A record of political correctness in the war on terror
James Comey: Not Just Incompetent But He Placed American Lives at Risk
FBI Director James Comey was incompetent and as FBI Director, his policies placed the lives of American citizens at risk. An in-depth look at his record as FBI Director reveals an incredible naivety toward the Islamic terror threat and a willingness to appease radical Muslims at the expense of protesting Americans. This piece will not address Comey’s handling of Hillary Clinton’s email scandal or his failure to investigate the obvious illegal pay-for play schemes concocted by the Clinton Foundation.
Nor will it look at his failure to prosecute anyone associated with the IRS’s effort to silence hundreds of political groups during Obama’s reelection or his refusal to come clean about his knowledge of how numerous Americans were “unmasked” for having the audacity of associating with Donald Trump. No, this is just a peek at how the FBI under Comey handled the Islamic terrorist threat. Thanks to a lazy media, the popular image most Americans have of Comey is that he’s a superb administrator, a straight shooting Boy Scout and an Eliot Ness kind of guy who aggressively puts all the bad guys away.
In 2011, in one of the most incredible acts of stupidity ever by the FBI, the agency agreed to purge its counter-terrorism documents of terms, concepts, and statements that a number of Islamic pressure groups objected to. The government watchdog group, Judicial Watch, forced the FBI to release documents about this purge which revealed that the FBI systematically purged some 900 pages and 392 presentations deemed “offensive” to Muslims. This occurred under the previous FBI director Robert Mueller as a result of meeting with Islamic pressure groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), both named in 2007 as unindicted co-conspirators in a case involving raising funds for Islamic terrorists.
This purge crippled the FBI’s ability to track terrorists and many believe the loss of this intelligence caused the FBI to miss clues that could have prevented future terrorist attacks. Indeed, Judicial Watch actually called the purge “part of a broader Islamist ‘influence operation’ aimed at our government and Constitution.”
The purged documents including records linking the Muslim Brotherhood to terrorism, probably because the Obama Administration had, by this time, appointed a number of MB sympathizers to key positions and was quietly supporting Muslim Brotherhood political movements in a number of countries such as Egypt and Libya. The purge also deleted all usage of the term “radical Islam,” and any statement that defined “Jihad” as “Holy War,” even though that’s the definition used by Islamic terrorists. Strangely, the FBI also destroyed all documents linking al Qaeda to the 1993 World Trade Center and the 1996 Khobar Towers bombings, despite the fact these are important events in the terrorist timeline.
Judicial Watch also revealed that the purge also “removed references to mosques specifically as a radicalization incubator,” even though every intelligence service in the world knows that mosques are regularly used to plan and organize terror attacks. FBI agents were even told what words they could not use in writing reports on terror threats. Banned words included sharia, jihad, Muslim, Islam, Muslim Brotherhood, enemy, Hamas, Hezbollah and al Qaeda. The FBI was basically more concerned about the feelings of radical Muslims than the security of American citizens.
While the file purging occurred under Bureau head Robert Mueller two years before Comey took the helm, there is no evidence Comey made any effort to restore these files and all evidence indicates that he continued to use this politically correct mindset as he investigated the Jihadist threat in the U.S.A. And it soon became a heavy price to pay.
Indeed, one of the FBI documents obtained by JW titled “Guiding Principles: Touchstone Document on Training” stated that “mere association with organizations that demonstrate both legitimate (advocacy) and illicit (violent extremism) objectives should not automatically result in a determination that the associated individual is acting in furtherance of the organization’s illicit objective(s).”
In other words, the FBI was instructing its agents that if a person is found to be involved with a group that advocates “violent extremism,” they are not to assume the person is involved with violent extremism! This give-the-benefit-of-the-doubt-to-potential-terrorists mindset is what may have caused the FBI to ignore clues that could have stopped the Ft. Hood, Orlando, San Bernardino, and other terrorist attacks even though it had prior knowledge about the Islamic extremist connections of those who carried out those attacks.
