Thinking about Comey once again: on getting away with it
Reading this commentary by John Hinderaker on Comey’s most recent testimony reminds me what an arrogant guy Comey is, among his other flaws—not that we really needed reminding.
And Andrew C. McCarthy had this to say about the FBI’s questioning of Flynn and Comey’s commentary on it:
…[T]there are innumerable fact patterns in which law-enforcement agents acquire incriminating evidence through sharp tactics…But those tactics, even though lawful, are often overkill when police use them against people who are not dangerous, hardened criminals.
The Flynn interview is troubling. He should not have been under investigation. If the FBI wanted to interview him on January 24, 2017, a request should have been communicated to the White House counsel by the Justice Department. The FBI decided to bypass both DOJ and the White House. The Bureau exploited the chaos of the second full work day of a new administration, contacted Flynn directly, and actively discouraged him from notifying the White House counsel. They intentionally avoided going through proper channels.
If properly advised that the FBI wanted to interview Flynn, the White House counsel would have asked why…On what basis did the FBI seek to interview the national-security adviser about conversations he appropriately had with a foreign government while Flynn was a transition official designated to become the president’s top adviser on foreign threats to U.S. interests?…
The FBI did not treat Flynn fairly. It is breathtaking to hear former director Comey brag about how he “got away with” dodging protocol in order to interrogate him. Nevertheless, while the Bureau’s situational ethics leave much to be desired, their aggressive tactics did not violate the law.
Comey isn’t alone. He’s merely one in a long line of supposed public servants, originally highly-praised as smart and full of integrity, who have either been revealed as quite the opposite or who have turned into quite the opposite. Their motives include one or both of these reasons: (1) partisan politics (and for those who would argue that Comey was a Republican and therefore can’t have had a partisan political motive, please read this); and/or (2) becoming drunk with power as a result of being given more of it.
And when McCarthy writes, “It is breathtaking to hear former director Comey brag about how he ‘got away with’ dodging protocol in order to interrogate [Flynn].” I’m pretty sure McCarthy’s shock isn’t just because such a thing happened. It’s also because it was McCarthy’s old buddy Comey who did it. As McCarthy wrote back in April:
I am fond of Jim Comey and have been for 30 years. I vigorously disagree with both his handling of the Clinton emails investigation and the manner in which the FBI has conducted what is supposed to be a classified, counterintelligence probe of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election — not a public, government-orchestrated campaign of insinuation that Trump was complicit in Russian perfidy.
McCarthy also writes this in his more recent article, “The FBI did not play it straight with Flynn, and it worked.” And therein lies a clue as to the mechanism for this whole process: a person and/or an agency has power, and when the boundaries of that power are pushed and yield a payoff, then it is done again and again because it is found to have worked. If there is no punishment, and the goal is reached, nothing but some sense of fair play will hold people back, and apparently that is often a very weak type of restraint indeed.
As commenter “huxley” wrote:
I’ve been having a hard time understanding what the rule of law means in America since Obama was elected in 2008.
Victor Davis Hanson files everything away and can pull out a long catalog of pertinent examples at a moment’s notice. I’m too lazy to do that now, but most readers here are aware of all the wacky legal stuff which has gone down since 2008 — the soft Trump coup being the latest and greatest.
For ten years I’ve been wandering around in a fog, mumbling to myself, “Can they really do that?”
The answer appears so far to be “yes, they really can.”
And if they really can, they really will.
McCarthy’s “chaos of the second work day” comment is something I have wondered about myself. If Trump were more experienced in electoral politics, and perhaps just a little more humble or willing to learn from others, he would have spent more time during the transition building his staff and cabinet. I was struck many times early in the administration that he complained about the Obama holdovers, but he didn’t clean them out or replace them. I think In part that was because he wasn’t a career politician. I remember watching previous administrations, both during their transition days and the early days of winter and spring after their inauguration, raiding Washington think tanks and universities for cabinet members, advisors, and White House staff. I didn’t see Trump doing that. Instead, he appeared to be content surrounding himself with his family and left low level staff in place for the rest of the White House.
