James Comey’s “October Surprise”, Political Chaos in America? Retrospect on the November U.S. Elections

This GRTV production was first released in the week prior to the November 8 Elections, following the release of FBI Comey’s Second Letter on October 28, 2017.

What motivated the May 2017 firing of FBI Director James Comey? Was it related to Comey’s October Surprise, which was detrimental to Clinton’s candidacy? 

The recommendation to fire Comey did not emanate from the White House. It was an initiative of US Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who prepared a three page memorandum, which  criticized James Comey for his handling of the Clinton email investigation and the release of his October 28, 2016 Second Letter to Congress 11 days before Election Day.

What was the purpose of firing Comey: Cui Bono?  Who was behind it?  That decision served the interests of the Neocons.

It was taken by the Attorney General’s office overriding the Presidency, precisely with a view to removing potential obstacles to the conduct of the Fake “Trump-Moscow collusion” investigation. 

In this regard, Comey was slated to be removed. He was viewed as unpredictable and uncooperative. Moreover, the decision was also intended to weaken the presidency of Donald Trump.

In the immediate wake of Comey’s dismissal, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed former FBI Robert Mueller to serve as special counsel for the United States Department of Justice to investigate the alleged interference of the Kremlin in the November 2016 presidential elections. 

The Mueller investigation under the auspices of the Department of Justice had a mandate to “exploring any coordination between Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Russian government as part of the Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections”.

The Mueller investigation serves two related purposes. It is intended to sustain the Russia-gate legend as an objective of US foreign policy, it is also intended to undermining the Trump presidency. 

About turn?

The recent statements by interim chair of the DNC of the Democratic Party Donna Brazile reveal that the DNC, its former chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Hillary Clinton conspired with a view to undermining Bernie Sanders candidacy in the primaries in favor of Clinton:

I had promised Bernie when I took the helm of the Democratic National Committee after the convention that I would get to the bottom of whether Hillary Clinton’s team had rigged the nomination process, as a cache of emails stolen by Russian hackers and posted online had suggested. I’d had my suspicions from the moment I walked in the door of the DNC a month or so earlier, based on the leaked emails. (Donna Brazile, November 2017

I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. I had gone department by department, investigating individual conduct for evidence of skewed decisions, and I was happy to see that I had found none. Then I found this agreement.

The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity. (Donna Brazile, Politico, November 2, 2017)

What is important to understand is that these alleged fraudulent actions including the rigging of the primaries conducted by the DNC of the Democratic Party could have been instrumental in triggering the loss of Bernie Sanders in the primaries.

Bernie Sanders was leading. If he had won the Democratic Party nomination, he would have won the November 8, 2016 presidential elections against Donald Trump by a landslide.

Without the DNC riggings of the nomination  process, Bernie Sanders would have become President of the United States.

Michel Chossudovsky, November 7, 2017

This GRTV report initially aired four days before the November 2016 presidential elections provides evidence of fraud and criminality involving Hillary Clinton and the DNC. It not only dispels the hacking accusations directed against Moscow, it also reveals the bribery of a senior FBI official who was subsequently promoted and put in charge of the investigation pertaining to Hillary Clinton’s State Department Emails.  

The FBI’s October surprise has thrown the 2016 election into November chaos.

But an examination of the trigger mechanism behind this event reveals a deeper layer of manipulation by the media and financial interests behind the election.

This is the GRTV Backgrounder with your host James Corbett.  This Global Research TV report includes an interview with Prof. Michel Chossudovsky.

 


Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research


About the author:

.James Corbett is Global Research TV's Film Director and Producer based in Okayama, Japan. He started The Corbett Report (www.corbettreport.com) website in 2007 as an outlet for independent critical analysis of politics, society, history, and economics. It operates on the principle of open source intelligence and provides podcasts, interviews, articles and videos about breaking news and important issues from 9/11 Truth and false flag terror to the Big Brother police state, eugenics, geopolitics, the central banking fraud and more.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]