Again, while this FBI document was produced pre-Comey, it is clear from the FBI’s performance that he never disavowed the “Guiding Principles” mindset and that they continued to follow the philosophy of appeasing Muslim pressure groups even at the expense of protecting Americans.
Indeed, Comey never broke with any of Director Mueller’s appeasement policies. For example, the FBI under Comey continue to maintain friendly ties with radical Islamic groups, namely the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the group mentioned earlier as a co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding trial. Even though the Justice Department banned the FBI from associating with CAIR, a number of FBI Field offices continued friendly relations with this extremist group. Ultimately, the Justice Department’s Inspector General (IG) investigated the FBI and its final report exposed the Bureau’s friendly interactions with CAIR at its Los Angeles, Chicago, New Haven and Philadelphia field offices.
Congressman Frank Wolf wrote, “Today, the Department’s Inspector General… confirms the blatant disregard of Bureau policy as well as multiple enacted Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations reports with respect to interactions by the FBI with CAIR.” The DOJ IG report even revealed that the director of the Los Angeles FBI office urged his staff to disregard this policy: “Please instruct your folks at this time that they are not to abide by the [directive to have no contact with CAIR] but that their direction in regards to CAIR will come from the LA field office front office.” While this occurred at the very beginning of Comey’s term, there is no evidence that Comey did anything to discourage these contacts.
And it gets worse. Judicial Watch reported that the FBI in 2015 created an interactive website called “Don’t be a Puppet,” for the purpose of preventing “susceptible youth from getting recruited online by terrorists,” but they were pressured by Islamic groups to omit all mention of Islamic terrorism. Comey caved and the site was changed to feature white supremacists, militia groups, religious extremists and so on, even though terrorist acts by such groups are quite rare while Islamic terrorists have committed tens of thousands of terror acts worldwide since 9/11. The only time the website mentions Islam is when it explains that Islamic terrorist groups such as ISIS “do not represent mainstream Islam.”
But the idea that obscure militias and white supremacists pose a threat to the national security in the same way as do Islamic terrorists happens to be a favorite theme of the loony left and Comey seems to have bought into this fantasy. Indeed, in 2015, Comey’s g-men stormed into a meeting of the Republic of Texas, a Texan secessionist movement. At the time of the raid, reported WorldNetDaily, the group “was debating issues of currency, international relations and celebrating the birthday” of one of their members. Sounds threatening. None of these guys were wanted terrorists or had ever engaged in any activity remotely threatening national security. Nevertheless, they were all fingerprinted and had their cell phones seized. If Comey’s FBI is really spending time, money and effort investigating and harassing harmless groups like the Republic of Texas, no wonder the agency missed numerous clues on many high profile Islamic terrorist cases under Comey’s watch. Clearly, they are allocating its resources based on political correctness, not reality.
Before Comey became director, the FBI initiated a policy that actually banned the FBI from conducting surveillance of mosques and instructed agents to “remove their shoes” before entering a mosque (what if they have to chase a suspect?), wait for the worship service to be over before entering, and not allow police dogs to sniff for explosives. The rules do not appear to apply to investigations involving Christian churches. Nor did Comey make any effort to change this policy even though Mosques have repeatedly been implicated in Islamic terror plots worldwide.
Moreover, Comey continued Director Mueller’s practice of heavily recruiting Muslims to be agents with apparently very little vetting. Indeed, the FBI placed recruitment ads in the publications of extremist Islamic groups with the slogan “Today’s FBI. It’s for You.” And it paid off. Indeed, WorldNetDaily broke a story that a Muslim agent working for the Los Angeles FBI field office “tipped off a Muslim suspect under investigation for terrorism about FBI surveillance.”
In years past, such a violation would result in not just the agent being fired, but also being prosecuted. However, this agent was allowed to remain with the FBI with only a reprimand! Moreover, other Muslim FBI agents have been exposed for assisting radical Islamic groups but the only consequence has been a transfer to another FBI office. Congressional investigators should review the FBI’s hiring and vetting polices when it comes to Muslims, because it’s likely Comey may have hired a slew of agents who are more loyal to the Jihad than to the U.S.A. Again, there’s no evidence that Comey did anything to change or reform aggressive hiring policies which actually targeted radical Muslims, not moderates.
