Patterico's Pontifications

6/9/2017

My Reaction to the Comey Testimony

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:08 pm



I have now watched all the Comey testimony. I’ve read very little in the way of reactions, but I know that I am supposed to dislike Comey for some reason. I don’t, though. I continue to believe he made a mistake on the Hillary thing, but it did not merit firing nor did it destroy my respect for him. The admission of a leak does not cover him in glory either. But he didn’t lie about it.

My reaction: he was honest, and Trump continues to be a giant liar. I’d believe Comey over Trump any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Also: John McCain is losing it. He can’t form a coherent sentence and seems very, very confused. Time to retire, buddy.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

338 Responses to “My Reaction to the Comey Testimony”

  1. Embarrassing actually.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  2. Good take. But just a ‘giant’ liar? Not ‘YUGE?!’ You’re mellowing w/middle age, Patterico.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  3. But he didn’t lie about it.

    he leaked through a cut-out

    for the express ulterior purpose of manipulating the losers at the DOJ into appointing a special counsel

    that’s subterfuge

    extremely dishonest and dishonorable subterfuge

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  4. A memo that may not exist, about a crime that never happened we’ve seen this pattern going back to 2003.

    narciso (d1f714)

  5. not defending Trump, but there seems to be several instances where Comey may have committed perjury. This is what happens when you get in front and talk too much to congress.

    EPWJ (efdc40)

  6. Like I say Alberto gonzalez, Stephen hatfill and Judith miller might have a different view. That covers both the stellar wind a us atty controversirs.

    narciso (d1f714)

  7. Comey convinced me that he was a flaming Democrat.

    Otto Maddox (e44ab9)

  8. So the Law Enforcement guy who hides the most relevant piece of data on the innocence of a man accused is a-OK to the host. in the Prosecutors Office in LA?

    Because the Law Enforcement guy was honest enough to admit to possibly committing a crime while also opening up a can of worms that he illegally did same many times before.

    Seriously?

    U Lawyers crack me up. So long as it is a BIG LIE that is ok, it is little ones that perturb the conscience.

    Blah (44eaa0)

  9. So we hate Trump for being a loud mouth jerk.

    Yet, we think Comey swell for allowing an innocent man to bend in the wind to please his politics all the while exposing said accused to entrapment on some banal “maybe in the future” lie?

    Meanwhile same Comey is likely to have broken some real laws while also seemingly being at the heart of all these unmasking and leaks.

    Yup, right from Ethics 101.

    Blah (44eaa0)

  10. Oh, and Russia Collusion, a hoax.

    Thanks JIM!!!!!!!!

    Blah (44eaa0)

  11. I have a suspicion that Comey wanted a special counsel from the get-go. To relieve him of the work and responsibility. Because he does not have what it takes to manage a “matter” at that level. As he proved with Hillary.

    nk (dbc370)

  12. Of course that’s what he did in the blame case, its like GOP learning curve is inverted.

    narciso (d1f714)

  13. That towering doofus James Comey crushed the spirits of millions of democracy-hating geebos when, trapped by his own prior testimony, he was forced to admit the truth on national television. And that truth, as those of us not caught up in the whirlpool of Menschian insanity and liberal wishcasting all know, is that the whole Russia thing is a wheelbarrow of fresh Schumer squeezed out by Hillary and her minions in order to create a narrative – any narrative – that would hide the bitter truth. We rejected her, and now we’re rejecting the Russia idiocy too.”

    https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2017/06/09/from-russia-with-stupidity-n2338795

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  14. I just learned that Comey intimated that AG Jeff Sessions had what were possibly illegal contacts with the Russians. Yes, James Comey is a stellar individual.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  15. Was that long after he blamed Poland for stating world war 2, or when he said those jihadists who visited syria were entitled to come backm

    narciso (d1f714)

  16. It’s all just performance art, and if they got rid of Trump, one can guess who’d be the next Russian agent…yes, Mike Pence.

    It’s disgusting, it’s shameful and it deserves to be denounced.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  17. It would be funny if this wasn’t the largest active measure since the trust, in the 20s.

    narciso (d1f714)

  18. @15 Colonel Haiku

    I heard Sessions got his hat off a dead Russian major.

    Pinandpuller (bb7abb)

  19. The whole grishenko move, the irony that the UK came very close to putting a,Russian puppet in downing street is crunchy.

    narciso (d1f714)

  20. Taking the Bar Exam, Comey would get no credit on a criminal law question regarding the issue of general intent. A prosecutor need only show that Hillary had the intent to do the acts of setting up the server and sending her top-secret communications through it. The statute requires no such thing as intent to hurt the country.

    Moreover, for Comey to step in and say he will act as a prosecutor because Lynch has a conflict of interest (because she improperly met with Bill Clinton) is not the role of the FBI. A prosecutor should make the decision whether to file a case. Comey should have called for a special prosecutor in that case. Comey said no case but threw a bone saying Hillary was bad.

    Secondly, there is a proper way for a law enforcement official to react when confronted by someone who is suggesting something unethical or improper. Doing nothing is unethical. If Trump did something wrong (and he may have), there is a duty to immediately inform the him that it is something that cannot be tolerated. And it should be reported immediately.

    Comey admitted to Sen. Feinstein that he was a coward in this regard.

    Comey was also a coward when he followed Lorreta Lynch’s order to refer to the Hillary Clinton investigation as a “matter,” which was how the Hillary campaign was referring to it.

    Comey may be honest when he quotes the words that Trump said but Comey’s impressions are self serving.

    Trump’s statements to Comey are insufficient to bring a criminal action or impeachment. But they are politically devastating. Comey’s accusations will hang on Trump’s neck like an albatross.

    Today’s NY Times and LA Times front page headlines screamed out something to the effect that “Comey called Trump a liar.” But reading the stories you learn that this charge of lying is only that Comey disputed Trump’s saying that the FBI under Comey was poorly led and in disarray. I am sure that you could find many agents that would be critical of Comey’s leadership.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  21. I’m still waiting for anyone, anywhere, to call for James Comey’s reinstatement.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  22. I am.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  23. Not.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  24. I am critical of Comey’a leadership and am not calling for his reinstatement.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  25. My views about Trump and his honesty have not changed from those I very, very frequently expressed here before the election.

    As to Comey, as I commented in the prior thread, I think that he likely would have passed a polygraph while testifying. I think those who suggest that he’s in perjury jeopardy are nutjobs. I agree that his demeanor was good, and I think most fairminded observers would find him credible in his narrative of historical facts.

    I’d not describe as “honest,” though, an FBI Director who engages in the leak he confessed to. Nor “professional,” nor “ethical,” nor “faithful to his oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.” He was surely all those things in most of his career, but with this leak, as with his wild going off the rails in the Clinton email matter, he’s forfeited my respect, and I don’t think I would enjoy sharing a meal with him. Rather, I don’t think he would enjoy sharing it with me, because I could not conceal my cosmic disapproval of him, which is exactly proportional to his own ego and to the seriousness of his own breaches of duty.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  26. Greetings:

    I saw somewhere that Senator Grassley (???) released a 300-page report on the Obama administration’s “Fast and Furious” venture but there doesn’t seem to be very much interest in it in the media. I can’t help but wonder if the stenographic Mr. Director Comey was involved in that bit of stonewalling and slow-walking but certainly nothing of a criminal nature or obstruction of justice.

    If you can stand 80 inches of passive-aggressive manipulation, you must have really enjoyed yourself.

    11B40 (6abb5c)

  27. When McCain secured the 2008 GOP nomination, my grudging sidebar on my blog urged readers to “Vote for the Grumpy Old Man, It’s Important.”

    And now he’s in and out of mental incompetence too. Yes, to spare his family and loved ones the embarrassment he has become, he should retire.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  28. And we stuck this shiv in Alberto Gonzales he was perfectly sincere too; re stellar wind a program as insignifucant as a gnat in thd panopticon.

    narciso (d1f714)

  29. Beldar,
    I agree. Comey is not all bad but he is flawed.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  30. I’ll point out one respect in which I think Comey is worse than Trump:

    Trump doesn’t give, and will never give, a flying fig about the Rule of Law. He has no concept of the phrase, no concept of separation of powers or checks and balances or constitutional prerogatives and duties, with a weak grasp of history — and he just doesn’t care about any of it. He does what he does, and I think it’s ugly, but it is self-consistent.

    Comey understands every one of the things I just referenced, and the history behind them. He could teach them to 7th graders at the drop of a hat, explain them all eloquently with examples. In his own head, he is obedient to them and he’s done what he’s done in their service.

    Trump should know better than he (Trump) does, and that’s blameworthy. But Comey knew — and put himself outside and above the Rule of Law. You can (metaphorically) convict Jim Comey of that using nothing but his own words — indeed, you can almost make the whole case solely from his testimony in this hearing alone. Comey’s is a betrayal, not just a breach.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  31. Well I would say what he did to judith Miller to steven hatfill (abetting Nick kristof) shows his poor understanding of civics and justice.

    narciso (d1f714)

  32. Patterico,

    I would say the whole bit of telling Trump that he was not suspected of collusion while not being willing to publicly say so is more than enough to have earned the firing.

    And honestly, I am not sure that the president is capable of obstructing justice in a legal sense when he tells a subordinate to quit investigating something. I have a hard time seeing the President telling a subordinate to quit investigating being different from any other act of prosecutorial discretion (and note that I believe all federal prosecutorial authority ultimately flows through the President). Note also that I believe the court decisions okaying independent agencies are wrong, the Constitution vests executive authority in the President. I might be open to amendments that would change that arrangement but until such amendments are ratified …

    A “quit investigating” order would be more than enough for a Congress to impeach and remove over were the political will present, but that is a very different thing from a matter actually being criminal.

    Soronel Haetir (86a46e)

  33. #31 Beldar,

    Using the Comey standard used on Hillary, Trump is not guilty because he doesn’t know better but Comey is guilty because he does know better.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  34. Of course, not knowing better is no excuse if you don’t give a damn.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  35. Which there is no evidence he actually did, comey’s word look at the examples I mentioned earlier I but him in the category of John Chisholm and Brenda Murray the latter is from the Stevens witchhunt.

    narciso (d1f714)

  36. Pattwrico, you need to look at Comey’a whole career, he is a stooge of thw Demo party. The “investigation” of the Hillary emaik server was either corrupt or mindless. Comey granted immunity to all the underlings, did not require any testimony, and allowed them to destroy their computers without any FBI review. I was a field investigator for 25 years for the NLRB, and a first year agent who worked like Comey would have been reamed by his superiors. How would an LA prosecutor who acted like Comey be treated?

    John Cunningham (9f1da8)

  37. Perhaps west of the Hudson, the warm, subtle touch of Manhattan management techniques appear alien, but in my 25 years of working in the corporate canyons of the Big Apple, when your bosses’ boss cuts across a level or two of senior management, invites you into his big office with the nice chairs and skyline view, closes the door, sits you down and says, “I hope you’ll…” something; there’s no ambiguity; he wants the ‘something’ done– and usually in a New York minute.

    “Am I getting through to you, Mr. Beale?” – Arthur Jensen [Ned Beatty] ‘Network’ 1976

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  38. “if Comey was sure of his right to release the memo, why use a law professor to avoid fingerprints?”
    –Sharyl Attkison

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  39. McCain’s explanation for his confusion:

    “I get the sense from Twitter that my line of questioning today went over people’s heads,” McCain said. “Maybe going forward I shouldn’t stay up late watching the Diamondbacks night games.”

    He clarified that he intended to ask Comey if he believes his interactions with Trump rose “to the level of obstruction of justice.” He said in Clinton’s case, Comey “was willing to step beyond his role as an investigator and state his belief about what ‘no reasonable prosecutor’ would conclude about the evidence.”

    Dana (023079)

  40. There is a rather large cadre of agents who will tell you Comey befouled the agency. He is a disgrace. Did he assiduously avoid perjury? Probably.

    Scalia was correct on Morrison. Comey played us all. He ran interference to avoid a Special Prosecutor for HRC and he maneuvered for one against DJT. How many Fast and Furious indictments did he manage to make happen?

    And the band played on…

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  41. If Trump testifies under oath, and lies, with the Democrats try to impeach him for perjury?

    Kevin M (752a26)

  42. This is all a big distraction, to make it impossible for Trump’s DoJ to go after the Obama administration for anything. These 4 years are going to be tortuous, and accomplish nothing. The opportunity cost is ALREADY staggering.

    BY now, Cruz would have replaced Obamacare, had 3 special counsel investigating the Democrats, the DoE* would be abolishe and sall the judicial and US Attorney positions would be filled, and a new broom would be going through the DoJ with Attorney General Mike Lee.

    The Democrats in the Senate would not be holding their filibuster together behind “Resist Trump!” and the House Freedom Caucus would be giving him sh1t.

    Pretty much the same thing under Rubio, except a different AG.
    Romney would have started restructuring.

    But Trump? “Mirror mirror on the wall, who’s the smartest president of them all?”

    —-
    *both

    Kevin M (752a26)

  43. I hate Trump
    I hate the Democrats more.

    I do not like them in a box.
    I do not like them with a fox
    I do not like them in a house
    I do not like them with a mouse
    I do not like them here or there.
    I do not like them anywhere.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  44. Daniel Richman -MIA

    mg (31009b)

  45. Comey is a disgrace to all payers of taxes. The thought of my hard earned money going to this pig makes me sick. Hang him.

    mg (31009b)

  46. Sessions should have arrested Comey for aiding and abetting Clinton.
    Fire Sessions and hire Andrew McCarthy.

    mg (31009b)

  47. Let me get this right – Legal rulings are to be based on Leftist/Progressive Political Ideology – the law as written means nothing to Comey.

    mg (31009b)

  48. My reaction: he was honest, and Trump continues to be a giant liar. I’d believe Comey over Trump any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

    Sadly Patterico, those are the beliefs and feelings of a substantial number of people not only leftists, Democrats and the usual litany of radicals from BLM to CPUSA. And since you feel that way I guess you must side with Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Kathy Griffin, Hillary, Hollywood and the Media (none of whom would be caught dead reading this blog) to call for impeachment if Trump will not voluntarily step down. It’s the only virtuous thing to do when a “giant liar” is President. After all, who would expect a politician to lie?

    Will you guys accept Pence as President or will we have to replace the entire Executive branch because they’re “tainted” with Trump cooties? Will you all demand a “special election” or would you prefer the Supreme Court just appoint Hillary or some other acceptable non-Republican, non-commoner and non-deplorable? You know, someone with the “right” breeding from the political class with the appropriate law degree and Ivy League creds?

    It appears we are finally admitting America is in a post Constitutional age so entering an age of appointed rulers seems appropriate. Why not? Then the right person will be ruler, the right people remain in government positions, the right people making K Street deals an the right people partying with celebrities and screwing minors on resort islands.

    It’s about time low class pigs like that pussy grabbing Trump learn their place. We don’t need real estate moguls in government. That’s a venue for lawyers. He should build his gaudy hotels and leave the taxing, spending and culture to those who have done so well with it.

    I figure if they manage to drum Trump out of office they have managed a coup. They have managed to overturn an election. They have established a one party state because no other Republican will ever be elected and the Party may just as well terminate. Republicans will become unelectable even at local and state levels so their continued existence is moot. The Left will have won. Permanently.

    It would also make George Soros most likely the first Trillionaire.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  49. Geez, I used to have such respect for Patterico. Now, not so much. His constant Trump bashing was tiresome, but he is entitled to his opinion. But can he not see Comey for the swamp-thing that he is and always has been? He didn’t “tell the truth” about his “memo” . Where is it? Has anyone seen it? Does he use the girls bathroom? What a PANSY. He is the exact definition of “what” you do not want running the FBI.

