In response to an FT article by Edward Luce on 30th October 2016, entitled 'The albatross around Hillary Clinton's neck'
“No, the Federal Bureau of Investigation is not working for Donald Trump — though Hillary Clinton should be forgiven for suspecting that. The reality is more troubling.
James Comey, the FBI director, was panicked into issuing his statement by the opposite fear — that if he had held back Republicans would have accused him of working for Mrs Clinton. Mr Comey, the fearsome sentinel, has over-reached. Public servants should never take actions that could sway a presidential election. His lapse was a result of Mr Trump having already singled him out as part of a “rigged system”. In a country so viscerally divided, neutrality is treated as collusion. On Friday Mr Comey was hustled into making an error” – Edward Luce
I’d be interested to know your basis for that conclusion Mr. Luce…that Mr Comey was ‘panicked into it’ by Republicans…other than it seems to be a terribly convenient conclusion for the ‘Clinton as victim’ narrative.
Others closer to the ‘inside’ seem to have a different view. Yesterday, a former assistant FBI director, James Kallstrom was interviewed by John Catsimatidis on radio. He implied quite strongly that the pressure is coming from inside the FBI. He said this:
“The problem here is this investigation was never a real investigation...that’s the problem. They never had a grand jury empanelled, and the reason they never had a grand jury empanelled, I’m sure, is Loretta Lynch would not go along with that…so this investigation was without the ability to serve subpoenas, serve search warrants, and obtain the evidence that they ended up begging for. It was just ludicrous what went on…This is not the FBI agents who’re to blame for this fiasco going on. This is the leadership. This is Jim Comey …the agents are furious with what’s going on. I know that for a fact”
Whilst we wait for more information to surface, I have a question for you Mr. Luce:
Do you really think that the Clinton’s have made millions of dollars from ‘speeches’, and handing out governmental and foundation contracts…without being ‘bought’ by the people writing the cheques?
If you do, I think you are utterly naïve. If you don’t, you have spent the past year shilling for a totally compromised candidate. Either way, the fundamental duty of the fourth estate is to hold power to account – I believe the FT is failing in its duty – miserably.