But let’s take a look at how Comey’s FBI actually handled a few of the more well known domestic terror cases during his tenure.
In 2015, an Islamic couple from Pakistan murdered 14 people and injured 22 others at an after work Christmas party in San Bernardino. The terrorist couple, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, spent time in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and used bomb technology commonly used by al Qaeda. The two jihadists were linked to Tablighi Jamaat, an Islamic extremist sect with a history of supporting terrorism. However, all records related to this particular group were purged from the National Targeting Center database, according to former DHS counter-terror analyst Philip Haney, who stated that “this Administration is more concerned about the civil rights and civil liberties of foreign Islamic groups and foreign nationals than securing the freedom and security of the American public.” NTC’s data is shared with the FBI. Had Comey made any effort to restore these valuable counter-terrorism files, there’s a chance the Bureau could have prevented this attack. But again, there is no record of any push-back by Director Comey to recover counter-terrorism files. Too bad, it would have saved American lives.
Also in 2015, two terrorists attempted to kill attendees at an event in Garland, TX hosted by anti-Jihad activist Pamela Geller, at which participants were drawing images of Muhammad, which is considered a sacrilege by Muslims. The terrorists had enough ammunition to kill dozens of people and they did wound one security guard before being shot dead. But the attack could have been prevented because not only did the FBI know the terrorists were planning something but, as 60 Minutes reported, they had an undercover agent working with them who sent an encouraging text to the terrorists three weeks prior to the attack: “Tear up Texas.”
That’s bad enough, but 60 Minutes also revealed that this agent was actually at the location of the terror attack. He was in a car behind the car containing the terrorists but when they opened fire on a security guard, his reaction was to photograph them. He did not intervene. Why not? And why weren’t more FBI agents placed at the event to stop the attack? Or prevent it before it even started? Why did they not even alert Pamela Geller, the organizer of the event? As Geller states, “It’s hard to escape the conclusion that the Obama FBI wanted me and the other speakers at the even dead.” This was a display of incredible incompetence, but neither the FBI nor Comey have ever been forced to explain their actions.
When Ahmad Kan Rahami set off powerful bombs in Manhattan in 2016, injuring 31 people, it was reported by the New York Times that Rahami’s father had informed the FBI two years previously that “he feared his son was a terrorist.” The FBI investigated and cleared him, even though, as the Times reports, “they never interviewed Mr. Rahami.” Nor did they adequately scrutinize the suspicious trips Rahami made overseas to both Pakistan and Quetta. It is likely those trips were to receive bomb-making training. Why would the FBI not even question him? Is this how the FBI “clears” potential terrorists under James Comey?
In 2016, Omar Mateen, murdered 49 people and injured 53 at an Orlando nightclub. The FBI twice investigated Mateen; one investigation was initiated because Mateen was in contact with a suicide bomber; the 2nd one began because he made threatening comments to co-workers. Both investigations were closed; the later one due to FBI’s belief that Mateen was making terrorist threats only as a reaction to “being marginalized because of his Muslim Faith.”
Yes, the FBI believed that the problem was not Mateen, but rather his “racist” co-workers. The FBI also knew Mateen had traveled to Saudi Arabia in 2011 and that his father posted pro-Taliban videos online. Finally, a gun store owner called the FBI shortly before the attack to report Mateen’s effort to buy body armor and ammunition. But the FBI did nothing. Due to political correctness, the FBI could not or would not connect the dots and 49 people paid the price. Moreover, Mateen attended a radical mosque in Orlando, but since Comey’s FBI refused to investigate terror-supporting mosques, they cut themselves off from finding out any additional information about Mateen. Incredibly, in response to this murderous attack, FBI special agent Ron Hopper announced that “civil rights violations are a priority for the FBI,” referring not to the victims of Mateen, but to anyone who might say anything negative about Muslims. This is not a joke.
