With a book to sell, former FBI Director James Comey is tantalizing everyone with a super-duper, soon-to-be-unveiled, never-before-revealed, abra-cadabra-alacazam revelation that will call into question President Obama's Attorney General's objectivity around the investigation of Hillary Clinton's mishanding of top secret classified information. Like we didn't know that. The real question is why didn't he say anything about it when it happened, and why he only see fit to use it to sell books now?

Fox News reports:

James Comey's cryptic reference in his new book to "a development still unknown to the American public" involving then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the Hillary Clinton email probe is sparking furious speculation inside and outside the Beltway.

According to ABC News, Comey writes in "A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies and Leadership," that he became the public face of the investigation partly because of the mysterious development which he felt could cast “serious doubt” on Lynch's independence.

“Had it become public, the unverified material would undoubtedly have been used by political opponents to cast serious doubt on the attorney general’s independence in connection with the Clinton investigation,” Comey writes, according to ABC. He calls the material a “development still unknown to the American public to this day.”

This is carnival barker stuff, nothing but a scheme to rope 'em in, to buy his book. The real issue here is why he is using a grave matter of rule of law not to correct the problem in question but just to turn a profit by selling his memoirs. If he really knew of some kind of serious malfeasance, it would have been his duty to raise a stink at the time it happened. And actually, we knew something 'off' had happened with that tarmac-meeting between Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch at the height of the 2016 campaign, back when Comey thought Clinton would win and adjusted his actions accordingly. Or, back when the FBI was investigating President Trump's campaign in the name of, as FBI lovebirds Peter Stzok and Lisa Page put it to each other, "an insurance policy."

What we have here, coming in the pipeline, is another indicator of Comey's biased nature as he seeks to make himself a Boy Scout in his memoirs, turn a profit, and throws someone else under the bus. He's never had a problem with doing this. Now it's Loretta Lynch's turn.

It would be nice if Congress could come up with some kind of retroactive impeachment, given Comey's blatant use of his government experience and dereliction of duty in it to feather his nest. In the meantime, the best that can be done is to either not buy his book or to insist that the media call on him to answer questions as he makes the rounds promoting his book.