[WSJ] The former FBI director professes to know little about how the government came to spy on the political opposition.
Can the story former FBI Director James Comey told Congress on Friday possibly be true? In a joint executive session of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees, Mr. Comey presented himself as unaware and incurious regarding one of the most consequential investigations the FBI has ever conducted. After describing how little he knew about the federal government’s use of its surveillance powers against associates of the presidential campaign of the party out of power in 2016, Mr. Comey then assured lawmakers that the launching of the investigation was proper and free of political bias.
On Saturday a transcript of the Comey testimony was released by the congressional committees. President Donald Trumptweeted without subtlety on Sunday:
On 245 occasions, former FBI Director James Comey told House investigators he didn’t know, didn’t recall, or couldn’t remember things when asked. Opened investigations on 4 Americans (not 2) - didn’t know who signed off and didn’t know Christopher Steele. All lies!
This is perhaps an overstatement. But some skepticism is clearly in order on the part of the President and every other American who wants free and fair elections. Lawmakers were interested in finding out who exactly initiated the investigation and when. Here’s a portion of the transcript in which the Obama administration FBI boss was questioned by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R., S.C.):
Mr. Gowdy. Do you recall who drafted the FBI’s initiation document for that late July 2016 Russia investigation?
Mr. Comey. I do not.
Mr. Gowdy. Would you disagree that it was Peter Strzok?
Mr. Comey. I don’t know one way or the other.
Mr. Gowdy. Do you know who approved that draft of an initial plan for the Russia investigation in late July 2016?
Mr. Comey. I don’t.
This was not just any investigation. On the other hand the FBI is a big place and perhaps the director would not recall which of the staff had worked on a particular document. Under further questioning from Mr. Gowdy, Mr. Comey added that he didn’t remember ever even seeing the document. Again, one might hope that consequential cases going to the heart of our democratic process would be closely supervised by the most senior officials, but any case generates some volume of documents and an FBI director may be able to learn enough from staff briefings to make sensible decisions. The next part of the transcript is harder to swallow:
Mr. Gowdy. How does the FBI launch counterintelligence investigations? What documents are required?
Mr. Comey. I don’t know for sure because it’s opened far below the Director’s level. But there’s documentation in criminal investigations and in counterintelligence investigations to explain the predication for the opening of a file, that is, the basis for the opening of a file.
Mr. Gowdy. Who at the FBI has the authority to launch a counterintelligence investigation into a major political campaign, and would that eventually have to be approved by you?
Mr. Comey. I don’t know for a variety of reasons. I’ve never encountered a circumstance where an investigation into a political campaign was launched, and so I don’t know how that would be done.
Saying that he’s never dealt with the investigation of a political party may seem like a falsehood but Mr. Comey argues that his bureau was not investigating the 2016 Trump campaign as a whole but particular people associated with it. This must be reassuring for Americans to know that the next time they are surveilled while engaging in political activity, perhaps not all of their friends and colleagues will be subjected to such treatment.
However Mr. Comey chooses to characterize the cases he was supposed to be overseeing, he is now saying that neither at that time nor in the more than two years since did he ever know or bother to find out how investigations of political campaigns begin or who authorizes them. Wouldn’t even a passionate anti-Trumper‐which Mr. Comey is‐be at least curious how the machinery operates when his own subordinates take the extraordinary step of investigating the party out of power?
At least according to his Friday testimony, Mr. Comey did not become any more interested in details once the FBI surveillance machinery was grinding its way toward a series of wiretaps. By now many Americans have understandably grown weary of the various Russian collusion claims. But in the summer and fall of 2016 the FBI was supposedly trying to determine if a hostile foreign power had compromised a leading candidate for President.
This is the stuff of spy novels. But even the real former spy peddling bizarre claims that would assist the Obama administration’s pursuit of those wiretaps didn’t arouse much curiosity or suspicion in the FBI chief, according to Mr. Comey’s Friday testimony. In this portion of the transcript it appears that to this day Mr. Comey doesn’t much care whether the bureau’s source was indirectly paid by the Democratic National Committee to generate dirt on Mr. Trump:
Mr. Gowdy. Who is Christopher Steele?
Mr. Comey. My understanding is that Christopher Steele is a former intelligence officer of an allied nation who prepared a series of reports in the summer of 2016 that have become known as the Steele dossier.
Mr. Gowdy. How long did he have a relationship with the FBI?
Mr. Comey. I don’t know...
Mr. Gowdy. When did you learn he was working for Fusion GPS?
