I want to direct your attention to Charles Lipson’s analysis of James Comey’s testimony yesterday. The way I’d summarize what strikes me as his even-handed commentary is that Mr. Comey’s testimony probably hurt:
- Trump
- Himself
- Loretta Lynch
- The country
I’ve just added his blog, Zip Dialog to my rather selective (and antiquated) blogroll. It’s become a regular read.
That motivates me to read the piece. As I mused at the post testimony commentary (didn’t watch it) that was my impression.
I also note that I suspect Comey has a bigger problem than currently acknowledged. Perhaps Lynch as well.
IMO, the country is the big, baseline loser because of all these endless hearngs.
Why wasn’t Russian involvement addressed in the prior administration? Didn’t former President Obama assure us, in Sept. 2016, that he had issued a stern warning to Putin to basically “knock it off,” regarding preceived interference in the ongoing general election? But, now, the Dems are grinding the R’s, bashng the current administration, holding up appointments/legislation, and embracing the former FBI director – someone they earlier wanted impeached or fired.
It all appears to be nothing more than a political farce. And, I think a lot of people are disgusted by this tiredsome display of gamesmanship that helps no one but DC politicians.
If you go by the common sense dictum that what Trump accuses others of doing is in fact what he is guilty of trying, then it’s clear that at the some point the Trump campaign and parts of the GOP tied themselves to the Russians and there attempts to hack into various state election systems. Probably meant nothing to the vote totals, but the mere fact of it is amusing enough.
He’s also probably deeply in hock to Russian banks. And oh yeah, the fact that he apparently asked Comey to disprove the totally not-true escorts and piss play story is a good sign that the pee tape is real.
Modulo,
If that is your standard, then what are the Democrats guilty of trying?
Lipman makes a good assessment, now lets see how it plays in the midterms.
Jim Geraghty commented about Comey’s “Russian” testimony succinctly this morning:
“Think about it, between Election Day and May 9, that’s a good six months of the FBI digging into Russia’s attempts to influence the election. Is it that the evidence connecting Russia to Trump is proving particularly difficult to find, or is it that the evidence just doesn’t exist?”
I might add that not only was Russia’s attempt to influence the election under covert scrutiny since last July, with Obama dismissing it’s urgency because he had personally confronted Putin about it, but also Obama directed Comey to not go public with this investigation before the election. The probable reasoning behind that directive being HRC was assumed to all but have the election in the bag, and the dems didn’t want to disturb a sure thing.
Now, however, the paradigm has drastically changed inciting media and political hounds to be unleashed, encouraged to unrelentingly proceed ahead in their attempts to find some malevolent connection between the R president and the Russians — even if they only feed on air, anonymous and/or poorly sourced stories to make their case.
I don’t think Comey is in any trouble at all. He seems to be the only player in this drama with any integrity.
Which reminds me to ask, since I have a hard time keeping track: Which partisan side is Comey on this week?
Andy – his own side.
How many people here have owned, run or managed a reasonably complicated organization? How many would tolerate a guy who by training and experience is such a weak player they, by their own admission, are incapable of executing their office or dealing with tough guys. This is our FBI head? I don’t believe it. I don’t believe he’s such a weak spined and malleable dupe. There is something wrong with this picture.
Trump’s position may not have been helped, but I don’t see how it was hurt (and in fact the advance buildup of this testimony by Trump opponents made it seem like it ended up a win for Trump since there was vindication and clarity given that he had never been under investigation.)
I started out somewhat sympathetic to Comey (though have often been puzzled by his actions over the last year) but ended up feeling he came across quite bad- for the reasons laid out in the linked article. Contra Andy’s assertion of integrity (and being nonpartisan by way of triggering dueling accusations of partisanship from each side) I think he admitted to quite a lot of actions that if not partisan were at least biased and personal. He didn’t elaborate on why he treated Lynch’s demand with a shrug but read Trump’s veiled comment she in the worst possible way. He described actions he’s taken since his firing in a personal and vindictive way, and spoke constantly of his “feelings” rather than giving objective accounts of what transpired. He may not be in any legal jeopardy but I don’t think he did himself any favors yesterday.
Oops. By training and experience should be capable but…..
CStanley:
IMO the longer the ball stays up in the air, the weaker Trump’s position will be. I also think that the longer he talks, the more likely it will be that Comey ends up in jail.
Out of curiosity, what does it mean in the Columbia law professor’s bio that he is an “advisor to FBI Director James Comey”? Sounds like more than just a personal friend.
Well, like all totally innocent people Trump has personally volunteered
to testify under oath. I’m sure this will go over well. He’s such a natural in these situations.
IMO the longer the ball stays up in the air, the weaker Trump’s position will be
I agree, but the Democrats and various collaborators have been playing beach volleyball with this for 6 months and the guy that was supposed to spike the winning point didn’t score (could almost say he scored for the other side with some of his admissions.) It just looks to me like the core reasons for the investigation are collapsing, at least as they pertain to Trump himself.
