↓
 
Home » Comey: What did I know? I was just the FBI director [Part 2]

Comey: What did I know? I was just the FBI director [Part 2]

The New Neo Posted on by

[NOTE: Part I can be found here.]

In the following, I’m discussing the Chris Wallace interview of James Comey that occurred last Sunday. Here’s the transcript, and here’s the video.]

During the video, Wallace confronts Comey with the fact that IG Horowitz testified that the Steele dossier was the main element that drove the FISA applications, despite Comey having claimed otherwise for ages. Although Wallace does a good job of pointing out the enormous contradiction there (and shows patience by explaining it to Comey again and again, in several different ways), Comey just plays dumb:

“…I agree with [Horowitz’s] characterization. I’m just confused — I no — I don’t see the disconnect between the two of us. And I’m sorry that I’m missing it.”

This is a top lawyer? It’s an absurdity to think he doesn’t understand. Wallace tries again, and Comey’s answer is waffley and confusing:

“Chris Wallace: I guess the question is, it seemed that you were minimizing the role of the Steele Dossier, and he’s saying it’s a lot more important than you let on.

James Comey: Okay. If I was, then I’m sorry that I did that. But I meant it was one part of the presentation to the court. It was not a huge part of the presentation to the court, but it was the fact, according to his report, that convinced the lawyers to go forward.”

Note the “if” in the apology, which is a classic tell of an apology that is actually a non-apology and an acknowledgement that is actually a non-acknowledgement. The rest of Comey’s answer barely makes sense, but Wallace finally gives up pursuing that line of inquiry after that and goes on to the next point. In this case, one can hardly blame him – except perhaps to suggest that he might have added, “Excuse me, but you’re just not making sense. The Steele dossier was the basis of the presentation to the court.”

And the following should earn an award for Comey for buck-passing:

“Chris Wallace: But this isn’t some investigation, sir. This is an investigation of the campaign of the man who is the president of the United States. You had just been through a firestorm investigating Hillary Clinton. I would think, if I were in your position, I would have been on that, you know, like a junkyard dog. I would have wanted to know everything they were doing in investigating the Trump campaign.

James Comey: Yeah. That’s not the way it works, though. As a director sitting on top of an organization of 38,000 people, you can’t run an investigation that’s seven layers below you. You have to leave it to the career professionals to do, to the special agents who do this for their lives. And if a director tires to run an investigation, it’ll get mucked up in all different kinds of ways, given his or her responsibilities and the impossibility of reaching the work that’s being done at the lower level.

Wallace’s question was a good one. Comey’s answer was unacceptable. This was a very special investigation that required his special attention. And it was not conducted “seven layers below” him. In fact, many of the people involved in the “sloppiness” were the higher-ups. For example, Clinesmith – the person who deceptively changed the meaning of an email about Page having worked as an agent for US intelligence – is often painted is a lower level lawyer at the FBI, but this was his actual role:

The reality is that [Clinesmith] was a member of the Hillary Clinton email investigation team (Midyear Exam). According to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’ June 2018 Report (on various actions by the FBI and DOJ in advance of the 2016 election)…he played a far larger role in the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign (Crossfire Hurricane). The report states Clinesmith was the “the primary FBI attorney assigned to that investigation beginning in early 2017.” He then joined Robert Mueller’s investigation team and was dismissed in February 2018 after his anti-Trump text messages had been revealed.

Perhaps the most cryptic and disturbing thing Comey said, though, was something Wallace failed to follow up on at all:

“There are mistakes I consider more consequential than this during my tenure.”

I’m sorry that Wallace didn’t ask him what they might be. Now, I imagine Comey would have shimmied out of that one, too, but his statement cried out for clarification.

I’m going to stop fisking Comey’s answers at this point; I think you get the idea. But I want to mention one other all-important question that Wallace never asked Comey: “If all of these are ‘sloppy’ errors, why did they all hurt Trump? If they were random errors there shouldn’t be a pattern like that, should there? How do you explain the sameness of the anti-Trump effect of every single ‘error’?”

Comments

Comey: What did I know? I was just the FBI director [Part 2] — 29 Comments

  1. MM: He said ‘I was seven steps removed from what was going on. The Director doesn’t get involved in these kinds of things, the actual investigation.’ Do you believe that?

