Comey channels Alfred E. Neuman
James Comey seems to be in “what, me worry?” mode.
Lat Monday’s statement of note from this wise public servant was as follows:
Mr. Meadows: All right. So, when you saw [that the Steele dossier was funded by a private client], who did you think the private client was?Mr. Comey: I don’t know that I knew. [see NOTE below]Mr. Meadows: I didn’t say you knew. Who did you think it was? Obviously — are you saying you’re so intellectually not curious that you would not say, “Who’s the private client?”Mr. Comey: Show me where the word “client” is. I’m struggling a little. I see. So the sentence reads, “The source collected this information on behalf of private clients and was not compensated for it by the FBI.”I don’t remember asking — other than knowing it was political people opposed to Trump, I don’t remember asking which firm, which law firm, those kinds of things. And I don’t remember being told.Mr. Meadows: So you’re trying to share with this committee –and I want to take you — and that’s why I was asking you to verify this. You expect us to believe that you got notation that a private client is there and that you didn’t — you weren’t inquisitive enough to figure out who the private client was?Mr. Comey: Who cares? It was Republicans —Mr. Meadows: Well —Mr. Comey: — opposed to Trump —Mr. Meadows: — it makes a big difference. I mean, if you —Mr. Comey: Let me finish my answer. It was Republicans opposed to Trump, and then it was Democrats opposed to Trump. There was potential bias in this information. That’s really important. Whether it was Sally Smith or Joe Jones, Republican, or Sally Smith, Democrat –Mr. Meadows: Director Comey —Mr. Comey: — to me, it didn’t matter.Rep. Meadows objected, saying it is of great importance, given that the information was used to gain court permission to spy on an American citizen:“It does make a difference. If someone is paying for this and you’re actually using that information to surveil American citizens with a FISA application, it does matter to me and most Americans.”
Here Comey is repeating MSM and Democratic talking points about Fusion which have been shown to be untrue. Republicans had zero to do with the funding of the dossier, as Comey either knows or should know if he’s at all competent. What he probably does know, however, is that Republican involvement is the fiction the MSM was pushing and that many many Americans probably believe that to be the case, so Comey’s answer will appear to make some sense to those people even though it is based on a falsity.
Comey’s lack of specific interest in who funded the dossier (if he really didn’t know and didn’t ask, which may or may not be the case) would have come from his need to get that investigation going and to use the dossier to jumpstart it no matter what. Why question its provenance if you’re already dedicated to using it despite the fact that Trump’s enemies paid for it, which should have made it highly suspect as a source?
Of course, it turns out that Trump’s oppponent’s campaign funded it, which if anything would make it even more suspect than if other Trump enemies had funded it. But to Comey, all of that was irrelevant (or at least he’d like us to think it was irrelevant). In his previous career, had he really lacked curiosity to that degree? I doubt it very much. But he’s a clever enough lawyer to use it as an excuse now. He’d prefer that we think him a fool rather than a knave, if he has the choice of shaping our opinion.
I say “knave.” The man is no fool, not by a longshot.
[NOTE: Let’s look at this exchange a bit more closely:
Question: So, when you saw [that the Steele dossier was funded by a private client], who did you think the private client was?Mr. Comey: I don’t know that I knew.
Isn’t that quintessential Comey? “I don’t know that I knew.” The question was not, however, whether Comey knew who the client was. The question was who Comey thought funded it. His answer was that he doesn’t know whether he knew or not, and yet later in the exchange he seems to be saying he didn’t know and what’s more was not the least bit curious about it.
That seems to contradict his earlier response about not knowing (or not remembering?) whether he knew or didn’t know, although it’s all so slippery it’s hard to even say. Statements that are so equivocal are deliberately difficult to contradict, because they essentially say nothing. But Comey is quite practiced at that sort of thing.]
No comments:
Post a Comment