If he had been close to previous White Houses he would had 50-100 people walking into the senior levels of the Executive Branch right after he was sworn in, even before the parade was finished. Then Comey’s tactic might not have succeeded.
The problem with “raiding Washington Think tanks” is that is where Deep State members roost between administrations that employ them. Trump has a real dilemma. I was pleased when he chose Tillerson from Exxon but, I think Tillerson was also a career bureaucrat of another brand; corporate.
The reason that he has his family around him is that he has few he can trust. Sessions was familiar and loyal but a typical Senator, all talk and no action. I don’t know why he could not make more use of Christy but there is probably a story there that we don’t know.
There are a few generals that are still not Obama butt boys and they have been good. Kelly is leaving but probably worn out by Trump’s energy. Mattis is hanging in there. Losing Flynn has hurt him badly but that is why they went after him so ferociously. I could see why many who might help recoil from the ongoing chaos, which is being done on purpose to cripple Trump.
This is war between the people and the elected leader they chose and the permanent bureaucracy and its allies in both parties. The bureaucracy is corrupt and has been since Lyndon Johnson.
The French Bureaucracy ran France, regardless of the chaotic governments since Napoleon. In recent years, perhaps since DeGaulle, they have also become corrupt and incompetent. The same was true of the British bureaucracy but Theodore Dalrymple warned about such competency when policy was turned on its head.
Admittedly, corruption is a strange kind of virtue: but so is honesty in pursuit of useless or harmful ends. Corruption is generally held to be a vice, and viewed in the abstract, it is. But bad behavior can sometimes have good effects, and good behavior bad effects.
Where administration is light and bureaucracy small, bureaucratic honesty is an incomparable virtue; but where these are heavy and large, as in all modern European states, Britain and Italy not least among them, they burden and obstruct the inventive and energetic. Where bureaucrats are honest, no one can cut through their Laocoönian coils: their procedures, no matter how onerous, antiquated, or bloody-minded, must be endured patiently. Such bureaucrats can
neither be hurried in their deliberations nor made to see common sense.
Britain now has such bureaucracy. Even the courts are now insane and acting so.
A man who attacked police with a sword outside Buckingham Palace while repeatedly screaming Allahu Akbar has been found not guilty of preparing acts of terrorism.
Mohiussunnath Chowdhury, 27, told jurors his claims to support ISIS were ‘in jest’ and his attack was because he was ‘depressed’ and ‘wanted police to kill him’.
They unanimously acquitted the Uber driver, who lashed out at three officers on August 25 last year.
The British who stood up to Hitler are all dead.
I’m afraid Trump may not win this war. Too few allies. I’m buying ammunition.
Related – Sharyl Attkisson has found the missing link and is waxing diabolical (H/T Instapundit):
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/421771-10-pieces-of-evidence-against-most-diabolical-russian-spy-ever
I agree with F and MikeK, and with MikeK where he disagrees with F.
Every clear headed person should realize that when you put a real outsider into the biggest of positions, there’s going to be a good deal of chaos for a time. Unfortunately, things don’t look too stable yet, and maybe never will in this admin.
G.W. Bush hit the ground running, if I remember correctly, but he did it with many G.H.W. Bush retreads. And lots of those people weren’t worth a damn. In my estimation 41’s presidency was a couple notches removed from atrocious.
Concerning Comey’s ill advised arrogance: Here’s a line from the film Double Indemnity played by Edward G. Robinson while addressing Fred MacMurray,
That screenplay was cowritten by Billy Wilder, one of the most brilliant men in old Hollywood, and one of the shortest.
One could argue that Comey is smart enough to commit major crimes and derelictions of duty and get away with it, but I’d counter that he shouldn’t brag about it.
F:
If Trump had been closer to previous White Houses, Hillary would be President.
G.W. Bush hit the ground running, if I remember correctly, but he did it with many G.H.W. Bush retreads.