    SD Harms (84960b)

  50. Hey, Patterico — go read Stately McDonald Manor for a REAL and logical analysis of Comey. I guess I am sick to death of “feelings” where logic should be. Maybe you should grow a pair.

    SD Harms (84960b)

  51. How can you take seriously a man after this?

    — Comey said he took exception to White House claims that the FBI was in disarray and that it was poorly led and had lost confidence in his leadership. “Those were lies, plain and simple, and I am so sorry that the FBI workforce had to hear them, and I am so sorry that the American people were told them,” Comey said. —

    He’s a lawyer and ex-FBI Director speaking in a quasi legal forum and he characterizes a subjective opinion as “lies, plain and simple”? This would be ridiculous even were it not the case that there are public figures on both sides of the ideological divide who would agree with them.

    David Pittelli (c51465)

  52. sleazy coward john mccain stayed up too late reliving a hawt sleep deprivation fantasy

    #theydidsomethingtohisbrain

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  53. scenes from a mccain presidency

    McCain delivering biggest cut in regulations since Reagan

    ah what might have bean

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  54. would you believe sleazy fbi turdboy comey of he told you an investigation was actually just a matter?

    hmm

    that’s a goddamn chinstroker, that one

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  55. In re is a Latin phrase meaning “in the matter of.” When in re appears in the title of a court case, it means that the judicial proceeding may not have formally designated adverse parties or is otherwise uncontested. The use of in re refers to the object or person that is the primary subject of the case. In re is commonly used in probate proceedings. It is also used in juvenile courts. Sometimes in re is used for a proceeding where one party makes an application to the court without necessarily charging an adversary. This may be done, for example, where a couple seeks to adopt a child or an adult wants to change his or her name. In re is also used in the title or name of a case where the proceeding is in rem or quasi in rem and not in personam and occasionally in the title of an ex parte proceeding.”

    In some local practice, some lawyers just write it in English, “In The Matter Of:”, in the caption of the case. Even when others still write “In re:”.

    nk (dbc370)

  56. USA Today editorial board:

    President Trump’s a liar. Now what?

    ***
    Whether Trump is a criminal as well as a liar is a more complicated matter, one that will depend on legal definitions of obstruction of justice and additional evidence to be uncovered by special counsel Robert Mueller and congressional investigators.

    While the inquiries unfold, two supreme ironies stand out:

    One is that Trump wasn’t a target of the Russia investigation, but because of his own actions in the Oval Office, the president is surely now in Mueller’s crosshairs.

    The other is that Comey, who helped Donald Trump become president with an October-surprise announcement that the Clinton email inquiry had been re-opened (only to find nothing), could turn out to be the man most responsible for hastening Trump’s departure from office.

    This isn’t WAPO or the NY Times. This is the USA Today editorial board, the same people who consistently publish the Instapundit.

    Trump has a problem.

    DRJ (15874d)

  57. in re: Matt Drudge’s obsession with useless british (pardon the tautology) turd-woman Theresa May

    what’s up with that?

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  58. ohnoes!

    a fake news propaganda slut website is saying bad things about President Trump!

    this changes everything

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  59. at the end of the day though, if the USA Today propaganda sluts like their doctor…

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  60. The original post is surreal.

    Why not just say “Comey good, Trump very very bad”.

    Still, I’m glad you started the thread because the comments of reason and content are stellar.

    harkin (536957)

  61. Actually nk, I think it behooves the New Priesthood of Lawyers to continue the use of Latin. Since fake law and lawfare seems to be replacing religious faith in America using as its point of worship government, the priests or attorney’s if you will can project a certain gravitas by using Latin which even the outdated Catholic church has dismissed. It would optically catapult these New Priests to the head of the cocktail party circuit (not that they’re not there already, wink, wink).

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  62. I don’t think Trump did anything illegal, but I didn’t think Nixon did either. We don’t know what he did. But he could have avoided this. His ego/mouth and desire to be loved wouldn’t let him.

    How can we fix this? We do it by stopping with the incessant loyalty talk and focus on pressuring Trump to be responsible and adopt conservative policies. Loyalty to a politician enables them to avoid responsibility, just as focusing on self-esteem does for children. You don’t work hard and do responsible things when everyone is telling you how great you are no matter what you do. You work hard and do responsible things when people expect you to earn respect.

    Think about it: It worked for appointing judges. The one thing Trump has done is to try to appoint conservative judges. Good for him. That is also the one thing his base consistently said it expected, even demanded, of Trump. He wanted to appoint judges like his sister — she is not conservative — but he changed because he knew it mattered to the base.

    Other things matter, too. Tell Trump you expect more. Don’t act like liberals and treat him like a child who needs constant self-esteem no mtater what he does.

    DRJ (15874d)

  63. “Also: John McCain is losing it. He can’t form a coherent sentence and seems very, very confused. Time to retire, buddy.”

    The minority leader is giving him a run for his money:

    “Shortly after calling into question President Trump’s mental health on MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe,’ House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s own mental health came under scrutiny, as the 77-year-old California congresswoman referred to President Trump as “President Bush” and forgot what day of the week it is.”

    https://news.grabien.com/story-moments-after-trumps-mental-health-pelosi-has-senior-moment

    harkin (536957)

  64. How would you feel if I defamed all restaurant owners, Hoagie? I bet a lot of them are liberals. Would it be fair for me to lump them all together and call them bad names because I was mad or unhappy?

    DRJ (15874d)

  65. 64 – “That is also the one thing his base consistently said it expected, even demanded, of Trump”.

    Illegal Immigration
    Obamacare
    Fiscal responsibility
    Equal treatment for all citizens (e.g. IRS, Courts, EPA)
    Voting integrity
    etc.
    etc.

    harkin (536957)

  66. Trump has a problem.
    DRJ

    The understatement of 2017 thus far. Trump has a problem all right and it’s the same one he’s had since he won the nomination: quisling Republicans and neverTrumper’s siding with leftists, communists and Democrats to overthrow the Constitutionally and lawfully elected President of the United States.

    Yeah, Trump has a problem. It’s people who would rather see the left pull off a coup because they just hate Trump.

    It’s a shame he hasn’t done one single good thing since the inauguration. Or at least that’s what that noble free press wants us to think.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  67. he could have avoided this

    the sleazy fbi was taking copious notes on every encounter

    they’ve wanted to take this president down from the start!

    that’s why the sleazy corrupt fbi turds took doddering torture victim john mccain’s pee pee dossier to a FISA court to get illegal wiretaps authorized

    and that’s why sleazy corrupt fbi p.o.s. Robert Mueller is hell-bent on expanding his potemkin investigation into realms wholly unrelated to his appointment

    President Trump’s doing God’s work standing up to the corrupt weak filth at the FBI.

    Standing up to the increasingly desperate and shrill CNN fake news Jake Tapper propaganda sluts.

    Standing up to terrorism.

    Standing up to job-raping regulations.

    Standing up to the snotty contemptuous ivy league trash who feel their social prerogatives threatened and disrespected.

    We couldn’t have asked for a better man to lead in this moment.

    We couldn’t have asked for a better man than Donald Trump.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  68. Let them hate provided they also fear, DRJ. Power is not only what you have, but also what you seem to have. If they want to think lawyers are powerful, horrifying, supernatural beings, capable of wreaking all sorts of havoc on the innocent and the guilty, that’s an advantage for lawyers.

    nk (dbc370)

  69. After plamegate is us atty gate and the whole hospital bed stellar wind affair you can’t be serious.

    We know who Richard burr, any ally of the deep state, that is why this conmittee is goniff, nothing will happen until mcturtle is made an example.

    narciso (6ea81f)

  70. You really think Cruz would have it easier Kevin, dream on, you know you have to just through the firewall to reach this site inside an institution of higher learning.

    narciso (6ea81f)

  71. I think USA Today is onto something. Comey feels a need to fix the public record. He publicly talked about the Hillary email investigation, even though doing so was questionable, and he leaked about Trump for similar reasons.

    He acts like a whistleblower, but being the head guy gives him more options in how to do it. I think it’s that aspect of his behavior that makes some people hate him and others admire him. I don’t love him or hate him, but I’m not a fan. I’m with Beldar when it comes to Comey.

    DRJ (15874d)

  72. snooty harvardtrash ted’s grimacing sacky is all up in it with a climate change hoax group that’s trying so so hard to viciously rape our freedoms and prosperity

    Goldman Sachs CEO Breaks Twitter Silence to Slam Trump’s Paris Decision

    these freedom-rapers are what’s putting food on harvardtrash ted’s table!

    he’s thoroughly compromised as far as I can tell

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  73. Yes drj Nixon did nothing wrong unlike Mark felt who actually has his dirty laundry Aired out and almost went to prison becauseOf how he pursued the weatherman and as a result yards yadda we had the killing fields, probably the iranian revolution and barack obama, now it did conversely sabotage detente and being Reagan to power

    narciso (6ea81f)

  74. He acts like a whistleblower

    lol

    sleazy corrupt fbi turdboy James Comey never once acted like a whistleblower when he was bending over for barack obama, doing all that illegal sneaky spying on obama’s political enemies for him

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  75. 66.How would you feel if I defamed all restaurant owners, Hoagie? I bet a lot of them are liberals. Would it be fair for me to lump them all together and call them bad names because I was mad or unhappy?

    DRJ

    Of course my intent is not to defame all lawyers, DRJ. Do you think it is? But it is a little hard to say “Lawyers are phuking up the law, politics, education and freedom on the whole. Except MY lawyers, they’re good”. I figure we’re all adults, the “MY lawyers” part is understood.

    BTW, I guarantee there are liberal restauranteurs. Think “white women forced to close taco stand because of cultural appropriation” as a reference. Cali must have a crap load of libs in food too. But liberals are not our problem, Leftists are! Liberals are the loyal opposition. Leftists are trying to overthrow our government. Get with the program.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  76. I’m retired, nk, but for the same reasons I’m fine with them thinking NeverTrump still exists and is all-powerful. NeverTrump was never a force that mattered, as is evidenced by the fact he won. It’s like saying racism mattered when Obama was elected twice. It’s a fool’s argument. But people do expect Trump to do a good job and right now Americans are not convinced he is.

    DRJ (15874d)

  77. Yes, I do think you hate all lawyers.

    DRJ (15874d)

  78. yes yes the lawyer class is feeling it

    they feel their social position is not what it was

    they been triggered and there’s not enuff play-doh and puppies

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  79. I hope for those things, too, harkin. Plus I want a wall.

    DRJ (15874d)

  80. There are a lot of parallels with Mark felt, of course Liam neeson will only explore what the narrative has allowed Garrett graf last seen pushing the levick narrative will likely be the ghost he has beena uditioning all spring like an American idol contratant.

    narciso (6ea81f)

  81. Well you aren’t going to get a wall if McConnell has any say in it. The oj case as well as Menendez made me abjure defense atty for a time but then we come to find out from the Edwin Wilson case on to Ted Stevens prosecutors can be unethical

    narciso (6ea81f)

  82. the only wall you get with Mitch McConnell is the wall around his corrupt pig wife’s bucket of taxpayer pension money

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  83. Back in the early 1990s, the time of the fall of the Soviet empire, the Russian archives were opened for a bit. The West learned what had been suspected for years: many left wing writers and politicians – and some celebrities- were either on the Soviet payroll, or eager to assist Soviet espionage activities.

    I believe this is still the case, only now they assist with promoting chaos. Best think twice about who and what you support.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  84. we know who harvardtrash ted’s grimacing sacky supports Mr. Colonel

    she gets up every day, eats a ginormous cinnabon-branded food product, and punches that clock for them

    doing their dirty

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  85. Don’t read Michael bets on and operate heavy machinery.

    narciso (6ea81f)

  86. I figure if they manage to drum Trump out of office they have managed a coup. They have managed to overturn an election.

    Well, they did it to Nixon, after he had won in a 49-state landslide, so I guess they could do it to Trump who just barely squeaked by.

    Republicans will become unelectable even at local and state levels so their continued existence is moot.

    Trump is polarizing things to the point that you may be right. I remember wondering if a Trump victory might be worse than a Trump defeat, and now I am getting my answer. I still hope that is not the case, but it just isn’t all that hopeful.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  87. “Through last Wednesday, Trump has issued 1,063 rules. During the comparable period, former President Barack Obama issued 1,139 rules.

    But Crews pointed out that in government, it takes a rule to kill a rule, so Trump’s impactful new rules are likely much lower. “Since rule reductions look like rules, too, the reduction in regulation under Trump is more dramatic than what the raw counts can depict,” Crews said.

    Trump’s mode so far is regulating bureaucrats rather than regulating the private sector, with rules to limit their rules. Even more importantly, more unswervingly than any other, the administration has incorporated regulatory dark matter into reforming the administrative state in both his freeze and the two-out requirement. This material consists of all the memoranda, guidance, notices, bulletins and other proclamations (including threats and bad publicity) with which bureaucrats create or influence policy, but that escape the (already inadequate) discipline of the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act.

    All this seems significant in terms of history of the regulatory state. The drop between Clinton and Bush was dramatic, but otherwise last time we saw anything comparable to today’s reduction was when both regulations and Federal Register page counts dropped over a third under Reagan.”

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-delivering-biggest-cut-in-regulations-since-reagan/article/2625451?mid=87744&rid=31182179

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  88. Buck up, oh ye weak of knee!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  89. yes yes Mr. Colonel

    President Trump’s done a lot of good work fighting regulation in spite of opposition from sleazy senile torture victim john mccain

    John McCain May Have Killed an Attempt to Roll Back Job-Destroying Regulations Out of Spite Over the Comey Firing

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  90. And James Comey is a weezul of the lowest order.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  91. @68 Hoagie

    Yeah, Trump has a problem. It’s people who would rather see the left pull off a coup because they just hate Trump.

    Trump is demonstrably unfit to serve in the office. No hate required, I’m sure he’d be fun to have a beer with. Apart from the fact that he doesn’t drink.

    Spartacvs (f89a24)

  92. Trump has a problem.

    It’s called the “credibility gap.” Clinton had it at the end and it harmed Gore. LBJ had it in spades, and despite his huge Congressional majorities (the Dems won over 2/3rds of both houses in 1964), he could not win renomination from his own party in 1968 and his VP lost the election to Richard effing Nixon.

    At this point I do not see how Trump can govern. Sure, he can appoint judges and stuff, but he doesn’t lead anything and his hard core supporters are fewer now in number. Maybe he’ll recover but the Dems and the press (birm) have done him in, and his own predictable incompetence has let them.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  93. It doesn’t matter if Comey is a weasel. Trump can’t play this game. He kicks over one board after another, but that’s not the same as winning.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  94. Dear Posters,
    Disagreement with Patterico does not need to be personal. I disagreed with him on his post. See #21. But let’s show some respect for him. Patterico has had this blog going for more than 10 years. Patterico’s been right a lot more times than wrong. This is a great blog because we can read so many interesting and in some cases, fun posts. Those of you that aren’t fun know who you are. OK, I’ll practice what I preach and I won’t get personal.

    I am glad Trump won. He has done a few good things already but his undisciplined personality gets in the way of accomplishing more good things. He actually wasn’t harmed by Comey’s testimony but he can’t resist jumping into the fray. And it usually doesn’t pay off for him when he does.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  95. a lot of sleazy republicans have helped the propaganda sluts and their politicians take Trump down Mr. M

    look no further than perverted snobby harvardtrash like Ben Sasse

    and remember how his harvardtrash pal Bill Kristol famously said he prefers the deep state to the trump state.

    there’s a huge contempt for democracy among the ivy league trash set and those who fancy themselves the peerage of same

    and they’re moving ineluctably towards the imposition of fascism

    they have sleazy John Roberts on the supreme court

    they have perverted Mitt Romney’s slicked-up boy toy installed as Speaker

    But President Trump can buy us some time.

