The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“THE WEEK IN REVIEW” mentioning the U.S. Dept of State was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H4383-H4387 on May 19, 2017.
The State Department is responsibly for international relations with a budget of more than $50 billion. Tenure at the State Dept. is increasingly tenuous and it's seen as an extension of the President's will, ambitions and flaws.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
THE WEEK IN REVIEW
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Budd). Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2017, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is recognized for the remainder of the hour as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from College Station for the profound tribute to a great man, great people.
It has been an interesting week. Our President is headed for the Middle East, and it has gotten rather vitriolic, condemnation of our President for firing the FBI Director.
The FBI Director is supposed to be more concerned with law enforcement than with press conferences. Since he is not elected, his job is not to go out and appear to be, politically, a substitute and, particularly, not to help one party over another.
It seemed that under Director Comey's tenuous head of the FBI--I was thrilled when he replaced Mueller. Mueller did a lot of damage to the FBI with his 5-year up-or-out policy, where anyone in a supervisory position for 5 years anywhere outside of Washington, at the end of the 5 years, had to either leave the FBI or come to Washington and be a minion up here for the Director.
We lost thousands and thousands of years of valuable FBI experience under Director Mueller. In fact, no one has done more damage to the rank and file of our outstanding FBI agents than Director Mueller. I keep hearing all these glowing things. Well, he did a lot of damage.
Plus, under his time as FBI Director, Mueller had the training material that would help FBI employees and agents understand more about radical Islam.
The FBI, in the 1990s, had done an outstanding job of gathering information about radical Islam, of groups like the Holy Land Foundation, individuals associated with supporting terrorism. After the 1993 attempt to bomb the World Trade Center, he did a good job gathering evidence for that trial. By the time Director Mueller came along under President George W. Bush, they had gotten pretty good at figuring out what radical Islam was.
Kim Jensen, with the FBI, had a 700-page program to train FBI agents on what radical Islam was, how you go about spotting people that had been radicalized, the things they believe, understanding which scriptures in the Koran they focused on. It really helped FBI agents figure out how to stop radical Islam.
But the reason the FBI took so much criticism after so many people across America have been killed needlessly from people who were on the FBI radar is because, under Bob Mueller, the FBI agents were not allowed to know how to spot radical Islam, and, in fact, they could hurt their career if they attempted to point out that someone had been radicalized.
So that is why, when Russia told the United States twice--once, directly told the FBI, as I understand it--that the older Tsarnaev brother had been radicalized and where he had traveled and where he had been radicalized over in the former Soviet Union area, the FBI, the best we can find out from the public hearings we had, apparently, under Mueller, they sent somebody to ask Tsarnaev if he was a radical terrorist, and he assured them he wasn't. And they sent somebody to ask Tsarnaev's mother, and she, in essence, said, ``No, he is a good boy; he is not a terrorist,'' and that was their investigation.
I challenged Mueller: You didn't even go to the mosques, the main Boston mosque where these guys attended to see and investigate whether they had been radicalized.
{time} 1315
He refuted that. He said we did go to those mosques, but then he added: ``In our outreach program.''
It turns out, as he admitted, he did not even know that the Boston mosque where the Tsarnaev radicalization was heightened was started by a man named Alamoudi. Alamoudi helped the Clinton administration back before they started making so much money on who they were. But the Clinton administration used Alamoudi to help them find the perfect Muslims to be chaplains at prisons, the perfect Muslims to help advise the government, the perfect Muslims to plug in to help our United States Government.
And it is what I have asked more than once and have gotten no answer: Who was it that encouraged or placed Huma Abedin Weiner next to Hillary Clinton as an intern in 1996? Who was it that put her in that position next to the First Lady, where she grew from being intern to being helper and ultimately her number one closest adviser as secretary of state?
Had Hillary Clinton been elected President, she would have been the foremost closest adviser to the President of the United States with some strong direct ties from her family to the Muslim Brotherhood.
In fact, Osama bin Laden had indicated that a couple of things that radicalized him, made him want to kill people like Americans for being infidels, was a booklet written by an Egyptian Muslim brother named Qutb--Q-u-t-b--called ``Milestones.'' He also gave great credit to a guy named Naseef, who was head of a number of Muslim activities--still is. But he had a journal that was a favorite publication of the Muslim Brotherhood.
And come to find out that, gee, back when she was working for Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin was listed on the masthead as being a part of that publication, contributing to being part of that publication, along with, at different times, one or two other family members. That is the journal that Naseef started for the Muslim group.