Bush I had a staff all ready and they quickly evicted the Reagan people. Reagan was similar to Trump in many ways. He had staff from being Governor of California. The GOPe feared him as much as Trump. Bush I was Reagan’s peace offering to the GOPe.
It is hard to know whether to be more outraged or terrified. The overt politicization of justice is a textbook feature of tyranny. Even the appearance of it is a cause for deep alarm, as people have seemed to realize until fairly recently. Maybe 60 years of Legal Realism is enough to make people forget why guardrails were there in the first place.
That Comey lives with a wife and three daughters who are ardent Hillary fans should not be overlooked. Only a saint could remain bi-partisan in such an atmosphere.
His latest call for the voters to vote Trump out of office pretty much shows that he was never non-partisan in his views of Trump – as in:. “Mr. Comey’s description of the president as an unethical liar “morally unfit” for office; his call for voters to decide Mr. Trump’s fate at the ballot box in 2020; and even his observations about Mr. Trump’s appearance — his “orange” skin, his too-long ties, his hands — are stark departures from the law-enforcement mission of his old agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation.”
I see Comey as a person, like so many in the D.C.establishment, who detests Trump’s style. Finds it so repugnant as to overlook any redeeming qualities whatsoever. He wants to believe the Steele Dossier. To him it seems plausible that Russia might have compromising material on Trump. His defense of his actions will always be that he was doing his patriotic duty to uncover he truth about Trump, the immoral imposter. Not surprising that he should be like that. My guess is that 90% of the D.C. establishment shares that opinion.
Trump is camped in enemy territory. Like Custer at Little Big Horn, he is surrounded by hostiles. Comey is just one of the most visible. Trump’s main strength lies with his supporters. He needs them now more than ever.
That Comey lives with a wife and three daughters who are ardent Hillary fans should not be overlooked. Only a saint could remain bi-partisan in such an atmosphere.
You have to be a ‘saint’ to not allow your wife and daughters push you around in regard to your job and in regard to your views on public affairs? We live in an age where mothers commonly fancy they have all sorts of prerogatives and fancy your function in the house is akin to a mix of pet, ATM machine, and employee. Still, people usually get their politics and their religion from the father, not their mother.
The problem with “raiding Washington Think tanks” is that is where Deep State members roost between administrations that employ them.
The number of fellows at the dozen or so most richly funded starboard think tanks likely does not exceed 400 and most of them are academics or quondam academics. You do have some whose berth there is consequent to having held a government position, but they’re a minority and not necessarily agents of the permanent government either. People who serve in Republican administrations have commonly had lucrative careers in business or law. With a few exceptions, the think tanks will pay you a pharmacist’s salary if you’re deemed to be a f/t researcher. That’ll work for some people, but it’s a reasonable wager that most quondam Republican officials entertain better offers. (I think Richard Cheney had a stint at AEI ca. 1995; then he got a handsome corporate offer which made him a wealthy man after just four years work).
The depth and breadth of the disconnect between the permanent government class and the country outside of the bid Democratic cities (and the states those cities dominate) is staggering and does not bode well for the country’s future.
When (not if, I fear) the left and the permanent bureaucracy returns to complete power, I suspect it will end up with armed resistance as it goes after so many on the right. But, given that the military has been run by leftist generals for a decade or more, most of the upcoming senior colonels and young generals gained rank during the Obama administration, and the junior officers are products of the colleges dominated by the left and the debased federal service academies, I wouldn’t trust the current Army to resist orders to kill Americans. It might as well be the Vendée.
I don’t see much hope of the Trump administration surviving, much less taking down the deep state as I once thought possible. Without that, the country is through as a constitutional republic.
I’m old, and my not see the end of it, but our kids sure will. I’d be worried for them, but they both turned into bleeding heart leftists comfortably ensconced in the urban upper middle class after we sent them to expensive, supposedly good conservative, colleges. So, if it’s what they want, they can have it good and hard. Too bad there is no country to go to, or I would.
Link explaining why Comey is not a Republican is broken.
