Wednesday, January 27, 2016

Mayor Mike and the FBI

Does Mike Bloomberg Know Something

We Don’t About the Clinton FBI Probe?

The Fiscal Times
Does Mike Bloomberg Know Something We Don’t About the Clinton FBI Probe?
View photo
Does Mike Bloomberg Know Something We Don’t About the Clinton FBI Probe?
Does Mike Bloomberg know something we don’t? The former New York City mayor is tiptoeing into running for the White House as a third party candidate, causing jitters amongst Democrats fearful that he might siphon off voters.
Liberal media outlets speculate that Mr. Bloomberg thinks Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders may emerge as the standard-bearers for their prospective parties. From Bloomberg’s perspective, they suggest, that match-up could allow a contestant who is fiscally conservative but socially liberal -- like himself -- to scoot through the middle.
Related: Clinton and Obama Launch Their Mutual Support Group
Another explanation is that he sees trouble ahead for Hillary Clinton. Because of his close relationship with former NYC police Chief Ray Kelly and others in the law enforcement community, he might have the inside track on the FBI investigation into the former Secretary of State’s handling of classified documents and questionable foundation-related activities. Democrats have done a fine job of completely dismissing the FBI inquiry, but the possibility that Clinton could face serious legal hurdles may be encouraging Bloomberg’s ambitions.
The probe is not, as some Hillary backers have claimed, scandal-mongering by right-wing zealots. It is a serious investigation, reportedly employing more than 100 FBI agents not normally known for idle gestures. It is being directed by the famously apolitical James Comey, who heads President Obama’s FBI. Comey faced down apparatchiks in the George W. Bush administration seeking to continue a warrantless wiretapping program, putting his job on the line to do so. When a reporter asked him if he didn’t have a duty to support President Bush, Comey answered “No, my responsibility, I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Obama proudly cited that independent streak when he announced Comey’s appointment. If the FBI discovers evidence of wrong-doing – and there are many reasons to think they will – Comey will not sit on the findings. The FBI does not indict; that is up to the Justice Department. But, if the FBI makes a recommendation to indict, and Justice ignores the report, rumor is the FBI could make public the incriminating material. Either way, Hillary Clinton’s political ambitions are toast.
Related: Why Every Candidate in the 2016 Race Should Fear Mike Bloomberg
The inquiry began by looking into whether Clinton’s use of a personal email server violated security standards; it has since been expanded twice. As reported by Judge Andrew Napolitano of Fox News, Clinton signed an oath promising to comply with the laws protecting national security information, violations that the Obama administration has aggressively prosecuted.
As Napolitano says, “The Obama Department of Justice prosecuted a young sailor for espionage for sending a selfie to his girlfriend, because in the background of the photo was a view of a sonar screen on a submarine….  It also prosecuted Gen. David Petraeus for espionage for keeping secret and top-secret documents in an unlocked drawer in his desk inside his guarded home. It alleged that he shared those secrets with a friend who also had a security clearance, but it dropped those charges.”
Napolitano contends that the bar for prosecution is low, and can be based on negligence. That is, the government need not prove that Clinton intended to reveal state secrets – only that she did so through carelessness.
Charles McCullough, the intelligence community’s inspector general, recently stirred the pot when he wrote to the chairmen of the Senate intelligence and foreign affairs committees that he has received sworn declarations from an intelligence agency he declined to name identifying “several dozen” classified emails, including several marked as “special access programs” – the highest security level possible. SAP information can include the names of intelligence assets, for instance, and other highly sensitive information. To date, some 1,340 “classified” emails have been discovered amongst those stored on Clinton’s server. 
Clinton argues that those communications were not so designated at the time. Undermining her defense is a series of emails exchanged with aide Jake Sullivan in which she appears to order him to get around security protocol and simply cut and paste sensitive information to be faxed to her. The compromising communication was amongst those released in a recent Friday night “dump.” In the exchange, Sullivan reports that staffers have “had issues sending secure fax. They’re working on it.” Clinton answers, “If they can’t, turn into non-paper w no identifying heading and send non-secure.” The intent is clear.
Related: How the FBI Could Derail Hillary Clinton’s Presidential Run
Meanwhile, Clinton and her operatives continue to brush off this major FBI investigation as unimportant. They have claimed that the information sent by Charles McCullough III, a long-time FBI agent who was appointed by Obama as the first Inspector General of the Intelligence Community in 2011, is part of a Republican conspiracy. In Clinton’s world, everything is a “vast right-wing conspiracy,” as she famously declared the Monica Lewinsky scandal. She may be able to cow a teenage intern; James Comey may be tougher to dismiss.
For Bloomberg, Clinton’s problems may be but one of his many reasons to run. His initial election as Mayor of New York City in 2001 occurred against a backdrop of political chaos, similar to what we are seeing nationally today. Former Republican Mayor Rudy Giuliani could not run because of term limits; it was widely expected that he would be succeeded by a Democrat in the very blue city. However, the liberal Mark Green defeated Fernando Ferrer in a nasty primary battle with racist overtones, alienating blacks and other Democratic voters. Bloomberg, a lifelong Democrat, switched to the GOP to run, narrowly defeating the bruised and battered Green. So, his political opportunism has worked before.
Perhaps most persuasive to Mayor Mike, running for president, however long the odds, would give him a platform for the next several months on which he could push his favorite causes. He is an avid supporter of increased gun control as well as a climate change activist. He has been out of office and with a muted national voice for two years; $40 billion will buy quite a megaphone.
Clinton’s legal problems could make that megaphone a whole lot bigger.