    And in spite of betrayals like that of his corrupt, racist attorney general Jeff Sessions, he’s not backing down.

    Not so far anyway.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  96. I should have added to my post #21 that Comey should have recorded the interview with Hillary, not given immunity to all the underlings and not let them destroy their computers. That’s law enforcement?

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  97. I’d not describe as “honest,” though, an FBI Director who engages in the leak he confessed to. Nor “professional,” nor “ethical,” nor “faithful to his oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.” He was surely all those things in most of his career, but with this leak, as with his wild going off the rails in the Clinton email matter, he’s forfeited my respect, and I don’t think I would enjoy sharing a meal with him. Rather, I don’t think he would enjoy sharing it with me, because I could not conceal my cosmic disapproval of him, which is exactly proportional to his own ego and to the seriousness of his own breaches of duty.

    This is a fair comment. I think he was honest about it, but the behavior itself did not cover him in glory, as I said in the post. Then again, I think he rationalized the leak as being in service to getting a special counsel, which he obviously believed was right for the country. I’m less convinced than others that a private everybody-else-get-out meeting followed by “I hope you stop this investigation” followed by “I fired the guy with the Russia thing on my mind” is a kosher set of events that could not be described as obstruction or an impeachable offense.

    So while I disapprove of his Hillary investigation actions and the leak, my disapproval is not cosmic and it does not forfeit my respect for him entirely. But I respect Beldar’s views on the subject and find them well within the range of sane opinion.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  98. I noticed the shameful speaker adjusted his schedule so house members would be nowhere to be seen after the clearing of Trump.
    Trump has the silent majority on his side and that is all.

    mg (31009b)

  99. Thanks, AZ Bob. It appears that for some, falling in line behind Trump has somehow become the key to being described as “conservative.” Since Trump is obviously dishonest and unreliable, among many many other wretched character traits, I don’t understand this point of view and never will. But I appreciate the call for civility.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  100. Trump has been cleared? Of what? By who?

    Spartacvs (f89a24)

  101. I’m amused by the number of posters who continue to not recognize that Trump’s continuing ability to govern is not determined by the views of newspaper editorial boards or opinion polls.

    Trump WON the Presidency by calling out the political classes. To the extent he has been engaged in six month running battle with the political classes and the press, he’s doing EXACTLY that which his voters picked him for.

    To the extent GOP members in Congress have failed to muster support within their numbers to carry forward legislation they promised the electorate, that is not going to undercut Trump with his voters because while they voted for both, they largely distrust the GOP members who, by definition, make-up the political class that Trump ran against. Remember, before he beat Hillary, he dispatched 17 representatives of the GOP establishment in the primaries.

    I have very educated, intelligent, professional member of my family and among my friends who were early Trump supporters — and they are no less Trump supporters today than they were a year ago. If anything, their criticism of him is that he’s sucked up to Congress a bit too much in order to get things done, and thereby compromised with them on some issues too willingly.

    Trump’s supporters expressed with their votes the fact that they were through with the way business has been done in Washington since the first Bush 41’s Presidency. Neither Bush 41 nor Bush 43 were authentic conservatives — they wore conservatism like a prom dress so they would look good to voters.

    Trump is not a conservative either — far from it. But what he is that has attracted the support levels he’s enjoyed is an anti-politician.

    What’s happened for six months is simply the exposure of the fact that he really is an anti-politician. In that sense he’s giving his voters exactly what they wanted — he’s engaged in hand-to-hand street fighting with entrenched interests on both the left and right, and he has no care or regard for the rules of political combat that have that have governed GOP v. Dem battles in the post-Reagan era.

    At this point, its the fact that he’s fighting — regardless of winning or losing — that matters.

    What he didn’t appreciate until he took office is the degree to which the permanent bureaucracy is a behind the scenes actor in this battle. He’s fine going toe-to-toe in the open against Dems and GOPs, but its the

    shipwreckedcrew (fb418b)

  102. Spartacvs,

    Comey’s testimony clarified that Trump wasn’t being personally investigated in the Russia probes. Even Vox acknowledged that. That doesn’t mean Trump might not have been a target of that investigation at some point, but it was unlikely since the investigation had been around for awhile. However, Trump may now have made himself a target of the special prosecutor because of the way he handled Comey’s firing.

    DRJ (15874d)

  103. Trump has been cleared? Of what? By who?
    Spartacvs (f89a24) — 6/10/2017 @ 8:18 am

    Good point. “I hope you can let this go” is ambiguous. I won’t get him impeached. But clearly it damages him and ultimately his agenda probably for the rest of his term.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  104. Swc,

    Your point would be a good one if Trump could call an election and prove people still support him, but that’s not how our system works. Instead, he has to deal with the political class and now with the special prosecutor. Someone as educated, intelligent, and professional as you should realize that Trump will have problems dealing with those elements, especially since he has shown no ability to do it so far.

    DRJ (15874d)

  105. Why didn’t Trump know the bureaucracy would be a problem, swc?

    DRJ (15874d)

  106. And what makes you think he can figure out how to handle it? He has shown no ability to do so yet. Is thee something magic about the first 6 months?

    DRJ (15874d)

  107. Thank you, DRJ.
    Spartacus – Anyway crickets from Ryan and his establishment hoods.

    mg (31009b)

  108. “… especially since he has shown no ability to do it so far.”

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  109. At this point, its the fact that he’s fighting — regardless of winning or losing — that matters.

    failmerica’s depraved and corrupt oval office will never see his like again Mr. crew

    one last burst of glory

    democracy’s final chapter, freedom’s final verse

    President Trump shames us all

    he fights

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  110. DRJ, the investigation of Russian influence on the election and possible collusion by the Trump campaign remains in place. Trump headed that campaign. Comey didn’t clear Trump, he confirmed that he wasn’t the subject of current investigations. Not something Trump can really on for much in a legal liability context. But he’s certainly trying to make the most of it on the political front…….so, mostly smoke and squid ink.

    Spartacvs (f89a24)

  111. I do not know how to get folks here to come to a simple understanding about the President and “Obstruction” of a criminal investigation. It just doesn’t work.

    You have to start from this point:

    The President oversees all policy considerations of the Executive Branch. When two policy considerations come into conflict, the President — NO ONE ELSE — gets to make the choice about while policy consideration prevails, and which gives way.

    So, in the circumstances at issue, if the President views the situation as having policy consideration (A) being the pursuit of a criminal investigation into potentially illegal contacts between members of his political campaign and a foreign power, and (B) attempting to improve bilateral relations with that same foreign power in order to address broader national security concerns where cooperation might produce significant benefit, the President ABSOLUTELY can direct the Executive Branch apparatus to abandon A because it is adversely impacting his pursuit of (B) which he values more highly on a policy basis.

    It doesn’t matter how he expresses that decision. He doesn’t have to provide anyone with an explanation. He could have flat out told Comey to “shut down the Flynn” investigation without explanation and Comey’s two choices would have been to follow the instruction or resign.

    DRJ made comment yesterday that I found troubling — saying that Trump was out of line for demanding “loyalty” when Comey’s obligations are to protect and defend the Constitution.

    Yes, that’s correct. But POTUS takes a nearly identical oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Its NOT POSSIBLE to have a government operating where there is disagreement within the Executive over what the Constitution means and requires. Comey, as FBI Director, isn’t entitled to his own interpretation, which he then has a right to follow regardless of how it might digress from POTUS or the AG. He has the same choice where his view is in conflict with view of his Superiors — just as he recognized in Ashcroft’s hospital room — follow the views expressed by your Superiors, or resign. That’s what he threatened to Bush 43 that he would do, along with Mueller, if the program under consideration wasn’t changed.

    He might think POTUS is a constitutional ignoramus — but that doesn’t give him license as a subordinate executive branch official to follow his own “Guiding Star” simply because he took an oath.

    shipwreckedcrew (fb418b)

  112. I’m sure. No one here believes polls and maybe with good reason, but Trump’s approval is dismal, especially compared with past Presidents. Scroll down at the link and play with the charts. The closest Trump comes at this point is to Gerald Ford after he pardoned Nixon.

    DRJ (15874d)

  113. My apologies for not being able to engage in a running conversation this morning DRJ. I have some family business to attend to now, and have to go. But I didn’t want you to think that I either didn’t see our comments, or that I was just ignoring you. It will be several hours before I have a chance to respond, but I’ll try when I can.

    shipwreckedcrew (fb418b)

  114. Sitting in the “grand jury box” as Comey presented his best case this week I have trouble reconciling how an impartial FBI Director can hold both of the following positions:

    Comey Agrees NYT Story About Trump Campaign Collusion With Russia ‘Almost Entirely Wrong’ when pressed he replied:

    “In the main, it was not true,” Comey replied. “The challenge, and I’m not picking on reporters, about writing on classified information is: The people talking about it often don’t really know what’s going on, and those of us who actually know what’s going on are not talking about it.”

    He added, “And we don’t call the press to say, ‘Hey, you got that thing wrong about this sensitive topic.’ We just have to leave it there.”

    Comey Asks Justice Dept to Reject Trump’s Wiretapping Claim.

    In addition to being concerned about potential attacks on the bureau’s credibility, senior FBI officials are said to be worried that the notion of a court-approved wiretap will raise the public’s expectations that the federal authorities have significant evidence implicating the Trump campaign in colluding with Russia’s efforts to disrupt the presidential election.

    The answer lies in the truth that for now remains in multiple SCIFs around the beltway. For all his difficulty in asking the question McCain seemed to be asking why can’t we get the truth out about this Russiapalooza stuff and both candidates?

    Given the gusher of leaks about Comey and Trump and McCain’s role in pushing the dirty dossier to the FBI that seemed significant. We’ll know soon enough one way or the other but for sure neither Comey nor Trump is covered in glory and the country suffers until this ends.

    crazy (d3b449)

  115. corrupt fbi pig comey favors an america governed by an unelected special prosecutor, an unelected special prosecutor who just so happens to be ivy league trash with a pedigree that includes a position with the corrupt fascist fbi that violates civil liberties with impunity

    comey was very clear about this

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  116. swc,

    I said Trump caused this because he didn’t fire Comey. Trump didn’t need a reason to fire Comey but he had one because of the way Comey publicly handled the Hillary email investigation. But Comey’s actions helped Trump win so he probably thought Comey would be loyal. Trump probably also likes the way Comey looks — very tall, handsome, patrician. Trump cares about that because he views his job as casting as much on appearance as ability.

    Loyalty is Trump’s criteria, not mine. As I said before, he is right to want to pick people who support him but he is wrong to demand loyalty from law enforcement. He is doubly wrong to think he can co-opt Obama’s appointees. That’s just stupid.

    DRJ (15874d)

  117. Life comes first, swc. I look forward to your response when you have time.

    DRJ (15874d)

  118. He added, “And we don’t call the press to say, ‘Hey, you got that thing wrong about this sensitive topic.’ We just have to leave it there.”

    lol

    Corrupt FBI Pig Comey greenlights TV series to boost FBI’s image

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  119. Yes he did but he couldn’t for all the reasons mentioned above, this is how Obama laid tripwires.

    narciso (d1f714)

  120. happyfeet, stop using the term “pig” to refer to law enforcement or you’re gone.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  121. FWIW I don’t think it’s a surprise that Trump had problems with Sessions at DOJ and Comey at FBI. They are different than other government/Cabinet positions because they have legal and ethical obligations beyond serving the President. I don’t think Trump accepts that. It’s hard for Presidents to accept that because they become so focused — overwhelmed? preoccupied? I’m not sure what the right word is — on their own power. They especially resent people from their own side who try to curtail their power. It’s a personal insult.

    In law, the areas where people have the biggest problems are in divorces, domestic abuse, bankruptcy, and not paying credit unions and family. These are areas where people feel they have been betrayed by people they trusted so the cases that can end up being disasters. I think Presidents feel the same way.

    DRJ (15874d)

  122. Comey has no credibility as a prosecutor or head of the FBI. Simply look at how he aided Hillary Clinton in the private server/email/Huma Adedin/State Department corruption/scandal (via Loretta Lynch actions –> Obama behind the scenes machinations and his public comments).

    Instructive here is the following, taken from Justice Scalia’s lone dissent in Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988, at 727:

    Only someone who has worked in the field of law enforcement can fully appreciate the vast power and the immense discretion that are placed in the hands of a prosecutor with respect to the objects of his investigation. Justice Robert Jackson, when he was Attorney General under President Franklin Roosevelt, described it in a memorable speech to United States Attorneys, as follows:

    “There is a most important reason why the prosecutor should have, as nearly as possible, a detached and impartial view of all groups in his community. Law enforcement is not automatic. It isn’t blind. One of the greatest difficulties of the position of prosecutor is that he must pick his cases, because no prosecutor can even investigate all of the cases in which he receives complaints. If the Department of Justice were to make even a pretense of reaching every probable violation of federal law, ten times its present staff will be inadequate. We know that no local police force can strictly enforce the traffic laws, or it would arrest half the driving population on any given morning. What every prosecutor is practically required to do is to select the cases for prosecution and to select those in which the offense is the most flagrant, the public harm the greatest, and the proof the most certain.”

    “If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his case, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather than cases that need to be prosecuted. With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes, a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone. In such a case, it is not a question of discovering the commission of a crime and then looking for the man who has committed it, it is a question of picking the man and then searching the law books, or putting investigators to work, to pin some offense on him. It is in this realm — in which the prosecutor picks some person whom he dislikes or desires to embarrass, or selects some group of unpopular persons and then looks for an offense, that the greatest danger of abuse of prosecuting power lies. It is here that law enforcement becomes personal, and the real crime becomes that of being unpopular with the predominant or governing group, being attached to the wrong political views, or being personally obnoxious to or in the way of the prosecutor himself.” R. Jackson, The Federal Prosecutor, Address Delivered at the Second Annual Conference of United States Attorneys, April 1, 1940.

    Under our system of government, the primary check against prosecutorial abuse is a political one. The prosecutors who exercise this awesome discretion are selected, and can be removed, by a President whom the people have trusted enough to elect. Moreover, when crimes are not investigated and prosecuted fairly, nonselectively, with a reasonable sense of proportion, the President pays the cost in political damage to his administration. If federal prosecutors “pick people that [they] thin[k] [they] should get, rather than cases that need to be prosecuted,” if they amass many more resources against a particular prominent individual, or against a particular class of political protesters, or against members of a particular political party, than the gravity of the alleged offenses or the record of successful prosecutions seems to warrant, the unfairness will come home to roost in the Oval Office. I leave it to the reader to recall the examples of this in recent years. That result, of course, was precisely what the Founders had in mind when they provided that all executive powers would be exercised by a single Chief Executive. As Hamilton put it, “[t]he ingredients which constitute safety in the republican sense are a due dependence on the people, and a due responsibility.” Federalist No. 70, p. 424. The President is directly dependent on the people, and, since there is only one President, he is responsible. The people know whom to blame, whereas “one of the weightiest objections to a plurality in the executive . . . is that it tends to conceal faults and destroy responsibility.” Id. at 427.
    _____________________

    Now consider this. Navy sailor’s [Kristian Saucier] ‘Hillary Clinton’ defense fails, gets year in prison for taking pics of classified nuclear submarine – http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/navy-sailor-hillary-defense-fails-year-prison-article-1.2758486

    So far Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin, Loretta Lynch, James Comey and Barack Obama have gotten off scot free. And there are many, too, too, many who are fine with that, have supported and defended them. And still do. And they could not give a damn about Mr. Saucier and allowed him to go to prison without a peep. Yet Clinton, Abedin, Lynch, Comey and Obama – all put self-dealing over their governmental duties and their country – all under the guise of public service.

