President Donald Trump's tweets alleging that President Barack Obama spied on him [1] during the campaign are unsubstantiated, according to FBI Director James Comey. On March 20, Comey testified in front of the House Intelligence Agency, refuting Trump's wiretapping claim and confirming that the FBI was investigating Russia's meddling in the election. While the lack of evidence to support the president's allegation is unsurprising, Comey's testimony revealed that the bureau had been examining Trump's ties to Russia since July — which is surprising given the FBI's contested involvement in the campaign.

Comey: Investigation began in late July

— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) March 20, 2017 [2]

At time of pivotal Comey letter on Clinton email, FBI had been investigating Trump campaign links to Russia for three months.

— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) March 20, 2017 [3]

Ryan Lizza, a New Yorker reporter, pointed out how the timing of the investigation was crucial; it was already happening when the FBI decided to announce it was reopening its probe into Hillary Clinton's emails [4] on Oct. 28, but they made no mention of the Russia investigation. Comey's letter, in the opinion of some critics, possibly cost Clinton the election. Nate Silver, the statistician behind Five Thirty Eight concluded that Clinton "almost certainly" would have won [5] had Comey's letter not been released.

There does seem to be some discrepancy, at minimum, between what Comey defines as essential public knowledge. If it's necessary to alert Congress after potential new evidence materializes in Clinton's case, isn't it just as necessary to disclose when the bureau is investigating (an inquiry which is ongoing [6]) Trump's potential collusion with Russia?