Collaborators? Telling word choice. All of these disloyal people in the FBI running around and not being loyal to dear leader. It’s like when the CIA killed Kennedy, but worse. Way worse–there’s leaks.
Comey is investigating the Hillary Clinton email scandal. He is told by Loretta Lynch to stop calling it an “investigation”. She orders him to call it a “matter”, like the Hillary Clinton campaign operation. Somehow he forgets to write a memo, but he is so troubled by it he decides to act.
The FBI Director is not a prosecutor, but he decides to alert the public about his perceived injustice. He decides that this is so important, he must publicly indict Hillary Clinton, but his press conference is nothing more than an open leak.
Later, he decides that he must alert the public that Huma Abedin is a spy, potentially. Again, he leaks the information through public means. Then, he decides he must pardon Huma and exonerate Hillary.
Later, he decides to write memos documenting his interactions with President Trump, but apparently, he is only holding them to have leverage over his boss at some later time. He knows that President Trump has not done anything illegal, but he decides that a Special Counsel needs to be appointed. In order to have a Special Counsel appointed against the boss that fired him, he anonymously leaks the information through a cut-out.
Before he was fired, he did not think that there should be a Special Counsel, and when his previous boss was pressuring him, he did not see anything with it. He is a disgruntled employee, and he only gained his “holier than thou” position after he was fired.
I guess that Loretta Lynch and Obama were smart to not fire him.
Realizing that one man’s whistleblower is another man’s leaker, I’ve seen nothing in any of the leaked materials that pointed to criminal activity. In my world that makes the leakers the criminals and press that publish the leaks collaborators. What national interest has been served by any of this?
It’s not illegal, as far as I know, to leak information that is unclassified. You can get fired, but you can not get be charged with a crime, unless it’s now a crime to do things Trump doesn’t like.
Anyway, he’s got tapes and he’s going to testify and produce these tapes one of these days, so I’m sure it will explain away his desire to punish Comey for investigating Michael Flynn and such minor things as his son-in-law and Flynn going to the Russian ambassador to ask for a secure communications channel.
I seriously doubt Comey will end up in Jail. There’s nothing criminal in his actions and, as FBI director, he would know what missteps to avoid.
If anything, this whole drama increased my opinion of Comey. Here’s an FBI director who is was subordinate to two highly politicized Executives during a unique election year at a time when there are two high profile investigations into powerful political figures. I don’t see any evidence that he did anything besides try to thread the needle through a very difficult situation. There does not appear to be any evidence that tried to to screw one side and help the other. The fact that both Democrats and Republicans hate him, yet he was still willing to testify – under oath – in front of a grandstanding Senate, suggests to me his actions had legitimate and fair intentions. If anything, his main concerns is the reputation of the FBI and there he had a stellar reputation among the rank-and-file.
CStanley,
“He didn’t elaborate on why he treated Lynch’s demand with a shrug”
This is what he actually said in testimony:
“He described actions he’s taken since his firing in a personal and vindictive way, ”
On this I can’t really blame him. He was fired, so his obligations changed. Were I in his position I don’t think I would keep silent either.
At the time of his firing, someone on Twitter commented that Trump’s decision was dumb. Trump thought that by firing Comey he would get rid of him but instead he just freed him to start telling everybody what he knows.
Andy, I’m pretty sure that if I were Mr. Comey’s lawyer, I’d advise him to stop talking. He has problems with a number of issues including illegal possession of government property, perjury, and contempt of Congress. The more he talks the more likely he is to run afoul of those or related issues. Then there are predicate felonies.
And he’s vulnerable to civil suit as well.
“…instead he just freed him to start telling everybody what he knows.”
But whether that’s harmful to Trump or not depends on whether or not there’s an underlying offense connected to the Russia investigation, as well as whether or not Trump’s behavior rose to the level of obstruction. Since both of those were denied, I don’t see what Trump has to worry about here.
The picture I get is the two men were highly distrustful of each other. Coney also comes across as very weak. He acquiesced to Lynch’s request because with a rationalization, and when he was uncomfortable with an improper request from Trump he went into CUA mode instead of firmly saying “Mr President, it would not be ethical for me to do what you are asking.”
Dave,
Well, it’s interesting that Trump has lawyered up buy Comey hasn’t.
Illegal possession of government property? Prosecuting him for keeping copies of memos that he wrote about conversations he had is thin gruel.
Perjury? No evidence of that so far.
Contempt of Congress? For what? He testified under oath. He’s cooperating with the Senate investigation.
Pres. Trump has done a lot of dumb things, but I don’t think he’s dumb enough to have his AG try to prosecute Comey for anything since it would clearly be retribution.
As for a civil suit, I think he would welcome the depositions it would require.
He may have lied to Congress oath, which is both perjury and contempt of Congress, see here.
Note that I’m not defending Trump. I’m just saying that I think that Mr. Comey’s best strategy is maintaining a lower profile.
My guess is that Comey is on pretty secure ground if Richman is advising him. I doubt he’ll say more, or meant to say more. I also don’t think he was out to “get” Trump as far as an obstruction charge goes. He didn’t trust Sessions and the rest to continue the investigation and I don’t blame him. He wanted a special prosecutor and he got one.