    And now – this Trump/Russian collusion claim paralyzes the country – without any evidence. And worse, it more and more appears to be conjured up by the Dem party, the deep state and the Lame Stream Media.

    What do Hillary Clinton, Loretta Lynch, Barack Obama and James Comey all have in common? All lawyers. Why do law students have to take the mandatory course on Professional Responsibility and why is part of the bar exam on Professional Responsibility? The Watergate Scandal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_responsibility

    But what has happened with lawyers Professional Responsibility since Watergate? “Too often, the fundamental precepts of professionalism remain unexamined; arguments over candor, confidentiality and client loyalty proceed without rigorous empirical or philosophical foundation.” Deborah L. Rhode, Ethical Perspective on the Legal Process, 37 STAN. L. REV. 589, 589 (1985). Too much professional responsibility scholarship is data-free doctrinal analysis: the functional equivalent of – geology without the rocks. Deborah L. Rhode, Law, Lawyers, and the Pursuit of Justice, 70 FORDHAM L. REV.,1543, 1560 (2002) (citing PAUL, WICE, JUDGES and LAWYERS: The Human Side of Justice 16 (1999); citing Lawrence M. Friedman, quoted in JAMES WLAM HURSE, The Growth of American Law 265-66 (1950)).

    So much for the Rule of Law in America. It has been Trumped by politics. GLZ.

    Gary L. Zerman (ab669e)

  123. sorry that wasn’t meant as a trigger it’s just i enjoyed using that word for hillary and she’s more or less gone now so i wanted to recycle it

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  124. Loyalty is Trump’s criteria, not mine. As I said before, he is right to want to pick people who support him but he is wrong to demand loyalty from law enforcement. He is doubly wrong to think he can co-opt Obama’s appointees. That’s just stupid.
    DRJ

    Well, I think loyalty is important in politics. One needs to know who is on his side and more importantly who can be counted upon when the going gets tuff. Fair weather friends we don’t need in an atmosphere of winner-takes-all politics. And you’re right DRJ, he should pick his own people, never demand or even think of loyalty from law enforcement as it could be a conflict for them and there is no way he’s gonna co-opt baa’s appointees. Yes, just stupid.

    BUT! I do not expect the President to never screw up. Not Trump, not George Washington. What disappoints me is how many people who should be supporting the AGENDA won’t because they hate Trump. Screw Trump, we got a country to run here and we need to stop the insane leftist agenda. We can’t do that if we spend all our time pi$$ing on Trump with Leftists who hate us anyway.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  125. Watergate isn’t part of the bar exam on professional responsibility, Mr Zerman. The questions vary every year, and here is the subject matter outline for the exam. They involve topics like client confidentiality, conflicts of interest, safekeeping of property, and other topics.

    DRJ (15874d)

  126. i think it reflects very poorly on Jeff Sessions that he accepted the AG position knowing he was too compromised to preside over anything involving Russian criminality

    while it’s not unusual to have an AG of poor character, it nevertheless has to come as a disappointment for President Trump, given how eager he is to clean up the corruption Washington

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  127. the corruption *in* Washington I mean

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  128. I supported every Republican including Nixon, Hoagie. Trump is too much for me to trust, but I have supported him when he does conservative things.

    DRJ (15874d)

  129. i also don’t know that I believe Comey when he says President Trump asked him for his loyalty

    Comey lies a LOT

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  130. I supported every Republican including Nixon, Hoagie. Trump is too much for me to trust, but I have supported him when he does conservative things.

    Ditto.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  131. President Trump hasn’t deceived us into engaging in costly murderous wars of dubious strategic importance.

    And he hasn’t done “read my lips no new taxes” all up in it.

    He didn’t lie about trading jew-killing weapons to Iran in exchange for hostages.

    He’s alright in my book.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  132. It doesn’t surprise me that people blame lawyers for criticizing Trump. Civil lawyers may be more likely to criticize him because we’ve all had clients like him — the guy we think might lie to win, who wants his lawyer to be a hired gun to manipulate the system instead of following the rules. The good part is these people aren’t as common as you may think. Most clients just want a hard-working, intelligent, committed lawyer and a fair chance.

    DRJ (15874d)

  133. “There’s been something of a bait and switch,” Mr. Hamburger says. “We talk about the importance of expanding voting rights, but behind the scenes there’s been a transfer of power from voters to members of the knowledge class. A large part of the knowledge class, Republicans as well as Democrats, went out of their way to make the administrative state work.”

    fab five freddie told me everybody’s high

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  134. 125 – “I don’t think it’s a surprise that Trump had problems with Sessions at DOJ and Comey at FBI. They are different than other government/Cabinet positions because they have legal and ethical obligations beyond serving the President. I don’t think Trump accepts that. It’s hard for Presidents to accept that because they become so focused — overwhelmed? preoccupied? I’m not sure what the right word is — on their own power. “

    That explains why Trump told all his other cabinet members to head out and achieve his agenda, honesty, ethics and law be damned.

    (do I really need a sarc tag?)

    harkin (536957)

  135. At this point, its the fact that he’s fighting — regardless of winning or losing — that matters.

    I was a Cruz supporter, originally. I have accepted Trump, warts and all. I completely agree with you, SWC; that, win or lose, Trump should continue to fight, regain his balance, and allow those who can, to help him.

    felipe (023cc9)

  136. A lot of y’all are misattributing to Comey and the FBI decisions during the Clinton email probe that were made by Loretta Lynch at DoJ or her underlings at DoJ in the Eastern District of New York, headquartered in Brooklyn — all of whom she personally had hired when she held that job up to the moment before she became AG. It was those prosecutors — not the FBI, and not Comey — who made the series of decisions that guaranteed Obama would be able to choke any serious investigation into Clinton, basically by handcuffing the FBI’s investigative resources and cutting off their investigatory attempts. The decision to grant Clinton aides immunity, for example, was beyond the FBI Director’s power, and Comey had nothing to do with that — it was DoJ lawyers from EDNY. Likewise the decision not to subpoena evidence and witnesses for a grand jury, but to rely on interviews. (Not recording them is in fact standard, and gives the FBI greater, not lesser, practical ability to create “process crimes” like the Martha Stewart “false statement” or the Scooter Libby “obstruction of justice” from the investigation; I hate that policy, but it wasn’t a deliberate faceplant to help Hillary.)

    Simply locating the investigation in EDNY instead of SDNY sent a message to the entire DoJ and FBI investigative staffs: The Clintons lived in SDNY (Manhattan & Chappaqua are both in SDNY), and she had a constitutional Sixth Amendment right to be tried there — or else where the crime was committed, which, again, was almost entirely SDNY — so any rational prosecutor would have chosen SDNY for the district to control the investigation.

    But of course, a defendant can waive her Sixth Amendment right to be tried in her home district. By placing the investigation in EDNY, Lynch not only assured that it would be handled day-to-day by the prosecutors she personally had hired and directed when she was U.S. Attorney for the EDNY, but also that Hillary, merely by waiving her Sixth Amendment right in the event of any indictment, would already be in the judicial district where she could be most certainly assured of a nullifying or at least hung-jury-guaranteed jury panel.

    In other words, early in the game, Comey wasn’t cooperating in the fix, because it wasn’t being accomplished inside the FBI. He was being manipulated by it: When the investigation is in EDNY, that’s whose assistant U.S. Attorneys you have to go to if you’re an FBI agent who thinks he needs prosecutorial help in the form of grand jury subpoenas and the like.

    If Comey were the ethical, justice-loving patriot he claims to be, someone whose personal integrity would compel him to resist corruption, then he would have objected internally (via channels, i.e., upstream through DoJ to the AG), failing which he should have either resigned or gone to a Congressional oversight committee rather than leaking, to expose the way Lynch was rigging the game. But he didn’t; he didn’t protest the handcuffs that Lynch had put on the FBI then. He was mute, and he was still coloring inside the lines — an unduly restrictive set of lines, though.

    It wasn’t until Bubba wandered over to Lynch’s airplane that Comey went rogue when it comes to “preserve, protect, and defend.” Of all the ways he could have reacted to that, he chose — and has struck to and defended, against criticism from everyone on both sides who knows anything about proper responsibilities of the DoJ as compared to the FBI — to put a prosecutor hat atop his police chief hat and then announce a prosecutorial decision.

    He lost my professional respect when he didn’t protest Lynch’s earlier obstruction of justice — and yes, I’m convinced she is guilty as hell of exactly that, and I’m likewise convinced Comey saw it and knew it at the time. But I began to despise him — not personally, but as someone who’d failed in his greatest and most important constitutional responsibilities under the highest and most important test, therefore least excusably — when he held the “no reasonable prosecutor” press conference, which was the most bizarre and ridiculous clown show in the history of the FBI.

    I know this stuff is complicated, and hard to follow. But many of you who are conflating stuff that Lynch did with stuff that Comey did need to work harder in getting your facts straight. From the Clintonista standpoint, Comey was the useful fool — and then, the un-useful loose cannon — but he wasn’t their co-conspirator to help out Hillary, even though he turned out to be, in an improbable way, the chief mechanism of her delivery from meaningful legal jeopardy for a lifetime of criminal conspiracies.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  137. I don’t think you understood my comment, harkin. Would you like me to expand on it or would you like to ask me a question, or do you just want to be sarcastic?

    DRJ (15874d)

  138. Comey had nothing to do with that

    did he threaten to resign?

    did he “memorialize it for the file”

    did he leak damning memos to his sleazy friends to give to the press

    not get-along go-along comey no sir!

    he’d pledged his loyalty to the obama administration, you see

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  139. this matter is closed

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  140. i also don’t know that I believe Comey when he says President Trump asked him for his loyalty

    Comey lies a LOT

    I do not exaggerate when I say that you could have witnessed this in person and rewatched it on HD video and you still would not believe it, on account of how hacky you are

    Patterico (115b1f)

  141. did he leak damning memos to his sleazy friends to give to the press

    Damning eh? Glad to see the scales finally lifting from your eyes.

    Spartacvs (f89a24)

  142. that’s your opinion Mr. P

    (comey would call it a lie)

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  143. gee whiz Mr. Spardapus

    if comey’s writing and leaking memos what other kind of memos is he gonna write and leak?

    this has nothing to do with whether or not the memos are true

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  144. From the standpoint of the likelihood of ever obtaining a criminal conviction under a media microscope, putting the Clinton investigation in the EDNY instead of the SDNY — which had a crusading, indeed grandstanding U.S. Attorney with national ambitions and a tendency to go a personal cross-purposes, driven by political ambition, to the POTUS who’d appointed him), and a jury pool that would have been tough but not impossible to win a conviction from — was as big a deal as when the OJ prosecution team chose to indict and try him in downtown LA instead of in Brentwood. That is to say, it was probably outcome determinative all by itself. This was Clinton’s last-ditch-and-firewall, in case things went badly sideways. Yet not 0.1% of Americans, probably not 0.01% of Americans, has a clue that this ever happened, or why, because you can’t show a picture of it like you can of Loretta Lynch’s airplane sitting at an airport.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  145. GOP Senator Lankford, who was a supporter of Trump’s Cabinet members, said Trump asked all of them for their loyalty they way he did Comey:

    Sen. James Lankford said Thursday that President Trump asking former FBI Director James B. Comey for loyalty is no different than his exchange with any other official.

    “That sounds exactly like [how] the president spoke to every other Cabinet official in the process,” Mr. Lankford said on Fox News. The Oklahoma Republican is on the Senate Intelligence Committee and is set to ask Mr. Comey questions Thursday during the hearing.

    Mr. Lankford said that Mr. Trump asked all Cabinet members for loyalty and said there is no difference with Mr. Comey’s account. 

    Lankford also said Trump doesn’t understand the difference between Cabinet officials and Comey:

    “[Comey’s testimony quoting Trump] reads like the president talks. It sounds like a guy who’s not a Washington guy,” Lankford said. “America did not select a Washington guy or a politician. They hired a New York business guy…. It doesn’t surprise me he’s sitting down with all the people he’s hiring and putting his board face-to-face and saying, ‘I need you to be loyal. That’s a part of this.’”

    Lankford went on to describe the exchange that ensued between Trump and his FBI director.

    “He sits down with Comey a week into his presidency and says, ‘Basically, you’re the same as everyone else.’ Comey is sitting there apparently thinking, ‘I’m not like everyone else. I’m an independent investigator. I’m leading the FBI,’” Lankford said. “I think Comey sees this different from the president did. The president sees him as another part of the team. Comey seems to see it as, ‘Hey, we’re very independent,’ which the FBI has historically been very independent.”

    DRJ (15874d)

  146. this tells us that the DOJ is corrupt and the media refuses to report on it

    but it doesn’t tell us very much about comey’s rectitude vis a vis what he liked to call “the Clinton matter”

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  147. 94… again, the Republican-controlled Congress – and their leadership – get a pass.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  148. Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/10/2017 @ 9:56 am

    When you’re right, you’re right, Colonel.

    felipe (023cc9)

  149. Happy Saturday, felipe!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  150. The AG is not like all other cabinet officers precisely because in addition to having sworn an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States, he’s also sworn an oath to become a member of the legal profession, thereby undertaking both its duties and its privileges.

    The particulars of that oath vary from state to state, but in Texas, for example, as prescribed by statute, it’s this:

    I, ____, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitutions of the United States, and of this State; that I will honestly demean myself in the practice of law; that I will discharge my duties to my clients to the best of my ability; and, that I will conduct myself with integrity and civility in dealing and communicating with the court and all parties. So help me God.

    The “honestly demean” part generates confusion and humor, but it’s roughly analogous to the “heart of a servant” scripture, with the Rule of Law as the metaphorical “master” in the relationship.

    This has been true since the first cabinet assembled by George Washington. When Jack Kennedy insisted on appointing his brother Bobby to be the AG, many Americans — including many Democrats, even many Kennedy Democrats who’d just helped elect him — were appalled because of (absolutely valid & legitimate) concerns that Bobby’s loyalty to Jack was greater than Bobby’s loyalty to the Rule of Law (which was frankly hard to document from his past career, which was more as Jack’s fixer than anyone’s lawyer).

    Did Trump understand a single bit of this before he picked Sessions as his AG? Don’t make me laugh; this is exactly the kind of stuff that he thinks is just stupid paperwork that gets in his way. He doesn’t know and doesn’t care, and his loyalists see that as a feature rather than a bug.