    AG WB: No. I think that the … one of the problems that happened was precisely that they pulled the investigation up to the executive floors, and it was run and bird-dogged by a very small group of very high level officials. And the idea that this was seven layers below him is simply not true.

    (Video): https://mobile.twitter.com/HansMahncke/status/1207695467343159301

  2. FWIW:
    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/12/james_comey_is_a_pathological_liar.html#.XfucEJ4ZyHg.twitter
    (H/T Instapundit)

    Well, maybe. It does sound quite a bit extreme on the one hand, and also, not really fair to a person who appears to have some rather serious memory issues:
    https://www.bostonherald.com/2018/12/09/comey-cant-recall-squat/

    …though he seemed pretty OK in the Wallace interview. “Funny”, that….

    (On the other hand, what might actually constitute “fairness” towards Comey?)

  3. sdferr got the money quote from Barr.

    “And if a director tries to run an investigation, it’ll get mucked up in all different kinds of ways, given his or her responsibilities and the impossibility of reaching the work that’s being done at the lower level.”

    Interestingly, Comey fluidly switches from a true, but misleading statement, to a nonsensical statement. Yes, these investigations shouldn’t be run from the top, and can get mucked up if they are, but they were most likely mucked up in exactly the way that Comey or McCabe wanted them mucked up.

    Then he ends with, “Oh, a Director is just way too busy to be bothered with the lower levels and besides, it’s impossible to reach it.” What?

    It crosses my mind that unlike an FBI Director like Louis Freeh, James Comey had never been an FBI special agent. Maybe he has no idea what an agent does. One would think that during the first several weeks on the job, a guy like Comey would spend time learning how the lower levels operate, but you never know.

  4. Neo:

    Your question about all the mistakes ending up damaging the President is a powerful one, and one that Comey and everyone else at the FBI and DOJ cannot, and will not, answer.

    As for Comey maintaining that the Director does not pay attention to investigations taking place seven layers below, the truth is that FBI professionals who were interviewed early on all expressed surprise that the investigation had been brought to headquarters. They all maintained that such an investigation would normally be run out of a field office. The fact that this one was brought to headquarters probably means that the top floor was, in fact, taking a very special interest in it. Again, Comey’s truthfulness is very suspect.

  5. Question not asked–
    Wallace in shocked tone: Mr Comey you signed the FISA warrants. That is fact. Signed by you, not someone at a lower level of the organization you led, much less seven steps removed. Are you contending that you were in the habit of signing documents of this magnitude without any pretense of due diligence?”

  7. An Oscar worthy performance! It was difficult to tell whether it was an act or he’s really that stupid.

  8. Like I said before guy is brain damaged, either refuses to process what he hears or processes it wrongly. Makes me wonder how he was disciplined as a child. He displays these childish behaviors, speaks non sense, has facial mannerisms that look to gain sympathy. Very bizzare. I have also read he dyes his hair. Now i can see a man in show business, a divorced guy on the hunt dyeing their hair but a 60ish guy married as unattractively tall as this buffoon. Who is he trying to impress? Of course our buddy trump is acquainted with Clairol too , so I ve got the same question, whats with these guys. Boris I m lookin at you!

  9. oldflyer if wallace had asked that exact question worded like you did
    Comey would have melted on the floor in to a thrashing heap!

  10. I cut Comey and the rest of the conspiracy members zero slack. Playing forgetful, acting confused, hiding behind ‘procedures’ and lying does not impress me. They are traitorous scoundrels. Period.

    Trump, for all his flaws, was duly elected. This can not stand if a Republic deserves to survive.

  11. I saw a comment somewhere the other day in which someone stated that their anti-interrogation training had taught them to become a three-year-old. The reason for this is because a three-year-old is absolutely convinced of the truth he or she is proclaiming, and can’t be convinced otherwise no matter how good the evidence.

    The write-up above of Comey’s interview makes Comey sound like that three-year-old.

  12. I think it indicates the Department of Justice is and has been a troubled organization. He spent most of his work life there and was promoted repeatedly. Whaddaya see? Smarmy weasel. Kinda reminds one of … Rod Rosenstein.

  13. “troubled organization”?

    Funny you should say that—given those impressive paragons like “Fast and Furious” Holder and “I plead the fifth” Lynch?

    Interesting that you bring up Rosenstein, though.

    For a while there, he appeared to be showing some contrition (everything being relative), given his central role in the “mistakes that seem to have been made”.

