“Today’s Senate hearings proved Comey is a leaker, that he had gut feelings (a human trait inadmissible in court), unveiled former AG Lynch’s obstruction of justice and impeachable offense, and that no link verifying Russia/Trump collusion exists.”
I’m left scratching my noggin over former FBI director James Comey’s admissions before the US Senate Intelligence Committee that he is a leaker while also condemning other leakers. He claims that tons of fake news persists, that the media report it all wrong, and that his “gut feeling” compelled him to document conversations involving President Donald Trump, adding, “I was alone” and thought “he might lie.” Wow, that is a bowl full of shaky Jell-O if ever I saw one. The entire Senate hearing was intriguing.
When I heard him utter that last part, my thought was Gee, that sounds very J. Edgar Hoover-ish.
While he promptly entered the Senate hearing chambers, the phalanx of photogs’ shutters click-clicked as the tall man took the hot seat. With evident bags under his eyes and a seemingly aloof demeanor, Mr. Comey sat and, after Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Sen. Richard Burr (R—NC) and Vice-Chair Sen. Mark Warner (D—VA) offered their opening statements, quickly deferred to a brief introduction while referring to his statement submitted the previous day. He got right to the meat and potatoes: “I understood I served at the pleasure of the president” followed by “the FBI will be fine without me.”
Down the road a little, Mr. Comey didn’t quite say he thought obstruction of justice is applicable but did say he found Pres. Trump’s Flynn query “disturbing” and “very concerning,” highlighting that the investigation is now in the capable hands of former colleague and current special counsel Bob Mueller.
When asked about the interrelations between ours and foreign governments, Mr. Comey clarified, “It is normal for foreign governments to reach out to an incoming administration.”
Regarding the now-infamous tarmac meeting between former AG Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, Comey said he felt he had to do something different pertaining to the Hillary Clinton email scandal, adding a pop-goes-the-weasel moment. Comey said Lynch directed him to call the Clinton investigation “a matter” and not “an investigation.” Ka-boom! Now that is sufficient basis for obstruction of justice charges. Definitely grounds for impeachment, had she still been in office.
Mr. Comey definitively said that he was never asked to violate any laws, at least not by Pres. Trump. Former AG Lynch is a different story, however.
To his credit, Mr. Comey made clear that President Trump was never under investigation and that, after telling the president three times, he was compelled by Mr. Trump to publicize that fact so that all could “breath more oxygen” and get on with the task of nation-building. In the same breath, Comey criticized the NY Times for getting their stories twisted and for publishing wrong accounts.
A historical line was born from yesterday’s testimony when Comey said, “Reporters talking about classified information don’t know what is going on and talk about it…and we know what’s going on and do not talk about it.” That strongly implies media bias, errant journalism, reckless reporting, and the proclivity to reconstitute leaked information.
Sen. Jim Risch (R—Idaho) poked the hive and asked Comey about President Trump’s verbiage referring to the Flynn investigation: “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go. He’s a good guy.” Sen. Risch said to Comey, “You may have taken it as a direction but that is not what he said, correct?” Comey’s un-ambivalent reply was, “That’s correct.” And that successfully dispels the notion of obstruction allegations.
After Sen. Dianne Feinstein asked him why he didn’t take a more direct stance with President Trump, Comey stammered that his “We’ll see what we could do” response was “a slightly cowardly way of getting off the phone” with him. Nothing remotely close to a smoking-gun scenario, but definitely a feeling of unease.
Perhaps a crystalline piece of commentary stated by Sen. Marc Rubio (R—Florida) was like lobbing a grenade to clear out the jaded junk: “Leaks all along, yet that the president was never under investigation was never leaked at all.” That seemed an articulation that underlined the chronic witch-hunt since before November 2016 that still pervades.
Next at-bat was Sen. Ron Wyden (D—Oregon), whose seeming snarl uttered that the “odor of presidential abuse of power is so strong!” His firecracker had no boom because it was powder less. Ultimately, Comey made reference to special counsel proceedings: “You’ve got the right person in Bob Mueller to lead the special counsel and the Russia investigation.”
A telling portion of Comey’s testimony belied perceptions. Sen. Susan Collins (R—Maine) asked him, “Was the president under investigation during your dismissal on May 9?” Comey replied, “No.” He added that he told him three times that he was not the subject of an investigation because “I didn’t want him to feel I was hanging something over his head.” Comey called it a “J. Edgar Hoover-type situation.”
The most jarring moment was when Mr. Comey admitted that his memos documented after each visit with Mr. Trump were subsequently turned over to “a friend” who is “a professor at Columbia Law School” with directions to “share them with a reporter” in response to Pres. Trump’s tweets that “there better be no tapes.” At that moment Mr. Comey declared himself a “private citizen” with the right to share his notes. But he also confessed to being a leaker as well.
As Jay Sekulow from the American Center of Law and Justice (ACLJ) stipulated, “It’s a bombshell leak of privileged information,” adding that Comey “did so to manipulate the situation and force the appointment of a Special Counsel.” I think Mr. Sekulow’s calculus is precise.
The I’m a leaker too moment struck me as hugely ironic, given the context of the entire hearing’s subject matter: collusion, leaking, and obstruction stemming from purported meddling with/from Russia. Perhaps to soften the approach he ultimately took (leaker), Mr. Comey tells Sen. Martin Heinrich (D—N. Mexico), “People should look at the whole body of my story. Why would the president kick everybody out of the Oval Office just to talk to me?” The whole body of his story goes well before any elbowing with President Trump, dating back to the Obama era.