CatoRenasci,
There are far more sergeants, corporals and privates in the military than officers. During the Obama years, one poll revealed that among the enlisted, 85% disapproved of Obama’s job performance. And if memory serves, the majority of those enlisted come from southern and western states…
Plus, armed resistance on the right will consist of “fourth generation” warfare.
Oblio,
May I be permitted to suggest now is the time to be outraged and terrified? VDH calls what Trump faces a soft insurrection. In the sense that the deep state has yet to produce an armed force storming the White House it is ‘soft’. I disagree, the ‘resistance’ is playing hard ball. The fact that the attacks on Trump are conducted in broad daylight is indeed outrageous and terrifying.
You do have some whose berth there is consequent to having held a government position, but they’re a minority and not necessarily agents of the permanent government either.
The law firms are probably bigger sources of GOPe staffers. My point, is that there is a permanent shadow government, which unlike the British version, are often not in office but are in law firms and think tanks waiting for the call.
I am a fan of Cheney and have read a couple of his biographies. When Ford lost the 1976 election to Carter, Cheney did NOT look for a think tank to hide out. He packed up his car and drove to Wyoming where he ran for Congress. It was during that run that he had his first heart attack.
By the way, I am reading Mental State and after a slow start it is getting pretty interesting.
It has an interesting history. It was written, like Kurt Schlicter’s first novel, assuming Hillary would be president. The author, Todd Henderson, is a law professor at U of Chicago law school. His book was suppressed for several years and only appeared this year. The publisher and Amazon both cancelled planned publication. The fact that the presidential character resembles Hillary is no doubt a coincidence.
Schlicter’s novel, “People’s Republic,”also does not come up on a title search even though it is popular. More Amazon manipulation.
Mike, I found it on Amazon at once. (Just now.)
https://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=sr_adv_b/?search-alias=stripbooks&unfiltered=1&field-keywords=&field-author=Schlichter&field-title=People%27s+Republic&field-isbn=&field-publisher=&node=&field-p_n_condition-type=&p_n_feature_browse-bin=&field-age_range=&field-language=&field-dateop=During&field-datemod=&field-dateyear=&sort=relevanceexprank&Adv-Srch-Books-Submit.x=34&Adv-Srch-Books-Submit.y=10
“therefore can’t have had a partisan political motive, please read this); ”
link is still broken.
But we know that ostensible Republicans can be either stealth-Democrats or at least #NeverTrumpers who would have voted for Hillary.
“therefore can’t have had a partisan political motive, please read this); ”
link is still broken.
neo, AesopFan: I checked that error earlier. There was a missing space in the link html.
The intended link is:
https://www.thenewneo.com/2018/07/19/those-republicans-comey-and-mueller/
It is hard to know whether to be more outraged or terrified. The overt politicization of justice is a textbook feature of tyranny. Even the appearance of it is a cause for deep alarm, as people have seemed to realize until fairly recently. Maybe 60 years of Legal Realism is enough to make people forget why guardrails were there in the first place.
Oblio: Good to see you back!
I guess you’re referring to the Critical Legal Studies school. Or “Crit” as my lawyer friend calls it, which claims that law is nothing more than a game so those in power remain in power.
I don’t believe that’s what our Founders intended, but if people have say that long enough and hard enough and act upon that belief, the law does devolve into nothing more than an ugly power game.
Or, as Dr. Horrible once said, “Destroying the status quo, because the status is not quo.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePiKE83sAIg
huxley – thanks for the repaired link.
That’s one reason I always put mine in “clear” instead of embedded format.
That’s one reason I always put mine in “clear” instead of embedded format.
AesopFan: Me too.
I used to like the emphasized text to indicate a link. But after some experience I prefer to have some idea of where I am jumping off to.
These days I won’t click a blind link unless the linker is a brand name I trust or describes it with some thoroughness.
Otherwise you get rickrolled or worse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
It’s your own fault if you clicked the above link!
Though it is harmless, albeit annoying.
Still a half-billion clickers can’t be wrong, can they?
huxley:
If you hover your mouse over a link it will always show the source before you click on it, which can help you decide what to do. If the source is unfamiliar or suspect, beware.