photo credit: RT.com
Over
the weekend, Democrat pundit Doug Schoen stunned TV viewers when he went wobbly on
his support of Hillary Clinton. He's concerned about the fallout from the FBI investigation. From his follow-up column at The Hill:
However,
in good conscience, and as a Democrat, I am actively doubting whether I can
vote for the Secretary of State. I also want to make clear that I cannot vote
for Donald Trump as his world view and mine are very different.
So, it
would seem that Mr. Schoen will either vote third party or not vote for any
presidential candidate. Either way, that’s more bad news for Mrs. Clinton.
On a
related subject, Andrew McCarthy raised some interesting points concerning the FBI
Director’s decision to re-open the email investigation. From PJ Media:
I
have never been a fan of the notion – at the Justice Department, it is the
received wisdom – that the election calendar should factor into criminal
investigations.
Law-enforcement
people will tell you that taking action too close to Election Day can affect
the outcome of the vote; therefore, it should not be done because law
enforcement is supposed to be apolitical. But of course, not taking
action one would take but for the political timing is as political as it gets.
To my mind, it is more political because the negatively affected
candidate is denied any opportunity to rebut the law-enforcement action
publicly.
The
unavoidable fact of the matter is that, through no fault of law enforcement,
investigations of political corruption are inherently political.
Thus, I’ve always thought the best thing to do is bring the case when it’s
ready, don’t bring it if it’s not ready, and don’t worry about the calendar any
more than is required by the principle of avoiding the appearance of
impropriety.
A
problem arises, however, when you start bending other rules. FBI Director James
Comey bent a few of them when he decided to (a) make a public recommendation
against prosecution, (b) nevertheless make a public disclosure of the evidence
amassed by the FBI, and (c) include a public announcement that the
investigation was closed.
McCarthy
had more to say about Director Comey’s decisions and his bending of the rules at
NRO here.
It
is fair enough to say that Director Comey should not have started down the wayward
road of making public comments about pending investigations in which no charges
have been filed. Such comments inexorably lead to the need to make more
comments when new information arises. Not that the director needs advice from
me, but at this point, he ought to announce that — just as in any other
investigation — there will be no further public statements about the Clinton
investigation unless and until charges are filed, which may never happen.
As
for the election, Mrs. Clinton is under the cloud of suspicion not because of
Comey but because of her own egregious misconduct. She had no right to know
back in July whether the investigation was closed. She has no right to know it
now. Like any other criminal suspect, she simply has to wait . . . and
wonder . . . and worry.
There
were other worthy Democrats, but the party chose to nominate the subject of a
criminal investigation. That is the Democrats’ own recklessness; Jim Comey is
not to blame. And if the American people are foolish enough to elect an
arrantly corrupt and compromised subject of a criminal investigation as our
president, we will have no one to blame but ourselves.
# # #