    Thus his frustration when Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III persists in honoring, visibly, his obligations to the Rule of Law, in addition to his obligations as Attorney General to the Constitution and laws of the U.S., in addition to his personal loyalty to Donald Trump, the abrasive but duly-elected flesh-and-blood currently occupying the office of the POTUS. Trump considers the last to be the only thing that’s important, and certainly that it’s more important than the other two, and he’s probably not even theoretically aware of the first one. Thus he’s frustrated and finds it inexplicable that Sessions had to recuse himself: Trump would rather Sessions have ignored the ethical advice he’d appropriately sought and gotten (surely in confidential memo form, thus leakable someday), from the DoJ’s own career ethics specialists, and that Sessions and he (Trump) had fought a grand war against them, and against all this “ethics/conflict of interest nonsense” as Deep State bureaucrats.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  151. Re #127: Watergate isn’t part of the bar exam on professional responsibility, Mr Zerman. The questions vary every year, and here is the subject matter outline for the exam. They involve topics like client confidentiality, conflicts of interest, safekeeping of property, and other topics.
    DRJ (15874d) — 6/10/2017 @ 9:10 am

    I did not never state/write (in #124) that Watergate WAS a part of the bar exam. What I wrote in part was: “Why do law students have to take the mandatory course on Professional Responsibility and why is part of the bar exam on Professional Responsibility? The Watergate Scandal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_responsibility

    That link has (if you had gone there) in pertinent part (footnotes omitted here):
    Professional responsibility in the United States
    In U.S. law schools
    Following the Watergate scandal, which involved questionable behavior by a number of lawyers, the American Bar Association (“ABA”) mandated that all American law schools incorporate a required course on this topic.[1] This is typically offered as an upper-level course, most often taken in the second year. Professional Responsibility courses include matters pertaining to basic legal ethics, as well as bar admissions, legal advertising, disbarment proceedings, ineffective assistance of counsel, and judicial misconduct.
    Examinations concerning professional responsibility
    Every state in the United States tests prospective attorneys on their knowledge of professional responsibility. 47 states and the District of Columbia require bar applicants to pass an exam called the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam (“MPRE”). The remaining three states test professional responsibility on their local bar examinations. Furthermore, the ABA promulgated the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct.[2][3] in 1983; when Maine adopted the Model Rules in August 2009, California became the only remaining U.S. jurisdiction not to have adopted the Model Rules in whole or in part. Most states have only minor variations from the Model Rules, if any. Attorneys who violate professional responsibility rules may be subject to sanctions ranging from reprimands to temporary suspension to permanent disbarment. The responsibility is defined as a charge assigned to a unique actor to signify its accountabilities concerning a unique business task.[4]
    ______________________________________________

    Maybe both the law school course and the bar exam on Professional Responsibility – SHOULD include a discussion/question about Watergate? (Ya know – the geology without the rocks – thing?) And maybe the Professional Responsibility course – should be in the first semester, of the first year? Further, maybe it is not just irony, that Hillary Clinton was fired from her position as a staff attorney on the House Judiciary Committee investigating President Richard Nixon – because she lied. https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4540251/hillarys-bold-lie-omission-fired-staff-position-house-judiciary-committee-impeach-president-nixon

    DRJ – could you be one of those – that Ms. Rhode was referring to, about doing geology without the rocks? GLZ.

    Gary L. Zerman (ab669e)

  152. sounds like sleazy fbi worm Comey was more interested in writing down stuff in his notebook he could use to take down President Trump than he was in having a candid and forthright discussion about how he perceived his role at the FBI and its attendant duties and responsibilities

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  153. swc,

    We might want to continue this on a more recent post. If so, this is my position.

    DRJ (15874d)

  154. Thank you for correcting me, Mr. Zerman. I’m sorry I misunderstood your comment. I’m sure Watergate affected legal education, just as it affected journalism and politics and society. Can you briefly clarify why this bothers you or has special meaning for you?

    DRJ (15874d)

  155. Good comment, Beldar. You said it much better than I did.

    Also, I’ve forgotten where my conversation with shipwreckedcrew is. Can anyone remind me what post that was on?

    DRJ (15874d)

  156. Read Beldar’s comment, Mr. Zerman. There is far, far more to legal ethics and professional responsibility than Watergate. That was the catalyst for some people to care, but it’s not when ethics first started. I personally think the change from lawyers are counsellors to zealous advocates was a mistake that has hurt the profession, but Watergate didn’t cause lawyers to lie. Humans lie, including some lawyers.

    DRJ (15874d)

  157. Patterico: Thank you for your comments in #99 above. We’re mostly on the same page, if not maybe in the same paragraph on it.

    I’m left unsure what possibly could earn your cosmic disapproval. No one can doubt that Comey has had more than any FBI Director’s share of difficult ethical and professional decisions to make while in the service of his respective principals, nor that the results of those decisions have been of genuinely cosmic (well, okay, planetary) consequences.

    So it seems to me that the pooches Comey screwed here are awfully important pooches. What kind of pooch do you require be screwed for cosmic disapproval? 🙂

    Beldar (fa637a)

  158. Mr. Zerman, FWIW, my law school years were 1977-1980, when memories of Watergate were still fresh and Jimmy Carter was POTUS; I can’t speak as well for what’s taught now, although I did keep half-an-eye peeled for what they were teaching my oldest son as he went through his own legal ethics instruction, and then bar examination, a couple of years ago.

    The Watergate controversy generated multiple landmark SCOTUS decisions, all of which were (and probably still are) studied as part of constitutional law, criminal law, federal courts, and other core cores taken by most or all law students. The controversy also raised issues that were more narrowly but squarely in the field of legal ethics — Deputy WH Counsel John Dean’s role raised a ton of those — but didn’t generate as much new or SCOTUS-level precedent, so it would be taught, if at all, as an example of a factual setting in which these issues might be raised, rather than as a source of future guidance from the results and wording of a Watergate-generated legal precedent. The general subject of “What should a lawyer do when his client is doing, or planning to do, something illegal” is certainly taught as part of all legal ethics curricula.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  159. Errata from #160: I meant “core courses,” sorry.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  160. Beldar @ 6/10/2017 @ 10:26 am, I believe the mammal you are looking for is the koala, and Trump didn’t so much screw it as nuke it.

    I’ll be around as you toss metaphors into the blender.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  161. You’re doing a good job, Beldar, but I see my role somewhat as the Senate parliamentarian.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  162. Metaphor mangling is one of my favorite pastimes!

    Beldar (fa637a)

  163. It shows, Beldar.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  164. Comey thinks he’s Thomas Becket. That made me laugh because whatever you think of King Henry II — and in particular, whether you think his expressed contrition and supposed penance after Becket’s murder was genuine or feigned — Henry Plantagenet was one of the most remarkable, well-educated, visionary, multi-faceted, and intelligent monarchs ever to sit that throne. He had one of the most fabulous, interesting, and consequential queens ever, Eleanor of Aquitaine.

    I’m not sure if Donald Trump could do much more than correctly place Henry II in the sequence of English kings — “Somewhere between Henry I and Henry III?” — but he ain’t Henry II. Nor is Comey in any sense like Becket.

    Becket believed he was doing God’s will. The equivalent for Comey would been fidelity to the Rule of Law and the Constitution and laws of the United States. But it is precisely that fidelity that Comey betrayed when he colored outside the lines.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  165. The Clintons, I think I read somewhere, fancy themselves the 20th Century’s Edward & Eleanor, by the way.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  166. Bah, “Henry & Eleanor.” (Edward I & Eleanor of Castile were later.)

    Beldar (fa637a)

  167. With a congressional work week totaling 25 maybe 30 hours and most of it is phone work for the next election, this b.s. will never end.
    Such a disgrace to the tax payer. What can be done to stop these ingrates?

    mg (31009b)

  168. Comey’s sins, in two sentences that are my paraphrase of his rationale:

    I decided after the Bill Clinton-Loretta Lynch airplane meeting that I, the head of the FBI, should undertake the function of the Attorney General, in doing which I decided to end the Clinton email investigation.

    I decided after Trump fired me that I, as the ex-head of the FBI, had the right to waive (or deem already waived) all executive privilege on my underlying conversation with the POTUS and to leak, contrary to regulation and practice and my contractual obligations, a confidential government document to the press while concealing my personal involvement (for a time) through a cut-out.

    Comey thought he was justified, and thought he was acting to defend his own reputation and that of the FBI. But it’s the old “ignore the Rule of Law to save the Rule of Law problem,” and he wasn’t Lincoln considering habeas corpus or the First Amendment during the Civil War, even if he thought he was. He was a servant, not a principal; at least Lincoln was a principal.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  169. Well in terms if presidents not potentates he’s more like Grover Cleveland,

    narciso (d1f714)

  170. oh lordy

    CNN Exclusive: US suspects Russian hackers planted fake news behind Qatar crisis

    yup.

    it’s a bunch of sleazy unnamed losers at the corrupt FBI pushing this

    so embarrassed for them

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  171. So taheads they win, actually refusing to pursue real criminal offenses, tails he losers continuing a non existent case.

    Qatar has financed militias in Syria Libya Egypt, it is the fiction Al qumar from the west wing

    narciso (d1f714)

  172. The problem is everyone in the admunistration not excepting obama used private emails

    narciso (d1f714)

  173. Seeking an escape from all this last night, a brief respite, I started flipping through TV channels and blundered onto the TMZ website’s show. They were showing video of a reporter interviewing Paris Hilton as she walked through some airport in her high-fashion clothes. He was asking her what she thought of James Comey, and she said, “Who? I don’t know who that is.”

    Turned off the TV, went to bed.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  174. Also, I’ve forgotten where my conversation with shipwreckedcrew is. Can anyone remind me what post that was on?
    DRJ (15874d) — 6/10/2017 @ 10:18 am

    This happens to me, from time to time, as well; your convo is on this post.

    felipe (023cc9)

  175. That’s like going to most eusley for a drink.

    narciso (d1f714)

  176. @170 Beldar

    a confidential government document

    Really? Do tell. Are all one on one conversations with POTUS confidential? Potentially maybe dependent on the subject matter, but absolutely? I don’t believe so.

    Spartacvs (014a95)

  177. I find nah hawleys take on fargo entertaining this season, so is the Einstein series with Johnny flynn well more illuminating.

    narciso (d1f714)

  178. All of the POTUS’ one-on-one private conversations with Executive Branch personnel, including the FBI Director, on matters relating to the course and scope of the execution of the POTUS’ responsibilities under Article II of the Constitution, are indeed subject to a potential claim of executive privilege. This is considered to be a communication made as part of the Executive deliberative process, so only the POTUS gets to decide what part of the communication, if any, ought be shared with the public or the other two branches of government. Personnel who work for the POTUS do not get to make a decision to waive that claim, nor a decision that the POTUS has arguably already waived it by public disclosures.

    Why don’t you spend some time with Wikipedia or Google before you share your “beliefs” about the law here, Sparty?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  179. I don’t know why, but I was keenly aware of a most beautiful morning today.

    Happy Saturday to you, too, Colonel, and to everyone else as well! I do not take, for granted, the general peace and prosperity obtained by the sacrifices of our veterans; a double thanks, to you!

    Today is the Vigil of the Most Holy Trinity. I am off to confession and then to worship The Lord.

    felipe (023cc9)

  180. Oops, wrong year! Correct year (and readings).

    felipe (023cc9)

  181. That’s the executive privilege analysis.

    You can also do a separate attorney-client privilege analysis, but it likely wouldn’t cover the conversation because Trump wasn’t seeking and Comey wasn’t giving legal advice to Trump as an attorney to a client; that’s not part of the FBI Director’s job, Trump has other lawyers for both his official capacity (the AG), his representative capacity (WH counsel), and his personal capacity (Kasowitz). That said, I think it was nevertheless a violation of his general legal ethics obligations even if he wasn’t waiving an attorney-client privilege that belonged to Trump in any of those capacities. That is, it’s a violation of legal ethics for a lawyer, even acting in a non-lawyer capacity, to deprive anyone of any kind of potential legal privilege.

    You can also do a work-product and investigatory privilege analyses on this memo: It reflects the internal judgment of a law enforcement official (who is, but needn’t have been, a lawyer) on an official matter that’s being kept confidential, so it was a document that the DoJ could have prevented from compelled disclosure (e.g., in a civil rights section 1983 lawsuit) on those grounds. Leaking it deprived the FBI, Comey’s former employer, of the opportunity to assert that privilege just like it deprived the POTUS of the opportunity to assert executive privilege. (I’ve heard Kimberly Guilfoyle make this argument on Fox News.)

    It’s also confidential under Comey’s employment contract and its incorporated NDA — that’s a civil, but still legally binding, commitment that Comey breached when he leaked it. Let’s say that another FBI official read the memo after Comey was fired, and was shocked, and took home a copy, and told Rosenstein at DoJ: “You better do ___ or I’m going to leak this memo Comey left behind.” The DoJ could have rushed to court and gotten a perfectly constitutional, valid, and binding emergency temporary restraining order, followed by preliminary and permanent injunctions in due course, ordering the would-be leaker to desist upon penalty of fines and jail for contempt of court. Comey’s leak deprived the FBI of that opportunity too, since its contents are already now in the public domain.

    It’s just wrong behavior from every point of view, except Jim Comey’s personal obsession with his own reputation and, he thinks, that of the FBI.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  182. Adam West died.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  183. In #180 above, I ought have written “All of the POTUS’ non-public communications,” since executive privilege certainly isn’t limited to one-on-one conversations.

    A last aside re Mr. Zerman’s comments and questions above (#153): Some aspects of legal ethics can’t be taught until you have an understanding of the legal principles which create the underlying problems. For instance, until you’ve had a course that covers the differences among various types of business organizations (corporations, LLCs, LPs, partnerships, joint ventures, sole proprietorships & DBAs, etc.), you can’t speak meaningfully about how the lawyer’s attorney-client obligations may be different when his client is a corporation and the CEO isn’t the sole owner. Until you’ve had a course on securities regulations, so that you learn which of those business organizations are and aren’t subject to SEC registration and reporting requirements, you can’t assess the additional ethical complications for the lawyer created by that whole framework. Until you understand the steps in a criminal investigation and prosecution and indictment and conviction and appeal, you can’t recognize the ways that conflicts are likely to arise. And so forth.

    So I don’t think it makes much sense to put the whole of legal ethics education into the first year law school curriculum, and certainly not in the first semester.

    But I’ve also come to believe over the course of my own education and career that there is a definite value to the profession requiring continuous and on-going formal instruction in legal ethics throughout every practicing lawyer’s career. I mentioned on another thread that Texas requires not only a specified minimum number of CLE hours for every practicing lawyer, but that Texas lawyers separately track and report their bar-approved ethics CLE hours, and that’s something I’d like to see done nationwide.

    And specifically to your point, while there are some parts of legal ethics education that won’t make sense to the entering law student, there are also some parts of it that would. I’d see no harm, and perhaps some good, in including some selected seminars or discussion sessions on ethics throughout law school.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  184. Yes but carload slims and a whole host of outlets ran interference for him, the way other security agencies allow propaganda to be introduced into news outlets. We still don’t know this memo is anything but real unless it can authenticated like chambers pumpkin papers.

    narciso (d1f714)

  185. No certainly the gulf of tonkun declaration was certainly misrepresentation . if not an actual lie wiretapping mlk is equivalent to the plumbers, bolshakov as back channel who deceived rfk about nadir 6 luckily penkovsky was available as was vosjoli was available, using exner as a conduit to guancana in fact the whole outreach to the mob was likely illegal.

    What made Nixon radioactive was the downturn after the 73 oil shock and settling a war that gone on too long.

    narciso (d1f714)

  186. Seems to me this POTUS wouldn’t hesitate to invoke executive privilege over his interactions with Comey, if he thought he could prevail. He has so far declined and volunteered his own version of events, but not as yet under oath. As far as Comeys professional responsibilities go, I think we can infer he counts his responsibilities to the country, the rule of law and the FBI exceed anything owed to the usurper in the Oval Office.

    Spartacvs (014a95)

  187. This piece relies on the ficction that wray was against stellar wind

    http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/who-christopher-wray-trump-s-choice-fbi-director-was-once-n769366

    narciso (d1f714)

  188. Sparty, it seems to me, since I actually have a clue what executive privilege is, that contrary to your speculation, the WH (whose lawyers also probably know what executive privilege is) knew that Trump had a strong position, at least to start with, if he had chosen to assert executive privilege to block some of Comey’s testimony, including his testimony about all his official nonpublic conversations with Trump. And they deliberately chose to waive executive privilege.

    I think they did that not because they thought the assertion would be overruled by the courts — it probably wouldn’t have been, not without a much better predicate showing to pierce the conditional privilege, like the showing Jaworski had made for Nixon’s tapes — but because they didn’t want to fan the flames in the court of public opinion.

