Democrats are going ballistic. What FBI Director James Comey did was unprecedented, it violated protocol, he’s influencing the election, maybe it was the Russians, and maybe Comey himself is a Putin ally. The Left is frothing at the mouth over Comey’s decision to inform Congress that the bureau will be reviewing more Clinton-related emails found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop. His now-estranged wife, Huma Abedin, serves as Clinton vice chairwoman and top aide, shared the device, which led us to where we are now with the email investigation. But is this really unprecedented? I’m not even going to comment on the Russian drivel spewed by some Democrats.
Well, in 1992, the Clinton/Gore campaign harped on the indictment of the late former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger to discredit the re-election campaign of President George H.W. Bush four days prior to Election Day. The indictment involved Weinberger’s involvement in the Iran-Contra scandal of the Reagan administration. At the time, October 30, 1992, then-Gov. Bill Clinton said:
Today's disclosure that President Bush knew and approved of the arms-for-hostages deal with Iran not only directly contradicts the president's claims, it diminishes the credibility of the presidency. It raises the question first, and most importantly, about whether he's told the truth in this campaign and for the last five years. And secondly, it raises the whole question of his support for the policy. But the far more important thing is whether for five years he's been telling the American people something about his conduct of foreign policy as vice president which was simply not true.
Then-Sen. Al Gore (D-TN) said at the time, "We now have the evidence--the smoking-gun memorandum--the clear proof that what George Bush has said about his role in creating one of the worst, most embarrassing catastrophes in American foreign policy is simply untrue. How can he now ask the American people to trust him?”
Recommended
Yes, Republicans made the same charge that this cost Bush his re-election. After all in December of 1992, a federal judge eventually tossed the one-count indictment due to statute of limitations (via NYT 12/11/92):
A Federal district judge today threw out a one-count indictment that was brought against former Defense Secretary Caspar W. Weinberger four days before the Presidential election and created an uproar when Republicans asserted that it had contributed to President Bush's defeat.In his ruling the judge, Thomas F. Hogan, said the new charge violated the five-year statute of limitations in the Iran-contra case and improperly broadened the original indictment that was filed in June against Mr. Weinberger. The one-count indictment was returned by a grand jury on Oct. 30.
"The new charge of false statement was a substantial amendment to the original charge of obstruction of Congress and broadened the charges against the defendant," Judge Hogan said.
So, yeah—indictments, or updates on investigations, have been divulged to the public close to Election Day. It’s not unprecedented. It’s happened. So, chalk the current Democratic talking point as just another lie aimed to protect Lady Macbeth. Guy will have a deeper analysis on this hypocrisy later. In the meantime, just enjoy the tantrum the Left is throwing.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member