Quite interesting, the ties that she had. Some of us asked for the inspector general--all we did was ask five different inspectors general and five different departments or agencies if they would investigate the extent of Muslim brother influence in their particular department or agency, and one was the State Department. There is not one single thing that we put in any of those five letters that was inaccurate. They were all factually correct. But there was a firestorm. John McCain rushed to the Senate floor to condemn us. We were right about everything we put in those letters. We are still right.
Bob Mueller did a lot of damage to our ability--as one of our agents told me, we have been blinded of our ability to see who our enemy is.
In recent days, since Director Comey was fired by the President--
which he totally has the authority to do for any reason or for no reason--there have been all these glowing comments by my Democratic friends in the House and Senate condemning the firing of Comey. President Trump has been vilified even for commenting today and yesterday that he thought when he fired Comey he would have wide bipartisan support. Because he had heard so many comments, he thought that would be widely appreciated on both sides of the aisle, because clearly the FBI had become about Comey and not about law enforcement.
It certainly seemed inappropriate, what he said last summer, when basically he laid out the case of how Hillary Clinton had committed a Federal crime that did not require intent, but then he added an element to the offense that Congress didn't add, that is not part of the law, of specific intent. Didn't exist. Not necessary to prove. It hadn't been proved in other cases where we have got people that have been put in the penitentiary for a lot less than what Hillary Clinton did. But he exonerated her. No prosecutor in his right mind would prosecute this case, when, actually, there are a lot of prosecutors who would have prosecuted that case if they were not so politically attuned as Mr. Comey was and is.
I thought it would be helpful, Mr. Speaker, to just go back and revisit comments from some of our friends across the aisle about the FBI Director Comey. In fact, nobody has been more vocal since Director Comey's firing than our friend down the hall, Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat from New York.
I am quoting from my friend Chuck Schumer. He came out bluntly on November 2, 2016: ``I do not have confidence in him any longer.''
Published in Bloomberg. So being a man of his word, we know that as of November 2, Senator Schumer had no confidence in Director Comey any longer.
Despite what he has said in recent days, beloved Senator Bernie Sanders from Vermont did an interview with ABC News in January of this year. The headline from the ABC News story: ``Sanders: `Would Not Be Bad Thing for the American People' if FBI Director Comey Steps Down.''
Then the story went on to say: ``Asked by ABC News' George Stephanopoulos in an exclusive interview on `This Week' if Comey should leave his post, Sanders responded, `I think he should take a hard look at what he has done and I think it would not be a bad thing for the American people if he did step down.'
`` `I think that Comey acted in an outrageous way during the campaign,' Sanders said. `No one can say that this was decisive, or this is what elected Trump, but clearly his behavior during the campaign in terms of what he said during the week or two before the election was unacceptable.' ''
Then we have former Senator Harry Reid. All those who know him to be a man of his word can take his comments seriously because as of October 30, 2016, Senator Harry Reid from Nevada said in a letter to Director Comey: ``Dear Director Comey: Your actions in recent months have demonstrated a disturbing double standard for the treatment of sensitive information, with what appears to be a clear intent to aid one political party over another. I am writing to inform you that my office has determined that these actions may violate the Hatch Act, which bars FBI officials from using their official authority to influence an election. Through your partisan actions, you may have broken the law.''
Again, this is Harry Reid to Director Comey. Harry Reid goes on:
``The double standard established by your actions is clear. In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisers, and the Russian Government, a foreign interest openly hostile to the United States, which Trump praises at every opportunity.''
And I will insert here parenthetically, we now know that the FBI did not possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisers, and the Russian Government. In fact, the Obama administration, intelligence, law enforcement officials have repeatedly testified that despite all their inferences, despite all the things they wanted to find, they could not point to any evidence of the Russian Government affecting our election, of the Russian Government colluding with the Trump administration or with Donald Trump's campaign to affect the election. No evidence.
Anyway, we know more now than we did at the time that Harry Reid wrote this letter.
Senator Reid went on: ``The public has a right to know this information. I wrote to you months ago calling for this information to be released to the public. There is no danger to American interests from releasing it. And yet, you continue to resist calls to inform the public of this critical information.
``By contrast, as soon as you came into possession of the slightest innuendo related to Secretary Clinton, you rushed to publicize it in the most negative light possible.
