This NYT's story makes me sad.

[Joe in PB]

Solid take.

[Moving Sale]

But his political viewpoint clouds the truth before his eyes.

pot kettle much?
POS cops kill people for no reason and with impunity, people complain and listening to them is undermining the FBI, but the Pedobear firing people to protect his fat ass is ok. Go fuck yourself you fucking POs.

[Moving Sale]

"High placed members of his agency have been outed as political hacks, who have abused their position and the power of government all in the name of advancing one political viewpoint over another."

Link?

[Truman]

"High placed members of his agency have been outed as political hacks, who have abused their position and the power of government all in the name of advancing one political viewpoint over another."

Link?

Well, former FBI Director James Come for one. Do you need someone to help you work out all the big words in the Memo?

[Moving Sale]

The memo says people were cozying up to the Russians so the FBI got a warrant to surveil one of them. That happens to be their job. What did YOU not understand about The Memo?

[Rooster]

The problem with this guy’s take? That any FISA warrants require at least 10 DoJ individuals in the hierarchy to sign off on it. On the surface of it that sounds fine, but when the Dept of Justice has been bent to the will of the President, it’s simply eyewash to cover the legalities. The result of this is an FBI that exonerated Clinton and her help months before the “investigation” was complete along with sweet immunity deals for them. To top it all off Comey had already written his statement taking Clinton off the hook long before the inquiry was finished. The fix was in.

Couple that with a DoJ that worked closely with the FBI to ensure that nobody got caught up in the net and you have two institutions that prostituted themselves to gain favor with the perceived incoming administration, only to be caught flatfooted when she lost the election.

I have no doubt that the vast majority of agents and employees of both the FBI & DoJ are fine citizens and worthy of their calling. However, the leadership sold them out for political gain, only to be amazed that the American people didn’t elect the woman they expected to win. Thus the whole house of cards fell down.

[Rooster]

I take one more issue with this guy’s take.
“F.B.I. agents are dogged people who do not care about the direction of political winds.”
Not true if you look at the sexts/texts of the two FBI agents involved in the investigation of the Steele dossier. They explicitly say that they need to take out an insurance policy against Trump in the highly unlikely event he were to get elected. These two were very concerned about the political winds and were adjusting their investigation as necessary to ingratiate themselves with the presupposed incoming Clinton administration and queering the results to gain favor with Herself.

[Rooster]

Andrew McCarthy over at the National Review Online says it quite well in these articles.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... wrongdoing

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... ct-hillary

The fix was in and the weaponization of the IRS, FBI, and the DoJ was complete. The only thing wrong with this plan was an American electorate who refused to follow the script and elected someone supposedly unelectable.

[Moving Sale]

So they were illegally spying on people who had no chance of winning to make sure they wouldn't win and then didn't cover their tracks because they knew they were winning? That is a pretty stupid plan.

[Rooster]

More like they were engaged in illegal spying because they never expected to see the “it’s-too-crazy-to-even-contemplate” Trump team win and thus place them in a position where their illegal activity would ever see the light of day. Most people commit crimes because they never expect to get caught and pay the consequences.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Has The National Review taken a firm editorial stance on whether they are pro or anti Trump yet?

[Moving Sale]

More like they were engaged in illegal spying because they never expected to see the “it’s-too-crazy-to-even-contemplate” Trump team win and thus place them in a position where their illegal activity would ever see the light of day. Most people commit crimes because they never expect to get caught and pay the consequences.

Why would they need to do that if he wasn't going to win? And how is getting a warrant illegal?

[Rooster]

Has The National Review taken a firm editorial stance on whether they are pro or anti Trump yet?

It is safe to say that NRO is firmly in the politically conservative side of the spectrum, of which they do not consider Trump to be a part of in any fashion. While they have approved of many of the policies Trump has enacted, they are highly suspicious of his underlying philosophy or ideology which drives those decisions. They believe that having no coherent or unifying political underpinning is the very weakness of a Jacksonian or Trumpian populist presidency. They believe Trump is just as likely to make decisions and choices that would be diametrically opposed to what he has done so far if it suited him and his agenda— whatever that might be at the moment.

I tend to agree with them, although to date I have found little to quibble with in terms of his decisions.

[Left Seater]

Meanwhile dude has already landed a gig at CNN. No doubt this job was in the works prior to his opinion piece.

[Moving Sale]

It's called the free market.

[BSmack]

James Come

Typo or Alt-Right fantasy?

[Left Seater]

Here is a take from another former FBI agent

Until recently Josh Campbell was an FBI special agent. He was appointed in 2008 and stationed in the Los Angeles field office. He also once served as a special assistant to James Comey. He is now most well known for a New York Times op-ed, "Why I am leaving the FBI."

