA Anderson profile image92
              GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

              My mention of party motivation was only a reference to possible motivation, not an inference that you said such.

              We disagree because I obviously have a different impression of Comey. So be it.

              GA

          2. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Perhaps it was deep state.

            But more likely, seems to me, is that Comey set himself up as the moral guide for the country; if he didn't like what he saw he would take steps to stop it.  Legal or not, ethical/moral or not, he would take steps.  And he did so.

            1. GA Anderson profile image92
              GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

              Yes he did. Now we must let history judge his actions.

              GA

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                It brings to my mind your thread on MLK: he, too, set himself up as the moral guide for the country.  He was proven right in that the country was ready to accept his idea of what was moral and what was not (at least relative to racial discrimination): is the country ready to accept that one man should violate laws because he thought another man was wrong in his actions?

                I fear that there a lot of people that will applaud his actions, simply because they don't like Trump for whatever reason, and ignore the rest of the question.  Such people, seems to me, are happy to forget the whole story when it is against an action they don't like, while forgetting that if one person can get away with it everyone should be able to.  Whether they will agree with all those other people in their actions is more than a little doubtful.  Those same people will, for example, support civil disobedience...unless it is done by white supremacists  or other group/individuals they disagree with.

                Another example may be Julian Asange (I think I've got the right name): while many see great damage, some of it to specific individuals that have done nothing wrong, others view him as a hero.

                1. GA Anderson profile image92
                  GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  While I wouldn't name Assange as a comparison, I would wonder if Snowden was an apt comparison.

                  I hope it has been obvious that I have not followed the anti-Trump mantra. so my support of Comey's action can hopefully be viewed without that taint.

                  However, I wouldn't be so generous as to put him in league with MLK Jr. ;-)

                  GA

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                    That's actually the name I wanted - Snowden.

                    Not another MLK?  Are you sure?  If he convinces us all that we are all a...god...for lack of better term, responsible for defining morality and acting on that morality regardless of rules, laws or other's morality?

                    That's my point, in a twisted sort of way - either he was right in ignoring rules of the rest of us or he was not.  Which will be determined in the future.

                    Personally, I would predict that he will fade into the sunset and be forgotten.  NOT another MLK in any form.

      3. GA Anderson profile image92
        GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        Although there is no legal or moral justification, as a man of conscience, I would do what Comey did.

        'Normal' had long since fallen by the wayside. Based on my opinion of the current political climate, (at the time of Comey's action), and my opinion of Comey, (be it right or wrong), I find no fault with his actions.

        I am reminded of that saying about evil and good men remaining silent.

        GA.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          How does an act with no moral justification fit with a description of a "man of conscience"?  The two seem at opposite ends from each other.

          1. GA Anderson profile image92
            GA Andersonposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            Perhaps I misspoke when I said no moral justification. Perhaps following your conscience is a moral judgment, hence a moral justification.

            GA

    6. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

      Yeah, Fylnn was charged for lying about having words with a Russian ambassador. Yeah, it's picked and choose who will be considered above the law.  It's very clear both sides love to play the game...

      1. Live to Learn profile image81
        Live to Learnposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        Yes. And both sides get away with it over and over again. All the time chipping away at the faith the average citizen has in the government.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 5 months agoin reply to this

          So true...

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://maven.io/company/pages/privacy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)