Pages

Wednesday, September 30, 2020

UPDATED: The Comey Senate Testimony

I've always disagreed with the idea that Senate hearings are the way forward with regard to the Russia Hoax. The only way is giving Barr and his prosecutors and investigators the time to do the job right. Coupled with public declassifications--which have been coming at an increasing rate as the investigations make headway.

Paul Sperry, in a brief series of tweets, illustrates what would foreseeable go wrong with having disgraced former FBI Director Jim Comey testify--it's a waste of time. He's too slippery to provide the soundbites that would light up the news--if the MSM even reported it:


Paul Sperry

@paulsperry_

Comey keeps referring to the Horowitz report -- "I only know what I've read in the Horowitz report" -- even though he ran the investigation the report details. When he's not limiting his testimony to the Horowitz report, he's suffering suspicious bouts of amnesia.

There is corrupt, and then there is pompously corrupt, and Comey is pompously corrupt.

This scandal is too serious to have politicians questioning such a key witness as Comey under oath. He's too slippery. A staff attorney with prosecutorial experience ought to be questioning Comey, pinning him down with documents, following up on his obfuscations and evasions.

BREAKING: Comey swears he doesn't remember hearing anything about Steele's primary subsource, Igor Danchenko, being the subject of an FBI C.I. investigation, as a suspected Russian agent, and doesn't recall his own CrossFire Hurricane team interviewing Danchenko in Jan 2017.

SENATE: When did you learn Steele dossier's primary subsource was a suspected Russian agent?

COMEY: I don't remember ever being informed.

BREAKING: Comey swears he does not remember, despite documentation, receiving intelligence in 2016 that Hillary Clinton was trying to tie Trump to Russia as part of a political strategy: "doesn't ring any bells".

Why do Senate Judiciary Republicans keep referring only to the Horowitz report when they have a guilty plea from FBI lawyer Clinesmith to now refer to?

Republicans are incapable of asking the pointed questions and follow-ups of Comey to draw any blood, to elicit new admissions and details to advance the investigation. They need a hard-nosed staff attorney to take Comey as a hostile witness.


The real answer isn't to have a Senate staff attorney do the questioning. The real answer is to finish the investigation, indict this deeply creepy guy, and see whether he's willing to be cross-examined in front of a jury by experienced prosecutors--and subject to impeachment by other witnesses.

UPDATE: More illustration of the relatively pointless exercise this testimony is--unless you're only just now learning what a snake Comey has always been. Jonathan Turley:


James Comey seems to be offering the Senate today a series of shrugs over troubling evidence of false evidence and possible Russian disinformation in the Russian investigation. Despite his signing off on secret surveillance, Comey is dismissing questions on the basis that he never knew of any of the memos indicating that the information in the investigation was false or even Russian misinformation. He was under a duty to confirm such facts. As someone who has billed himself as a strong leader, he is now portraying himself as a passive player in these decisions. However, while he would not answer questions on the new evidence of possible Russian misinformation used by the FBI, he had no problem discussing new evidence on Trump's debt that might suggest Russian control over him.

After saying that he could not comment on the new evidence on possible Russian misinformation used by the FBI, Comey just had no problem is saying that he has read material on the Flynn case and give his conclusions on their meaning.

Comey did say that, knowing what he knows today, that he would not have signed off on the Page surveillance. That makes it unanimous with Yates and Rosenstein. Nobody now supports the surveillance request but no one takes real responsibility. 

 

All this was entirely predictable. No surprises at all.


33 comments:

  1. I think if Graham has done as you say and has coordinated these hearings with the DOJ to ensure he does not step on ongoing investigations, then they do serve a limited purpose. That limited purpose is that it shows Comey to not be particularly trustworthy. Either Comey was grotesquely incompetent, he was complicit in improper/illegal conduct, or some combination of the two. Comey may avoid perjury with his dissembling, but he does even more damage to his reputation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree these hearings do serve a purpose--for senators, like Graham, who are facing an election. That's legit. It may give voters some idea of where he would stand if related issues came up for a vote--IC reform, etc.

      My point, however, is not to expect real world results from such testimony. Real world results come from the witness facing real legal jeopardy in the form of a possible guilty verdict and jail time. That comes from a trial in front of a jury.

      Delete
    2. Mark, Ted Cruz voiced the same opinion on Maria Bartiromo this morning. Comey needs to be indicted, prosecuted under oath before a jury.

      Delete
  2. Agree 100%… Comey is far too important and far too wily. Hearings like this are exercises for him. Games. He needs a courtroom and the oath and a real pro criminal prosecutor going after him. Let’s see how arrogant, how pompous he is then...