``Moreover, in tarring Secretary Clinton with thin innuendo, you overruled longstanding tradition and the explicit guidance of your own department. You rushed to take this step 11 days before a Presidential election, despite the fact that for all you know, the information you possess could be entirely duplicative of the information you already examined which exonerated Secretary Clinton.''
Well, again parenthetically, we know now it actually condemned Secretary Clinton, showed she committed a crime. She may not have had the intent to violate the law, but had the certain intent to do what she did, and that was a violation of the law.
He goes on. This is Harry Reid talking to and about Comey. He says:
``As you know, a memo authored by Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates on March 10, 2016, makes clear that all Justice Department employees, including you, are subject to the Hatch Act. The memo defines political activity prohibited under the Hatch Act as, `activity directed toward the success or failure of a political party, candidate for partisan political office, or partisan political group.'
``The clear double standard established by your actions strongly suggests that your highly selective approach to publicizing information, along with your timing, was intended for the success or failure of a partisan candidate or political group.
``Please keep in mind that I have been a supporter of yours in the past. When Republicans filibustered your nomination and delayed your confirmation longer than any previous nominee to your position, I led the fight to get you confirmed because I believed you to be a principled public servant.
``With deepest regret, I now see that I was wrong.
``Sincerely,
``Senator Harry Reid.''
So as of last October 30, Reid believed Comey was not fit for being Director of the FBI.
On May 5: ``Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia told CNN's Alisyn Camerota on Friday that the letter FBI Director James Comey sent to Congress days before the 2016 election notifying lawmakers of the reopened investigation into Hillary Clinton's email practices was `probably the lowest moment in the history of the FBI' next to wiretapping Martin Luther King Jr.''
{time} 1330
Tim Kaine, Senator Kaine, went on: `` `It will go down as probably the lowest moment in the history of the FBI, probably next to the decision of J. Edgar Hoover to wiretap Martin Luther King. And it was unfortunate,' Kaine said.'' That was from the Free Beacon.
Senator Dianne Feinstein from California, November 6, 2016, had this to say about Director Comey of the FBI: `` `The FBI has a history of extreme caution near election day so as not to influence the results. Today's break from that tradition is appalling.' ''
Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat from Connecticut, said this on May 10 on MSNBC: `` `It is absolutely true the Democrats have been very critical of James Comey, and many of us did call for his resignation.'
''
Senator Cory Booker from New Jersey, back on November 6 of 2016, said: ``Hillary Clinton was sharply critical of the FBI in the wake of the surprise announcement that investigators were examining newly discovered emails that could be related to her former private server, but she has avoided the issue more recently.
``So it was striking that Senator Cory Booker took a swipe at the law enforcement agency on Sunday when he introduced Clinton at a black church here.''
This actually is a story from the LA Times.
``Without mentioning the email probe specifically, Booker said there have been `reruns' in this election.
`` `We saw what the FBI did in MLK's day,' he said, a reference to how it targeted the civil rights leader decades ago.
``FBI Director James B. Comey has faced withering criticism from Democrats and even some Republicans for notifying Congress so close to the election that the agency was examining additional emails.
``But Booker's reference to the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., was also interesting in light of how Comey has required FBI trainees to study the lessons from the `shameful' investigations of the civil rights leader.''
In an interview with NPR back on November 8, 2016, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey had an interviewer say this to him: ``Now, earlier today, we had House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi calling the FBI Director James Comey's recent announcements a Molotov cocktail. And she was saying it might have affected down-ballot races for House and Senate, saying it might have made things more of an obstacle for Democrats. What concerns do you have about that in the Senate?''
Senator Booker, again this is November 8, 2016, said: ``Well, I really think that it was a big impact on the election. I don't have any, obviously, data to back that up, and hopefully through an analysis we will see. But clearly our Senate candidates and our Presidential candidates were surging--or at the time that news came, it sucked the momentum out a lot of those races. And we think it could likely affect the outcome of some very tight Senate races as well. It's unfortunate that he would break with precedent. It's--to me, it showed a grave lack of judgment, to put something like that into an election days before it would come to pass. And I think he did a disservice to the United States of America.'' That was from NPR on condemning the actions of Director Comey.
Just so that we know what the theme is we are talking about here, basically Farewell to Director Comey as FBI Director, and I am just giving quotes that our friends across the aisle, Democrats, have made about Director Comey.
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said this November 2, 2016: `` `Maybe he's not in the right job,'. . . .