In the wake of Comey's firing last May, he wrote another piece for USA Today - a glowingly sympathetic tribute to the just-relieved director, "James Comey is no showboat."

What struck me odd at the time - having retired in 2015 after serving for 25 years in the FBI agent and executive management ranks - was this: Who afforded a GS-13 bureau employee the privilege to have a personal opinion piece published?

An official farewell soiree flyer from the FBI's Los Angeles office announced that party attendees could "celebrate [Josh's] new endeavor defending the Bureau as a CNN Law Enforcement Analyst." Well, knowing how difficult it is to break into the television analyst ranks, and having the privilege to work at CNN as a full-time contributor since last May, I graciously extend a hearty welcome

But, Campbell's explanation for resigning talks of "reluctantly turning in his badge" and "leaving an organization he loves." He describes his voluntary, unforced resignation as "painful."

He describes ignoring the counsel of "a small number" of onboard and retired agents who gamely advised him that FBI agents should keep their heads down and ignore the maelstrom that is the current president's rhetorical attacks on certain senior leadership. And as he flatly states in the piece about those who disagree with him: "They are wrong."

Why the sudden urgency to quit, you ask?

Well, as Campbell notes, "So I can join the growing chorus of people who believe that the relentless attacks on the bureau undermine not just America's premier law enforcement agency but also the nation's security."

And having served for a full decade in the special agent law enforcement ranks, Campbell now views criticism of FBI leadership as a "threat to national security."

Utter nonsense.

Now, I do not know Campbell and some may view him as well intentioned. Comey - the man Campbell spent a year working for - certainly does. In another curious twist, Comey tweeted Campbell's piece on Friday, adding his personal imprimatur, lamenting how Campbell would be missed at the FBI and noting, "his voice is an important addition to the national conversation."

Comey's public commendation to an agent who elected to resign is unusual.

But allow me to share another side of the debate that some, like Comey and Campbell, feel is settled. Many of us have watched the proceedings these past few years with disgust and revulsion. They are angry and disillusioned for different reasons than the ones described by Campbell, and certified by Comey.

Many of us await the impending report from the Office of the Inspector General that will, hopefully, answer some questions about glaring instances of politicization within the senior ranks of FBI and DOJ.

If the nine troubling encounters Comey described with the president occurred exactly as he recounts them, leaving him feeling "uneasy" - as he testified - why didn't the 6'8" head of the world's premier law enforcement agency directly confront the president?

As he told Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee last June - "maybe other people would be stronger in that circumstance but that - that was - that's how I conducted myself." Which begs the question why didn't he tender his resignation on the spot. Many of us inside and outside the bureau, found his lack of courage disappointing, sad and pathetic.

And since Campbell established his bona fides in the Times piece, allow me to relate my own.

I spent years investigating organized figures and drug dealers. I worked undercover against mobsters and gangbangers. I served on FBI SWAT and was selected for and served on our elite Hostage Rescue Team. I ran a line squad and headed a multi-agency federal task force. And also served as the supervisory senior resident agent for an upstate New York FBI satellite office, spent time in Afghanistan while detailed to, Joint Special Operations Command and learned Spanish in six months to accept an appointment to Mexico City as one of the FBI director's direct representatives, a deputy legal attach , to the Mexican government.

I know the bureau. I'm also one of those "voices" defending the bureau when I feel it is unfairly assailed, and criticizing it - painful though it be - when the actions of a few misguided or mistaken senior executives make some inexcusable and dubious decisions.

I didn't always agree with the decisions of Presidents Bush and Obama. But I put my head down and awaited the passing of the storm.

So, on behalf of the innumerable FBI employees, past and present, that I humbly represent in this open letter, I'd like to take this opportunity to explain why I left the FBI to teach at St. John's University. And the wholly unexpected opportunity to "demystify" the FBI on-air at CNN was an added bonus.

One of my former colleagues, New York special agent, Lenny Hatton, has a story on why he left the bureau too. I have to tell it because he is no longer here with us. He was crushed under the pancaking floors of the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001 while attempting rescues.

Or former Navy SEAL Tim Flaherty, who while working on my federal safe-streets task force, lost his left, non-shooting hand in an accident. He fought not to be medically retired, but the government can be such an unsympathetic opponent. He fought separation and worked hard until they forcibly retired him.

But he still came to work - every damn day. He didn't quit.

Hatton and Flaherty are the folks we should spend our time lionizing.

My hope is that all who have leave the bureau's ranks remain loyal to the FBI's motto of fidelity, bravery, and integrity.

[Moving Sale]

If thIs^^^ turd was busting "drug dealers" {Coors and Merek?} then the chances he never violated the USC - Art. 1 sec. 8, are approaching zero. Good riddance.