The FBI's Impact on the 2016 Election: An Analysis of James Comey's Decisions

When FBI Director James Comey reopened the Hillary Clinton email investigation just weeks before the 2016 election, the repercussions were profound. This decision not only underlined the complexities of governmental investigations but also highlighted the potential for personal biases and infractions of longstanding policies. Let's delve into why Comey re-opened the investigation, what his motivations were, and how it potentially impacted the election's outcome.

The Violation of DOJ Policies

James Comey's actions were a clear violation of the Department of Justice's (DOJ) strict guidelines. These guidelines prohibit making public announcements or statements that could influence an election just prior to it. Comey's decision to reopen the Hillary Clinton email investigation was a major breach of this protocol, and it had a significant impact on the 2016 presidential election.

According to The Washington Post, Comey’s appointment as the head of the FBI followed the Peter Principle, which suggests that people continue to be promoted until they reach a level where they are no longer competent. Comey rose to a position where his actions potentially jeopardized the integrity of the DOJ, all while going against well-established policies.

The Peter Principle and FBI Leadership

The Peter Principle states that in a hierarchy, employees tend to rise to their level of incompetence. Comey exemplified this concept in his role at the FBI, where his ego and belief in his impartiality led him to jeopardize the DOJ's policies and the overall integrity of the FBI's operations. His actions are a prime example of how an individual’s knowledge or experience may not be enough to ensure success at a higher level, especially in sensitive governmental roles.

Personal Biases and Lapses in Judgment

During his tenure as FBI Director, Comey’s decisions were heavily scrutinized, particularly the ones leading up to the 2016 election. One of the most controversial decisions was his letter to Congress in October 2016, which released new evidence about the Clinton email investigation, leading to renewed calls for Clinton's emails to be investigated again.

While Comey claimed that his actions were in service of transparency and the public interest, the timing of his letter to Congress raised eyebrows. His belief was that this would help Hillary Clinton, whom he supported regardless of party affiliation. Comey's internal struggle with maintaining the policies of the DOJ while supporting a candidate caused him to act in ways that were ultimately detrimental to the integrity of the electoral process.

The Role of the FBI in the 2016 Campaign

The FBI's influence on the 2016 election cannot be understated. The leak of Clinton's emails and the re-opening of the investigation created a disruptive environment, sowing doubt and mistrust. This scenario aligns with the idea that the FBI's role is to maintain the integrity of investigations, but Comey's actions blurred the lines between personal and professional objectives.

Moreover, Comey's underestimation of the political impact of his actions on the election demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the delicate balance required in maintaining law and order. His actions, though well-intentioned, ended up being harmful to the very system he was tasked with protecting.

Conclusion: The Inevitable Consequences of Misalignment

The 2016 election was a pivotal moment that highlighted the critical importance of adhering to established legal and ethical guidelines. James Comey's actions, driven by his personal biases and a misunderstanding of the Peter Principle, ultimately cost Hillary Clinton the 2016 election. The case of Comey and the 2016 election serves as a stark reminder of the potential dangers of allowing personal beliefs to override professional responsibilities.

Additional Resources

For further reading and exploration of the 2016 election and FBI's role, consider examining the following resources:

James Comey's book, "A Excellent Intelligence" Articles from The New York Times and The Washington Post Interviews and analyses from key political figures and scholars