Lastly, the FBI under Comey has ignored a large network of domestic terrorist training compounds. In his book, Twilight in America, author and researcher Martin Mawyer documents the existence of at least two dozen compounds in rural areas operated by a terror group known as “Muslims of America (MOA).” MOA’s Islamic name is “Jamaat ul-Fuqra” and its leader is Sheikh Mubarik Ali Shah Gilani, a radical jihadist cleric who mentored the Christmas Day bomber and many other terrorists. He has declared jihad on America and his compounds are clearly involved with training jihadists. Indeed, MOE members were involved with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Before Obama came to power, the FBI prepared a report about these Islamic warriors: “MOA members have participated in ten murders; one disappearance; three fire bombings and one attempted firebombing and two explosive bombings with one attempted bombing…. the leadership of the MOA extols members to pursue a policy of jihad or holy war against individuals or groups it considers enemies of Islam which Include the U.S. Government.…members of the MOA are encouraged to travel to Pakistan to receive religious and military/terrorist training from Sheikh Gilani.”
There is little doubt the FBI possesses enough information about MOA’s activities to obtain court warrants to search their compounds or wiretap its phones, but Mawyer says that his sources tell him “the FBI under Comey showed no interest in investigating these compounds.” Mawyer says while a few field agents understand what these camps are really all about, many in the FBI “Think they are just Muslims who want to be left alone.” Sure. Meanwhile, these compounds continue training jihadists unimpeded. Mawyer has spent twenty years researching MOA and its network of compounds but Comey wouldn’t know him from Adam. In any case, the latest chatter from MOA operatives is a fear that Trump will actually close down their compounds. They will miss Comey dearly.
While Comey made quite a media splash informing Americans that the FBI is investigating ISIS-related terrorists in all 50 states, one now has to wonder how many of these investigations are just for show? Or how many cases will the FBI drop for fear of offending Muslims?
If Congress would spend more time investigating the FBI’s competency, rather than phony Russian conspiracy theories, perhaps someday we will have an FBI that’s not driven by political correctness. In the age of terrorism, we need a FBI Director who is fearless and aggressive in investigating Islamic terrorism. Comey has bungled many high profile Islamic terror cases under his watch. Trump did the right thing by firing him and he needs to now hire someone who will ignore political correctness and do what is necessary to keep America safe from Islamic terrorism.
Steve Baldwin is a former California assemblyman (1994-2000) and minority whip.
The Comey affair; lies and reality pass like trains in the night
By Jon Rappoport
NEWSMAN #1: Trump fired Comey.
NEWSMAN #2: Biggest thing since the great Chicago fire of 1871.
NEWSMAN #1: Bigger. How do we play this? The Democrats wanted Comey’s head for what he did to Hillary. Trump just fired Comey. I’m confused.
NEWSMAN #2: Doesn’t matter. Say Trump just burned up the Constitution. Say he hates dogs and little children. Say his hair is actually a wig made of Russian sable.
NEWSMAN #1: What about the truth?
NEWSMAN #2: The what? You poor sap. Truth is relative to agenda. Did you miss that lesson in journalism school?
NEWSMAN #1: I didn’t go to journalism school. I got my PhD in philosophy at Yale. I wrote my thesis on a comparison of “an” and “the” in ancient Babylonia.
Fired FBI Director Comey is obviously in trouble. Cry for him. He’ll have to go on food stamps and welfare now, won’t he? Will he be able to collect Social Security? He’s too young! He needs crowdfunding. Send canned food.
The media are portraying Trump firing Comey as “breathtaking,” “stunning,” “shocking.” They’re saying this is how Washington is reacting.
If you live in Washington, try to find somebody who is really sucking air and trying to breathe. Find somebody who is leaning against a wall because he’s stunned. Find somebody whose eyes are rolling up inside his head from the shock.
It’s all made up. It’s all hyped.
Washington politicians may be pretending shock and amazement for the cameras, but that’s about it.
And if you travel outside Washington, most people don’t care about Comey. People are fired from their jobs all the time. People are let go for many reasons. People who can’t afford to be unemployed. Comey, on the other hand, is thinking about a book deal. He might be planning a vacation. He might be talking to Obama about doing some elite “community organizing.” He’ll be fielding offers to sit on corporate boards. His biggest worry: “Do I go on the talk shows right away or do I wait?”