    It was a wise decision. I haven’t said it here expressly that I can recall, but Trump deserves due credit for following advice from his lawyers (probably WH counsel, or him plus Kasowitz) on this point. It must have been tempting for him to do otherwise, and certainly in character.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  189. SWC (103)

    “Trump voters” are not exactly the same as “Trump supporters”.

    People voted for Trump as the better of two choices.

    1. Some of them disliked Trump, but despised Hillary more.

    2. Some of them would have voted Republican no matter what and did not care who it was.

    3. Some of them supported Trump over Jeb or Kasich but had other people they liked better.

    4. Some of them would only vote for for Trump and would have stayed home as they usually do otherwise.

    5. Some of them usually vote for Democrats, but chose this time to vote for Trump becasue they identified with his message.

    6. Some of them always voted GOP but say they’ll vote Dem if Trump is given the boot.

    Of these groups the first 3 would be happy to see Trump leave office so long as Pence (or even Ryan) took over. The fourth group would retreat to political irrelevance as before.

    The 5th group would be a problem for the GOP. As would the 6th if it was actually there and nit just a threat. More likely the would join #4

    There is also Group #7 — Long-time GOP voters who could not vote for Trump. They voted for Hillary, or McFluffin, or Bozo or stayed home.

    Since you talk of “Trump voters” still loving Trump. are these new voters, old Dem voters or what? It matters. Are there more of these than the GOP voters Trump repelled, or now repels?

    Kevin M (752a26)

  190. This happens to me, from time to time, as well; your convo is on this post.

    felipe (023cc9) — 6/10/2017 @ 11:38 am

    Heh. There are too many Comey posts for me to remember who said what and where, but they are all interesting. Thank you, felipe!

    DRJ (15874d)

  191. @132. Ditto, Patterico?

    Nixon was President of the United States from January 20, 1969 to August 8, 1974. What were you; 5 or 6 years old, thereabouts?

    Nippers For Nixon, eh.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  192. I supported every Republican including Nixon, Hoagie. Trump is too much for me to trust, but I have supported him when he does conservative things.

    I’ve supported Trump because he was the duly elected President and Hillary wasn’t, and hoped for the best. My issues with him are not political — I do not consider myself a “conservative” by some definitions, particularly social ones.

    I see this administration as hopelessly compromised and dysfunctional, primarily because of the President’s inability to STFU when S-ing-TFU would serve him better. His ability to communicate outside his (narrow) base is infinitesimal, his understanding of how government works is child-like, and his selfcenteredness is legend.

    If Trump serves out his term it will be one lost opportunity after the next. Worse, it will poison the Republican Party’s image to a degree Hoover never managed.

    IF you don’t see all these things now, you will, soon.

    Kevin M (752a26)

  193. I don’t know why, but I was keenly aware of a most beautiful morning today…

    felipe (023cc9) — 6/10/2017 @ 11:57 am

    Indeed, sir. I woke to the same dawn. Let us rejoice and be glad.

    But in the meantime. Here’s to not being on the hook for something we never volunteered for…

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  194. @191 Beldar

    Maybe they sat him down and made him watch All the Presidents Men? If not, someone should and right quick.

    We both know the optics of his invoking executive privilege would have been bad, very bad. I don’t see that he or his legal team had much choice really.

    Spartacvs (014a95)

  195. I’m trying to work through in my head whether Comey’s leak of the memo could have improperly (i.e., without the client’s knowledge or permission or standing authority) waived an attorney-client privilege that Trump would have been entitled to claim, in addition to executive privilege, for the conversation documented in the memo and the memo itself.

    The easier analysis is the investigative privilege part, which belongs to the FBI and through it, to the DoJ and the POTUS. Clearly Comey thought he was functioning in an investigative role on a private matter, and he indeed was. If, say, Mike Flynn ever sues the government under section 1983 for abusing his civil rights, the FBI could and should have resisted production of this memo as part of that litigation on grounds of investigative privilege.

    But attorney-client privilege is distinct from either executive or investigative privileges, and it requires that the communication be between attorney and client for the purposes of seeking or receiving legal advice. I mentioned above that Comey, although a lawyer, was not acting as Trump’s (or the POTUS’ or the Executive Branch’s) lawyer in that conversation. So at first I was doubtful that you could successfully maintain an attorney-client objection to either the conversation or the memo documenting it. I’ve just about come to the opposite conclusion, though: Even though Casey wasn’t acting as a lawyer for the POTUS or the Executive Branch, he was participating in the conversation as the subordinate and employee of the Attorney General, who indeed is the Executive Branch’s lawyer and who reports to the POTUS in that capacity, and who does indeed give the POTUS legal advice and have an attorney-client relationship with him. Just as my paralegal’s presence at an attorney-client conference doesn’t waive or breach attorney-client privilege, and neither does my secretary when she reads and email from my client and forwards it to me, and neither of them are free to go forth and broadcast those details, Comey was bound by the attorney-client relationship between the AG and the POTUS, not because he was himself the POTUS’ lawyer, but because he was part of the subordinate staff of the POTUS’ lawyer.

    So yeah, I think Trump might also have been able to assert attorney-client privilege along with executive and work product privileges, had they wished to block Comey’s testimony.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  196. DCSCA,

    I acknowledged that Watergate was a catalyst for reforms but legal ethics were around, even in law schools, long before then. One of the main changes after Watergate was that some professional responsibility rules became mandatory. My understanding is that happened because John Dean said he couldn’t decide which ethics rules were suggestions and which ones were mandatory. It doesn’t surprise me that Dean took that position.

    DRJ (15874d)

  197. Frankly, I wonder if it was Dean, not Watergate, that was the catalyst. Watergate was the excuse.

    DRJ (15874d)

  198. @64. I don’t think Trump did anything illegal, but I didn’t think Nixon did either.

    After all these years and all the evidence revealed after four decades, that’s just sad, DRJ. Speaks more of you than of Nixon. Maybe you should actually listen to the White House Nixon tapes– ‘warts and all.’ I supported the Big Dick as well… which makes his betrayal to all those who did– and the greater country as a whole– all the more damning.

    https://www.nixonlibrary.gov/virtuallibrary/tapeexcerpts/index.php

    Woodward and Bernstein: Nixon’s crimes were worse than we knew

    http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opinion/column/woodward-and-bernstein-nixon-s-crimes-were-worse-than-we/article_c9664e56-b3f8-11e1-bc67-0019bb2963f4.html

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  199. Beldar,

    I’m not sure but, at one time, I think the government recognized an attorney-client privilege that protects facts and a deliberative process privilege that protects opinions and advice from FOIA and other disclosure. That distinction may or may not still exist.

    Another question I have is: Has Comey waived either privilege with his disclosure?

    DRJ (15874d)

  200. Jesus, ‘made a mistake” on the ‘hillary thing’??? I thought Patterico was a lawyer… How does he not have utter contempt for Comey who contorted himself to find she had ‘no intent’ in violating a law that does not have intent as a requirement? I understand your average sheeple on the street not getting it, but come on, man, this is DISQUALIFYING

    peggy (fb6611)

  201. DCSCA,

    I am going to assume you read what I wrote quickly and without thinking about what I meant. At this point in the investigations, I don’t know if Trump has done anything illegal but it doesn’t appear so. Early in the Watergate investigations, it didn’t appear Nixon did anything illegal either … but we now know he did. I was making the comparison precisely because Nixon did do something illegal but we didn’t know it at the time. I don’t think Trump has but, because of Nixon, I’ve learned not to be so sure about what Presidents are doing.

    DRJ (15874d)

  202. A troll is someone who takes a statement, recasts it — converting “didn’t do anything illegal” into “didn’t do anything wrong and was a swell fellow” — and then presents an argument as to why that straw man is a bad straw man.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  203. I was also worried about what Obama was doing. It’s not just Republicans.

    DRJ (15874d)

  204. @200/201. And after Watergate– they’re supposed to be better. Well, Dean was disbarred and never pursued getting reinstated while others in Nixon’s flock did– Krogh comes to mind.

    Speaking academically, Trump for me is an exercise in fulfilling predictions from a thesis inked 40 years ago researching ‘initial elected public offices’ of public officials in the Federal governnent over the history of the country– data ends in 1976. Dry stuff– (you could start a Texas prairie fire with it) as you’d expect from political science diggings– but the research took me nearly a year and the hard data was revealing over the 200 year history of the country through the various eras. Long story, short, the data graphed out, showed the lines crossing in the future (30-50 years or so from ’76) that one of the major parties was inevitably going to nominate a ‘corporate candidate’ w/o any previous elected public office experience. ‘Course some of the variables have changed; campaign financing laws and the media landscape. But debate in the oral was over how an autocrat- a strong CEO-type- was going to manage government. Would he adapt to it or visa versa. That’s playing out now. The wild card in this, unfortunately, is Trump’s persona.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  205. @205. I think in so far as the Comey vs. Trump situation, the country has learned, after the experience of the Dean vs. Nixon experience, that Americans are less inclined to give the President the benefit of the doubt today.

    We’re both likely old enough to recall there was a time when most people would.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  206. @206. Projecting again, Beldar. Speak for yourself.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  207. @ DRJ, re #203: I don’t buy that distinction you point out in the material you linked — the argument that deliberative, i.e., executive, privilege only protects opinions and advice. The privilege covers communications. And that includes communications about facts, and also communications about opinions and legal advice. They sort of recognize that, recognizing that privilege may still protect against disclosure of “underlying facts” when “they would indirectly reveal the advice, opinions, and evaluations circulated.” But that’s utterly impractical and unworkable, and unless you interpret “indirectly” extremely narrowly, it swallows the supposed rule.

    Re your excellent question: “Has Comey waived either [attorney-client or deliberative] privilege with his disclosure?”

    I think that the POTUS/Executive Branch could successfully assert in court that Comey’s revelation of the substance of privileged communications was unauthorized and therefore not binding upon the POTUS/Executive Branch. There’s caselaw from the attorney-client context, certainly, regarding inadvertent or unauthorized disclosures, as when the secretary accidentally faxes to the secret memo to opposing lawyer’s fax number instead of to the client, or when a rogue ex-employee steals and sells a file.

    Based on a finding that the disclosure was unauthorized, a court could then refuse to compel further discovery — for example, refusing to require the Executive Branch to turn over Comey’s written memos, which we still have not seen, and which may have a whole lot more CYA by Comey written with the intention that it become politically toxic when finally released — so that might be very important. Likewise, in some sort of evidentiary proceeding, a court might likewise, based on a finding of unauthorized disclosure, still sustain a privilege objection and prevent witnesses in their oral testimony from returning to the subject of the memo.

    So I suppose there are at least theoretical horses who might still be in the barn door that Comey opened, and they might become important horses.

    But that certainly doesn’t excuse Comey.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  208. (My strong hunch is that there are no horses in that barn, though, and that Comey’s leaks were already his best shot.)

    Beldar (fa637a)

  209. I hope Patch wins the Belmont

    mg (31009b)

  210. I wonder if Comey signature is GOD?

    mg (31009b)

  211. @165 It shows!

    It shows, indeed. So does posting corrections to earlier posts. Lots of ’em.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  212. Jonah Goldberg has labeled Comey “Lord Varys of the Beltway,” a Game of Thrones reference that’s amazingly apt. Lord Varys was a very powerful, very canny eunuch who served as spymaster for a series of corrupt rulers of the Seven Kingdoms, for non-GoT fans.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  213. @205. I don’t know if Trump has done anything illegal but it doesn’t appear so.

    DRJ, credit earned for the bold half of that sentence. The second half, not so much; appearances can be deceiving.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  214. President Trump is wearing a bullet proof vest for us.
    The deep state and 90% of republicans want him out.
    Keep making these people nuts, Mr. President, they deserve it.

    mg (31009b)

  215. @210 DCSCA

    Americans are less inclined to give the President the benefit of the doubt today.

    I think that’s true. But, beyond respect for the office, it also depends on the nature and character of the man. Which is where Trump fails miserably.

    Spartacvs (014a95)

  216. @220. ‘Miserably’ is too kind to the term. From the Howard Stern tapes to ‘The Apprentice’ and all the tabloid trash through the decades between.

    But what a show!

    Because as we know in this era [and to the great disdain or our host] Americans don’t want to be governed, they wish to be entertained.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  217. DRJ, knowing what you know about Trump through the years and all you’ve see, read and heard — and putting aside he is currently POTUS– would you take him on as a client?

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  218. There is no evidence of any wrongdoing, now trump will be movung toward fulfilling his promise he made last fall in little havana on friday, Cuba is a Russian colony as much as Egypt was till the late 70s.

    narciso (d1f714)

  219. REPEAT: Funny how since Comey was fired, the leaks have stopped.

    Blah (44eaa0)

  220. Blah: that’s not my impression. But believe what you have to I guess.

    Spartacvs (014a95)

  221. Comey’s sins are not hard for a normal human to understand:

    1) He covered up the truth about Trump not being investigated to fuel chaos.

    2) He took a normal human discussion about showing compassion to Flynn (deserved or not) and turned it into a “crime” after the fact to take vengeance on the guy who shit canned him.

    3) He covered up for Hillary Clinton on July 2016 under the assumption she would be his boss in and LIKELY would use his inside knowledge to leverage Hillary to keep his job. Cuz nothing from a logical perspective makes Comey’s “no intent” ruling sensical.

    He is a vile human.

    Blah (44eaa0)

  222. To the Bat Cave… Rest In Peace, Adam West– forever the one and only Caped Crusader.

    “Holy dead end!” – Robin, The Boy Wonder [Burt Ward] ‘Batman’ episode ‘The Joker’s Last Laugh’ ABC TV 1967

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  223. Comey’s sins are not hard for a normal human to understand:

    1) He covered up the truth about Trump not being investigated to fuel chaos.

    2) He took a normal human discussion about showing compassion to Flynn (deserved or not) and turned it into a “crime” after the fact to take vengeance on the guy who canned him.

    3) He covered up for Hillary Clinton on July 2016 under the assumption she would be his boss in and LIKELY would use his inside knowledge to leverage Hillary to keep his job. Cuz nothing from a logical perspective makes Comey’s “no intent” ruling sensical.

    4) He showed no sense of outrage when covering up for Lynch and not investigating Clinton Foundation.

    He is a vile human. Worse than anything Trump has done.

    Blah (44eaa0)

  224. There is no evidence of any wrongdoing

    …and the story stops with the five burglars.

    “…let others wallow in Watergate, we are going to do our job.” – Big Dick Nixon, July, 1973

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  225. #225 Please find me any leaks of merit since Comey is fired …….. not when the story is written but when the leaks came.

    Blah (44eaa0)

  226. 2) He took a normal human discussion about showing compassion to Flynn (deserved or not) and turned it into a “crime” after the fact to take vengeance on the guy who canned him.

    It of a stretch that. Do you have any instances to report of Trump being human enough to show compassion for wronged individuals? Central Park 5 maybe?

    Spartacvs (014a95)

  227. I didn’t like the series that much on reflection, gotham city like its Potomac mirror more likely was not as day glo as barnaby street, but a darker hue although Bruno heller paints it too dark, although Cesar Romero, Marty’s grandson made a interesting villain.

    narciso (d1f714)

  228. #231 …. Trump is well known for being loyal to those who are loyal to him.

    Fact you are deranged enough to think otherwise speaks to your poor character.

    I hate Obama politically, he made some unethical moves in his time, but I never thought him a not human. He stuck by his people even when they made mistakes …. David Plouffee taking $100K from the Iranians for example. He even went out of his way to try a squash investigation like IRS and Benghazi to protect his folks.

