James Comey admits polls were 'a factor' in email announcement

Adjust Comment Print

So much so, that Comey wrote in his new book that he anxious the FBI, Justice Department and Clinton's potential presidency would face intense criticism if he hadn't announced the reopening of her private email server probe less than two weeks before the election. The president has heaped much of the blame for his ongoing legal troubles on the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and just Friday blasted Comey as an "untruthful slime ball".

Comey is re-entering the public after being fired by President Trump in 2017. But he said he also believed Clinton would still prove victorious. Clinton has said she partly blames Comey's handling of the investigation for her loss, as do many of her supporters.


While Comey doesn't divulge the information, many speculate whether the document relates to Lynch's infamous "tarmac meeting" with former President Bill Clinton just days before her Justice Department exonerated Hillary Clinton of any wrongdoing.

Comey is frank about what a distasteful task the investigation of a major presidential candidate represented for an agency that aspired to preserve its independence in an election rent by poisonous partisanship. However, in the book Comey acknowledges that he assumed at the time that Clinton would win the election. That revelation came more than three months after Comey said at a press conference that the Federal Bureau of Investigation would not be charging Clinton.


In March 2017, Comey confirmed the FBI was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election. She said nothing untoward happened during that incident.

Inside the extracts, Comey moreover says he intentionally wore a gold tie so he wasn't displaying the crimson or blue colors of the respective political occasions. "Hindsight is always helpful, and if I had to do it over again, I would do some things differently", he wrote. He moreover says that he wouldn't have modified his broader conduct, "nonetheless I can take into consideration good and principled people in my reveals making completely totally different selections about some points". "My use of "extremely careless" naturally sounded to many ears like the statutory language-'grossly negligent'-even though thoughtful lawyers could see why it wasn't the same".


Comments