    Then, he seems—as far as I can tell—to have disappeared from off the face of the earth. (Excessive contrition is bad for the Narrative, I guess.)

    Maybe Durham’ll conjure him back….

  14. Explains a lot of why the #Resistance to Trump was larded throughout the DOJ and FBI.

    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/william-barr-unfit-attorney-general-von-spakovsky-fund

    We interviewed many sources both inside and outside of the Justice Department for our book. They all told us the same thing: Holder politicized and radicalized the department to an extent they had never seen before. They stated that every decision made by Holder was through a political lens, not a legal lens.
    …
    They reported that he filled the career ranks of the Justice Department with political allies, cronies, and Democratic Party donors, in what they believed were clear violations of civil service rules. Many of those cronies and political hacks are still there and have been doing everything they can from inside DOJ to attack President Trump and get him removed from office.

    Holder treated Congress with contempt and did everything he could to evade its oversight responsibilities by misleading, misinforming, and ignoring members of Congress and its committees.
    …
    Holder demonstrated during his tenure as attorney general that he believes in a “living” Constitution that can be bent, twisted, broken or just plain ignored when needed to achieve his “nakedly partisan” political goals and to protect his president.

    It is no wonder that he is critical of an attorney general who actually believes in the rule of law and is forthright in enforcing the Constitution as it was written and intended regardless of partisan politics.
    …
    Holder has shown once again his lack of class and why he should never have been attorney general. Holder got only one thing right in his diatribe against William Barr. He says that the American people “deserve an attorney general who serves their interests, leads the Justice Department with integrity and can be entrusted to pursue the facts and the law.”

    The American people have that with Attorney General William Barr. They never had it with Eric Holder.

  15. Explains why the FBI probably isn’t going to get better.
    https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2019/12/17/fbi-director-wray-responds-fisa-courts-statement-just-doesnt-get/

    First, yes it is representative of the FBI as an institution. This is far from the first example of rabid misconduct among its ranks. Further, the fact that these specific actions took place at the highest levels means the FBI is not only responsible, but must carry the burden of what was done. This game where bureaucracies pretend to be holy orders only rarely stained by the acts of rogue agents is nonsense. That kind of benefit of the doubt has no place when dealing with unelected, largely unaccountable agencies and law enforcement entities. What happened in regards to the Trump-Russia investigation was malicious, purposeful, and widespread. It was not an isolated incident that otherwise doesn’t reflect on the entirety of the FBI.

    Secondly, the idea that the solution here is to just take “corrective steps” at the administrative level is unbelievable. No, some people should be fired. Others should be prosecuted. Still more should be demoted and reprimanded. The kinds of abuses of power that took place deeply harm our country. That’s not going to go away by holding a few workshops and changing up the paperwork. What happened within the FBI is part of a cultural, partisan rot that permeates the bureau. You fix that be getting rid of people, not by giving the guilty a new handbook they’ll inevitably ignore again.

    Lastly, you can tell by the statement that Wray doesn’t actually care about what transpired. He’s instead worried about losing the ability to easily get warrants on American citizens. If there were no possible consequences here, I’d struggle to be convinced he’d take any action at all.

    It’s time for Wray to go. This is not the guy who can lead a full rehabilitation of the FBI. He’s clearly more concerned with protecting the institution’s power than with cleaning out the bad actors and righting the ship. That’s simply not acceptable given the stakes.

  18. Comey just plays dumb… It’s an absurdity to think he doesn’t understand.

    He understands, all right:

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/18/james-comey-referred-criminal-prosecution-justice-/

    Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz said Wednesday that he referred former FBI Director James B. Comey for criminal prosecution this year after concluding he leaked sensitive materials to a friend.

    And the Justice Department watchdog told Congress he would “assess” Republican allegations of inconsistent statements in Mr. Comey’s testimony before the Senate

    I’m sure it pains the arrogant SOB… who no doubt considers himself the smartest man in every room… to know that he has been so completely outmaneuvered that he must now resort to playing dumb just to stay out of prison.

    “I didn’t break the law on purpose like a crook; I broke the law on accident like a fucking dummy.”

    It probably won’t save him.

    Tit-for-tat for the Flynn conviction means Comey… in addition to being charged with mishandling classified information… gets charged for lying under oath.

    lol… is there any way to charge Comey with a violation of the Logan Act, too?

