HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why did the FBI have to i...

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 05:26 PM

Why did the FBI have to inform congress?

Seems like that is unusual.

Is it because once comey put out his announcement in July that the republicans called comey to Capitol Hill to explain (which is also unusual). Did they tell him that they had to be informed when things changed (which is also unusual)

34 replies, 2644 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 33 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why did the FBI have to inform congress? (Original post)
Proud liberal 80 Oct 2016 OP
meow2u3 Oct 2016 #1
thejoker123 Oct 2016 #2
Divine Discontent Oct 2016 #3
Avalux Oct 2016 #4
okaawhatever Oct 2016 #28
No Vested Interest Oct 2016 #5
imanamerican63 Oct 2016 #6
PoliticAverse Oct 2016 #7
Bucky Oct 2016 #8
yallerdawg Oct 2016 #11
Bucky Oct 2016 #12
yallerdawg Oct 2016 #14
Bucky Oct 2016 #16
yallerdawg Oct 2016 #17
Yo_Mama Oct 2016 #29
philosslayer Oct 2016 #18
Bucky Oct 2016 #23
Yo_Mama Oct 2016 #30
ecstatic Oct 2016 #21
napi21 Oct 2016 #10
Takket Oct 2016 #13
spanone Oct 2016 #15
ChoppinBroccoli Oct 2016 #19
Thor_MN Oct 2016 #22
dalton99 Oct 2016 #20
B_Mann Oct 2016 #24
uponit7771 Oct 2016 #25
Mystery sage Oct 2016 #26
Yo_Mama Oct 2016 #27
atreides1 Oct 2016 #31
Yo_Mama Oct 2016 #32
philosslayer Oct 2016 #34
TrollBuster9090 Oct 2016 #33

Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 05:34 PM

1. Sounds like Comey's motives are political

And that he's trying to undermine HRC's campaign and get the Tangerine Tyrant installed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 05:37 PM

2. He didn't have to, make no mistake

 

If he found something substantial you could argue he did, but the mere fact that he came into a possession of a device that may or may not have anything pertinent on it relating to the Clinton investigation in no way warrants a public letter to congress, especially 11 days out from an election.

This was a gift for republicans. Him trying to save his job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 05:37 PM

3. good question. all things behind closed doors are to be questioned for sure...

I'd go with your thought about the committee members who get spoken to by them, wanting to know if anything changes. It'll be news for the rest of the election, but, her opponent helps her gain votes every day, so not too much to worry about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 05:39 PM

4. I read that while under oath, Comey agreed to disclose new info within 48 hours.

Let me look for a link....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Avalux (Reply #4)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 08:58 PM

28. He mentioned as much in his second letter, but there was no 48 hour time limit. I heard Trump was

forcing his hand. Either Comey admits investigation or the story about the emails was coming out anyway, which makes sense. The question then becomes how did Trump's team get the info? Perhaps his comrades at Wiki?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 05:42 PM

5. "Out of an abundance of caution" - Steny Hoyer NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 05:43 PM

6. Saving face with the GOP!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 05:44 PM

7. Well he testified under oath that the investigation had been completed...

and noted today that "I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony" since apparently there was some additional relevant material discovered that the FBI is evaluating.

His letter:
In previous congressional testimony, I referred to the fact that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had completed its investigation of former Secretary Clinton's personal email server. Due to recent developments, I am writing to supplement my previous testimony.

In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation. I am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday, and I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation.

Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant, and I cannot predict how long it will take us to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony.

Sincerely Yours

James B. Comey

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 06:02 PM

8. A little thing called the Constitution requires Congress to oversee the Executive Branch

Of course status changing developments in a political investigation have to be reported to Congress. It's not collusion or prying. It's the law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bucky (Reply #8)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 06:26 PM

11. What?

Congress oversees FBI investigations?

This is a "political" investigation and they have to be reported to Congress?

It's the law?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yallerdawg (Reply #11)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 06:35 PM

12. Article 1, Section 8, "necessary and proper" clause

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.


Yes, Congress writes the laws of the land. To do that, they have the power of oversight for all federal agencies. It's called "checks and balances." Didn't your government teacher cover this when you were in high school? What the heck kind of republic would we have if the law enforcement agencies didn't answer to anyone outside the executive branch?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bucky (Reply #12)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 07:10 PM

14. No "government teacher" ever taught what your suggesting.

Constitutional "checks and balances" are to offset possible unconstitutional activities by another branch, not supersede their authority to do their jobs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yallerdawg (Reply #14)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 07:26 PM

16. No, not true. Let me explain.

Checks and balances is NOT only there to offset unconstitutional behavior. The president can veto a budget because he doesn't like it, no only because if he thinks it's unconstitutional. Where did you get such an outlandish idea?

And Congress can question and investigate and subpoena employees of both other branches for any policy reason, not just on Constitutional grounds. It's true federal judges are mostly limited by Constitutional questions, but that doesn't apply -- and has never applied -- to the legislative or executive functions for checking and balancing each other.

I'm not sure why you don't see that Congressional oversight is an important part of checks and balances. When I teach classes in American government, it's in the printed material. Any government teacher who leaves that out of her classroom instruction isn't doing her job.

Note, I'm not sayng Congressional Republicans don't abuse their oversight function. Clearly they do. What they did to Secretary Clinton over Benghazi is atrocious. They should all be turned out for that. But it is their duty. And I'm pretty sure the FBI director is required by law to report changes in status of important political investigations to Congress, even if they are October surprise bullshit cases like this one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bucky (Reply #16)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 07:55 PM

17. I'm talking about your outlandish ideas!

Comey is not compelled to send letters to Congress informing them the FBI may have found some emails that might have some classified material that might pertain to Hillary - 11 days before an election.

