Subscribe via RSS Feed

Comey Comedy Classics

[ 57 ] March 20, 2017 |

lb-8

With notably rare exceptions:

The FBI director said he cannot say more “about what we are doing and whose conduct we are investigating” because the investigation is ongoing and classified.

“We just can’t do our work well or fairly if we start talking about it while we’re doing it,” Comey said.

It’s like 10,000 spoons when all you need was someone who wasn’t a Republican hack in charge of the FBI.

As you’ve probably heard, in addition to taking his standup act on the road Comey also confirmed what he was expected to confirm:

FBI Director James B. Comey acknowledged on Monday the existence of a counterintelligence investigation into the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 election, and said that probe extends to the nature of any links between Trump campaign associates and the Russian government.

Testifying before the House Intelligence Committee, Comey said the investigation is also exploring whether there was any coordination between the campaign and the Kremlin, and “whether any crimes were committed.”

Hmm, interesting. I’m so old I remember when the FBI was going out of its way to imply that Russia was not trying to influence the 2016 elections like it was last October.

…oh:

FBI Director James B. Comey told Congress that the FBI launched its investigation into Russian meddling in the U.S. elections nearly nine months ago.

He said the FBI started investigating the matter in July and that its work was still in the early stages.

It’s ridiculous how badly the New York Times got played, and it’s outrageous that Comey let the false impression created by the story stand while he was going out of his way to smear Clinton based on nothing.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Comments (57)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. humanoid.panda says:

    With Comey, hardly a bourgie identity-politics-obsessedHillary-lover having confirmed that yes, the FBI is investigating the Trump campaign, I wonder what is going to be next act in the troll comedy show..

    • Dr. Waffle says:

      1.) Accuse Democrats of being hypocrites (Glenn Greenwald’s on the case!)

      or

      2.) Downplay the connections/investigation (Michael Tracey’s go-to talking point)

      or

      3.) “Why won’t Democrats focus on the REAL ISSUES” (a favorite of the Jacobin crowd)

      • SoRefined says:

        4.) Congressional Republicans continue to take Donald’s Pretend Time Claims VERY SERIOUSLY. Devin Nunes, activate! “We know there was not a physical wiretap of Drumpf Tower,” Nunes said. “However, it’s still possible that other surveillance activities were used against President Drumpf and his associates.”

      • The Lorax says:

        I wanted to listen to Pod Save the World last week (GG was on), but I knew it’d just piss me off. Such a sophist.

        • nemdam says:

          Did you listen to it and/or do you know if there are any highlights in the conversation? I’m a regular listener of the podcast, but I had to skip this one as it would enrage me too much.

          • The Lorax says:

            I skipped it entirely for the same reason you did.

            • nemdam says:

              My guess is Tommy asked him some tough questions, but Glenn just weaseled his way out and pretended he didn’t do what he actually did or said, and Tommy out of undue respect didn’t follow up like he should. I’ve seen Glenn do this before.

  2. GeorgeBurnsWasRight says:

    Wow, you can remember last October.

    You must be an historian or something.

    Real Americans can't remember anything past last week when they vote. Get with the program!

  3. Abbey Bartlet says:

    I’m going to punch the first progressive I see cheering for Comey.

    • Q.E.Dumbass says:

      The line for punching Comey cheerleaders started forming last month.

    • (((max))) says:

      Well, don’t be aiming at me: I think Trump’s tweet about being ‘tapp’ed should have been true because the FBI should’ve fucking started surveilling him before the election.

      If a counter-intelligence section won’t investigate when a foreign power attempts to interfere in an election there’s not much fucking point in having a counter-intelligence section. Particularly one like the FBI that seems to spend all its time messing with the left regardless of how much of a threat they pose (if any).

      max
      [‘Tired of these assholes.’]

      • Asteroid_Strike_Brexit says:

        I’m inclined to agree. Leaving aside any other issue – and there are many! – Trump has engaged in large property deals for unscrupulous FSU businessmen. It would suggest the possibility of money laundering. I take it for granted that Trump actually has been under investigation by the FBI. I also take it for granted that European intelligence agencies have investigated Trump using clandestine methods, under the invitation of Obama or not.

  4. Lit3Bolt says:

    Shorter Comey: I was born a hack Republican hedge-fund lawyer shit-weasel, and a hack Republican hedge-fund lawyer shit-weasel I shall remain. If that means surrendering my country to Russia, so be it!! Mr. Putin is quite rich…I wonder if he needs a financial adviser or a security consultant…I hope he notices me on CNN…

  5. Joe_JP says:

    Ferris Bueller turned into Ed Rooney?

  6. Cervantes says:

    It’s also outrageous that Dean Baquet and the rest of the NYT aristocracy refuse to admit that they got played, or in fact made any error of journalistic judgment whatsoever. They seem utterly without self-awareness.

