FBI Takes a Position in Presidential Politics

October31, 2016. When the Watergate scandal had been top news for months and the so-called Erwin Subcommittee of the U.S. Senate had been exposing evidence of White House crimes for many weeks, the FBI Director finally let it be known his agency had done almost nothing except watch. Remember? The usual excuse given, however, was that the FBI should stay out of Presidential politics—even if that meant ignoring Presidential involvement in burglary. You may remember that the burglars belonged to a unit that had been created by the Republican Party and the White House. As the head of both Party and House, Richard Nixon was implicated by the actions of both, and the victim of the burglary was the Democratic National Committee, the purpose of the burglary appeared to be the obtaining of political information for political purposes, and the burglary occurred in the middle of a presidential election. The Director of the FBI kept the Bureau out of the fray and the Bureau contributed very little, if anything, to the investigation of the Watergate burglary. Few people expressed disappointment at that fact because it was generally recognized that the overall working of our democracy depends upon—among many other factors—on the absolute neutrality of the national criminal investigation unit of the national government.

When the government’s criminal investigation forces become involved in politics very bad things usually happen. Think of Joseph Stalin controlling the KGB an using that control to turn Leon Trotsky into a fugitive, while millions of other Russians were being turned into “suspects”. Think of former KGB boss Putin becoming dictator in Russia. Think of J. Edgar Hoover wiretapping Martin Luther King, Jr., keeping secret files on numerous other American political leaders, and leading the country into the paranoid McCarthy era. Think of the use of the Thought Police in Orwell’s novel 1984; there the investigative arm of the government’s police has become the brutal enforcer of a tyrannical government that demands conformity in thought and deed. Think of the incorporation of Hitler’s SS into the national police in Germany, and remember the consequences.

The Clinton Email investigation has been one of the strangest uses of police power for its entire duration. It starts with the FBI announcing that it is investigating the former Secretary of State for the allegedly criminal activity of putting her Email on her private computer and sharing some of it with her closest confidants and advisors. This is said by some to be dangerous, as well as a violation of the rules of her Department. Why? Because some criminal might hack into her private Email server the same way that criminals have hacked into the official government servers repeatedly. If that had happened, unspecified diplomatic secrets of the State Department might join the mighty stream of secret government documents that are being released by these hackers almost daily. The public might learn about State Department activities and policies that are, or should be, unpopular. Think here of the revelation that the government’s official spy agencies have hacked into the private Email of Andrea Merkel, the Chancellor of Germany! And then been hacked by Wikileaks so that ordinary people learned of the spy agency’s unscrupulous behavior. The insinuation of the FBI investigation was that the Secretary of State of a democracy had possibly committed the allegedly heinous act of exposing herself and the U.S. government to the same sort of embarrassment the FBI or a similar government spy outfit had inflicted unwittingly on the German head of government.

Several months ago Mr. Comey announced to Congressional investigating committees that, though careless, the former Secretary of State had committed no crime, injured no victim, and done nothing that deserved a criminal indictment. This news so infuriated her Republican critics that they began demanded that she be jailed anyway. They nominated a man who announced he would see to it that his presidential victory would lead to the incarceration of his political rival anyhow. Numerous Republican spokesmen called for their life-long Republican comrade, Mr. Comey, to resign in disgrace after admitting that careless handling of Email has in fact been made a serious crime by the statute book, even if Mrs. Clinton would become the first person ever treated as a criminal for committing that error. They expected better of a man who has never been a law enforcement officer, but who has been a senior vice-president of LOCKEED MARTIN, one of the world’s largest weapons makers and who has been a major operative for THE world’s largest hedge fund. Personally I expected Mr. Comey to become again involved in insinuating that the Democratic nominee just might be headed for legal trouble again. He has fulfilled my expectations. This weekend he wrote a letter to the Congress and announced that the national police, the FBI, would be reopening the Email investigation. This time his insinuation also includes reference to a Jewish Congressman’s inappropriate communications with a fifteen year old girl. And it is open ended, not to be substantially resolved until after the voting for president between now and next week. Half-truths and hints of dark deeds have always been more effective for character assassination than clear accusations of specific wrongdoing. The Federal Bureau of Insinuation. Very sad development indeed.

Comments are encouraged, though your first one on this blog must be approved by blog author before it appears. Thanks!