Also, I have never heard of a "political" criminal investigation, much less the FBI would be doing one.

In this sense, the "separation of powers" defines what each branch can and cannot do constitutionally. The "checks and balances" are also constitutional, and where issues come up involving the separation of powers, that is a constitutional matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yallerdawg (Reply #11)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 08:59 PM

29. Congress oversees the entire federal bureaucracy, which they created by law.

When things go awry, it's their duty to see to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bucky (Reply #8)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 08:09 PM

18. You're actually defending Comey on this???

 

What a disgusting position to take.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to philosslayer (Reply #18)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 08:14 PM

23. Good job on missing the point

I'm defending the rule of law. You clearly didn't read what I wrote.

For the record, compliance with the law is not optional for the FBI.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to philosslayer (Reply #18)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 09:03 PM

30. Comey had told members of Congress under oath something that now may

not be true. I don't see that he had the right, once he knew his testimony was false, not to correct the record. I believe he had been specifically asked if they would be informed if something changed, and said they would.

Comey didn't release this to the press - a member of Congress or a staff member must have.

This may well be a nothingburger for everyone except Huma, because she supposedly said she had turned over everything, and now it seems like that wasn't true. THAT is serious, but it probably depends on context and whether she got immunity and what that immunity covered.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bucky (Reply #8)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 12:54 AM

21. Isn't congress supposed to vote on supreme court nominees? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 06:19 PM

10. To cover Comey's a**.

flack from the Congressional Pubs for not issuing an indightment last July. The FBI found what appears to be some emails involving Huma and Hillary on Weiner's laptop but they have to get legal authorization to search them. They know it COULD be classified, but most likely they're not. If he keeps quiet now, and it turns out there IS something damaging there, he'd be FRIED! If it turns out there's nothing there, his Pubs would still be mad because he didn't jail her, but the Dems would fry him. He decided to protect himself no matter what the outcome, and the election be damned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 06:46 PM

13. at least we know there is nothing in the emails

if there was, it would already be in the headlines.

they have nothing, so they grandstand and say they MIGHT have something, which will buy them some additional support until after election day when we find out Hillary was just emailing personal things. it won't net them as many votes as actual emails showing wrongdoing, but it will do better than nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 07:20 PM

15. and how long has the FBI known this allegation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 12:15 AM

19. And I Just Heard Rep. Marcia Fudge Say He ONLY Sent The Letter To Republicans

Not politically motivated at all, I'm sure. Maybe Comey started hearing rumors that after Hillary wins, she's going to replace him, so he decided to put his thumb on the scale.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChoppinBroccoli (Reply #19)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 11:16 AM

22. He sent the letter to the Committee Chairpersons, which are all Republicans.

 

Republicans control the Committees, so don't read too much into that. If you were to write the to heads of Senate Committees, you would send the letter to only Republicans too. I just hope that the asshole that leaked the letter is revealed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 12:20 AM

20. Comey wanted to see Comey's name in the news

The self-righteous asshole used a non-issue to stoke the fire

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 08:21 PM

24. Lots of things are unusual about this election

I hope not to see another like this one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 08:41 PM

25. There was no need to disclose this right now...That's a know known

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 08:50 PM

26. It seems to me he ...

Wanted to come out of the closet for Trump and allies and this was the only way to do it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 08:57 PM

27. Because he told them something under oath that might well be no longer true.

Namely, that the FBI had secured all the repositories of emails that contained classified info.

By law, the FBI does have this responsibility. Congress has the constitutional power and duty of oversight. So when Congress has officially requested information from the FBI on this topic, a failure to correct the record would infuriate Congressional leaders and might be grounds for deposition.

The FBI is going to look through these emails to see if any of them have classified email, and if so, secure them and trace any possible leaks. That's why the unrelated investigation is important.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #27)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 09:40 PM

31. Okay

Then why did he only notify the committee chairs, and not the ranking members? Also, why did he feel it necessary to go against DOJ and FBI protocols and procedures?

When you look at the simple fact that the FBI hasn't even had time to determine if these emails are even pertinent to the original investigation...this looks like Comey was attempting to interfere with the elections!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to atreides1 (Reply #31)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 10:12 PM

32. I saw in an article that at least some Dems were notified as well.

So I assume he did. It's Congress, not the FBI, who made this info public. Or some Congressional staff member. Not the FBI.

I don't think Comey did violate norms here - this info wasn't released to the press by the FBI, and the press certainly went beyond what Comey said in the letter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to atreides1 (Reply #31)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 10:50 PM

34. The letter was sent to Democrats and Republicans.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Sat Oct 29, 2016, 10:18 PM

33. I was mentioning this in another thread. The House GOP simply 'worked the ref' until they

until they had him so rattled that he felt 'compelled' (his words) to inform them AGAINST the advice of the Attorney General, and AGAINST standard FBI policy.

The House GOP sent him out to investigate Clinton, and when he didn't indict her, THEY WENT AFTER THE FBI INSTEAD. They hauled him up before the oversight commettee and grilled him about WHY he didn't indict her. And then started insulting the FBI, questioning their integrity, issuing subpoenas to look at their NOTES, so they could find things to embarass them with. The message is clear: when we send you out to investigate our political oponents, you'd better indict them, or we'll come after YOU INSTEAD. Obviously they got him rattled to the point where he felt compelled to do this.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028259998

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread