Image 01 Image 03

Comey Book: October 2016 Disclosure of Hillary Email Investigation Based On Assumption She Would Win

Comey Book: October 2016 Disclosure of Hillary Email Investigation Based On Assumption She Would Win

“If I hide this from the American people, she’ll be illegitimate the moment she’s elected”

Former FBI director James Comey’s book reportedly includes unsubstantiated accusations against then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch.  He reportedly writes that he was aware of “’unverified’ information discovered by the U.S. government in 2016 from a classified source [that] ‘would undoubtedly have been used by political opponents to cast serious doubt on the attorney general’s independence in connection with the Clinton investigation’.”

Comey’s book also reportedly reveals that his firm belief that Hillary Clinton would win the 2016 presidential election influenced his decision-making process and that his goal in his October announcement was to help ensure the legitimacy of her presidency.

ABC News reports:

James Comey said his decision to announce that the FBI was going to look back into the Hillary Clinton email investigation just days before the election was influenced by his belief that she would beat Donald Trump and his desire to make sure that the election results were viewed as legitimate.

“I don’t remember consciously thinking about that, but it must have been because I was operating in a world where Hillary Clinton was going to beat Donald Trump, and so I’m sure that it was a factor,” Comey told ABC News’ chief anchor George Stephanopoulos in an exclusive interview ahead of the April 17 release of his book, “A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership.”

“I don’t remember spelling it out, but it had to have been, that she’s going to be elected president and if I hide this from the American people, she’ll be illegitimate the moment she’s elected, the moment this comes out,” he added.

Apparently, Comey’s decision to make the October, 2016 announcement that the FBI investigation into the Hillary email scandal was made while Comey was “operating in a world where Hillary Clinton was going to beat Donald Trump.”

Setting aside the fact that this “world” of his imagination also included other major decisions during the lead-up to the 2016 election, this admission reveals shocking hubris and partisanship.

Even the leftist media and Hillary supporters are outraged by this disturbing insight into Comey’s “justice by polling.”^tfw^tfw

The FBI should not be basing their decisions on what the latest polls say or on any partisan basis at all.

It’s hard to imagine someone completely impartial, particularly when that someone’s wife and daughters voted for Hillary and marched in the anti-Trump “women’s march,” but this revelation coupled with his detailed account of Hillary’s wrong-doing followed by the recommendation that she not be prosecuted paints a picture of a highly politicized FBI.

The Atlantic reports:

This is an astonishing admission. Justice Department guidelines bar officials from making important disclosures related to investigations close to elections to avoid influencing them. Comey took it upon himself to decide that, based on his concern that keeping the news confidential could call the legitimacy of a Clinton presidency into question, he had to announce that the investigation was being restarted. But that was not his decision to make; the role of the FBI is to investigate crimes, it is not to use its authority to protect or harm the legitimacy of a given politician.

A hypothetical Clinton administration’s legitimacy should not have been a factor in Comey’s decision whatsoever; Comey should only have been concerned with following the Justice Department’s guidelines, which exist to protect the integrity of the democratic process, and which Comey followed in the case of the Republican candidate.

Perhaps, Comey defenders might argue, the sensitivity of the Russia inquiry as a counter-intelligence investigation prevented him from disclosing anything about it. But the point isn’t that the Russia investigation should have been disclosed, but that the Clinton inquiry should not have been.

The fact that the Trump inquiry was kept under wraps while the Clinton inquiry was not simply accentuates the importance of the Justice Department rules against making such announcements close to an election—rules that Comey broke for one candidate but not for the other.

Comey’s admission also contrasts quite starkly with his own sworn testimony before Congress.

The Atlantic continues:

Comey’s admission that he believed Clinton would win is also dramatically at odds with Comey’s own sworn testimony before the Senate in May of 2017. “There was a great debate. I have a fabulous staff at all levels and one of my junior lawyers said, ‘Should you consider that what you’re about to do may help elect Donald Trump president?’” Comey said. “And I said, ‘Thank you for raising that, not for a moment because down that path lies the death of the FBI as an independent institution in America. I can’t consider for a second whose political fortunes will be affected in what way.’”

