President Trump’s dismissal of James Comey as FBI director was unfortunate only in that it should have occurred sooner. Comey, however gifted he may have been as a prosecutor, was a loose cannon whose record over the last year was peppered with bizarre statements and errors of judgment.
Last July, Comey announced that he would not recommend that criminal charges be brought against Hillary Clinton for her use of a personal server to exchange emails while she was secretary of state. But he followed this statement with a detailed excoriation of the impropriety of Clinton’s behavior, calling her and her colleagues “extremely careless.” Comey concluded, “to be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.”
This statement, far from “clear,” only confused the issue. If the activity under investigation would generally deserve sanction, why wasn’t that the case for Clinton? Instead of laying the question of Clinton’s corruption to rest, Comey hinted that she was not being charged because it would be impossible to prosecute her—exactly the kind of special treatment for the elite that angered so many Americans during the election. Comey thus turned up the heat of suspicion and mistrust.
As FBI director, Comey, a former high-ranking federal prosecutor and deputy attorney general, seemed unwilling or unable to embrace the role of cop. No FBI director has ever before made such a disclosure about his recommendations to charge or not charge a subject of an investigation: that’s normally left to prosecutors. Comey’s unprecedented action was planned prior to the revelation that then-attorney general Loretta Lynch had met in private with former president Bill Clinton; Comey apparently wanted to reserve the moment in the spotlight for himself.
Source: for MORE