  19. He’s playing stupid and playing word games to protect Obama, do you really think Obama didn’t know anything? Obama stuck with people that acted as if they were passive observers because Obama did the same thing. He always said he learned about an issue or people’s in his administration from the news.

    I really think they think they’re the smartest people in the room, and so any idea or thought is the best one, it’s just pure delusion on their part. They thought their plan was so great that it will all work out in the end, everyone else is just too stupid to realize it.

  20. If Comey were actually threatened with jail, he might go ahead and flip. I don’t see him taking the fall for anyone. Just imagine the testimony he could provide… He is perhaps one of the few people who actually does know the whole sordid story.

  21. If Comey were actually threatened with jail, he might go ahead and flip. I don’t see him taking the fall for anyone. Just imagine the testimony he could provide… He is perhaps one of the few people who actually does know the whole sordid story.

    Not many people he could flip on, as he’s a big prize. Brennan, Clapper, Yates, Lynch, Rice, and Obama, I suppose…

  22. He’s playing stupid and playing word games to protect Obama, do you really think Obama didn’t know anything?

    The Democrats have a different relationship with the permanent government than do Republicans. There is no resistance. Obama himself is secretive by default. It’s a reasonable wager it was accomplished orally, with no memorializing. We get a hint of it in one of Susan Rice’s e-mails.

    That having been said, I can see these crooks doing this on their own authority. Brennan, Sztrok, and Weissmann are bad men.

  23. I believe ‘parker’ and another commenter said this before, Comey signed the warrant applications. That is supposed to mean something, especially in hearings that are almost always ex parte.

    One of the main points of Neo’s post is that Comey is essentially saying that he was just a very high level cog in the machine. A cog that doesn’t know what the other cogs are doing.

    Well, when he signs on the dotted line, it means one of two things. Either he is claiming that he has read most of the documentation and maybe had some follow up conversations so that he does understand the whole chain of information or, he has such faith in the perfection or honesty and integrity of the whole chain that he is willing to stake his career on it.

    Does the language in the statutes surrounding this issue allow for a claim of ignorance?

  24. “Does the language in the statutes surrounding this issue allow for a claim of ignorance?” – TommyJay

    YOU won’t get a break from a judge for ignorance.
    The real question (by his own precedent) is: do the statutes speak to the intent of the dummy arguing said ignorance?

    He may truly believe intent & (faux) ignorance matter, but a reasonable prosecutor may not agree with him.

  25. BTW, Mentus, that link is to a story on Wednesday, September 18, 2019 about the leaks of his memos, and DOJ decided not to prosecute — which I think was a very wrong decision, and part of why we have people breaking laws with impunity at the highest levels, because they presume (rightly it seems ) that they have immunity.

  28. Some news on the RussiaSpySwingingGate scandal.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/court-orders-review-of-all-fisa-filings-handled-by-fbi-lawyer-facing-criminal-investigation

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/judge-gives-ex-fbi-agent-a-week-in-jail-for-spying-on-pro-trump-activist

    Collyer: What did I know? I was just a FISC judge.

    https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2019/12/20/fisa-court-judge-collyers-concern-2018-devin-nunes-brought-issues-attention/

    Where Was FISA Court Judge Collyer’s Concern in 2018 When Devin Nunes Brought These Issues to Her Attention?
    Posted at 7:00 pm on December 20, 2019 by Elizabeth Vaughn
    …
    It’s great that she appears to be cracking down on these agencies in the wake of the IG’s revelations, but why did Judge Collyer fail to act when Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), then-Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, wrote to her in 2018 to express his concern that the FBI had acted improperly?

    The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel reported on Friday that Nunes sent a letter to Judge Collyer on February 7th, 2018 to tell her what his committee had found during their investigation of the FBI’s four applications.
    ..
    The House Intelligence Committee has oversight jurisdiction of FISA. The Committee had just released the “Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses memo,” better known as the “Nunes memo” in which Nunes and his staff enumerated the ways they believed the FBI had deceived the FISA Court. (All of the allegations in the Nunes memo were confirmed by the Horowitz report.) One would have expected her to at least question the FBI and the DOJ over the issues Nunes had brought to her attention. Instead, she did nothing. Was she one of them?
    …
    Judge Collyer failed to act when she should have. Once the FBI’s abuses were revealed to the world, she was forced to respond. I consider that to be misconduct.

    Maybe we ought to hold our applause for Judge Collyer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