Question about Comey's e-mail revelation just before the election
Granted, we were all suitably outraged by Comey's e-mail nonsense just before the election.
We have since learned that the FBI has had a Russian organized crime investigation ongoing for years, and then there's the revelation about the FISA warrant on Page (and possibly others that haven't been leaked). And, of course, the dossier. So the FBI knew full well that 45 et al were as fraudulent as the proverbial 3 dollar bill and, presumably, building a case against one and all.
You could argue that Comey was a tool. Or a fool. Or whatever. But at that level of government - at least during Democratic administrations - for the most part the people at the top are smart, dedicated, competent. Not perfect, mind you, but generally not stupid or rash or corrupt. So what if the big reveal about the e-mails before the election was deliberate? In other words, it was judged to be "better" for the country in the long run to jeopardize the election for Hillary in order to secure indictments for Page, Manafort, Sater, Flynn, et al, and the impeachment (and eventual indictment) of 45 and Pence. Yes, this could create a constitutional crisis, but it strikes a possible fatal blow to Russian interference in the US. If Hillary were to win and the investigation into collusion with Russia were to continue, there would the smell of vindictiveness. (Of course, vindictiveness is acceptable for Republicans. After all, picture the outrage machine in action if Hillary were to have conducted herself as 45 has.) And the investigations might have stopped or slowed sufficiently that the Russians would continue to be a threat.
Maybe I need to cut back on my purchases of tinfoil hats?
= new reply since forum marked as read
