FBI Director Comey sought to reveal Russian election meddling last summer

Rational Poster

Actually the Best Poster
@plutonium
Joined
Sep 18, 2013
Messages
55,900
Reaction score
27,153
jamescomey_122016getty.jpg



FBI Director James Comey sought to publish an op-ed as early as last summer about Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election, but was barred from doing so by the Obama White House, Newsweek reported Wednesday.

In a White House meeting in June or July, Comey reportedly brought with him a draft of the proposed op-ed and presented it to top administration officials, including former Secretary of State John Kerry and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

"He had a draft of it or an outline," a source with knowledge of the meeting told Newsweek. "He held up a piece of paper in a meeting and said, 'I want to go forward, what do people think of this?'"

White House officials at the time ultimately rejected the idea, deciding instead that any effort to make information about Russian election meddling public should be coordinated between multiple federal agencies, according to the report.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-...-russian-election-meddling-last-summer-report

I didn't post this in the wrong forum. I swear.
 
Round 2, eh?

So basically, this just confirms that the Dems didn't give a flying fuck about Russia until they lost, and needed a scapegoat.

Good to know.
 
How dare the American people find out some truths about what Hillary & her campaign were up to

Those evil Russians, damn that Putin

So much hack, hack guy
 
Right around the same time Wikileaks's showed dems planning on tying Trump to Russia.
 
Is there any precedent for the Director of the F.B.I. publishing an opinion article about a foreign state compromising our national security?
 
Is there any precedent for the Director of the F.B.I. publishing an opinion article about a foreign state compromising our national security?

We're not secure now? I feel pretty secure. Besides, the standard line is that revealing what is known and how it's known is the real threat to our Republic. ;)
 
Is there any precedent for the Director of the F.B.I. publishing an opinion article about a foreign state compromising our national security?

Has there ever been an FBI director this gigantic, handsome, and mysterious?
 
Round 2, eh?

So basically, this just confirms that the Dems didn't give a flying fuck about Russia until they lost, and needed a scapegoat.

Good to know.
or it could mean we didn't want to openly attack russia in media when we are negotiating ceasefires in syria... you would make a horrible politician
 
Is there any precedent for the Director of the F.B.I. publishing an opinion article about a foreign state compromising our national security?

I really doubt there is.

But he ran it by the proper channels and this should of been revealed in the summer but Obama didn't want it to.

Hmmmmmm I wonder why. Could it be they didn't want it to backfire on them in the case Hillary lost?
 
We're not secure now? I feel pretty secure. Besides, the standard line is that revealing what is known and how it's known is the real threat to our Republic. ;)
I won't feel secure until 100% of our economy is allocated to the Pentagon.
 
I really doubt there is.

But he ran it by the proper channels and this should of been revealed in the summer but Obama didn't want it to.

Hmmmmmm I wonder why. Could it be they didn't want it to backfire on them in the case Hillary lost?

I think it's more likely they expected Hillary to win and not be Putin's little bitch.
 
This man James Comey fucking fascinates me. I want a movie, and I don't want Hollywood to make it. Find a wunderkind screenwright and give him to the Brits.
 
I won't feel secure until 100% of our economy is allocated to the Pentagon.

Plus they should start looking through our snail mail too. Just open it up at the post office, scan it in, seal it back up and deliver it. No harm no foul.
 
Round 2, eh?

So basically, this just confirms that the Dems didn't give a flying fuck about Russia until they lost, and needed a scapegoat.

Good to know.

Seems like that's somewhat besides the point. The Russian connection is becoming more and more blatantly obvious (if it wasn't already), and it was clearly in Trump's favour. I think the real question is how do you move forward, knowing that Russia brazenly interfered in the US election?
 
Seems like that's somewhat besides the point. The Russian connection is becoming more and more blatantly obvious (if it wasn't already), and it was clearly in Trump's favour. I think the real question is how do you move forward, knowing that Russia brazenly interfered in the US election?

Showed the DNC for what they really are...

"Interfered".

LOL.
 
Showed the DNC for what they really are...

"Interfered".

LOL.

Spying on your politicians and then releasing that material at opportune times, like say, during the last week of the election, isn't 'Interference'? K, curious to know how you define that term then.
 
"Whatever the Russians may have been doing, let's take the most extreme charges, that barely registers in the balance against what the U.S. does constantly. Even in Russia. So for example, the U.S. intervened radically to support Boris Yeltsin in 1993 when he was engaged in a power play trying to take power from the Parliament, Clinton strongly supported him. In 1996, when Yeltsin was running, the Clinton administration openly and strongly supported them, and not only verbally, but with tactics and loans and so on.

All of that goes way beyond what the Russians are charged with, and of course that is a minor aspect of U.S. interference in elections abroad: 'If we don't like the election, you can just overthrow the country.'


^^
This from the right wing shill, known as... uh ... oh wait no, that's from Noam Fucking Chomsky
 
Back
Top