Now, Comey admits Clinton’s political fortunes were a factor in his decision, which means that by his own assessment, he personally put the FBI’s political independence at risk.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


The FBI is part of the Executive branch of the federal government. It is not independent. It works for the President, although it is supposed to be apolitical.

Close The Fed | April 14, 2018 at 9:41 pm

And he thinks he’s one of the “smart people”? His underling, with his observation that he might be helping elect Trump, was the more analytical.

The guidelines here, though, bother me. Americans should be kept apprised of information about candidates throughout. We pay for these investigations, and guidelines should be changed to reflect Americans deserve the best information possible when evaluating candidates.

Slippery little weasels aren’t unusual among career government types. But seeing one go through such gyrations in a futile attempt to cast himself in a bizarre, heroic light is really weird.

This, however, is pure revisionism from The Atlantic

The fact that the Trump inquiry was kept under wraps while the Clinton inquiry was not …

Comey certainly didn’t keep the Trump inquiry under wraps. In fact, he maintained the fraud that Trump himself was under investigation. He admitted to Trump that he was not, but refused to set the Press straight on that. That was Trump’s proximate cause for his termination. This has since been obscured by the smoke blown by all parties involved, but the President made it quite clear at the time.

    Olinser in reply to tom_swift. | April 14, 2018 at 10:08 pm

    Of course it is.

    Both decisions are completely consistent.

    They were BOTH made from the political standpoint of ‘do what we think would help Hillary the most’.

    Comey thought Hillary was going to win, and multiple sources have stated that the FBI field office point blank told Comey and McCabe that if they didn’t get a warrant for the Weiner laptop and reopen the investigation they would go public.

    Him announcing it was done from the calculus of, ‘She’s going to win so lets do whatever it takes to shut people up about her crimes’. He thought it would help Clinton.

    Meanwhile, the fact that they were spying on a political campaign based on a document that the National Enquirer would laugh at would have severely hurt Obama, and by extension Hillary.

    So he kept it quiet because that would help Clinton.

    Comey is a disgusting partisan weasel, and the FBI’s reputation is simply gone.

Paul In Sweden | April 14, 2018 at 10:29 pm

I just can’t seem to put all the Comey lies I am constantly hearing into some kind of order that makes sense. Since Comey seems to also be having a tremendously hard time making sense out of all his own lies, I am going to give myself a pass. Comey and the rest of the DOJ/FBI leadership really need to be sat down and put under oath so we can get a clue as to what happened during the various investigations(“MATTERS” LOL).

It seems to me that Comey testified before congress stating that all investigations into Hillary were concluded and then he then informed congress that new information had just surfaced and he was informing them that the investigation into Hillary was being reopened. I believe that is BS. Weiner’s laptop was in the FBI’s possession for quite some time and I believe the information regarding the Hillary emails were known and was actively being concealed. Comey was just covering up the fact that the FBI decided to whitewash the Hillary emails but realized that the scandal of the emails being on Weiner’s laptop was too big and would eventually come out. The FBI agents need to be put under oath and we need to find out who knew what and when. This whole thing stinks.

Comey is a high order narcissist, once you see that you get to see he is acting in a manner not unlike Obama and Hillary with the spins used to paint himself as the most honorable and pure person who ever walked on the face of the earth.

Many have commented on the things said in Congress and the things written in the book don’t jive. Quite a few have voiced the thought that his book shows the justification of why he was fired,

I hope he and Rosenstein and McGCabe are all put under investigation for the conspiracy they put together to enact a coup on the President. I wonder if Madcow was advising them, it’s so crazy.

