What is James Comey and the F.B.I. trying to tell us (or not)?


F.B.I. Director James Comey seems utterly intent on pissing everyone off, regardless of which side of the political aisle they call home. I suppose this might be construed as an “honorable” trait from a lawman; one would presume his impartiality and absolute objectivity would place him at odds with with 50% of politicos at any one time, hinging on any one directive or statement.




James Comey




Or perhaps he is under someone’s ulterior ideological spell, but in order to Trojan Horse his way deeper into the maelstrom, he strategically pisses certain narratives off in order to divert the scent. Is Comey merely tossing out stinkin’ red herrings in order to dissuade triangulation on his true motives?


Now he has asked the Justice Department to abandon and reject President Trump’s wiretapping allegations against Barack Obama.



Mr. Comey, who made the request on Saturday after Mr. Trump leveled his allegation on Twitter, has been working to get the Justice Department to knock down the claim because it falsely insinuates that the F.B.I. broke the law, the officials said.


A spokesman for the F.B.I. declined to comment. Sarah Isgur Flores, the spokeswoman for the Justice Department, also declined to comment.


Mr. Comey’s request is a remarkable rebuke of a sitting president, putting the nation’s top law enforcement official in the position of questioning Mr. Trump’s truthfulness. The confrontation between the two is the most serious consequence of Mr. Trump’s weekend Twitter outburst, and it underscores the dangers of what the president and his aides have unleashed by accusing the former president of a conspiracy to undermine Mr. Trump’s young administration.



In addition to serving the predictable ass-covering motivations on the part of the F.B.I. investigators, the Times also points out that the F.B.I. has another dubious, albeit worrisome, motivation to suppress Trump’s request, one which I can’t quite wrap my head around.



…senior F.B.I. officials are said to be worried that the notion of a court-approved wiretap will raise the public’s expectations that the federal authorities have significant evidence implicating the Trump campaign in colluding with Russia’s efforts to disrupt the presidential election.



What is this sorcery?


Since when are public expectations a significant shaper of the Bureau’s investigatory focus?


And if Comey is attempting to allay public expectations of “significant evidence” demonstrating Trump and the Russians have a “thing” going on, does this in fact mean they have found absolutely nothing incriminating?


In other words, is Comey trying to avoid publicly exonerating Donald Trump of corrupt Russian ties?  And if so: why?