Comey Channels Maxwell Smart
So, the new version of the Comey rationale for dropping the Hillary investigation is that he knew the document claiming that Loretta Lynch had promised a Clinton staffer that the email investigation would go away was disinformation, but it didn’t matter! He had no choice but to drop the investigation lest the disinformation be leaked in order to discredit Lynch if she dropped the investigation. Or something:
Sources close to Comey tell CNN he felt that it didn’t matter if the information was accurate, because his big fear was that if the Russians released the information publicly, there would be no way for law enforcement and intelligence officials to discredit it without burning intelligence sources and methods. There were other factors behind Comey’s decision, sources say.
What complete and utter bullshit.
The I’d-tell-you-but-then-I’d-have-to-kill-you-because-the-information-is-from-super-secret-sources dodge is getting so, so tiresome, especially when the people who tell us this leak like sieves. Such a convenient way of telling partial truths.
But it gets better! Come on, think about it: the Russians would only plant disinformation where they knew it would be found, that is, in communications they already knew were compromised. What’s the point of passing disinformation through a super-secure channel? You WANT the disinformation to be uncovered, and hence will broadcast it over channels you know the target is monitoring. So revealing this information would have compromised exactly nothing.
Meaning that the new story is inherently contradictory, and an insult to our intelligence.
And please: you think there is no way for the FBI to show that a document is disinformation through independent means? Especially when they knew of its existence in advance of any leak?
Comey (and/or his leaky mouthpieces) remind me of Maxwell Smart. When one stupid story implodes, they try another: “Would you believe . . . ?”
“Would you believe, I knew the story was disinformation, but because of its existence I had to torpedo the Hillary investigation anyways?”
No. We find that hard to believe, Mr. Smart, I mean Mr. Comey.
.
Comey was the most unqualied and compromised FBI Director ever. Way too many ties to the Clintons i.e.Mark Rich pardon and then he ok’d contributions to the Clinton Foundation, pay for play influence peddling scheme while at Lockheed Martin and then at the money launderer HSBC.
Comment by chris hafferty — May 27, 2017 @ 10:38 pm
On Mr Pournelle’s blog, someone writes:
Now, on your correspondent’s fairly lengthy communique wrt Comey, I would like to add one detail that he leaves out: Comey’s involvement with the Clintons goes back to the Senate Whitewater probe in 1996, even before the Marc Rich thing. In that case Comey was, among other things, lead prosecutor, and he pressed no charges while explicitly finding that Hillary Clinton destroyed documents that she was legally obligated to preserve (and “mishandled” others that she was obligated to divulge).
It was sort of a rehearsal for the email investigation: Comey found criminal conduct, described that conduct accurately, and then declared that it did not warrant prosecution. In 1996 Comey accused Hillary of “a highly improper pattern of deliberate misconduct.” In 2016 Hillary was “extremely careless”, i.e. grossly negligent. In both cases Comey spelled out the elements of a criminal offense and then declared that there was nothing more to see or do
Comment by dearieme — May 28, 2017 @ 5:42 am
CNN provides Fraudcast News 24 hours a day to a global audience unfortunately.
Pournelle wrote much of the SDI text for RR. I read one novel many years ago that he coauthored and very much enjoyed it. Kind of a very early guide for preppers when things suddenly go south.
Comment by pahoben — May 29, 2017 @ 3:32 am