The premise of this whole article is false. You selectively quote his words. Here’s the whole quote:

I was surprised when Donald Trump was elected president. I had assumed from media polling that Hillary Clinton was going to win. I have asked myself many times since if I was influenced by that assumption. I don’t know. Certainly not consciously, but I would be a fool to say it couldn’t have had an impact on me. It is entirely possible that, because I was making decisions in an environment where Hillary Clinton was sure to be the next president, my concern about making her an illegitimate president by concealing the restarted investigation bore greater weight than it would have if the election appeared closer or if Donald Trump were ahead in all polls. But I don’t know.

As you see, he explicitly denies making the sort of political decision you and everyone you quote is accusing him of. He did not make decisions based on polls, but if Ronald Klain thinks Reno was not influenced, even subconsciously, by what the polls were saying, he’s out of his expletive mind. Everyone is always and inevitably influenced by what they know, and there’s no point in denying it. And the assumption that Clinton was going to be the next president was almost universal in Washington, and was influencing everyone’s decisions.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Milhouse. | April 15, 2018 at 12:02 am

    No chance the guy is lying, right?

      tom_swift in reply to Henry Hawkins. | April 15, 2018 at 12:45 am

      “Certainly not consciously …”

      Looks like some people will believe anything.

      Milhouse in reply to Henry Hawkins. | April 15, 2018 at 1:41 am

      Since the entire basis of this post is his words, one either takes those words or one doesn’t. If you don’t trust his words then you have no basis for supposing any of this, and there’s nothing to discuss. There is no other evidence, apart from his own admission, that the polling even crossed his mind. And if you take his admission you have to take the whole thing. Pulling one sentence out of it is just dishonest.

        Barry in reply to Milhouse. | April 15, 2018 at 1:43 pm

        “then you have no basis for supposing any of this”

        Baloney. We can suppose anything we want about a book of fiction, on that basis.

      Not a chance the guy is self serving

    gibbie in reply to Milhouse. | April 15, 2018 at 12:04 am

    Milhouse, This is very interesting. I tried searching for the full quote as you supply it, and everything I found starts with “It is entirely possible …” and leaves out the context, so I suspect many writers are basing their articles on the same incomplete quotation.

    Please supply a reference to the larger context.

    I believe that many aspects of Comey’s behavior have been reprehensible, but truth is important.

      Milhouse in reply to gibbie. | April 15, 2018 at 1:37 am

      Gibbie, the full quote is in one of the links in this very post. Fuzzy Slippers surely saw it, since she linked to it.

        Yes, I saw it and thought it worth linking to. I don’t see the conflict you do. He’s hedging and doing a semantic dance, a point you unintentionally make when you admit that “everyone” was influenced by their knowledge (belief) that Hillary would win. If you want to burble on about how one’s subconscious influences action, then you have to explain how you exempt Comey from that evaluation. Because he said so and then kind of waffled about its influence on his decisions? That’s apparently your argument.

        What I was more interested in was his insistence that he was “operating in a world where Hillary Clinton was going to beat Donald Trump.” That world influenced his decisions, and we know this because we saw what he did and, importantly, what he did not do in the months leading up to the 2016 election. He was running interference for the Obama White House, the Lynch DOJ, and Hillary because, as he states, he was concerned that she would be “illegitimate president.”

        Do you note how he is actively working to undermine President Trump’s presidency, working his damnedest on making it illegitimate? This, to me anyway, is a real problem. He’s not interested in the Office of the president, he’s interested in who sits in that office.

          Milhouse in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 15, 2018 at 5:42 pm

          It is a simple and obvious fact that everyone is always influenced by what they know. And if what you know is that Clinton is bound to win, it’s going to have its effects on your thinking about everything. Ronald Klain claims to believe Reno was exempt from this; he’s obviously wrong. But there’s a million miles between this sort of unconscious influence and the sort of deliberate political calculations of which you accuse Comey, without any foundation at all.

