Tag Archives: former FBI Director James Comey

Broken-Window Theory On A Federal Level

Posted on by

In 1994, Rudy Giuliani became Mayor of New York City. The prior Mayor was David Dinkins who became Mayor in 1990. In the early 1990’s the crime rate in New York City was staggering. There were 2,245 murders, over 100,000 robberies, and over 200,000 burglaries (source here). When Rudy Giuliani was elected, he instituted a broken-window policy.

Basically, the broken-window theory says that visible signs of disorder and neglect lead to more serious crimes. It supports the enforcement of laws preventing broken windows and other seemingly minor crimes to deter more serious crimes.

By the end of the 1990’s, New York City was one of the safest cities in the nation.

On Sunday, The American Thinker posted an article suggesting we use the broken-window policy in the Department of Justice.

The article notes:

The left is outraged that Trump is seeking retribution.  Duh!  Retribution is a key component of the crime-punishment equation.  The punishment must be severe enough to deter future crimes.  That the left continues to attack our right of self-governance proves that the punishment has not reached adequate severity — yet.

The left insists that the DoJ is not Donald Trump’s tool to use against his enemies.  We know that — Merrick Garland isn’t the attorney general anymore.  The Trump DoJ is actually going after our enemies — those who attacked our constitutional republic.  The left attacked our institutions of law and order and must be held accountable — or there will be no law or order.

When a law enforcement officer is attacked, the system reacts far more energetically than it would for other assaults.  That’s because an attack on a police officer is an attack on the institution we have commissioned to maintain social order.

When an ICE agent was struck in Washington, D.C., it wasn’t one guy hitting another guy with a sub sandwich.  It was a citizen giving “we the people” the finger by attacking our agent.

When E. Jean Carroll sued Donald Trump, it wasn’t a ditz with a bad memory trying to get a windfall from a billionaire with a big mouth.  It was part of a planned conspiracy to undermine our right to choose our leadership.

When James Comey posted “86 47,” it wasn’t an innocent photo of sea shells.  It was a threat against our president, using the same symbolism violent protestors are using to call for his murder.  The fact that there have already been numerous attempts against on the president’s life makes Comey’s posting all the more egregious.

The article concludes:

Rudy Giuliani used the “broken window” strategy to clean up the mess that the Dems had made of New York City. He punished delinquents for misdemeanors to deter them from becoming felons. It worked.

Is the DoJ using Giuliani’s strategy in its pursuit of Comey and Carroll, or are they just pieces of a much bigger strategy?

As silly as James Comey’s posting was, it was an illegal implied threat against a president. Carroll’s alleged perjury was an illegal undermining of our justice system. Both acts had a shared objective of preventing Trump from being our president. That makes both offenses something far more important — recent acts of an ongoing conspiracy. As such, Comey and Carroll have reset the statute of limitations for all acts of the conspiracy that came before them.

Now the conspirators are faced with the necessary consequences of their actions — without a statute of limitations shield. James Comey, John Brennen, James Clapper, Letitia James, Fani Willis, Jack Smith, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and numerous others must be held to account for the crime-punishment ledger to balance. Their combined offenses undermined our right to free and fair (i.e., honestly informed) elections, and all should be treated as such.

Perhaps prosecution of the Comey and Carroll “window breakers” will lead to the eventual downfall of the traitorous conspirators.

Using a broken-window policy may be the only way to stop the weaponization of the Justice Department in the future.

 

Waiting For The Other Shoe To Drop

Posted on by

I believe that bringing James Comey to trial for his beach shells incident is a mistake, but evidently there is more to the story.

On Sunday, Just the News reported:

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said on Sunday that the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey goes beyond his “8647” Instagram post about President Trump.

“Rest assured that it’s not just the Instagram post that leads somebody to get indicted,” Blanche said on “Meet the Press” on Sunday.

“The career FBI agents, the career Secret Service agents that investigated this case, didn’t just look at the Instagram post and walk away,” he added.

Blanche declined to elaborate on the matter.

“So I am not permitted to get into the details of what the grand jury heard or found,” he said.

I hope that whatever other charges the government has against James Comey are substantial. I disagree with the solo charge of shells on the beach.

I believe that James Comey is a sleeze who should have gone to jail for previous crimes, but the statute of limitations has passed, and the law is the law. If Facebook posts similar to his resulted in indictments, our courts would be full. Yes, his post was tacky, unnecessary, and petty, but I question whether or not it was illegal.

Someone with a different opinion than mine told me that he was glad James Comey would have to use his resources to defend himself–much like the pain his lawfare caused to others when he was in office. I see his point, but does this indictment further polarize the country?

We can’t  undo the damage the Biden administration did to the concept of equal justice under the law, but we can avoid making the same mistakes.

We Have Found The Corruption. Why Are The Villains Still Free?

Posted on by

We have found the corruption and law breaking in the Obama and Biden administrations. So far I don’t recall seeing anyone wearing an orange jumpsuit. Why do you think that is? I think we might have a clue.

On Tuesday, The Washington Post reported the following:

Justice Department lawyers said Tuesday that a recent ruling barring their access to key evidence has effectively crippled their efforts to reindict former FBI director James B. Comey, two weeks after their original case against him was dismissed.

The concession came in a court filing urging a federal judge in Washington to lift a temporary order she imposed Saturday restricting the government’s ability to review or use emails and other electronic communications seized as part of an investigation more than five years ago involving Comey confidante Daniel Richman.

Richman’s records had played a central role in the Justice Department’s effort to indict Comey on charges he lied during a 2020 congressional hearing about authorizing Richman to leak information to the media — allegations Comey has denied. Tuesday’s court filing raised new questions about prosecutors’ ability to pursue their case against the former FBI director.

Richman, a Columbia University law professor who briefly represented Comey as his attorney in 2017, has argued that the Justice Department’s current use of those files violates his constitutional rights. Justice Department officials wrote Tuesday that without access to the communications between the two men the government is “effectively enjoined … from investigating or prosecuting Comey.”

The article concludes:

The FBI originally obtained Richman’s emails and text messages in 2019 and 2020 as part of a different inquiry into whether Comey had disclosed classified information to the media through Richman on Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. That investigation was closed without charges.

Richman, in his request to Kollar-Kotelly last week, said prosecutors in that first probe had seized and analyzed more of his messages than the initial search warrants allowed and then unlawfully held onto them for years.

In an order Tuesday, Kollar-Kotelly granted Richman’s attorneys and the Justice Department until Wednesday to brief her on whether she should allow the government access to Richman’s emails again for the limited purpose of arguing whether the government should be permanently blocked from using them.

If the Department of Justice can’t put people in jail for breaking the law, we need a new Department of Justice. We have seen tons of evidence against various people who violated their oath of office and the culprits are still walking around free. That is infuriating, particularly after Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro both did jail time for lesser offenses.