Washington insiders aren’t shocked by anything. They just play that role on television.
When an interesting event occurs, like Trump firing Comey, Washington pols meet with their staffs and plan their public response. They look for a personal advantage. “How can I play this?” “Can I use this to get ahead?” “Let’s go for the Trump impeachment angle.”
Comey himself knew he was on the verge of getting fired. There wasn’t any mystery about it. He kept pushing the fantastical Trump-Russia investigation. He didn’t bother looking into Trump-team leaks that were the result of domestic hacking. His initial reaction to getting fired—he thought it was a joke, a prank—was nonsensical. He knew. He knew he was on the edge.
Right now, Comey is wondering how far he can move from his former job and maintain credibility as a non-partisan figure. Or: can he go the other way and sign on with Obama? Can he approach Hillary and mend fences? Can he lobby? How can he successfully position himself for the “next chapter of his life?”
I once interviewed a troubled Washington politician who had jumped the wrong way on an important decision involving his Party. He was toast. With me, he mouthed all sorts of gumble-jumble about “sticking to his guns,” but I could see his wheels were turning. He was contemplating his future. Where could he go? What could he do to make hay after public office? These people don’t waste time. They move on. Nobody cares. It’s politics.
Comey rolled the dice and lost. He knew he could lose. As he was rolling those dice, he was already thinking about his image and whether he could emerge as a hero or a martyr. Or whether he had already played out all his political capital. If so, his next gig would land him in the private sector, or with a prestigious foundation.
Washington is a mix of musical chairs and checkers. Doors open, doors close, the players scramble for a spot.
Nobody is shocked.
In the swamp, nobody is amazed.
The media pretend shock, awe, and amazement, because when they do, their ratings go up.
Right now, in that vein, they’re all jockeying for a chance to interview Comey. He’s the next big “get.”
“Tell Mr. Comey we can do this anywhere he wants to. In his living room, his study, or we’ll put him in a quiet studio. And we’ll walk along a riverbank, stroll through a forest. It’ll be dignified. Absolutely no gossip. He’s a major figure. We’ll accord him all the respect he deserves. We’ll track his career from the early days. He’s a…statesman. We hold him in the highest regard. We’d like to do this long-form, as a two-parter, on consecutive nights. An hour each night. Only one commercial per half-hour. We want to give him the widest possible exposure. All of America wants to hear what he has to say at this crucial moment. As a token of our appreciation and an expression of concern, we’re prepared to FedEx him a dozen cans of baked beans and several flank steaks from Safeway, because we know he’s currently unemployed…”
And then there was the Comey farewell letter to his FBI people.
As you read it, try to hold back the tears.
“I have said to you before that, in times of turbulence, the American people should see the FBI as a rock of competence, honesty, and independence. What makes leaving the FBI hard is the nature and quality of its people, who together make it that rock for America.”
“It is very hard to leave a group of people who are committed only to doing the right thing. My hope is that you will continue to live our values and the mission of protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution. If you do that, you too will be sad when you leave, and the American people will be safer.”
Competence? Committed to doing the right thing? Upholding the Constitution and the law?
Comey was obviously excluding himself from that reference.
Recall his surreal press conference during the presidential campaign, during which he acted as FBI director, Attorney General, and grand jury, when he recited a list of felonies Hillary Clinton had committed in the handling of her private email server…and then said he was not recommending prosecution, because Hillary showed no intent to deceive or do harm. Comey obviously knew intent was no part of the law, which was written to make sure negligence alone, in the handling of classified materials, was sufficient to prosecute and convict a perpetrator.
A number of FBI agents weren’t happy with Comey then. Not at all. The new Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe belatedly confirmed it in testimony before Congress on Thursday: “…there were folks within our agency that were frustrated with the outcome of the Hillary Clinton case and some of those folks were very vocal about those concerns.”
As for the unparalleled honesty of the FBI Comey referred to in his farewell letter, where does one begin?