As for contempt, he doesn’t have the memos anymore. Congress can take that up with Mueller. Charging Comey would be a waste on that score, unless they were feeling vindictive, too.
So Comey says he was not aware of a memorandum that outlined the parameters of his recusal. The DOJ says they sent an email.
I don’t see how that is perjury. Nor does it make any sense for Comey to lie about this since it’s irrelevant to anything of substance.
You’re probably right. I just think this is a presidency like no other, arrogant guys like Trump are apt to be pretty vindictive, and going after Comey would increase Trump’s standing in his supporters’ eyes as going after the Washington establishment.
Before the election Richard Branson had an interview with Trump. He said Trump spent all their time together talking about how he’s spent years getting even with people who he felt had wronged him in the past. So I figure you’re right as far as that goes.
Comey better be prepared.
My timing is way off. Here is the clip:
http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/10/25/rciahrd-branson-entrepreneur-erin-burnett-out-front.cnn
My take is closer to Andy’s. The guy was in a difficult position with the Clinton email scandal. I think he made what were reasonable decisions at the time, and didn’t really see much partisanship at play. In retrospect, I think he could have held off on the letter to Congress, or revealed the Trump investigation if being fair was the issue, but that also has problems. Clinton could have avoided that by telling her people to bring everything out in the open right away.
With Trump,again, I don’t see any evidence of partisanship. Cant blame the guy for writing memos since I am sure he was aware of the rumors circulating about him, and Trump has cultivated the image of someone who gets even with people. Like Comey, I hope there are tapes.
Steve
John Podhoretz has an interesting, and I think accurate, take on Trump. He sees him as a Rat Packer — in reference to Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Sammy Davis Jr., Joey Bishop and that crowd. Vegas and Bunny clubs, without any of the humor.
I’m probably the only one who frequents this place who’s actually been to a Playboy Club. My recollection is that everything on the menu was a la carte and everything cost $2. That meant that martinis were expensive but steaks were cheap. I went to a company party once at the St. Louis Playboy Club.
Our waitress clung to me like a tick. I think she figured I was safe.
Gloria Steinem was a bunny. It was a real job for her at the time, not a Barbara Ehrenreich put-up.
Girl looks pretty good for her age.
https://images.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=Gloria+Steinem+2017&fr=yhs-iry-fullyhosted_003&hspart=iry&hsimp=yhs-fullyhosted_003&imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.elviejotopo.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F03%2FGloria-Steinem.jpg#id=3&iurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.elviejotopo.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F03%2FGloria-Steinem.jpg&action=click
But getting back to the point, do you think that characterization fits? Vegas and clubs? Steel mills and coal mines? Duck tails?
I doubt Comey is in any serious legal jeopardy. I just think he came across quite badly and since so much of this is being tried in the court of public opinion, I don’t think that serves the anti-Trump cause so I see it as a pretty big win for Trump. Since there isn’t any substantive charge against Trump, all that has come out is that he’s a jerk when someone crosses him and he doesn’t get how government works-which everyone already knew about him.
To be clear, I don’t see venality in Comey and I fully believe he was always trying to do what he thought was right. I think he was blinded to his personal biases (not necessarily partisan, but being more sympatico with one administration than the other which led him to overlook things he shouldn’t have in one case and perhaps overcorrect in the second case.) And by his own accounts of things, he was too weak to stand up to corrupt individuals when face to face with them. He certainly did face some very difficult situations and had to “thread the needle”, but often those situations came about because he didn’t take a tough stance to begin with.
Steinem was working an article for a magazine, too, when she was a bunny. I had that wrong. 1963.
The testimony also hurt the media, Comey said a bunch of stories in the NYT and Wash Post were basically that, fictional stories
I am in the middle, Comey is not in any legal trouble, but he showed very poor judgement. I stand by my previous opinion that he does not exhibit the usual partisan hackery; his problems are elsewhere. I do not understand why he chose to not inform the various deputy AG or Congress about his discomfort with Lynch’s and Trump’s request, its passing the buck, but it has the benefit of being the right way of addressing it, and multiple people working on an issue is better then Comey holding it like some form of blackmail. Then there is Comey leaking to force a special prosecutor. He could have easily testified openly in Congress earlier and recommended a special prosecutor openly; now Comey’s leaking is going to be used against the impartiality of whatever Mueller finds against the President.
As for Trump, my small hope is that with Melania finally moving the White House, Trump will be distracted by domestic bliss to engage in his destructive tendencies to feud. Who am I kidding – he’s 70 and he’s too old to change.
Dated a bunny who worked at the Great Gorge club. Never went inside. (Dumb as a box of rocks, but gorgeous. )
Steve
The clubs had strict rules against giving out phone numbers and dating customers and they were enforced. I somehow suspect that any reputation the clubs had as dens of iniquity was greatly exaggerated.
Did management allow customers to touch the waitresses? I don’t remember.