`` `I think that we have to just get through this election and just see what the casualties are along the way.' ''
Our friend, Representative G.K. Butterfield, Democrat here in the House, serving nobly, former head of the Congressional Black Caucus, he said this year, January 24: `` `I can't speak for Democrats, but I can speak for myself, and I think that James Comey needs to fade away into oblivion.'
`` `He embarrassed this Nation, he possibly influenced the outcome of a presidential election, and he should not hold any position of trust, whatsoever, in our government.' ''
And my friend, Representative Steve Cohen from Tennessee, we serve together on the Committee on the Judiciary. This was his press release October 30, 2016. The press release his office sent out said:
``Congressman Steve Cohen, ranking member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice, today called on James Comey to resign as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.''
Then it has a quote in the Cohen press release: `` `FBI Director James Comey's recent public comments on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her emails, apparently before seeing any evidence, and against the advice of the Justice Department according to press reports, and even, some have suggested, in violation of the Hatch Act, make it clear that for the good of the FBI and the Justice Department, he should resign his position effective immediately,' said Congressman Cohen. `In the past, even quite recently, I have expressed my appreciation for Director Comey. I appreciated his courage as Deputy Attorney General when he stood up to President Bush's Chief of Staff Andrew Card and White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales when they attempted to persuade hospitalized Attorney General John Ashcroft to reauthorize Bush's domestic surveillance program, which the Justice Department had just determined was illegal. When, in July of this year, Director Comey recommended no criminal charges against Hillary Clinton for her handling of classified information while she was Secretary of State but added his own sidebar of opinions to the announcement, I gave Director Comey the benefit of the doubt, despite the fact that his making such highly unusual remarks was called into question by many.'
``Congressman Cohen elaborated, `While I cannot know Director Comey's reasoning for his recent letter to House Members notifying them about the FBI's review of emails that he deemed ``potentially related'' to Hillary Clinton's personal server, it was plainly premature, careless and unprecedented in its potential impact upon a Presidential election without a speck of information regarding the emails in question, their validity, substance or relevance. Director Comey stated in the letter that he had no idea of ``the significance of this newly discovered collection of emails,'' which makes his decision all the more disturbing.
`` `There is a reason that FBI investigations are not usually made public until they are completed. To do so gives an impression of guilt before all the facts have been determined. That was the case during the FBI's investigation of Secretary Clinton's emails that led Director Comey to state that there was no evidence that Secretary Clinton intentionally transmitted or willfully mishandled classified information and that ``no reasonable prosecutor'' would bring a case against her. In light of that finding and the Department of Justice's prohibition and practice against influencing elections, it is clear that Director Comey's actions, no matter his motivations, have called into question his judgment and ethics. That is unacceptable as the FBI Director must, like Caesar's wife, be above suspicion. I agree with CNN's Paul Callan who, in calling for Director Comey to resign wrote
`Trashing the Justice and FBI rule books in the interest of `openness' is likely to put the FBI front and center in one of the most contentious Presidential races in recent U.S. history.' ''
``Congressman Cohen continued, `Additionally revelatory is The New York Times opinion written by Richard Painter, chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, in which he states: Absent extraordinary circumstances that might justify it, a public communication about a pending FBI investigation involving a candidate that is made on the eve of an election is thus very likely to be a violation of the Hatch Act and a misuse of an official position. Serious questions also arise under lawyers' professional conduct rules that require prosecutors to avoid excessive publicity and unnecessary statements that could cause public condemnation even of people who have been accused of a crime, not to mention people like Mrs. Clinton, who have never been charged with a crime.'
``Congressman Cohen concluded, `The fairness of our electoral system is like the fairness of a trial, and no justice official should act in such a way to potentially influence an election whether intended to or not. Standards must be upheld and an FBI Director needs to investigate, not inject issues into a Presidential election when no investigation dictates action or basis for action. At a minimum, Director Comey's actions are, to use his own verbiage, ``extremely careless'' this close to the election and without any apparent substance. If Director Comey cares about the Bureau and the rule of law, as I have felt he has in the past, I'm sure upon reflection of this action, he will submit his letter of resignation for the Nation's good.' ''
So that is my friend, Congressman Steve Cohen from Tennessee, saying, for the good of the country basically, Comey ought to submit his letter of resignation back last October.
Also, when Congressman Cohen appeared on MSNBC, he said: `` `What he's done'--talking about Comey--`is put the FBI in a position that it has never been in. The FBI Director is supposed to investigate and keep his judgments quiet and not get involved in elections . . . and while he's made the right decision, even though he went too far, this summer in not indicting the Secretary, what he did here was just wrong, and something the FBI Director needs to exert extreme control over themselves not to get involved, and he just made a mistake, and I think he should resign, because he's damaged the FBI's reputation.'
