Shortly after news broke that the FBI had found emails on Anthony Weiner’s computer that were connected to Hillary Clinton and was investigating them, I wrote that FBI Director James Comey was simply doing his job.
I said his decision to inform Congress of the investigation fulfilled a promise he had previously given and could in no way be considered a violation of the Hatch Act 1939. I also pointed out that the idea that he could suppress news of an investigation that required a court warrant was absurd.
I also made this point about Hillary Clinton’s reaction
“Whilst a secure and confident person would welcome the FBI investigation, say they had nothing to hide, and offer assistance, Hillary Clinton’s reaction and that of her campaign team is to release the attack dogs. Thus over the last two days we have seen an obviously orchestrated storm of criticism of FBI Director James Comey, with claims that he is trying to influence the election, is breaching protocols, and may even have broken federal law, by informing Congress of the new investigation before the election has taken place.”
It is worth revisiting some of the allegations this “obviously orchestrated storm of criticism of FBI Director Comey” has involved.
Comey has been accused of breaching the Hatch Act, of abuse of his office, of trying to swing the election in Donald Trump’s favour, and – absurdly – of suppressing evidence of Donald Trump’s (non existent) Russian connections. The FBI – the country’s premier police agency – has in the meantime been accused of being riddled with Trump supporters and Hillary Clinton haters. There have even been fantastic claims that it has ‘looked the other way’ as (non existent) ’evidence’ of Russian attempts to help Donald Trump win the election have ‘mounted up’ (!).
It should not need saying that all these allegations are completely absurd, yet over the last few days they have been all over the US news media, as well as being broadcast to all corners of the world.
With news that the FBI is not going to launch a prosecution of Hillary Clinton we can see how utterly counter-productive this campaign has been.
If Hillary Clinton had done what I suggested – welcomed the FBI investigation, said she had nothing to hide, and offered assistance – she would now be looking completely vindicated, whilst Donald Trump’s attacks on her would look absurd. Instead, by launching the attack dogs on FBI Director Comey, she has made the world think he succumbed to her pressure.
The result is that instead of Hillary Clinton today looking vindicated, Comey’s latest announcement will not only fail to persuade anyone, but has made Hillary Clinton look like a bully.
This ugly pattern of behaviour: the secrecy, the defensiveness, the bullying, and – as so often articulated by her supporters – the sense of entitlement and the self pity, only succeeds in alienating people, and in drawing suspicion on Hillary Clinton even in situations where there are actually no grounds for it. It explains why she is so unpopular and so distrusted.
Politically successful US Presidents – eg. Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, even Hillary Clinton’s husband Bill Clinton – were certainly not ignorant of some of politics’ darker arts. However they never let themselves be consumed by them. Hillary Clinton has to an extreme degree, which is why – as I said previously – she is not a fit person to be President. A dreadful prospect awaits the American people if she is elected tomorrow.