Did we come close to a "Saturday night massacre"?

[Anonymous]

More precisely it would have been a "Friday night massacre" - the Saturday night massacre for those not familiar with the term is associated with the Watergate scandal when the AG and Deputy AG both resigned because they would not fire Cox - the special prosecutor - in accordance with Nixon's orders.

I ask this because it turns out that AG Loretta Lynch and Deputy AG Sally Yates were both opposed to Comey sending the letter that he did. He effectively disregarded their admonition and sent the letter. I don't know if they ever ordered him not to send it because if that happened the likelihood is that Comey would have resigned which would have cause a major fracas and scandal. Alternatively, Lynch could have fired Comey for insubordination which would have also had major repercussions.

Comey is a straight-shooter and has stood up for principle in the past:

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/clinton-emails-only-latest-controversy-fbi-director-james-comey-n675006

Re the AG being opposed to the letter being sent:

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/james-comey-broke-with-loretta-lynch-and-justice-department-tradition

[jsteele]

It seems that you answered your own question and that we didn't come close to a Saturday night massacre. There is no indication that the President was involved which is pretty essential to the comparison and no indication of any orders being given.

Why are you trying to make a controversy out of the AG and Deputy AG's actions when the real oddity is the apparently violation by Comey of standard FBI procedures?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:It seems that you answered your own question and that we didn't come close to a Saturday night massacre. There is no indication that the President was involved which is pretty essential to the comparison and no indication of any orders being given.
?
Why are you trying to make a controversy out of the AG and Deputy AG's actions when the real oddity is the apparently violation by Comey of standard FBI procedures?

Yes, there is no indication that Obama was involved but don't you think it is remarkable that Comey disregarded Lynch - who is his erstwhile boss - and proceeded to notify select members of Congress?

Are you aware of any other instances when a high ranking official in the federal government effectively challenged his superior on a matter of sensitivity and disregarded the superior's order?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:It seems that you answered your own question and that we didn't come close to a Saturday night massacre. There is no indication that the President was involved which is pretty essential to the comparison and no indication of any orders being given.
?
Why are you trying to make a controversy out of the AG and Deputy AG's actions when the real oddity is the apparently violation by Comey of standard FBI procedures?

Yes, there is no indication that Obama was involved but don't you think it is remarkable that Comey disregarded Lynch - who is his erstwhile boss - and proceeded to notify select members of Congress?

Are you aware of any other instances when a high ranking official in the federal government effectively challenged his superior on a matter of sensitivity and disregarded the superior's order?

I still think that you are trying to spin controversy where none exists (or where it actually exists you are ignoring it). There is no indication that the Justice officials did anything more than offer their opinions and allow Comey to proceed according to his own judgement. I'm sure that sort of thing happens all the time and doesn't get reported simply because it isn't newsworthy.

Traditionally, the FBI doesn't comment on investigations unless charges are recommended. Comey has twice violated that procedure. Both times it has created controversy. That think that is far more worth questioning.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:It seems that you answered your own question and that we didn't come close to a Saturday night massacre. There is no indication that the President was involved which is pretty essential to the comparison and no indication of any orders being given.
?
Why are you trying to make a controversy out of the AG and Deputy AG's actions when the real oddity is the apparently violation by Comey of standard FBI procedures?

Yes, there is no indication that Obama was involved but don't you think it is remarkable that Comey disregarded Lynch - who is his erstwhile boss - and proceeded to notify select members of Congress?

Are you aware of any other instances when a high ranking official in the federal government effectively challenged his superior on a matter of sensitivity and disregarded the superior's order?

I still think that you are trying to spin controversy where none exists (or where it actually exists you are ignoring it). There is no indication that the Justice officials did anything more than offer their opinions and allow Comey to proceed according to his own judgement. I'm sure that sort of thing happens all the time and doesn't get reported simply because it isn't newsworthy.

Traditionally, the FBI doesn't comment on investigations unless charges are recommended. Comey has twice violated that procedure. Both times it has created controversy. That think that is far more worth questioning.

The controversy based on news reports is that Lynch and Yates did not want Comey to send the letter - whether it was advisory or something more direct is not clear at this time though I am sure we will hear more about it down the line.

I think it is remarkable that Comey sent the letter contravening established procedure despite the views of his boss. I actually think it is quite stunning - and especially so if it was something more than a mere preference that Lynch expressed. Why he would have done so is a matter of speculation.

With regard to your comments about Comey's controversial actions, I think he felt an obligation to do so because of his prior statements before various committees. He was really in a no win situation. If he did not send the letter and the emails had incriminating information he would have been rightly accused by Republicans of having held back pertinent information.