    But that is what Never Trumpers have descent to. To treating him as a non human and dunce when it suits them and evil Machiavellian when it suits them.

    Blah (44eaa0)

  229. comey leaks in the wind

    mg (31009b)

  230. leaks of merit

    Where to start? Wasn’t Trumps Oval Office meeting with Lavrov after he fired Comey?

    Spartacvs (014a95)

  231. I thought the way he actually debated whether his grandmother would have a hip transplant told you something about him.

    The plumbers were men like Bernard barker the fmr pow who saw his country stolen from him, and perhaps held out too much hope that Nixon would go some ways to restore the balance.

    narciso (d1f714)

  232. a president has to be able to talk to his eunuchs privately

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  233. “I think that’s true. But, beyond respect for the office, it also depends on the nature and character of the man. Which is where Trump fails miserably.”

    Spartacvs (014a95) — 6/10/2017 @ 2:55 pm

    Meh. You would’ve been quite happy with harridan Hillary Clinton, buffoon.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  234. Trump is well known for being loyal to those who are loyal to him.

    Incorrect, he’s well known for saying exactly that. But there’s no evidence it’s true, in fact quite the opposite. Donald considers loyalty a one way street, always has, always will most likely.

    Spartacvs (014a95)

  235. Mr. Spardapus you don’t know for sure you just bias on Mr. Trump

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  236. Meh. You would’ve been quite happy with harridan Hillary Clinton, buffoon.

    Apparently, the majority of citizens felt that way and I expect that number grows day by day.

    Spartacvs (014a95)

  237. Trump is well known for being loyal to those who are loyal to him.

    And ‘those’ “loyalists” have the rope burns around their necks from being hung out to dry or left twisting in the wind to show for it.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  238. have a margarita

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  239. Democrats demand loyalty, republicans naively expect it than they hire Paul o’neil keep Richard Clarke and Paul pillar.

    http://www.weaselzippers.us/343213-trump-opens-companys-first-new-coal-mine-in-6-years

    narciso (d1f714)

  240. com·ey·tose
    ˈkōməəˌtōs,ˈkäməəˌtōs/
    adjective
    of or in a state of deep sh*t for a prolonged or indefinite period, especially as a result of a severe overplay of one’s hand
    “he had been comeytose for seven months”
    synonyms: inabadspot, uptohisears, in a comey, properlyrogered, screwedtehpooch
    “he was comeytose after the testimony”

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  241. oops about to slip down

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  242. speaking of which

    on amazon turdlord jeffy bezos’s blog they’re trying to rehabilitate Meghan’s senile coward torture victim daddy

    One explanation for McCain’s grogginess: a 75,000-mile itinerary as ‘shadow’ diplomat

    McCain’s journeys to those far-flung places also drains the octogenarian — and it is beginning to show when he returns to the Capitol. He won’t publicly admit this, but some friends suspect his awkward performance at the Intelligence Committee’s hearing with James B. Comey, the fired FBI director, could be traced to McCain’s near-constant global travels whenever Congress takes a break.

    lol

    or maybe he’s just a rode-hard-and-put-up-wet senile p.o.s. torture victim

    occam’s razor and all

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  243. And what was the big leak from the May 10 meeting? The IC which the NY Times already had about Israel as a source of IC data shared with Russians about lap tops which I had read in the Newspaper weeks back?

    Yeah, big get. So big that McMaster called the NY Times liars for the story. So again, find me any leaks of merit/substance/importance since May 9? Stories made up on the spot, well those will continue. Like a real leak of substance …..

    And fact is Trump has employed many senior level people for many years. I dunno for Govt Bureaucrats but a boss can be loyal to you and rip you a new one every so often. And also folks come and go in all businesses. Doesn’t mean he is not loyal to good employees.

    Blah (44eaa0)

  244. @247- ‘Loyalty’ is a matter of legalities w/The Donald; private sector Trump has had all his ’employees’ sign non-disclosure agreements. Likely part of the ex-wives pre-nups as well.

    Break it at your own legal and financial risk.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  245. Why don’t we ask his first two wives how loyal he is.

    nk (dbc370)

  246. or sleazy war hero pappy bush’s mistresses

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  247. And what was the big leak from the May 10 meeting?

    Well apart from burning a source of intelligence as you describe. He also bragged to his Russian guests that he had relieved “great pressure” on him by firing that “nutjob” Comey. Could be relevant to Muellers investigation don’t you think?

    Spartacvs (014a95)

  248. to me, that would suggest a lot of people had been pressuring him to fire this rancid corrupt fbi butt-weasel

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  249. Particularly his son in law apparently. Which sets up another intriguing encounter with Mueller in the not to distant future I suspect.

    Spartacvs (014a95)

  250. Oops. Contrary to his testimony, Comey kept and shared notes on Bush one-on-one with staff and press.
    Hinderacker’s concludes after reporting the annotated details from Gellman’s book Angler:

    James Comey says there is a pattern to his dealings with presidents: he is an honest man who only needed to create memos to document his conversations with Donald Trump, because Trump is untruthful. But that isn’t the real pattern. The real pattern is that Comey is a snake in the grass who creates tendentious, self-serving memos that can later be used to cover his own rear end or to discredit presidents, but only if they are Republicans.

    crazy (d3b449)

  251. his son-in-law has a strong pimp hand

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  252. Everything they’d been alleging was false or the opposite of how it had been sold… which is why the Democrats and their media operatives with bylines remain angry, untrustworthy, out of touch, empty-handed and out of power.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  253. One of Comey’s colleagues, who also was about to resign, was Comey’s good friend Bob Mueller, who waited for Comey downstairs at the White House while Comey had his dramatic conversation with President Bush.

    sick incestuous swamp trash

    comey and mueller

    two peas in a sleazy fbi cesspool

    and both of these scummy ex-fbi directors?

    they’re both worth millions upon million

    Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity

    lol!

    scummy extortionist fbi turd-monkeys more like it

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  254. The real pattern is that Comey is a snake in the grass who creates tendentious, self-serving memos that can later be used to cover his own rear end or to discredit presidents, but only if they are Republicans.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  255. “Why don’t we ask his first two wives how loyal he is.”

    nk (dbc370) — 6/10/2017 @ 4:48 pm

    Strike that, your Honor, poorly phrased… has no bearing on teh case.

    Perhaps we can ask yours?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  256. oh stop let’s focus on these fbi butt-weasels

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  257. Meh. You would’ve been quite happy with harridan Hillary Clinton, buffoon.

    “Apparently, the majority of citizens felt that way and I expect that number grows day by day.”

    Spartacvs (014a95) — 6/10/2017 @ 3:51 pm

    She even has Vanity Fair asking her to please go away, lol. Wake teh EFF up, Sparkycuss!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  258. oh lordy

    national soros radio is sucking the nut out of this story like it was the last penis in penisville

    we’re gonna have to redefine tl;dr now

    they’ve taken it to a whole new level

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  259. Even if Mueller doesn’t believe the standard for criminal prosecution of obstruction is met, his findings, if he puts credence in Comey’s testimony, could be damning and lay the foundation for articles of impeachment when or if Democrats wrest back control of Congress at some point in the Trump presidency.

    there you go pickleheads

    this is the wet dream apotheosis of the npr lena dunham dream sequence your tax dollars paid for

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  260. Re “Hillary instead”, I’d be most afraid of her doing disco granny at Studio 54 or opening scene of Scanners (not the head pop) and winding up with down low suburban dad on the post office wall.

    urbanleftbehind (847a06)

  261. While Comey as kept US focused on Russiapalooza and who’s the bigger liar Did Comey Cover Up a Massive and Illegal FBI-CIA Spying Operation? Hmmm… Might explain the ferocity of the leaks from the many current and former officials of all stripes.

    crazy (d3b449)

  262. You could use another metaphor that doesn’t require neutralization, Montgomery is a dodgy character, there was something to the stenigraohic claims re the 2003 air france standowns but he didn’t prove it. I rely on what sarah carter and John Solomon have turned up.

    narciso (d1f714)

  263. Good point. Didn’t know that about him. Thanks

    crazy (d3b449)

  264. Its like Indiana Jones digging for tanis there are many straight drops into snake pits
    https://mobile.twitter.com/ABC/status/873636522838421504

    narciso (d1f714)

  265. Comey Comey Comey Comey Chameleon is the perfect persona for our media age of Boy George Stephanopoulos

    this should at least get an A++ strawberry-scented scratch-n-sniff sticker i think

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  266. Comey is a compulsive liar. And not even a smart liar like most of these people in positions of power. He said he leaked the conversation to the NYT after Trump tweeted regarding the NYT story that featured the Comey leak the day before the tweet. I guess that’s too complicated for some people to wrap their minds around. It’s smoking gun perjury evidence and Comey needs to go to prison for a long time or else the FBI will think it’s okay to leak.

    jcurtis (00837a)

  267. your eyes have died

    but you see more than i

    comey, you’re a star!

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  268. fbi trash gotta be trashy Mr. curtis

    we gonna need a bigger trough

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  269. I hate to tell you this jcurtis, but the FBI does think it’s okay to leak as long as the leak 1) hurts a Republican or 2) harms Trump or 3) promotes a coup d’états or 4) grows the scope and power of the State. As do all the Deep State agencies.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  270. No we can reasonably surmise he told richman as he did wittes at some point. After that its pure conjecture.

    circa.com/politics/hillary-clinton-email-surfaces-calls-into-question-former-secretarys-fbi-testimony

    narciso (d1f714)

  271. In the 70s there seem to intimations of deep state everywhere, in italy, in the UK against Wilson, Chris mullen extrapolated for a very British coup in the 80s the stepping down on goug whitlam the October syrpruse was a mabifrstatio. Of this mania over here.

    narciso (d1f714)

  272. @ hatefulfeet (#263): What “findings” do you mean? Or does the source you quote mean?

    That was in the independent counsel statute. It’s not in the special counsel regs, 28 C.F.R. part 600.

    Rather, in the special counsel regs, if there’s no indictment that generates a trial that generates a verdict, the special counsel “shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel” per 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c ).

    So assuming Mueller doesn’t go rogue, then in no circumstances, other than a press conference in connection with a pending prosecution (a la Patrick Fitzgerald), will Mueller be speaking to the press or giving them any “findings” or “report.”

    As for what the Attorney General does with that confidential report, section 600.9(a) reads:

    (a) The Attorney General will notify the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Judiciary Committees of each House of Congress, with an explanation for each action –

    (1) Upon appointing a Special Counsel;

    (2) Upon removing any Special Counsel; and

    (3) Upon conclusion of the Special Counsels investigation, including, to the extent consistent with applicable law, a description and explanation of instances (if any) in which the Attorney General concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.

    You have to read sub-part (3) closely. If the special counsel has explained the “declination decision” to the Attorney General’s satisfaction, then all the AG has to say to the Congress-critters is: “The special counsel’s investigation has been concluded.” It’s only if the special counsel wants to prosecute and the AG overrules him that the AG has any obligation to explain why.

    And even that can be delayed, essentially indefinitely and at the AG’s discretion, under section 600.9(b).

    Now, if the AG instead wants to release a special counsel’s confidential report explaining a no-prosecution decision, whether the AG agrees with it or not, then “may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions.” But it’s going to be Rod Rosenstein, who for all his independent attitude is indeed a Trump political appointee confirmed by the Senate, who will be making that discretionary call.

    I can’t rule it out. But it strikes me as wildly improbable that immediately upon the heels of Jim Comey’s career going up in flames spectacularly, and Rod Rosenstein having accurately explained that in his memo criticizing Comey for grandstanding in public when the FBI’s rules and tradition dictated he keep his mouth shut, Rosenstein himself would take the opportunity to gratuitously besmirch Trump.

    So yeah: Lefties may fantasize about this, and coming a full 180 degrees in both directions along the crazy/sane arc, so too will paranoid alt-Rights and Trumpkins. But it’s crazy talk.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  273. These regulations read the way they do precisely because of the Starr Report. Mueller can’t write a Starr Report.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  274. yes yes that’s why i called it an npr lena dunham dream sequence

    but i’m a go to the kitchen and rescue my miso and read your 277 in earnest

    brb

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  275. It’s a waste of time, this investigation was predicated on subterfuge, preferring documents that never existed, passing off third hand gossip as journalism. Taking the
    Rantings of a,nut like mensch.

    narciso (d1f714)

  276. and i don’t get why you call me hatefulfeet when i’m not really hateful i’m just sassy

    srsly at worst you should call me sassefeet

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  277. wow i just did my first pass at #277

    npr really screwed the legal pooch

    arf arf arf

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  278. The three judge panel was,a better mechanism but of the thousands of items that merited Ann independent counsel this wasn’t one.

    narciso (d1f714)

  279. when i look at pictures of this sleazy “bob mueller” (sp?) dude all i can think is

    when i’m that old i hope i’m doing something much more useful and substantive with my life than this clownish ex-fbi pedophile-looking creepshow

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  280. Btw re my Lun reza aslan seems to have griifined himself.

    narciso (d1f714)

  281. @DRJ. You know, the difference between Nixon and Trump is back in the day, before we were aware of just what a bigoted bag of bones the Big Dick was, you wanted to at least try to like him–but he’d end up doing things to repeatedly repel you. With Trump, we already know the content of his character and there’s little to embrace- save his entertainment value.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  282. honestly your 277 should be its own post

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  283. yes yes Mr. narciso

    i had no idea he was attached to the leftovers

    i labored through season one and thought it meritorious

    but i never went back for season two

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  284. There does seem.to be a pattern of progs resorting to expletive starting with Tom Perez and most recently with Kirsten ‘mattress girl’ gillebrand early onset Tourette they think HBO comedy club is still on tv.

    narciso (d1f714)

  285. “So assuming Mueller doesn’t go rogue”

    meaning we have to assume Mueller doesn’t pull a comey

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  286. Tom perrotta was mildly interesting in election, but that’s about the size of it.

    narciso (d1f714)

  287. Oh, you know why. We used to have conversations when your comments were like #281. For the last couple of years, your comments have been consistently more like numbers:

    54
    56
    59
    74
    76
    84
    86 (!)
    97
    117
    246
    250
    252
    255
    257
    260
    262 (!)

    I’ve probably missed a few that I ought have included, and I gave you a very wide benefit of the doubt on several, but see if you can spot the trend.

    No, hatefulfeet it shall be, so long as this persists. I cannot think of anything more apt.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  288. FBI is the epicenter of the D.C. Corruption.

    Blah (44eaa0)

  289. well gee whiz a pikachu has to keep up with the times

    and right now we need to explore the language of anger and alienation and disillusionment

    AND yes yes yes – the language of contempt for our feckless ruling class, which – honest to pikachu jesus – some people are going so far as to equate with what they call the “knowledge class” (cheeky people are doing this)

    oh my goodness Mr. Beldar

    we’re truly suffering under the ancient chineser curse what inflicts interesting times upon those afflicted by it

    but me, i’m a try to help us navigate the lifeboats to safer shores where we can once again frolic in the meadows of freedom

    and i’m gonna be with TRUMP

    (i know i will)

    on that midnight train to freedom

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  290. Well certainly McCabe and ryziki who is a holdover from the Mueller era and parietal, basically the top echelon of the bureau. Langley may be undergoing house cleaning but ompeo has been as quiet as a basenghi of late.

    narciso (d1f714)

  291. Lemme re-emphasize what I wrote in #278, when I said:

    These regulations read the way they do precisely because of the Starr Report. Mueller can’t write a Starr Report.

    Date of the Starr Report: September 11, 1998.

