Comey's letter and the problem of leaks
By Jeffrey Toobin
OCTOBER 29, 2016
Since Friday afternoon, the political world has been convulsed by the decision of James Comey, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to release a three-paragraph letter to congressional leaders, announcing that the F.B.I. had found additional evidence that might be relevant to the investigation of Hillary Clinton for improper handling of classified information. Was Comey’s letter appropriate, because it disclosed an important development to Congress, especially since he had earlier told them that his investigation was complete? Or did Comey’s letter represent unjustified meddling in the Presidential election, less than two weeks before election day?
These questions, in a way, miss the point. The issue is not the propriety of Comey’s letter. The issue is the propriety of Comey’s letter and the leaks that followed it. It is worth noting, at the outset, that Comey’s letter said only, “In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation.” Within moments of the release of Comey’s letter, though, government sources leaked that the “unrelated case” was that of Anthony Weiner, who is being investigated for sexually explicit correspondence with an underage girl. Weiner, of course, is the estranged husband of Huma Abedin, a close aide to Hillary Clinton, and the leaks suggested that the new evidence consisted of e-mails found on computers that Weiner and Abedin may have shared.
But what was the actual evidence that prompted Comey’s letter, and what do the e-mails say? The answer depends on the news source. “The emails were not to or from Clinton,” according to the Los Angeles Times. But the Washington Post said, “The correspondence included emails between Abedin and Clinton.” And, according to the New York Times, “Senior law enforcement officials said that it was unclear if any of the emails were from Mrs. Clinton’s private server.” This muddled issue is crucial, because if none of the e-mails were to or from Clinton — who is the person running for President — then this new chapter of the investigation amounts to very little ...
Comey says that he didn’t “want to create a misleading impression,” but that’s precisely what he did. He had to know that his vague letter to Congress virtually demanded elaboration from “senior government officials,” who would apply their own gloss, in the form of leaks. The responsibility for the confusion sown by these leaks, if not for the leaks themselves, belongs only to Comey. If the outcome of the Presidential election turns on Comey’s action, that’s his burden, and the nation’s, too ...
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/james-comeys-letter-and-the-problem-of-leaks
= new reply since forum marked as read