FWIW, I am inclined to agree with Carl Bernstein who said that something damning must have been discovered in the emails on Weiner's computer for Comey to have taken the step that he did.

[Anonymous]

There was no good option for him anyway, and I don't think this will greatly affect the election - people are sick and tired of hearing about these emails when none of them have revealed any wrong doing or any mildly interesting tidbits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:It seems that you answered your own question and that we didn't come close to a Saturday night massacre. There is no indication that the President was involved which is pretty essential to the comparison and no indication of any orders being given.
?
Why are you trying to make a controversy out of the AG and Deputy AG's actions when the real oddity is the apparently violation by Comey of standard FBI procedures?

Yes, there is no indication that Obama was involved but don't you think it is remarkable that Comey disregarded Lynch - who is his erstwhile boss - and proceeded to notify select members of Congress?

Are you aware of any other instances when a high ranking official in the federal government effectively challenged his superior on a matter of sensitivity and disregarded the superior's order?

I still think that you are trying to spin controversy where none exists (or where it actually exists you are ignoring it). There is no indication that the Justice officials did anything more than offer their opinions and allow Comey to proceed according to his own judgement. I'm sure that sort of thing happens all the time and doesn't get reported simply because it isn't newsworthy.

Traditionally, the FBI doesn't comment on investigations unless charges are recommended. Comey has twice violated that procedure. Both times it has created controversy. That think that is far more worth questioning.

The controversy based on news reports is that Lynch and Yates did not want Comey to send the letter - whether it was advisory or something more direct is not clear at this time though I am sure we will hear more about it down the line.

I think it is remarkable that Comey sent the letter contravening established procedure despite the views of his boss. I actually think it is quite stunning - and especially so if it was something more than a mere preference that Lynch expressed. Why he would have done so is a matter of speculation.

With regard to your comments about Comey's controversial actions, I think he felt an obligation to do so because of his prior statements before various committees. He was really in a no win situation. If he did not send the letter and the emails had incriminating information he would have been rightly accused by Republicans of having held back pertinent information.

FWIW, I am inclined to agree with Carl Bernstein who said that something damning must have been discovered in the emails on Weiner's computer for Comey to have taken the step that he did.

Except that none of the information leaking out of the FBI since Comey sent the letter even remotely supports that assumption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
FWIW, I am inclined to agree with Carl Bernstein who said that something damning must have been discovered in the emails on Weiner's computer for Comey to have taken the step that he did.

Except that none of the information leaking out of the FBI since Comey sent the letter even remotely supports that assumption.

Has anything leaked out of the FBI on the specific contents of the emails on Weiner's laptop other than there being thousands of emails?

[Anonymous]

My initial speculation is they were investigating wiener for his selfies (because there was talk about underage recipients), and they found that there were emails that existed which didn't appear in the ones turned over before. As in deleted emails that weren't accounted for.

There was something in one of the first articles yesterday that triggered my way of thinking here.

This is my speculation. But we'll wait and see.

I also think it could be nothing. Just a minor thing but they need to re-open. And comey being in between a rock and a hard place. Doesn't want to interfere but can't ethically keep it all quiet.

[Anonymous]

Lynch did not have the moral standing to make any sort of demand.

She is a political hack as evidenced by her meeting with Bill Clinton for 40 minutes when they ostensibly discussed their grandchildren! This literally happened days before Hillary was interviewed by the FBI.

Given this, who is she to tell Comey anything about the ethics of how he should act?

[Anonymous]

No, we didn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lynch did not have the moral standing to make any sort of demand.

She is a political hack as evidenced by her meeting with Bill Clinton for 40 minutes when they ostensibly discussed their grandchildren! This literally happened days before Hillary was interviewed by the FBI.

Given this, who is she to tell Comey anything about the ethics of how he should act?

HRC will keep her as AG. No conflicts here, just move along.

[Anonymous]

Did Dems care that Comey broke FBI procedures when he announced the FBI would not recommend charges a few months ago? Or y'all only care now?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Did Dems care that Comey broke FBI procedures when he announced the FBI would not recommend charges a few months ago? Or y'all only care now?

I cared then. He made a very political and inappropriate statement at that time.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:It seems that you answered your own question and that we didn't come close to a Saturday night massacre. There is no indication that the President was involved which is pretty essential to the comparison and no indication of any orders being given.

Why are you trying to make a controversy out of the AG and Deputy AG's actions when the real oddity is the apparently violation by Comey of standard FBI procedures?

Would the AG's private meeting with the husband of a person under active DOJ investigation for potential violations of national security a violation of DOJ procedure?