    Milhouse, you write:

    As you see, he explicitly denies making the sort of political decision you and everyone you quote is accusing him of. He did not make decisions based on polls, but if Ronald Klain thinks Reno was not influenced, even subconsciously, by what the polls were saying, he’s out of his expletive mind. Everyone is always and inevitably influenced by what they know, and there’s no point in denying it. And the assumption that Clinton was going to be the next president was almost universal in Washington, and was influencing everyone’s decisions.

    So Comey is somehow not part of “everyone” because he explicitly denies being influenced by polls, but anyone denying being influenced by polls is “out of his expletive mind” because “Everyone [except Comey?] is always and inevitably influenced by what they know”? Huh?

    Further, “what they know” is ridiculous because he did not know, no one “knew,” that Hillary was going to win. As evidenced by the fact that she did not, in fact, win.

    I’m off to ponder how Comey is the only person on the planet who is exempt from your assertion that everyone [else] makes decisions based their understanding of the world and their belief in polls and that Hillary was going to win.

      Milhouse in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 15, 2018 at 5:32 pm

      Fuzzy, WTH are you talking about? How on earth did you derive an assertion that Comey was exempt from the same subconscious influences that affected everyone else? Your claim in this post is that he consciously based his decisions on the polls. And your entire basis for that claim is his own words, speculating that he may have been subconsciously influenced by the polls, but explicitly denying that he consciously took them into account. Either you take his entire statement or none of it. To do as you have done, and pretend he just admitted to making a political decision, is outright dishonest.

        Barry in reply to Milhouse. | April 15, 2018 at 9:02 pm

        “and pretend he just admitted to making a political decision”

        Downright funny that. No pretending required. The crook comey absolutely made decisions with extreme political consideration. His book of fiction doesn’t change that, it reinforces it.

          Milhouse in reply to Barry. | April 16, 2018 at 1:39 am

          This post is not about suspicions you or Fuzzy may have about Comey’s true motives. It’s about Comey’s own statement about his own motives. And Fuzzy claims Comey just admitted to making political decisions, when in fact he explicitly denied that. That’s dishonest.

          Barry in reply to Barry. | April 16, 2018 at 1:52 pm

          That’s your take and you are entitled to your opinion.

          I read it quite different. He is lying, trying to say he wasn’t influenced, but of course everyone is to some degree, giving him an out of some kind. He’s just admitting the truth, one we already know from the mountains of evidence.

        I was clear, so I’m not sure your problem here. Comey said he was “operating in a world” in which Hillary would be the next president and that he was concerned that not revealing the re-opened case would immediately “make her presidency illegitimate.”

        If you honestly think someone like Comey, with a lengthy background in law and at the FBI, didn’t have any idea at all what was going on or what he thought, then, that’s okay. You’re free to take his word for it that he didn’t consciously think about who might win the WH and be his next boss. Heck, why not? Comey had clearly demonstrated already how upright, honest, and ethical he was in his crazed condemnation of Hillary that led to his recommendation that she not be prosecuted. We also know that he so hates Trump that his agents were talking about Plan B to take him out (while Comey was busy hiding from Trump in some curtains). Yeah, that’s a guy I’m taking at his word.

        His “I didn’t think this way, but I would be a fool not to acknowledge I thought this way” is apparently confusing to you. That’s okay, we are all free to think what we will. And that includes you in impugning my integrity.

        For some reason I keep thinking of OJ’s “I didn’t do it, but if I did, it went down like this.” Go figure.

Comey is a crook.

Wonder if Comey will go down in history like a Benedict Arnold.

    Paul In Sweden in reply to oldschooltwentysix. | April 15, 2018 at 12:28 am

    That is not possible. Arnold was recognized and much esteemed as a brave, highly respected and accomplished general before he fell from grace. What accomplishments and grace did Comey ever have?

