(The Federalist)—The Justice Department recently acknowledged that it is conducting a criminal investigation of both former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey. The current CIA director, John Ratcliffe, made a criminal referral to the DOJ concerning Brennan. Many believe that referral involves perjury on Brennan’s part when testifying before Congress or during Special Counsel John Durham’s inquiry.
The precise criminal offenses concerning Comey are not clear at this point. But there was certainly plenty of malfeasance and misfeasance by both these agency heads starting with the inception of the Russia collusion fiasco.
Comey described, in his book, the sole origin of the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign as a report “from an allied ambassador” of a conversation in London between a Trump adviser and “a Russian agent.” That was his characterization of George Papadopoulos’ meeting with Joseph Mifsud, who told the Trump aide the Russians had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. Comey has piously huffed that it would have been “dereliction” not to proceed with an investigation. But to proceed with an intrusive investigation on so little was abuse.
A secondhand rumor should never be enough to justify opening an investigation of any American, much less a presidential candidate. This off-hand conversation initiated an investigation that dogged the presidency. Like directors before him, Comey should have said, “We need more probable cause.” Instead, Comey had the Bureau pursue investigations into more than one U.S. citizen without sufficient predicate.
Comey tried to bolster his case by branding Mifsud a Russian agent. It is more plausible that Mifsud was a British or CIA asset. In that first encounter, there was no mention of emails. Only after the WikiLeaks disclosures was an assumption made by both Australian High Commissioner Alexander Downer, Comey’s “allied ambassador,” and Papadopoulos, that the “dirt” was in the emails.
- Read More: thefederalist.com