The Patriot Post® · Comey's 'Higher Loyalty' Was to Hillary Clinton

The mainstream media is full of praise, ad nauseam, for FBI¹ Director James Comey’s² defamatory and petulant perspective on Donald Trump³ by way of his Higher Loyalty⁴ book promotion tour.

However, what is emerging from all the Leftmedia spin⁵, with no hint of journalistic objection, is that Comey, unapologetically, had a “higher loyalty” to Hillary Clinton⁶ than to his oath “to support and defend⁷” our Constitution. The interviews reveal more about his abject and reprehensible bias⁸ while FBI director than about anything Trump has done. Across the board, political observers conclude there was no “bombshell” in Comey’s book.

What is also clear is that Comey’s bias enabled Barack Obama’s⁹ deep state FBI operatives¹⁰ to influence the 2016 election in Clinton’s favor. Though Comey has been condemned for his “on again, off again” Clinton investigation review just prior to the election, in fact, as we noted at the time, Comey used the window after absentee voting had ended and before the general election vote to exonerate Clinton¹¹.

And it was Comey’s compromised political views that led to the contrived investigation of Trump/Putin collusion¹² after his election, in order to disable his presidency.

What follows are a few of Comey’s most revealing comments from his five-hour ABC interview with Bill Clinton’s¹³ former communications director, George Stephanopoulos. (Given the final televised interview was less than an hour¹⁴, four hours of that interview ended up on an editing room floor¹⁵.) Time permitting, you can watch a summary of that interview¹⁶ in 100 seconds!

When asked, “You write that President Trump is ‘unethical,’ ‘untethered to the truth.’ Is Donald Trump unfit to be president?” Comey insisted, “I think [Trump] is morally unfit to be president.”

Indeed, Trump’s moral failings are considerable. We have noted those failings¹⁷ since he first declared his candidacy, and he does not help his case by engaging in sophomoric name-calling¹⁸.

However, it is equally clear that Comey was ethically unfit in the end, to serve as FBI director, and a morality play¹⁹ pawn for the Democrat’s midterm election strategy²⁰. He was grossly biased and negligent in his exoneration of Clinton, even though he claimed she was “grossly negligent²¹,” and his investigation of Trump was based on fake information funded by Democrats.

Comey was, and remains, a “Trump hater,” much as his fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe²² and senior investigators Peter Strzok and Lisa Page²³, all of whom colluded in an effort to ensure Clinton would win in 2016.

Perhaps the best indication of Comey’s personal bias was his repeated reference to being greatly influenced by his wife (as was McCabe). According to Comey: “My wife and girls marched in the Women’s March the day after Trump’s inauguration. My four daughters, probably all five of my kids, wanted Hillary Clinton to be president. I know my amazing spouse did.”

All the while, he was, ostensibly, directing the investigations of Clinton’s communications coverup²⁴ and the corrupt Clinton Foundation²⁵ activities while she was Obama’s secretary of state²⁶.

Stephanopoulos asked about the fact that Comey leaked²⁷ the fake Trump dossier to the media, knowing full well it was funded by Trump opposition²⁸, and he then asked Comey about Trump’s reference to him as “the leaker.” Comey replied, “Look, it’s true. … I gave an unclassified memo to my friend and asked him to give it to a reporter. That is entirely appropriate.”

Only in Comey’s now deluded mind was that “entirely appropriate.”

When asked if he should have advised Trump that the FBI knew the real collusion with Russia was perpetrated by Clinton and the Democrat Party²⁹, the delusional Comey responded, “No.”

He also concluded it was “unlikely” Trump colluded with Russians to swing the election and went on to offer a lot of political speculation about Trump — just as he did a lot of speculating in 2016 as FBI director, when he should’ve been dealing objectively with facts.

When asked if Trump should be impeached, Comey replied, “I think impeaching and removing Donald Trump from office would let the American people off the hook and have something happen indirectly that I believe they’re duty-bound to do directly.”

In other words, Comey knows there was no impeachable offense in connection with the fake “Russian collusion” investigation, and since he could not swing the election to Clinton in 2016, he now insists that Americans are “duty-bound” to defeat him in 2020.

All that having been said, as I have noted before, James Comey is a case study of what happens to once-right-minded government administrators who don’t properly maintain their political immunity against Potomac swamp fever. They transform as through metamorphosis into bureaucratic political hacks, and when they lead an agency as powerful as the FBI, they are a formidable threat to the future of Liberty³⁰.

Comey has devolved into a sad, comical caricature of a once-reputable and admirable prosecutor and FBI director — one who is demonstrably “untethered to the truth.” Despite efforts to recast his populist appeal³¹, he has become the incredible shrinking man, the stature of his veracity having shrunk from 6'8" to something considerably less.

I should reiterate here that the disgraceful corruption of FBI leadership has cast a long shadow on the 12,484 special agents and 2,950 intelligence analysts in the FBI, most of whom steadfastly abide by their constitutional oaths and live up to the FBI motto: Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity. Indeed, most FBI agents, whose reputations are being sullied by the corrupt actions of a few high-ranking officials, are deeply offended both personally and professionally by that corruption.

Finally, regarding the Obama/Clinton deep-state operatives, recall the words of Demo minority leader Sen. Chuck Schumer³² about Trump’s criticism of some US intelligence operations: “Let me tell you: You take on the intelligence community — they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

Schumer’s comments mirrored a similar assessment³³, by Obama’s former senior intel advisor, Daniel Benjamin: “Trump’s [intel criticism] will also come back to bite him in the form of leaking and whistleblowing.”

Contemplate the lawless implications of the Schumer and Benjamin assertions. These are bold face admissions that their deep-state operatives within the CIA and FBI will use their positions to do exactly what they have done with the Russian collusion charade³⁴, in order to disable and undermine this presidential administration. They have outlined how Obama/Clinton deep-state actors³⁵, under former CIA director John Brennan³⁶ and Comey, have used their positions endeavoring to take down the Trump presidency³⁷.