James Comey’s Lackluster Civil Liberties Record Shows Washington’s Failure to Police Itself

[EasyAce]

Comey stood up to the Bush administration over illegal snooping, but as FBI director he defended surveillance.
By C.J. Ciaramella
http://reason.com/blog/2017/06/07/james-comeys-lackluster-civil-liberties/print

As all of Washington braces for James Comey's incendiary testimony before Congress Thursday, it's worth a trip down
memory lane to reflect on his tenure as FBI director.

When Comey was appointed by Barack Obama to lead the FBI in 2013, he was seen as a hero in many circles for dramatically
pushing back against the Bush administration's illegal surveillance programs.

"Jim understands that in time of crisis, we aren't judged solely by how many plots we disrupt or how many criminals we bring
to justice," Obama said as he nominated Comey in 2013. "We're also judged by our commitment to the Constitution that we've
sworn to defend, and to the values and civil liberties that we've pledged to protect."

Yet as Reason's Nick Gillespie wrote shortly after Comey's nomination, "Comey has been applauded for standing up to some of
Bush's more-expansive surveillance policies, but he also defended indefinite detention without a trial, waterboarding, and—
once a new legal rationale had been hammered out—those more-expansive surveillance policies" . . .

. . . Congress didn't have have serious credibility concerns with Comey until the 2016 presidential election, when the FBI had
to juggle investigations into Hillary Clinton's private email server, Donald Trump's alleged links to Russia, and the Kremlin's
thinly disguised efforts to undermine U.S. elections.

When Comey came into the FBI director's office, we were told he'd leave the unconstitutional excesses of the Bush years behind.
Now he has been unceremoniously ousted, and the Senate is once again talking about the crucial need to appoint an independent
and trustworthy FBI chief, free from political influence. The next director will no doubt tell senators what they want to hear.
Whether they actually attempt to hold him to those words is up to them.

[truth_seeker]

I seriously doubt that Obama would have appointed Comey, without knowing he was a cooperative kind of fellow, when it got really dirty and partisan.

I cite letting Hillary off, twice for her emails.

First time, to effectively placate his agents, by listing her offense, then claiming it was unintentional and playing prosecutor and claiming no jury would convict.

Next by reviewing some more last minute emails, and again saying there was nothing there.

After watching inept congressional committees under Issa, Gowdy and others, the dems must have thought Comey's performance would win the day.