Sen. Roy Blunt (R—Missouri) poked Comey when he emphasized how he claimed to have been discomfited by being in the room with President Trump, yet continued talking to him on the phone—three physical meetings and nine phone conversations. I slice the pie on that one; by way of having to conduct communications regarding the nation’s business and yet not feeling awkward in the physical capacity, the phone is the next thing to being there, albeit meant in an iffy way.
In a seeming moment of telepathy, both Sen. Angus King (I—Maine) and Mr. Comey got a chuckle from like-mindedness: “Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?” The jest was intended to colorize how Mr. Trump seemed to imply “loyalty” and “letting this go.” Comey implied a haunting of sorts.
Sen. James Lankford (R-Oklahoma), with daggers from his eyes, directed at Comey that actual memo notes are exceptionally important and that the US Senate would love to have that for examination. I suppose that is government-speak for You gave notes to a friend but never considered sharing them with the Senate? Daggers aside, that’s a valid point. Notably, Sen. Lankford also noted that Pres. Trump never brought up Flynn again after the initial suggestion to let it go.
Mr. Comey also imparted that President Trump said, “If there are people in my circle under investigation, let’s get that out.” Comey confirmed that to be a true statement, and such an assertion does not reflect a man who has something to conceal, either directly or indirectly.
Based on “gut feelings,” Mr. Comey said he felt compelled to document all his conversations with Mr. Trump and, when pressed several times from varying senators, did not claim any of President Trump’s dialogue rose to the level of obstruction of justice, repeatedly referring to Special Counsel Bob Mueller. Under the same obstruction-of-justice lens, however, Comey’s testimony directly jabbed at facts surrounding former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who he claimed admonished him to use the words “a matter” and not “an investigation” regarding the Clinton email investigation. So an Obama appointee voluntarily sticks her hands in the flames of obstruction and, well, here we are. That fact is certainly not a nothing-burger!
Sending one across the bow of the media, Mr. Comey harped on the fact that “when I reported ‘a matter’ the media said ‘an investigation’ and that is how it went. It was inaccurate because we had an open investigation at the time.” A paper cut is a matter. A far-reaching email scandal allegedly perpetuated by a sitting US secretary of state is an investigation, hands down.
Even after the NY Times is mentioned in Senate hearings, the media entity still gets it twisted. In its post-Comey testimony, the Times published an article with the title “James Comey said he indirectly leaked a memo on a meeting with President Trump in order to trigger the naming of a special counsel.” Actually, he directly leaked a privileged memo to “a friend.”
To Sen. Joe Manchin (D—W. Virginia), Comey seemed amused and comforted by the notion that President Trump suggested tape recordings may exist, saying, “It never occurred to me that there may be tapes and recordings. I hope there are. I’d consent. Release the entire tapes. I’m good with it.” He seemed totally candid with his words, as if that would help cleanse his soul…or at least sterilize his entire role.
Sen. Tom Cotton (R—Arkansas) addressed Comey by asking if he would consent to having all his “private citizen” memos made public, to which he replied, “Yes.” Sen. Cotton asked Comey about any evidence of collusion, and Comey’s reply went in the way of “I’m not trying to suggest something nefarious.” That counters obstruction of justice and implications regarding Pres. Trump’s communications with him.
With Sen. Kamala Harris (D—California), Comey said he recognized the “danger of projecting onto [Trump] but I believe his expression” indicated a look of “What am I gonna do?” Sen. Kamala was less fiery today than she was in the prior day’s hearings with the nation’s top intelligence officials. Wonder why.
What absolutely floored me was when Sen. John Cornyn (R—Texas) asked Comey, “Does an FBI agent have a legal duty to report a crime being committed?” The question is wholly valid, but Comey’s answer was strikingly odd. He replied, “I don’t know, good question.” The buzz in the room sizzled out for a moment. Everyone has a duty to report a crime, whether law enforcer or civilian. Sen. Cornyn’s follow-up question was rather conclusive: “If you’re trying to make an investigation go away, does it make sense to fire the FBI director?” Comey’s answer was conclusively “No.”
Sen. Marc Rubio offered a post-hearing summation, as follows: “Today’s testimony is part of a broader piece of the Russia investigation.” Rubio also interpreted that Comey initiated the leaks and admitted leaking something through an intermediary to get it to the press, presumably because he was fired.
Within a few hours after the hearing concluded, I received an email from MoveOn.org asking for my endorsement regarding their “Civic Action”:
“Today, we’re doing something we’ve never done before in the history of MoveOn: We’re calling for the impeachment of the president of the United States.
“We’ve held off on taking this step even as Donald Trump’s scandals have continued to unfold. We didn’t want to jump to conclusions. But former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony today confirmed that Trump used his power as president to pressure the FBI to drop the investigation into his team’s ties to Russia—and that’s exactly the kind of abuse that our nation’s founders meant by ‘high crimes and misdemeanors.’” To paraphrase their own words, it sounds as if they’ve already jumped to conclusions.
Somehow, the details that should have been gleaned from Comey’s testimony fell upon deaf ears…or ears that deny anything other than preconceived notions that remain, perhaps stemming from a political loss in November 2016. It’s a guess.
What would make a President Trump impeachment possible? Today’s Senate hearings proved Comey is a leaker, that he had gut feelings (a human trait inadmissible in court), unveiled former AG Lynch’s obstruction of justice and impeachable offense, and that no link verifying Russia/Trump collusion exists. Is this a sign of the undertow until 2020? If so, President Trump has already exhibited his ability to tow the line, all while making America great again.
Obstruction of Justice as defined by 18 U.S. Code § 1510: (a) Whoever willfully endeavors by means of bribery to obstruct, delay, or prevent the communication of information relating to a violation of any criminal statute of the United States by any person to a criminal investigator shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
What do you think?
