A very open and candid discussion
I missed the first hour, and turned it off while Cornyn was questioning because I was getting restless. The hour+ I did see was interesting.
Comey sat grim-faced at a witness table before the Senate Intelligence Committee shortly after 10 a.m. as the committee chairman, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), began the hearing by calling for a “very open and candid discussion’’ about the “strained relationship’’ between the president and Comey. Comey’s written account of those discussions, made public on Wednesday, have fueled the debate over whether the president may have attempted to obstruct justice by pressuring the FBI director about a sensitive investigation.
…
Comey began his testimony by saying he became “confused and increasingly concerned’’ about the public explanations by White House officials for his firing on May 9, particularly after the president said he was thinking about the Russia investigation when he decided to fire him.
He wasted little time repudiating White House statements that he was fired in part because of low morale among FBI employees, and those employees’ supposedly soured attitude toward his leadership.
“The administration then chose to defame me and more importantly the FBI by saying that the organization was in disarray, that it was poorly led,’’ Comey said. “Those were lies, plain and simple. And I’m so sorry that the FBI workforce had to hear them, and I’m so sorry the American people were told them.’’
It’s interesting that Trump and his people feel justified in doing that. Usually Republicans are pretty loyal to the FBI.
In connection with that, it’s interesting how Comey explained his thinking when he briefed Trump about the “salacious” dossier: he was thinking of the Hoover FBI and he wanted to assure Trump that he wasn’t doing a Hoover: telling him about this scuzzy material as a not very subtle kind of blackmail. He wanted to make it very clear that he wasn’t doing that, hence volunteering the information that they weren’t investigating him personally.
After his January dinner when the two discussed loyalty, Comey and the president had another discussion in February at the White House. A number of senior officials met in the Oval Office on Feb. 14 to discuss terrorism. At the end of the meeting, according to Comey, the president asked everyone to leave but Comey.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions lingered behind until the president told him, too, to leave, Comey said.
“My sense was the attorney general knew he shouldn’t be leaving which is why he was lingering,’’ said Comey. “I knew something was about to happen which I should pay very close attention to.’’
Later someone asked him – I think it was Kamala Harris, another former prosecutor and AG – a question I’d wanted to ask: what happened when he implored Sessions not to leave him alone with Trump ever again and Sessions didn’t reply. Comey said he wasn’t sure he remembered accurately but he thought there was some kind of body language or expression conveying “what can I do?” Harris said “A shrug?” and Comey acted out a little eyeroll head twitch version of a shrug, while still underlining how uncertain he was about the memory. He mentioned that uncertainty repeatedly throughout the questioning. It’s reassuring when people are aware of the fallibility of their own memories, especially people in law enforcement.
Unfortunately, for many Americans, that is considered as a sure sign that they are making it up. If they aren’t confident, they are lying. So few Americans realize that the report to distrust is the one stated with total confidence, in great detail, and without any change at all.
I found it interesting that Comey’s instinct, after their first meeting at Trump Tower, before the inauguration, was to write everything down because of the personality of the individual he was dealing with. After that meeting, he felt that Trump could not be relied on to tell the truth about it.
“I was honestly concerned he might lie about the nature of our meeting so I thought it important to document.”
Pretty damning for a first meeting. And that instinct was correct.
Well it was the first in person meeting, but I daresay Comey had had some exposure to Trump before that day, that could have contributed to his gut feeling that TRUMP WOULD LIE LIKE A FUCKING RUG.
Well, Sarah Huckabee Sanders sees it differently:
‘After Comey’s public testimony before Congress, spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders rebuked Comey on that charge.
“No, I can definitely say the president is not a liar,” Sanders said. “I think it’s frankly insulting that that question would be asked.” ‘
(from here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2017/live-updates/trump-white-house/james-comey-testimony-what-we-learn/?utm_term=.17f95dec52e7)
That’s just too hilarious for words. Yes, you shouldn’t have to ask if Trump is a liar, everybody KNOWS he’s a liar. It’s common knowledge. Sheesh. Get with the progamme. At this point, the people working for him are beyond shameless. How anyone the least bit familiar with Trump could say that with a straight face is beyond me. I feel the need for disinfectant and brain bleach just reading it. They must be True Believers. Speaking of True Believers, a comment on a Sadly, No! article linked to this piece:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/25/opinion/wrestling-explains-alex-jones-and-donald-trump.html?_r=3
It kinda makes sense for a certain percentage of Trump supporters, but it is frightening to think that such a large percentage of the American electorate is that delusional. I know, wishful thinking.
The kind of people who work for Trump are the kind of people who are willing to work for someone like Trump.
I caught some of the questioning too, and I was impressed at Comey’s sincerity, especially about how some events were subject to human memory (a comment that also bolstered his claim that he did the ‘instant memo’ thing to make certain later recollections were on the spot).
All of which continues to cry out for an explanation as to why, WHY, Comey did the nasty in the first place? Why would such an intelligent, cautious and competent individual throw in with such an unremitting monster, when it is clear from any examination of the man’s history that he’s utterly horrible, and that he will ultimately destroy anyone whom he feels betrayed by?
And I think I’ve finally gotten it. I think he overestimated the American public.
He didn’t want to put Trump in the White House. He was trying to preemptively nerf President Hillary Clinton, and bolster morale among the disaffected FBI troops, whom multiple reports have painted as believing (without the ability to prove) that Hillary got away with something that should’ve been actionable. So announce an investigation a week before the election, then ‘clarify’ that leak with a few days left to go. Hillary loses a few percentage points here and there, but still becomes President–but is now even more wounded than she’d been by the two decade smear campaign, and has to face a hostile Congress (in fact, bolstering the down-ticket was also a likely benefit in his eyes, since he’s a Republican and likes their lassez-faire approach to monitoring law enforcement agencies). But he overplayed the hand, and suppressed the turnout on Hillary’s side enough to tip a bunch of states.
It fits. Anyone can make a momentary lapse in judgement, and then he found himself in a situation that was untenable. This doesn’t raise my sympathy for him one whit, mind you–it was still dirty and reprehensible. But it at least would be dirty and reprehensible in a way I, a student of Illinois politics for four decades now, can at least comprehend.
From Politico’s transcript, here care some bits relevant to the Clinton end of things:
BURR: Let me go back if I can very briefly to the decision to publicly go out with your results on the email. Was your decision influenced by the attorney general’s tarmac meeting with the former president, Bill Clinton?
COMEY: Yes. In ultimately conclusive way that was the thing that capped it for me, that I had to do something separately to protect the credibility of the investigation, which meant both the FBI and the justice department.
BURR: Were there other things that contributed to that, that you can describe in an open session?
COMEY: There were other things that contributed to that. One significant item I can’t but know the committee’s been briefed on, there’s been some public accounts of it which are nonsense but I understand the committee has been briefed on the classified facts. Probably the only other consideration that I guess I can talk about in open setting is that at one point the attorney general had directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a matter, which confused me and concerned me, but that was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department if we’re to close this case credibly.
Oh, I believe what he’s said all along–he had told congress the investigation was closed, and he was afraid that if something turned up, so close to the election, and he hadn’t alerted them that they had something new to look at, he’d be accused of a cover-up in favor of Clinton.
It was a big mistake. I don’t believe it was made out of partisanship.