Mr. Comey. I don’t know that I ever knew that...
Mr. Gowdy. When did you learn that Fusion GPS was hired by Perkins Coie?
Mr. Comey. I never learned that, certainly not while I was Director.
Mr. Gowdy. Well, when did you learn the DNC had hired Perkins Coie?
Mr. Comey. I never learned that. Again, while I was Director. I think I’ve read it in the media, but, yeah, even today, I don’t know whether it’s true.
Wouldn’t a reasonable person make it his business to find out who paid whom if for no other reason than to make sure that as FBI director he hadn’t been taken in by a partisan attack disguised as a national security case?
Mr. Comey rejected the possibility that law enforcers in the Obama administration targeted Team Trump in response to questioning by Rep. Ted Deutch (D., Fla.):
Mr. Deutch. Director Comey, do you believe the FBI or DOJ ever investigated the Trump campaign for political purposes?
Mr. Comey. I not only don’t believe it, I know it not to be true.
Mr. Deutch. I’m sorry, would you repeat that?
Mr. Comey. I know it not to be true. I know that we never investigated the Trump campaign for political purposes.
How would he know, if the rest of his testimony is accurate?
#1
How would he know, if the rest of his testimony is accurate?
Silly WSJ! Because it now appears as though such an action might be perceived to be less than salutatory, in the eyes of some. Therefore, IOTTMCO*, my agency could not have engaged in such activity.
* IOTTMCO - From high-school geometry. Intuitively Obvious To The Most Casual Observer.
Posted by: Bobby ||
12/11/2018 10:48 Comments ||
Top||
When a criminal keeps committing crimes in open defiance of law enforcement, there's comes a point when you have to scrutinize the "good guys", not just the criminal.
#5
Instead, they should be asking him questions about whether or not things that might have allegedly happened would be good or bad. He should be able to answer those since they are just supposition, not accusations. And then we can hang him with the answers later when the facts are revealed.
#3
Framing the rise of Trumpism as a political ill the country needed to exorcise at the ballot, he expressed a hope that Americans would “in a landslide rid ourselves of this attack on our values.”
Sorry, James. You missed you chance last month.
Posted by: Bobby ||
12/11/2018 10:50 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Afraid he'll be prosecuted by Trump for his handling of Hillary's emails no doubt.
[Declination] I keep hearing about all of these Illegal Aliens present in the USA, who "are law-abiding, hard-working, and kept out of trouble". Why, we are scolded, are we so intent on removing these stellar people who have done NOTHING wrong.
Well, except for being in this country without our consent.
Piffle. Such a minor offense, if you can CALL it an offense. A minor misdemeanor.
Oh, really? The fact is, those aliens have committed multiple crimes ‐ crimes that, in fact, DO hurt Americans ‐ quite a lot.
#1
Look
If you sneaked in to disney land and went on the rides it would be a crime. Paying people would have to wait longer and prices of things in the park would go up to compensate.
#2
Inevitably they need a false idea to remain hiding in plain sight - hence they usually steal the identity and SSN of an American Citizen. That causes harm and financial and time damages to a real Citizen.
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/11/2018 8:31 Comments ||
Top||
#3
It should be a non-deportable felony to use someone elses SSN. Maybe make a single one for guest workers to pay into that can then help keep the Social Security system floating an extra 20 minutes.
#6
Wait until one of them climbs to the top of the fence and starts waving his arms. Vaporize his head with .308 round. Party will be over, they'll all head back home.
[Daily Caller] The China Daily, a Chinese government media outlet, published an article, "Pakistan key to Afghan peace process," by an author from Pakistan, an ally of China, which not only drips with irony but unabashedly explains the Chinese-Pakistani plan for the future of Afghanistan.
It originates from the "non-governmental" Beijing think tank, the Center for China and Globalization, founded and run by former high officials of the Chinese government, one of which was chief negotiator for China’s entry into the World Trade Organization.
The article begins by blaming the United States for waging "an unnecessary and avoidable war" for 17 years, despite the fact that it was actually Pakistan who provided safe haven and supported a Taliban proxy army that "caused the deaths of countless innocent people."
Contrary to the author’s contention, it was not the War in Afghanistan that "has endangered and destabilized the whole region" but Pakistan’s domestic policy of promoting Islamic extremism to subdue ethnic self-determination and its use of terrorism as an instrument of its foreign policy that led to and nurtured that war.