    ReplyDelete
  3. A double here, here, or “this” in today’s parlance.

    Comey knew for a fact they can’t pin him.

    He does not know for a fact if Barr can,

    Lying to the Senate/Congress is a crime, a crime he already committed.

    But, this allows the powers to be to say we did all we can even though the powers to be did not.

    - TexasDude

    ReplyDelete
  4. Why not just do it away from the camera? That way no grandstanding.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why not just do it away from the camera?
      To enhance public awareness that Comey dares to try to play Sgt. Schultz.
      Let senators grandstand, if it helps public awareness.

      Delete
  5. "I sent them. Something we, I probably wouldn't have done or gotten away with in a more organized investigation — a more organized administration."

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Knowing what they know now" is precisely the standard for signing off on warrant applications--those signing off were affirming their knowledge of the truth and accuracy of the statements made in the application. To now allege an "unknowing" means, at least, a dereliction of duty.

    An absence of care, given the responsibilities and authority of office, looks purposeful--and I presume, a criminal offense.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Comey is kicking the ball down the road and praying Trump loses.

    The Senate had a lot of involvement in the Trump coup attempt in both parties. Members involved want to memory hole their involvement.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Unbelievable how people like Feinstein keep pretending the CH investigation was all above board, in light of yesterday's declass.

    And they must know that there's more to come.

    Is their game plan to keep lying that the declass is a lie?

    Frank

    ReplyDelete
  9. Q. Mr. Comey, who was the FBI director in 2016-early 2017?

    A. I don't recall.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He knows nothing—NUH-THING! But he knows that the investigation was "by the book".

      How does that work, exactly? Wait..."by the book"...Where have we heard that expression in connection to Crossedfingers Hurricane?

      Or was he saying "buy the book" so he can move somewhere with no extradition?

      Delete
  10. I read a couple summaries of Comey's day in the Sanate, and the big takeaway I got is he's willing to throw anyone and everyone under the bus! This should be a message all his former minions and fellow conspirators everywhere should have received loud and clear- it's everyone for themselves, and, according to Comey, everything that went wrong is all your faults! Of course, the converse of this message is that it's now fair game to turn on Comey, and do it quickly before he gets you first...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And no doubt Barr is very pleased to have that message getting out.

      Delete
  11. Mark, have you addressed the issue of whether all FISA signers have the same level of criminal liability even if they chose to rely on their underlings as to the “facts” set forth to support the request to the court. Seems too easy to get off
    with that position, but does it work legally for the higher-ups? Thx.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have. I believe it would work. After all, Comey has to rely on the work of his subordinates. He can be briefed on the results, but ultimately he can't conduct his own investigation of the investigation. There are many, many cases that an FBI director would be briefed on. That's what Durham is up against--tracking down everyone with knowledge to determine who knew what. I argued not too long ago that Carter Page was far better known at FBIHQ than many people would suppose--because of the Russian case he was involved in in NYC. It's complicated, but I believe Durham has a shot at this. In addition, I believe Comey was briefed re Danchenko, so that changes things midstream, so to speak. This isn't necessarily a simple case.

      Delete
    2. Thx. Would a prosecution here be a case of “first impression” or have any cases been litigated previously? I obviously am hoping Comey and others cannot slither away, but the guy is a world class CYA player.

      Delete
    3. It depends on what you mean by a case of first impression. I'm pretty sure there's never been a case like this re FISA applications. However, while I can't point you to a specific case, I believe it's well established that a superior generally can't be held accountable for the deceptions of his subordinate. But the facts of this case are different. We know that Comey and McCabe were very hands on with this. Strzok wasn't just a loose cannon.

      Delete


  12. Here are my notes regarding Jim Comey's acceptance of responsibility for (and truthfulness relating to) the investigation of Donald Trump's campaign and his associates.

    Comey asserts that

    a) the FBI CH investigations were not politically motivated
    b) the FBI investigations were not an investigation of Trump -- there was 'no spying on the President'
    c) while he acknowledges that the Page FISA warrants contained numerous errors, Comey was not aware of any error or omission when he signed the warrants - three times.
    d) Comey did not know that the Steele Dossier Primary Subsource, Danchenko, had associations with Russian Intelligence when he signed the FISA warrant applications.
    e) he has no recollection of directly receiving a warning from the IC in August 2016 about Clinton's strategy to 'stir up a scandal' against Donald Trump and he did not order any investigation.
    f) he believes Joseph Mifsud was "a Russian agent".
    g) he denies that there was an organized 'plot' by Trump's enemies to destroy Trump.
    h) he has no recollection of discussing using the Logan Act against Flynn at the WH meeting on January 5, 2017.
    i) he believes Crossfire Hurricane was 'done by the book'.
    j) he was not aware when he signed the FISA applications that the CIA characterized the Dossier as 'internet rumor'.