    Unlike Comey, Benedict Arnold was not a professional career weasel. He was in fact something of an American Achilles, easily ranking among the best battlefield commanders America has ever been lucky enough to have. He was such a paragon that even his defeats, such as the Battle of Valcour Island, were decisive to the outcome of the Revolution.

    That was what made his treason so shocking.

    To be fair, he had an expensive wife. Which wouldn’t have kept George Washington or Nathanael Greene from hanging him if they’d caught him.

If we just had an attorney general……….

Most likely Comey made the announcement that additional emails had been found and, therefor, the election was being reopened, because he had crawled way, way out on a very skinny limb in exonerating Clinton in Servergate already and the existence of the new emails was about to be leaked. So, he decided to get ahead of the story by releasing the info in order to attempt to appear apolitical. It was CYA. Did he believe that Clinton was going to be elected? Very likely. But, whether she won or not, he would still have been accused of exonerating HRC for political reasons.

    Paul In Sweden in reply to Mac45. | April 15, 2018 at 2:24 am

    The FBI had Weiner’s computer and knew of the emails dating back to Clinton’s days as Secretary of State, in fact so many people knew that Comey could not deny personally knowing that they existed after Oct 3rd but the whitewashing and slow walking dragged on until Oct 28 when so much pressure especially from the NYPD threatening to go public that the FBI stated that if they were actually interested in investigating Clinton we would have to obtain a warrant if we actually want to read them. One of the judges involved said that he would have issued a warrant weeks earlier if there were only a handful of emails from Hillary. This was a cover up. Wikileaks was all over it and the NYPD was really pissed off with the FBI cover up.

    The FBI did not need a warrant at all. Anthony Weiner and Huma were cooperating witnesses and would have been required to give their consent or they would loss their sweetheart deal. This was a fix and it stinks.

    So if even Comey, the head of the FBI knew there were emails from Sec. of State Hillary Clinton in Weiner’s possession on Oct 3rd how many other people knew and how long before then did they know? Why was nothing done until Oct 28th when they without actually needing to do so applied for and received a warrant on Oct 28?

Comey is even more evil and dangerous then we thought.

    Tom Servo in reply to Sally MJ. | April 15, 2018 at 11:09 am

    It’s astounding that someone can point to the corrupt Janet Reno, the murderer of children, and say with justification that even she was more ethical than James Comey.

This guy is so full of crap, its coming out of his ears.

Enough: indict.

Comey told Trump about the dossier, but held back the fact it was generated by the Clinton campaign leading Trump to believe it was generated by normal FBI practices. When asked if he should have told Trump the source of the dossier he says, “I don’t know”. Trump was his ultimate boss but didn’t know enough to demand all the intelligence and Comey was only going to give him what served Comey.

Comey, her illegitimacy would not have been altered by you revealing or failing to reveal its source.

Is this sneering moron supposed to be Hillary’s secret weapon?

That expression on his face reminds me of Diane Sawyer’s faux-concerned interviewing face.

Either that, or he has gas.

I expect the FBI director to be a sleaze bag. Look at Hoover. But at least Hoover did something. Comey is just plan stupid and so full of himself. I wonder how he got as far as he did? My guess is that he was someone’s puppet. Useful idiot is no longer needed so he is going to crash and burn. Maybe he was Mueller’s puppet.

Comey’s statements under oath before Congress seem a little inconsistent with what he wrote in his book.

It’s ok. Everybody knows you don’t write a book under oath …

Somehow I doubt the answer is in his book, but what is stupefying about Comey’s behavior is that while his partisanship was clear, his actions helped to destroy his (albeit unappealing) candidate.
This is a puzzle, and the only thing I can conclude is (political) incompetence on his part.
One other puzzle is that most people in his position might feel some legal caution in offering incriminating morsels in his (unusually recent and topical) memoir. Not Jim Comey! He is truly a man of mystery.

Suggested book title: “What A Tangled Web We Weave.” By an author so smart he out-smarted himself!