The author then conveniently identifies the countries collaborating with Pakistan to hasten a U.S. exit from South Asia; China, Russia, Iran and Turkey.
U.S. withdrawal is necessary for "the true potential of the Belt and Road Initiative, especially China-Pakistan Economic Corridor", to be realized because "Eurasia, Russia and Central Asia can only utilize Gwadar [Pakistan’s port] as a newly emerged trade route through Afghanistan, where CPEC may later extend in the future."
That can happen when "the [United States] completely withdraws from the country, as in Vietnam ... and Pakistan can facilitate this by providing a safe passage for a U.S .withdrawal." The subtle message being that Pakistan will continue to attack Afghanistan with its Taliban proxies until the United States does so.
Here is the punchline: "China’s Belt and Road Initiative and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization objectives can only be realized only when there is a stable Afghanistan," that is, a Chinese-Pakistani controlled Afghanistan.
And here is how the Chinese-Pakistani plan will unfold.
Posted by: Besoeker ||
12/11/2018 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
Let them have it, arc light the runways and major roads on our way out.
[MIL TIMES] For decades, small arms advocates have pushed for a replacement for the M16/M4 weapons carried by most soldiers, Marines and special operators.
And despite long-running programs that have come on the scene and later floundered before being canceled, the much revised 5.56mm weapon and its similarly chambered light machine gun counterpart have continued to be the mainstay of squad-level firepower.
But news over the past year, from the secretary of defense to service chiefs and heads of small arms programs across the force, has revealed the potential for an actual replacement of the weapon first delivered to troops more than half a century ago.
And that weapon is expected to do far more than simply shoot a bigger bullet and weigh less.
Instead, it is designed to be the centerpiece of a more lethal fighting force as ground combat troops see evolutions in their training and equipping take place more rapidly than they’ve seen in decades.
Next summer, prototypes of the new weapon are expected to be ready for test fires. By the end of next year, an advanced night vision and sophisticated targeting system will be reaching troops. All with the goal of getting more rounds downrange, on target and exceeding anything adversaries have in their inventory or will have for years to come.
Though it is an Army program, Marines and special operations forces have been involved in providing feedback on weapons development and will receive the new weapon when fielded. Marines are already scheduled to get thousands of the new night vision devices the Army plans to start fielding late next year.
#1
Prices have really come down on thermal scopes. I picked up a FLIR scope earlier this year for hog hunting, and I was amazed at the quality of image at middle distances. Our troops should have no less.
[AP] NEW YORK (AP) ‐ This year has seen a record number of cases of a mysterious paralyzing illness in children, U.S. health officials said Monday.
It’s still not clear what’s causing the kids to lose the ability to move their face, neck, back, arms or legs. The symptoms tend to occur about a week after the children had a fever and respiratory illness.
No one has died from the rare disease this year, but it was blamed for one death last year and it may have caused others in the past.
What’s more, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention officials say many children have lasting paralysis. And close to half the kids diagnosed with it this year were admitted to hospital intensive care units and hooked up to machines to help them breathe.
The condition has been likened to polio, a dreaded paralyzing illness that once struck tens of thousands of U.S. children a year. Those outbreaks ended after a polio vaccine became available in the 1950s. Investigators of the current outbreak have ruled out polio, finding no evidence of that virus in recent cases.
The current mystery can be traced to 2012, when three cases of limb weakness were seen in California. The first real wave of confirmed illnesses was seen in 2014, when 120 were reported. Another, larger wave occurred in 2016, when there were 149 confirmed cases. So far this year, there have been 158 confirmed cases.
In 2015 and 2017, the counts were far lower, and it’s not clear why.
The condition is called acute flaccid myelitis, or AFM. Investigators have suspected it is caused by a virus called EV-D68. The 2014 wave coincided with a lot of EV-D68 infections and the virus "remains the leading hypothesis," said Dr. Ruth Lynfield, a member of a 16-person AFM Task Force that the CDC established last month to offer advice to disease detectives.
#4
When there has been a wave in the U.S., cases spiked in September and tailed off significantly by November.
Curious, Holmes. There is nothing at all special about September - other than kids going back to school and spending their time indoors together.
Anyone attempt to correlate regional elementary school classroom attendance, demographic make-up, etc ?
You mean do the things epidemiologists do when fighting an epidemic? The problem with that is you might find answers that are, uhm, politically unappealing. Best keep a lid on it.
I've been trying halfheartedly to find a map showing where the cases are, but have not seen anything beyond aggregate cases at the state level. Perhaps my google-fu is weak...