    Now consider, based on what you know of the plot against Trump, whether you believe what Jim Comey is saying. And if you don't, ask yourself whether you can believe anything Comey says.

    PS In concluding Comey was lying, I join Mark, and Sperry and Turley, quoted above, as well as shipwreckedcrew who posted his thoughts on redstate.com this afternoon:

    https://www.redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/09/30/comey-denials-of-key-facts-in-fbi-investigation-of-crossfire-hurricane-are-not-worthy-of-belief/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "he believes Joseph Mifsud was 'a Russian agent'"

      LOL. Do Russian agents normally hand their phones over to the Attorney General?

      Delete
    2. The Mifsud one was a particularly egregious lie. BTW, where is Mifsud?

      Delete
  13. Thank you for your comprehensive summary of Mr. Comey’s assertions. I was
    thinking that if you choose to run the investigation out of HQ and advise Congress that the case was “too sensitive” to keep them informed, then you assume a much higher level of responsibility and liability to get it right. I do not think Mr. Comey would enjoy reading your summary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you're right on that. Comey's trying to have it both ways. On the one hand, as you say, he was very hands on, but now he's trying to claim lack of knowledge and/or lack of memory. It's one thing to do that in a setting like today, but another thing to pull that off at a trial.

      Delete
  14. Thank you for your comprehensive summary of Mr. Comey’s assertions. I was
    thinking that if you choose to run the investigation out of HQ and advise Congress that the case was “too sensitive” to keep them informed, then you assume a much higher level of responsibility and liability to get it right. I do not think Mr. Comey would enjoy reading your summary.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Interesting tidbit teased by Sen. Graham on Hannity tonight:

    Graham was describing Comey's not terribly believable claim he has no recall of being briefed that Steele PSS Danchencko was a suspected Russian agent. He added a very intriguing editorial comment, to the effect that if there were someone who briefed Comey on this and testified to it/and documents supported it, "Comey would be in deep trouble."

    No why would Graham bring that up?

    Perhaps it is because Dan Bongino has reportedly claimed to know who the woman was who wrote the report and personally briefed Comey after the Danchencko interview, telling him "the source [PSS] is garbage."

    Ergo, Comey is in deep trouble.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I heard that Comey and McCabe were briefed on the interview, heard that early on, but can't remember where.

      Delete
  16. Comey is a master criminal, and not a bumbling Keystone Cop that may be absolved from future criminal liability by qualified immunity. His "I'm just a stupid idiot" routine is an insult to the institution of the FBI, and in a sane world, it would be the FBI itself that takes him down for his reign of corruption. And just because Wray is Deep State is not an excuse to bend over. The agents that still have their balls in the WFO should go around Wray to Barr, and nail both of their asses to the wall. That is how you repair your reputation and regain your dignity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "The agents that still have their balls in the WFO"

      There must be one or two who aren't kneeling to terrorists.

      Delete
  17. Another one of Comey's memory lapses is called into question, by Grinnell:

    >> Richard Grenell
    @RichardGrenell

    There are people who were around Comey who know he was briefed. And then directed action. <<

    >> https://twitter.com/RichardGrenell/status/1311658264065523714 <<

    It's in reference to the IC referral to FBI about the Russian intel that Hillary approved a plan to frame Trump for colluding with Putin to hack the DNC.

    If Grinnell knows this, Durham/Barr know it as well.

    ReplyDelete
  18. AN extremely interesting comment by Adam housley about Comey:

    >> Adam Housley
    @adamhousley
    As I reported...behind the scenes McCabe and company considered Comey a “useful idiot” who “carried the bags for other directors and wanted just to be the face of the FBI” so it may not be a surprise that he’s playing the clueless/no big deal card. <<

    >> https://twitter.com/adamhousley/status/1311343253854142475 <<

    If accurate, this essentially puts Comey in the same league as "Percy Alleline," the preening egotistical dimwit who aspired to become head of MI-6, while Russian mole "Bill Haydon" quietly slipstreamed behind him, destroying the Circus bit by bit as he betrayed MI-6 to his masters in Moscow.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course, the whole thing is preposterous. McCabe...McCabe...thought Comey...Comey...was an idiot?

      If there is any justice all of these idiots will turn on each other.

      Delete
    2. Heh. With McCabe the brains behind the coup, what could possibly go wrong?

      Delete