Reuters: FBI Chief Sees No Evidence Of Interference In Russia Probe
link
What...I...what?
Does this include the Comey firing?
I realize that he's in a much better position to know than we are...but I find it hard to believe that the Comey firing doesn't constitute some evidence of interference.
What...I...what?
Does this include the Comey firing?
I realize that he's in a much better position to know than we are...but I find it hard to believe that the Comey firing doesn't constitute some evidence of interference.
posted by Winston Smith at
5:02 PM
3 Comments:
The out of context quotes make it difficult to parse, but it seems like Wray might have actually have been talking about Mueller's investigation, not the Russia probe as general media narrative existing since Trump's nomination, including Comey's firing. Probably a garbage headline (not that that is unusual these days).
The direct quote is:
"I can say very confidently that I have not detected any whiff of interference with that investigation,” Wray said during a panel discussion at the Intelligence and National Security Summit in Washington."
The prior paragraph discusses Mueller's investigation, so I'm pretty sure the referent of "that" is supposed to be Mueller's investigation. But I honestly can't say for sure.
Yeah, it's a carefully phrased statement. There's no interference with Mueller's investigation, but Comey was fired, various congressmen including a committee chair have pooh-poohed the investigation (as has Trump), and there is zero effort to make election hardware immune to hacking. (The best way to do this is of course ScanTron technology, which has other benefits as well.)
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home