#5
I'm afraid political correctness wouldn't allow an honest discussion of this particular source, or any other non-domestically-inherent contagion
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/11/2018 9:45 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Our local Medical folks tell me that the first cases they heard of this were in the Minneapolis area.
FWIW
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
12/11/2018 12:02 Comments ||
Top||
#7
From the "Related" link:
2. It Spreads Easily
EV-D68 is spread just like the common cold. That means frequent and thorough hand washing with soap and water for 20 seconds -- is one of the best ways to avoid the virus. Remind your children to avoid touching their eyes, nose and mouth with unwashed hands, and to cover coughs and sneezes with a tissue or shirt sleeve, not their hands. Clean and disinfect touched surfaces, like your child's toys, countertops and doorknobs. Strober recommends keeping your children away from kids who are sick, and keep them home from daycare or school if they are sick to avoid spreading the virus.
Posted by: Bobby ||
12/11/2018 12:05 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Hmmm, looks like it is time to home school your kids.
[Red State] A little earlier today, the Supreme Court declined to hear challenges to two lower court rulings that said states could not refuse to recognize Planned Parenthood as a Medicaid provider. Kansas and Louisiana passed laws in 2014, based on the celebrated undercover videos of James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas that showed Planned Parenthood officials sizing up the value of aborted babies with all the conscience of the manager of a mob-owned New Jersey auto chop-shop.
Conservative justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Samuel Alito voted in favor of taking up the challenge, but fellow conservatives John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh voted against, depriving their colleagues of the four votes required to review a case.
Given the criminality involved and the basic absence of medical care available at Planned Parenthood facilities (no, they actually don’t do mammograms and most of their services are no more sophisticated that what you get at a drug store and do yourself at home...other than killing babies, of course) this should have been an open-and-shut issue of what businesses state governments decide to give their money to.
#2
Sorry, but that headline from Red State is terribly misleading. What the court decided was not to hear appeals from conflicting appellate court decisions, which said in several circuits that private parties could sue states over changes in Medicaid coverage or providers, and in another circuit, which said they could not sue. All the Supreme Court did was to not rule (for now) on the issue of who could sue. This allows lawsuits in several Circuits to go forward in a district court which will eventually decide whether states can defund providers. Nothing gives Planned Parenthood any 'rights'. This was a decision not to allow hearings on whether Federal law allows such lawsuits from private persons, if for instance, their preferred doctor is removed from Medicaid plans, or if a state decides to pay more or less for any given medical procedure or service. The 2 states which were the subject of the lawsuits did defund Planned Parenthood, but the case the Supreme Court passed on was about who could sue, not on the issue of PP.
#4
JC your description, in 177 words, is the best synopsis of this non-ruling I've heard in the voluminous over-bloviations from both sides.
Thank you
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
12/11/2018 10:29 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Glad to be of help. It has been speculated that both Roberts and Kavanaugh voted not to hear the appeal (for now), because they feared that it would be misrepresented as an abortion case, or a Planned Parenthood case, and so cause more discord, especially considering Kavanaugh's confirmation fight. Clarence Thomas wrote a serious dissent, in which he said resolving splits among the circuits is the Supreme Court's responsibility (he's right), and the only reason the liberals, Roberts and Kavanaugh declined to hear the case is because it has the name "Planned Parenthood" in it somewhere. Legal experts seem to think they will wait for a similar case and hear it, when it is less likely to lead to more hate and discontent. It also sounds like whenever the case (or a similar case) is heard, the Court will rule that Congress did not intend for citizens to have the right to sue over every administrative decision made by Medicaid managers. In the meantime, it seems unlikely Congress will look at this and tighten the statute, since the houses of Congress are now split. This is really kind of an unimportant non-issue which will get settled in a year or two.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[MIL TIMES] For decades, small arms advocates have pushed for a replacement for the M16/M4 weapons carried by most soldiers, Marines and special operators.
[AP] NEW YORK (AP) ‐ This year has seen a record number of cases of a mysterious paralyzing illness in children, U.S. health officials said Monday.
[Red State] A little earlier today, the Supreme Court declined to hear challenges to two lower court rulings that said states could not refuse to recognize Planned Parenthood as a Medicaid provider. Kansas and Louisiana passed laws in 2014, based on the celebrated undercover videos of James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas that showed Planned Parenthood officials sizing up the value of aborted babies with all the conscience of the manager of a mob-owned New Jersey auto chop-shop.