    Date of Publication of 28 C.F.R. part 600, as per 64 Fed. Reg. 37042, by authorization of the then-Attorney General, Janet Reno, using authority delegated her under the Appointments Clause by the then-POTUS, William Jefferson Clinton: July 9, 1999.

    Actually, neither party much wanted any more Starr Reports by that time, which is why no one proposed reauthorizing the independent counsel statute. But the Clintonistas absolutely, positively did not want any more Starr Reports from what they knew necessarily would have to be created to fill the vacuum left by the statutory lapse.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  292. Bush-41 didn’t touch these rules either.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  293. Still though there is no need for invective, does all this surveillance get is anywhere.

    narciso (d1f714)

  294. (Senate acquittal on impeachment articles: February 2, 1999, in case you forgot.)

    Beldar (fa637a)

  295. ?

    there are many need for invective

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  296. Bah, sorry, meant Bush-43 in #297.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  297. What was the threshold for special counsels in the Reagan era some olc opinion that agitated liberals the wedtech matter the his matter probably actually touched on real malfeasance but that went nowhere. Mark Levin can tell you of the persecution of meese.

    You misunderstand you Ethan Hawke jackass there are words that come to mind about this criminal sabotage we are undergoing but it’s a copout to use profanity.

    narciso (d1f714)

  298. Hud how about superfund that was the excuse the white toga crowd used to distance themselves from Anne gotsuch a fact justice gotsuch hadn’t forgotten.
    Admittedly there were some foolish counsels summoned like the Henry Cisneros matter. But comey aS the controller of the Libby persecution

    narciso (d1f714)

  299. i think you’re wrong, that it goes way past “criminal sabotage”

    we have people asserting that the voters need to shut their stupid ignant pieholes cause they voted for someone who isn’t 199% obeisant to the mean girls what spent years and years and years carefully organizing the optimal ebbs and flows of the ivy league trash cafeterias and commissaries in which the newly elected President is expected to enjoy specially-curated lunch items such as the sustainable spinach-lentil curry loaf

    eff that nonsense

    Trump’s election is a gloriousness and a wonderment not unlike the birth of the wee small baby jesus in an animal-infested manger

    they said it couldn’t happen here

    Jeborah? to this day, she’s flabbergasted

    pervy Mitt Romney? the poor dear just held a retreat with his slicked-up boy toy Paul Ryan and his choice alpha male fantasy stud Joe Biden – and they still can’t come up with a plan of action!

    comey comey comey comey comey chameleon

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  300. this could be the best place yet but you must overcome your fears

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  301. No I think criminal sabotage is on point it’s a night soil brigade that prevents real issues from being considered like what happens when one of Kim’s missiles hit some target in Eastern western Japan, or the next attack in Europe is biological or chemical?

    narciso (d1f714)

  302. @ narciso (#302): It was a complicated process under the old independent counsel statute, which expired in 1999.

    It basically started with a list of public officials that included the POTUS, VPOTUS, cabinet-level officials, WH staff above a certain pay level, some other designated DoJ officials, the heads of the IRS, CIA, national political campaign chairmen (this was post-Watergate!), and everyone who’d held any of those positions within the past year. Whenever the AG had “information sufficient to constitute grounds to investigate whether any [such] person” had violated any federal criminal law with a felony or class A misdemeanor punishment, then that triggered an elaborate dance of congressional notifications, which could in turn compel the AG to apply to a special panel chosen from the DC Circuit to actually appoint the independent counsel. As a practical matter it gave both sides of the aisle in Congress a lot of power to force the AG to ask for an independent counsel, which is one reason there were so many of them in the 1980s and 1990s.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  303. i think it’s more definitional than that Mr. narciso

    it’s about what it means to be an american

    is an american obeisant to silver-tongued harvardtrash like the ben sasse who doles out chores judiciously such that you too can grow up to be a slimy piece of us senate trash

    or does an american chart his own destiny by his own stars?

    we’ll see you right back here in 2 and 2

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  304. bam

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  305. It was part of the victory of the bureaucracy over political administration it began with Kennedy minion Archibald Cox disgruntled gopers like Lawrence Walsh yes very lance had one set upon him.

    narciso (d1f714)

  306. Slight modification: The reporting was to Congress and the special panel, which could, on its own, reverse an AG decision not to seek a special counsel. Here’s how the SCOTUS described the process in Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988)(citations omitted), so rely on that rather than my paraphrase in #307:

    Briefly stated [ha! very wry, Chief Justice Rehnquist!], Title VI of the Ethics in Government Act allows for the appointment of an “independent counsel” to investigate and, if appropriate, prosecute certain high ranking Government officials for violations of federal criminal laws. The Act requires the Attorney General, upon receipt of information that he determines is “sufficient to constitute grounds to investigate whether any person [covered by the Act] may have violated any Federal criminal law,” to conduct a preliminary investigation of the matter. When the Attorney General has completed this investigation, or 90 days has elapsed, he is required to report to a special court (the Special Division) created by the Act “for the purpose of appointing independent counsels.” If the Attorney General determines that “there are no reasonable grounds to believe that further investigation is warranted,” then he must notify the Special Division of this result. In such a case, “the division of the court shall have no power to appoint an independent counsel.” If, however, the Attorney General has determined that there are “reasonable grounds to believe that further investigation or prosecution is warranted,” then he “shall apply to the division of the court for the appointment of an independent counsel.” The Attorney General’s application to the court “shall contain sufficient information to assist the [court] in selecting an independent counsel and in defining that independent counsel’s prosecutorial jurisdiction.” Upon receiving this application, the Special Division “shall appoint an appropriate independent counsel and shall define that independent counsel’s prosecutorial jurisdiction.
    ….

    [T]he Act provides for congressional oversight of the activities of independent counsel. An independent counsel may from time to time send Congress statements or reports on his or her activities. The “appropriate committees of the Congress” are given oversight jurisdiction in regard to the official conduct of an independent counsel, and the counsel is required by the Act to cooperate with Congress in the exercise of this jurisdiction. The counsel is required to inform the House of Representatives of “substantial and credible information which [the counsel] receives . . . that may constitute grounds for an impeachment.” In addition, the Act gives certain congressional committee members the power to “request in writing that the Attorney General apply for the appointment of an independent counsel.” The Attorney General is required to respond to this request within a specified time, but is not required to accede to the request.

    The Chief Justice then “briefly” ran through the history of Olson’s particular appointment, including how it was effectively driven by a partisan fight among Congress-critters, if you’re really a glutton for detail.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  307. Summarizing it better

    https://www.steynonline.com/7897/comeytose-state

    The process is the punishment

    No need for curse words they are damning justbtbe same.

    narciso (d1f714)

  308. And then I go and make another editing error, a major one, that resulted in the opposite of what I meant to say! Ack.

    Errata: In #311, the introduction to the block quoted material should have said: “The reporting was to Congress and the special panel, which could, on its own, reverse an AG decision not to seek a special counsel. The actual quote makes that clear, and I apologize for omitting the crucial “not” as I was constructing that comment.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  309. And … sigh … it was Morrison’s appointment, not Olson’s. Mea culpa.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  310. Yes but there is no incentive to do that, except when it comes to dems.

    narciso (d1f714)

  311. This deep in the weeds we understand the error.

    narciso (d1f714)

  312. My claim to fame. I once kinda no kidding almost bought a 1980 Trans Am.

    But then I didn’t.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  313. here’s the transcendent warbling lesbian if you need a break from all this fake news comey drama

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  314. Off the showroom floor.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  315. Did it have a working hood scoop?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  316. i almost bought a big eyes print this one time and then i did buy it and it cost me more to fed ex then i paid for it but it was a present but apparently it’s too creepy to hang up so it lives in a closet

    in Los Angeles

    not unlike many numerous network tv stars

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  317. ok now it’s your turn Mr. Beldar

    share something with the group

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  318. On this and other threads, there are several commenters who are taking shots at Patterico for still being anti-Trump. My advise: Get over it folks. Number 1, it is his blog and he can assert any opinion he so chooses. Number 2, he has his reasons for not liking Trump which are well thought out, like them or not.

    For the record, I voted for Trump. I want Trump to succeed. I voted for him for 2 main reasons: 1) He is not Hillary, and 2) the possibility to change the orientation of the SC. (Here is hoping that RBG & Breyer cash out quickly!!!).

    I do not agree or disagree with anyone 100% of the time. Even when I disagree with him, Patterico usually has a well thought out and well reasoned counter argument. I value that. Just some random thoughts on an early morning Sunday from the City that produced Obama, Sid Blumenthal, Hillary Clinton, Saul Alinsky and nk & happyfeet.

    Ipso Fatso (7e1c8e)

  319. Also: John McCain is losing it

    I wouln’t go so far. This was only one day. McCain said his question appeared to have gone over people’s heads and he maybe stayed up too late watching Arizona Diamondbacks games.

    There probably was some kind of idea there with his question. I’d like to know what it was. I think this was more a failure of commmunication than a failure of thinking. I’m sure there was some kind of coherent idea there, although maybe it was completely wrong or based on a misunderstanding.

    Sammy Finkelman (a248bd)

  320. Donald Trump Jr. appears to corroborate Comey’s version of the Oval Office meeting with Trump

    http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-jr-james-comey-oval-office-meeting-trump-2017-6

    Memo to the Trumps: silence is golden; it ain’t just for name plates and bathroom fixtures.

    “Never mind what I told you. I’m telling you!” – Captain Morton [James Cagney] ‘Mister Roberts’ 1955

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  321. “You [Fox News’ Jeanine Pirro] and I both know my father a long time. When he tells you to do something, guess what? There’s no ambiguity in it. There’s no — ‘Hey, I’m hoping — You and I are friends. Hey I hope this happens, but you’ve got to do your job.’ That’s what he told Comey. And for this guy, as a politician, to then go back and write a memo: ‘Oh, I felt threatened.’ He felt so threatened — but he didn’t do anything.” – Donald J. Trump, Jr.

    See #38.

    No ambiguity. Thank you DJT, Jr.

    “And I kid you not!” – Captain Queeg [Humphrey Bogart] ‘The Caine Mutiny’ 1954

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  322. I thought about your comment this afternoon Mr. Fatso. It nagged at me in just the right way and helped me get at something I’d yet to articulate.

    On this and other threads, there are several commenters who are taking shots at Patterico for still being anti-Trump. My advise: Get over it folks. Number 1, it is his blog and he can assert any opinion he so chooses. Number 2, he has his reasons for not liking Trump which are well thought out, like them or not.

    It’s not the anti-Trump sentiment. Oh lordy! After Bush and Obama, and the obscenely ardent and covetous passion so grotesquely displayed by romney hillary and mccain – I think we’ve established that the oval office is something of a slut magnet.

    What I find more unpalatable is what I’m afraid what I perceive in the stances of those like Mr. P and DRJ and Mr. Dustin is simply a rather pedestrian and pitiable lack of imagination.

    And this is because the stance with which they’ve greeted our new president is not appreciably different than the stance with which they endured the 8 dismal years of our last president.

    It’s just so unforgivably dreary if you ask me.

    I stuck to my dark happyfeet stance all through the interminable obama years.

    But when President Trump was chosen to lead America by my countrymen – that struck me as quite a surprising and substantive change – and one that called for a meaningful and thoughtful response from me – if only as an American yes yes yes, but also as someone who engages thoughtfully with our culture and our politics.

    Like many I was caught off guard by Trump’s election, and I’m feeling my way forward. But like Jesus I feel a great and heavy stone has been rolled away from my tomb, and my heart is lighter than it’s been in many a moon.

    This spring has been sublimely beautiful here in Chicago, and it’s goddamn metaphor I think.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  323. oopers – this sentence should read like this:

    What I find more unpalatable is *that* I’m afraid what I perceive in the stances of those like Mr. P and DRJ and Mr. Dustin is simply a rather pedestrian and pitiable lack of imagination.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  324. UGH

    and it’s *a* goddamn metaphor I think.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  325. Mr. Feet:

    I try to separate “President Trump” from the business man, family man, TV man, “Donald Trump”. So I guess you can say that I compartmentalize. What I concentrate on is how will President Trump help the US going forward especially after 8 years of the disastrous rule of a complete left wing cretin, Barack Obama? For instance, given that the left worships Teddy Kennedy and Bill Clinton, does it matter how Trump spoke about women in the past? I may not share his views but I try to look at the big picture. The SC, immigration reform, elimination or reduction of various federal agencies, elimination of federal regulations, etc. Trump has done some of that. In my view not a bad start. And, this is interesting, he shut up on Twitter when Comey was testifying. Is her learning a valuable lesson? Time will tell.

    Ipso Fatso (7e1c8e)

  326. #331: Correction: Is he learning a valuable lesson?

    Ipso Fatso (7e1c8e)

  327. we’re all learning valuable lessons about the depths to which his enemies are willing to sink

    sleazy torture victim John McCain desperately peddling a phony pee pee dossier?

    lordy who saw that coming?

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  328. This entire Comey affair is nothing more than the latest act in the ongoing Kabuki theater that is being staged by and for those who think it’s perfectly fine to overturn a legitimate election. That, of course, is not worrisome. No, Trump’s cretinism is the problem, by God!

    You see, it’s more vital to drum a lying, bumbling “buffoon” out of office than keep our Republic. Those who work in government cannot begin to understand what is really important to most other Americans – sixty percent of whom don’t have enough savings to cover an unplanned $500 expense. Believe me – a liar and cretin in the White House is not dominating their thoughts. Being fleeced by their own “representative” government is beyond evil, and if a liar and cretin could stop it, I’d vote to make him president for life.

    Arguing over the finer points of constitutional law is laughable when it isn’t driving normal people insane. Patterico’s hatred for Trump is as palpable as Trump’s buffoonery and blinds him to what has to be done – if he could even fathom it. Sad!

    Lenny (5ea732)

  329. Yes, Colonel. Remember his prosecutions of Quattrone and Stewart? I guess that’s just what the big swinging di…..er, prosecutors do, eh? Take a scalp at the expense of innocents.

    Comey’s always been at the center of the Clinton’s corruption. Whitewater, the email server, Sandy Berger, Marc Rich…..calling him a tool is offensive to tools everywhere — and some will have us believe he’s fundamentally honest?

    Lenny (5ea732)

  330. Blah (44eaa0) — 6/10/2017 @ 4:05 pm

    And what was the big leak from the May 10 meeting? The IC which the NY Times already had about Israel as a source of IC data shared with Russians about lap tops which I had read in the Newspaper weeks back?

    Now they are saying that Israel had broken into ISIS computers ???

    And that while Turmp never mentioned Israel, or probably computers for that matter, the Russians could figure it out ??

    And how would that get known to ISIS?

    If this does make sense, we don’t have enough facts to make it make sense.

    Sammy Finkelman (1df645)

  331. I figure if they manage to drum Trump out of office they have managed a coup. They have managed to overturn an election.

    The New York Daily News is even publishing some fiction about it this week: (which they call political satire.

    It’s not so much satire, as just regular fiction, or maybe it will turn out to be satire. It incorporates a number of false or misleading accusations aaginst Trump as background.)

    http://interactive.nydailynews.com/fiction/coup/

    The following email was received at tips@nydailynews.com on June 22, 2042:

    I was a career Central Intelligence Agency covert operative for more than 30 years. For most of that time, I worked overseas. For all that time, I hid in plain sight. I had planned to take my secrets to the grave but, with my life slipping away, I changed my mind.

    Thanks to inoperable rectal cancer, I won’t last until the 25th anniversary of the overthrow of President Donald Trump by Vice President Mike Pence under the 25th Amendment. With so much interest in the coup, and so many misconceptions about it, I am going to set the historical record straight…

    Sammy Finkelman (1df645)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2650 secs.