`` `. . . in fact, he's been excessively careless now. I gave him the benefit of the doubt I guess based on the result but I didn't like the way he had cut to the process in which he got to the substance of the decision.' ''
October 31, 2016, also Congressman Cohen from Tennessee appeared on CNN, and the CNN reporter said: `` `Congressman, up until the last few days, you didn't just think the FBI Director was doing a good job--you thought he was doing a great job. You told him last month in a hearing, you said ``You are a credit to the FBI, you are a credit to government service.'' How do you explain you're . . .' ''
And then Congressman Cohen said: `` `Because he went too far with this one.' ''
November 3, 2016, The Hill said this: ``As a nearly ten-year veteran of the House Judiciary Committee--the committee responsible for oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Justice--and ranking member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice, earlier this week I called on FBI Director James Comey to resign his position after his recent communication with Members of Congress regarding the Bureau's review of emails potentially related to Hillary Clinton's personal email server.''
Anyway, it goes on--it is a long story--but again feeding Congressman Cohen's call for FBI Director Comey to resign.
December 16, 2016, in a tweet attributed to Congressman Cohen of Tennessee: `` `#Comey was wrong to hide hacking of #DNC #DCCC, but he should not resign. Trump would appoint worse. #FBI & Senators bulwark for next admin.' ''
So by December he was already thinking differently.
But December 10, in a statement, he said: `` `I applaud Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid for also calling on FBI Director James Comey to resign after new information came to light that Director Comey may have known the CIA had secretly concluded that the Russians were trying to help Donald Trump win the Presidency. . . .' ''
So, anyway, back and forth. But our friend, Representative Keith Ellison, Democrat from Minnesota, November 6, 2016, from Twitter said:
``I'm not surprised at all `Comey says latest emails don't change decision.' ''
{time} 1345
Representative Elijah Cummings from Maryland, my friend, a Democrat, January 13 of this year, said: ``I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Today, I must tell you, when I left the hearing, I felt a great sense of disappointment.''
My friend, Ruben Gallego, a Congressman from Arizona, a Democrat, said: ``What I heard in the briefing made me not trust him, that's all.''
My friend, Hank Johnson, a Democrat from Georgia, said: ``My confidence in the FBI Director's ability to lead this agency has been shaken.''
On January 13, Hank Johnson also said: ``He should pack his things and go.''
He was talking about Comey.
Johnson said: ``I don't have confidence in this man to lead the FBI in the coming weeks and months ahead, with all the work that must be done to get to the bottom of Russian hacking into our electoral process.''
Then my friend, Jerry Nadler, a Democrat from New York, November 14, 2016, said: ``The President can fire him for cause and ought to. He violated all the guidelines and put his thumb on the scale of an election. Whether it was decisive or not is a different question.''
House Democratic Caucus vice Chairwoman Linda Sanchez, my friend from California, said: ``I don't believe that Director Comey conducted himself during the election in a way that was impartial. I have concerns about that. But I also have concerns about who would the replacement be.''
Also, my friend, Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz from Florida, said: ``I think Director Comey has taken enough actions that call into question his ability to continue to serve credibly. I would lean in the direction that he no longer is able to serve in a neutral and credible way.''
My friend, Representative Mark Takano from California, said: ``I'm extremely concerned--extremely. I'll just--I'm very angry.''
He was talking about Comey as FBI Director.
Representative Tim Walz, my friend from Minnesota, said on January 13: ``I was nonjudgmental until the last 15 minutes. I no longer have that confidence in him.''
And then so many of the media have been condemning President Trump for firing the FBI Director. Yet, if we just go back a little bit, those same people in the media--Paul Callan from CNN, on October 30, 2016, said: ``Perhaps it's time for the embattled FBI Director who seems to have forgotten how to conduct a proper investigation to resign.''
Kurt Eichenwald said on November 7, 2016: ``James Comey should not simply be fired as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He must be barred forever from any form of public service.
``He has done more damage to the reputation of the FBI than any Director since the Nixon administration. Comey will, without doubt, be listed as second only to Hoover as the worst Director to ever hold the office because of his willingness to abuse his power.''
Ian Millhiser, on October 31, 2016, said: ``We also know that Comey violated longstanding Justice Department protocol when he decided to disclose the very few facts that he actually did disclose in his letter to the Republican chairs. And we know that he wrote the letter over the explicit objections of Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Taken together, these actions constitute a fireable offense.''