    • Lit3Bolt says:

      Surprisingly, it’s crowd that’s used to “Oh, well, guess I gotta suck someone’s dick now.”

      *said in Deputy Dawg voice*

    • howard says:

      I cancelled my nytimes subscription thanks to election 2016 coverage and banquet’s awful “we didn’t enable trump supporters enough” post-election comments, but unfortunately, lots of people have subscribed since.

    • JKTH says:

      It’s infinitely worse to admit a mistake than to make a mistake.

    • GeorgeBurnsWasRight says:

      Assuming (and I know it’s an assumption) that the NYT is telling the truth about a big jump in the subscriptions since the election, I think maybe they learned from FOX that it’s very profitable to be the voice of the opposition.

      IOW, possibly throwing the election to Trump was just a good business decision on the part of the NYT. With the newspaper biz being a dying industry, they had to “think outside the box”.

      The worst of all possible worlds would be if the NYT wound up taking over the Democrats the way FOX (mostly) did with Republicans.

      • Breadbaker says:

        Given the theme of their ad campaigns, they’re obviously acting as though they’re entitled to these new subscribers. Of course, the Seattle Fucking Times is doing the same thing (and presumably not moving the needle at all).

      • MyNameIsZweig says:

        You should see the ads they’re running on bus shelters here in SF, patting themselves on the back for being Our Only Option For Truth or some such nonsense. I keep wanting to vandalize the one in front of my building, but I don’t want to martyrize them.

  7. Mike in DC says:

    1. Ongoing investigation of Trump-Russia ties: confirmed
    2. Trump allegations of Obama interference: debunked
    3. Investigation not ending soon.
    4. Circumstantial evidence for collusion laid out in public.
    5. Republican hackery on public display.

    The political damage from this will be ongoing.

    It will be fascinating to hear the future Republican rationalizations for not voting to impeach.

    • Joe_JP says:

      2. Trump allegations of Obama interference: debunked

      The idea that Obama personally was wiretapping him or something was silly. But, I didn’t find it outrageous to contemplate that the Trump campaign was being investigated and at some point one of the Trump people or more than one was under some sort of surveillance, pursuant to legal procedures. And, maybe even in the process something was picked up via a call or email that was directly connected to Trump in Trump Tower.

      Don’t know if that happened but one soundbite that interested me was the wording about “physical” surveillance “in” Trump Tower. The wording seemed curious.

    • GeorgeBurnsWasRight says:

      The political damage from this will be ongoing.

      Oh Lord, let it be the Republicans who are damaged by this, and not just the country.

      Amen.

      • Dennis Orphen says:

        Sorry, but if i was an insurance adjuster and you were making a claim I would say the country is totaled and the damaged is not covered under your policy.

        • Rob in CT says:

          Property coverage: damage not caused by a covered cause of loss (windstorm, hail, lightning, etc., but not willful stupidity), thus no coverage.

          Liability coverage: damage not caused by an occurrence, which must be accidental in nature. Thus, no coverage. Also, the pollution exclusion may apply… (Trump qualifies as a pollutant, IMO: a solid, liquid, gaseous or thermal irritant or contaminant…).

          DENIED.

  8. heckblazer says:

    Here’s some predictions yesterday from Lawfare:

    That is, if Comey says a lot, makes a lot of news on Russia matters, and cheers a lot of anti-Trump hearts by maximally embarassing the President for his outrageous comments on Obama’s alleged wiretapping of Trump Tower, that will very likely be a sign that Comey has relatively little to protect in terms of investigative equities in the Russia matter and is thus free to vent. Conversely, a quiet, reserved Comey—one whose contrast with the relatively loquatious FBI director who talked at length about the Clinton email matters will infuriate a lot of liberals and frustrate those who want to know what’s going on with Russia—may well spell trouble for the President.

  9. C.V. Danes says:

    So maybe Trump’s microwave was spying on him after all?

  10. […] Earlier today, I alluded to the story published in the New York Times — a couple days after it devoted 5 out of 6 above-the-fold A1 stories in two days to James Comey’s letter informing Congress that Anthony Weiner had a laptop, which might mean Hillary Clinton was a crook — dutifully repeating the claim of the anti-Clinton within the FBI that “the hacking into Democratic emails…was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump.” This decision has…not held up well. Today I was reminded that Eric Lichtbau, one of the marks reporters behind the Oct. 31, was also responsible for one of this Clinton Rules Classic: […]

  11. JdLaverty says:

    How does any halfway respectable reporter not respond to comeys statement by asking “what makes this case different than the one involving Hillary and her emails?” Seriously I keep waiting for a fucking journalist to do some fucking journalism and ask. I suspect I’ll be waiting for, well, forever.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.