Comey conundrum crime collusion

En Garde in the bunker…

Consider this as the Comey conundrum crime number one: Back in the heady days of 2016 as the presidential campaigns were really getting into high gear, Comey never considered recommending charges against the Duchess of Chappaqua, Hillary Rob’em Clinton (aka ‘Felonia de pantsuit’), since he had written her exoneration letter long before he even questioned her; but then again, he didn’t even put her under oath or take her statement.

Don’t you wish that if you were being investigated by the FBI that you would get this kind of treatment, innocent without ever having to prove anything to anybody? But I digress…

Comey conundrum crime number two: Once the evidence of Hillary Clinton (aka ‘Felonia de pantsuit’) and her criminal activities became widely known, it wasn’t so much a matter of Comey making mistakes, but of Comey being put in an untenable position by events. Courtesy of ‘Felonia de pantsuit’ and her many felonies, Comey would influence the election either by ACTION or INACTION.

Comey conundrum crime number three: For at least the last 6 months of the campaign, there was a real possibility that some lower-level FBI employee would sacrifice career for country and go public with details of the cover-up and inaction regarding the Duchess of Chappaqua (aka ‘Felonia de pantsuit’) if her crimes were to pass a certain level of egregiousness. I mean – who could know?

Which brings us to the fact, then, that Comey was doing his best, under impossible circumstances, to run interference for the Duchess of Chappaqua and the DemoMarxists.

He did this first by attempting to get in front of the bad news before it was leaked from less-controlled sources (as in the first 80 percent of his July 2016 statement; followed by the October 2016 announcement of a re-start after Anthony Wiener got into the underwear). And second, by giving out ludicrous statements with the patina of official authority, as to why an obvious prosecution would NOT take place (ie the last 20 percent of his July statement, and the November “Never mind” follow-up on Wienergate.)

This Comey conundrum course of action appears to have been chosen as a way to minimize the inevitable damage to the Duchess of Chappaqua (aka ‘Felonia de pantsuit’) and her failed campaign brought on by her own actions.

That it was not enough, we may take as proof of a Divine Benevolent Providence who involves himself in the affairs of men (and Duchesses of Chappaqua, aka ‘Felonia de pantsuit’).

Jay D. Homnick, and his eye-opening piece in The American Spectator, titled ‘James and the Giant Preach – Yet another way the Tall Talker has incriminated himself’ …

James Comey loves to preach to us lesser mortals about ethics and such. Like Jimmy Carter before him, James Comey has let the J.C. initials get to his head and thinks he can walk on water. Now that he is trying to plug a book at the same time, he is in danger of electrocution.

Comey’s contribution to Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations, for now, is this classic: “No reasonable prosecutor would bring such charges.” The idea that Comey has a clue of what defines reasonableness is itself impugned each time he opens his mouth. His new book, A Higher Loyalty, is subtitled “Truth, Lies and Leadership.” In it he offers a bit of the first, a lot of the second, and none of the third.

The usual suspects have come out in favor of Comey, hoping in some way to shine more darkness into Donald Trump’s life, and the other set of usual suspects have come out in opposition. This partisan divide gives a momentary false impression. One viewing from the outside, with no horse in the race or ox being gored, may be pardoned for thinking Comey has committed liberal virtue and conservative vice, that on the left he is in the right. In fact, he is guilty by whatever standard one cares to apply. And he is hoist on his own petard, condemned by his own confession.

Here is my point. Comey says in his magnum opus that the reason he allowed himself to send a letter to Congress in October 2016 to announce the reopening of the Clinton email investigation was that he thought she was safely ahead and this development would not prove disruptive. The critics of this statement on the Republican side have bemoaned his politicization of the investigative process. FBI Directors are not supposed to base law enforcement decisions on the conditions of electoral polls.

These critics are right, of course, but they are missing the forest for the trees. Much more is at stake here than cops looking over their shoulder to stay in step with political trends.

This is a confession of actual crime.

For the entire revelation of Comey crimes simply click here…

The Duchess of Chappaqua (aka ‘Felonia de pantsuit’) surrounded by loyal corruptocrats…

The unfortunate Comey conundrum brings to mind the old adage – ‘If brains were dynamite, he’d be hard pressed to blow his own nose…’

Bottom line on the Comey conundrum is that his weird claim as to why he re-opened the Duchess of Chappaqua (aka ‘Felonia de pantsuit’)  investigation when he did is revealing in a lunatic sort of way. It’s more than loony for the Director of the FBI to begin by thinking he really could determine the ‘legitimacy’ of the Duchess of Chappaqua’s presumed/desired election by not giving it his personal imprimatur for a second time.

In short, despite the long and totally inconsistent title of his (as Jay D. Homnick calls it) ‘Magnus Opus’, the Comey conundrum is just not that important to our political system. It is however, revealing that the former Director of the FBI who seriously believed he had the power to legitimize a presidential election, now ends up in actively attempting to delegitimize one that is neither expected nor desired, namely, that of President Donald J. Trump.

The Comey conundrum implicitly implies that suspicions he has been deliberately and intentionally trying to do exactly that since Trump won are fully justified. And therein lies the Comey conundrum, for which he surely needs to be brought to task.

*************************

See also Rich Logis: Is James Comey Insane?

And Thomas Lifson: Comey leaked classified memo ‘special government employee’

Plus further Lifson: Comey hired notorious Fitzgerald for legal team after Trump fired him

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.