The New York Daily News editorial board called on Comey to resign, and said: ``FBI Director James Comey's democracy-bending decision to inform America, 11 days before its Presidential election, that the Bureau is digging into a trove of additional emails demands the highest condemnation. And he must resign.''
The Wall Street Journal editorial board said: ``But if the FBI Director has demonstrated anything in the last year, it is that he has lost the trust of nearly everyone in Washington, along with every American who believes the FBI must maintain its reputation as a politically impartial Federal agency.
``The best service Mr. Comey can render his country now is to resign. Failing that, Jeff Sessions should invite him in for a meeting after he is confirmed as attorney general and ask him to resign. If Mr. Comey declines, Donald Trump can and should fire him in the best interests of the Nation's most important law enforcement agency.''
Keith Olbermann with GQ tweeted out: ``Very simple: FBI Director Comey needs to clarify--today--that these are not emails from, or withheld by, Clinton or resign immediately.''
The Washington Post said on October 29, 2016: ``James Comey is damaging our democracy.''
Michael Cohen with The Boston Globe on October 21, 2016, said: ``FBI Director James Comey should resign. James Comey really messed up. The FBI Director did not commit some garden-variety mistake. This is not an
`oops' moment. For reasons that have more to do with protecting himself from dishonest Republican attacks, Comey committed an overly egregious and political act that roiled the Nation's politics 11 days before election day--and undermined public trust in the Nation's criminal justice institution. And he needs to go.''
That is The Boston Globe.
Anyway, Mortimer B. Zuckerman, chairman and editor of U.S. News and World Report, on November 4, 2016, said: ``Time to resign--FBI Director James Comey needs to step down over his handling of the Clinton email investigation.''
This is what they said.
``The self-righteous James Comey has served his country badly. Comey seems oblivious of the effect of handing Trump a piece of dynamite.''
And he goes on condemning Comey over and over.
Jeff Jarvis from Buzzfeed said on November 6, 2016, in a tweet: ``Now resign, Comey, resign.''
On October 31, 2016, a tweet from Bret Stephens of The New York Times, said: ``FBI Director James Comey needs to resign now, while he can salvage his honor. My Wall Street Journal column explains.''
You have the Clinton campaign on May 10--it was republished on May 10, but it first went out on October 30, 2016, and it talks about having worked with Director Comey: ``But his unprecedented decision to publicly comment on evidence in what may be an ongoing inquiry just 11 days before a Presidential election leaves us both astonished and perplexed.''
It went on to say that they were ``moved'' to speak out publicly because Comey's action violated ``settled'' DOJ tenets.
And Hillary Clinton herself said: ``It's pretty strange to put something like that out with such little information, right before an election. In fact, it's not just strange, it's unprecedented and it's deeply troubling. I was on the way to winning until the combination of Jim Comey's letter on October 28 and Russian WikiLeaks raised doubts in the minds of people who were inclined to vote for me but got scared off. If the election was on October 27, I would be your President.''
John Podesta, it turns out, is on the board of directors of one or more companies and had dealings with Russia. He said: ``It's extraordinary that we would see something like this just 11 days out from a Presidential election.
``Light on facts, heavy on innuendo, knowing full what Republicans would do with it. It is not up to him who owes the public answers to questions that are now on the table.''
He also said that he has ``not been forthcoming with the facts.''
Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I just thought it would be interesting to understand why President Donald Trump would have said in the last 2 days he thought that firing Comey would be applauded in a bipartisan fashion, because he knew all of these quotes from Democratic leaders, mainstream leaders that are mainstream media-leading publications weighed in demanding Comey's resignation. President Trump demands his resignation or fires him.
So it seems to me President Trump is in a situation where it is understandable he would think the Democrats would appreciate him firing Comey, just like Republicans.
I know President Trump is relatively new to politics, but hopefully this is a lesson to President Trump. Just because Democratic leaders and the mainstream media say one thing in righteous indignation one day does not mean they are not going to turn around and say exactly the opposite the very next day or the next month.
The President, I know he is learning--he is a quick learner--but he is bound to learning as he goes. You can't always trust what a Democratic leader says one moment, because they may turn around and completely contradict themselves immediately thereafter.
So I think if the President just relies on what our Democratic Senators and House Members said, he will be in good stead. And I think the country is better off, depending on who is appointed, but I have faith it will be an improvement.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________