Let’s take a peek at just one area: the vaunted FBI lab, where evidence in crime investigations is analyzed.
April 20, 2015, The Atlantic: “…the Washington Post made clear Saturday in an article that begins with a punch to the gut… ‘Nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000,’ the newspaper reported, adding that ‘the cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death’.”
August 12, 2014, New Scientist: “…the initial results were released of an ongoing review of thousands of criminal cases in which FBI scientists’ testimony may have led to wrongful convictions – including for some people now on death row…’we teach these people [lab techs in training] for two weeks, and they would go back to their laboratories with a certificate of completion and be told: “Great you’re qualified to do this [analysis of evidence] – here’s your caseload”‘.”
Buckle up for this one. March 22, 1997, CNN: “The Justice Department inspector general’s office has determined that the FBI crime laboratory working on the Oklahoma City bombing case made ‘scientifically unsound’ conclusions that were ‘biased in favor of the prosecution,’ The Los Angeles Times reported Saturday.”
“…[FBI] supervisors approved lab reports that they ‘cannot support’ and…FBI lab officials may have erred about the size of the blast, the amount of explosives involved and the type of explosives used in the bombing[!].”
“…harshest criticism was of David Williams, a supervisory agent in the explosives unit, the paper [LA Times] said. Those flaws reportedly include the basis of his determination that the main charge of the explosion was ammonium nitrate. The inspector general called such a determination ‘inappropriate,’ the Times said.”
“…FBI officials found a receipt for ammonium nitrate at defendant [Terry] Nichols’ home and, because of that discovery, Williams slanted his conclusion to match the evidence.”
If you’re thinking the FBI’s fake investigation of the Oklahoma bombing evidence opens the door to a whole new direction in the case, you’re right. (I wrote a book about false evidence in the OKC bombing in 1995.)
Yes, there are honest and honorable agents at the FBI, but let’s not go overboard with Comey and his sop of a farewell letter.
Comey postures. He works the “honor” angle. He tap dances. He puts out pure jive.
In 2013, before his appointment as FBI director, Comey was brought in by the scandal-ridden HSBC Bank, to oversee efforts to clean up its act—in particular, money laundering for drug cartels.
Comey was positioned as the face of honesty and competence for HSBC.
How well did he do, before he exited his position? How much crime and how many criminals did he leave behind?
Three years later, after Comey had departed, The NY Times wrote: “HSBC Bank Executives Face Charges in $3.5 Billion Currency [Fraud] Case … Traders Use Front-Running to Profit From Client Orders…”
I guess Comey didn’t clean up the HSBC mess. There were a few things he didn’t notice while he was there. A few thing he left behind. A few billion things.
And now, far more interesting than “why was Comey really fired from the FBI”: what corruption he did he leave behind at the FBI that we don’t know about?
The old saying, fake it ’til you make it, applies. Comey faked it until he made it. And then he faked it again.
Now he’ll move into a new role. Who knows, some day, as history is rewritten, people may be saying he was the only honest man in Washington.
FUTURE NEWSMAN #1: I’m writing a book about Comey, comparing him to Gandhi.
FUTURE NEWSMAN #2: Who wins?
FUTURE NEWSMAN #1: Comey, in a landslide. He stood up against the titanic forces of evil in Washington.
FUTURE NEWSMAN #2: You have a publisher?
FUTURE NEWSMAN #1: The US Printing Office. My uncle owns it.
FUTURE NEWSMAN #2: I thought that was a government department.
FUTURE NEWSMAN #1: The New York Times bought it.
FUTURE NEWSMAN #2: Your uncle owns the New York Times?
FUTURE NEWSMAN #1: He owns the company that owns Facebook and Google. They own the New York Times.
FUTURE NEWSMAN #2: Wow. What’s the name of the company your uncle owns?
FUTURE NEWSMAN #1: Clinton and Comey. It’s a law firm and a foundation. Their headquarters are in Tel Aviv, Riyadh, and the Vatican.
Gutfeld: Trump fires Comey, media lose it
Emergency Message To MSM: Don’t Lose Your Humanity