  1. My interpretation of Bloomberg's thought process, "Huh, Trump is killing these guys and he's kind of a douchebag. I'm a billionaire with shit tons of money too."

    I'll tell you what William, if any of this Republican bitch behavior actually comes to something, I will donate 50 bucks to whatever candidate you choose, are you willing to do the same if nothing comes of this in the next two months?

    1. Bloomberg can buy and sell Trump. The mayor will probably work this for the pr value.

      Frankly I just can't see how far a Jewish candidate can get nationally. I'd love to see his business acumen employed for the sake of the country.

      If Hillary is indicted who knows?

    2. As for the bet Max, I don't carry anything that small.

    3. My preceptor is Jewish and we talked pretty openly about such things, he seemed amused I could occasionally drop in a yiddish word correctly. I think your assessment is pretty spot on, for as much as the conservatives love Israel, they don't seem to keen on electing someone Jewish in national races. I don't discount Trump's business acumen, at the very least, his self preservation ability is pretty astounding. Bloomberg, to me, is at least an adult. I would not lose my mind seeing him become POTUS. Bloomberg=Mensch, Trump=Momzer

      As for the bet, it's not meant to be giving a pound a flesh, just a friendly wager.

    4. Currently reading "The Israel Test" by George Gilder. Forward by Joe Lieberman.

      I recommend it.


    6. Yeah, there's that, I guess. You may not agree here William, but I think there is an outrage threshold and eventually people get bored. I've made it clear, I'm not here to defend Hillary in any way shape or form. That said, there is a cavalcade, of people who keep posting this stuff that you keep posting, who are starting to sound like people with sandwich boards standing on a corner saying the world ends tomorrow, who keep showing up every day. Given all the mishigas that has happened this year, I certainly don't rule out something could come of this. On the other hand, it's post after post after post after post of people looking in from the outside who USED to be on the inside. Sooner or later, there needs to be something real, like an indictment. IDK buddy, I'm still betting it doesn't happen.

    7. You call it boredom I call it denial. You think it's bad now just wait until The Donald turns his full attention on the Clinton's. This will turn into the biggest shit slinging fight fight in history.

    8. That's not quite true William, I've said multiple times I won't be surprised if something sticks, I wouldn't say that's denial. But it's post after post that keeps tweaking some new computer speak angle, it's getting to be like Fred Sanford claiming, "I'M COMMIN TO JOIN YOU LIZBETH" Sooner or later, a charge has to be levied. You are right about Trump though, despite the fact he's just like the Clinton's, he will have no shame at all to rip into them with everything he's got.

    9. As I have said before, if HRC doesn't do well in Iowa and NH this week Obama just might unleash AG Lynch and plug in his dry powder backup Uncle Joe.

      Billy has been pretty much neutered by Trump already and would rather be playing with his girl friends in Harlem anyway. Ironically Max your boy Bernie may be the catalyst that brings down the Clinton empire.

      As for our resident magpies inquiry about the wager my response is that I don't presently have a horse in the race, supporting neither The Donald or Mayor Mike. Carson and Cruz remain my favorites but having my eyes open I realize the Trump steamroller may flatten out my speed bumps.

    10. hey, I saw an article on the NY Times last night about 22 emails that got classified, I was honestly going to try and post it here, but I guess you can only read so many stories there for free. I think you have a good point, Bernie might be the catalyst here that does more damage than Hillary's baggage.

      As I lamented the death of Paul Kantner of Jefferson Airplane, the thought occurred to me that Bernie's candidacy likely represents the last of 60's idealism. Sanders was born in 1941, Trump 1946 and Elizabeth Warren 1949. Warren may still pop up down the road, but in a race between Sanders, Trump and Hillary, I think it's clear that Bernie is riding a big wave of excitement from young people who DO want something to believe in. It's easy to dismiss the young people following Bernie as ignorant of how the world really works, but I think another possibility is that they understand it clearly and reject it, and I think that can be said of the people who support Trump with no dscernment whatsoever and also younger people who support someone like Rand Paul.

    11. Aww, c'mon, William. $50 is tip money to a playah like you!

      It's not just that I think it would be hilarious if you lost, had to suck it up, and write a check to that commie Sanders' campaign. Believe me, it would be equally as hilarious to watch Mike throw up in his mouth a little as he contributed to Holy Roller Carson or Tea-Time Teddy.

      Do it for the sport of it ...

    12. That would be rough having to kick in to either one of those two, but all in good fun indeed