Sometimes I feel pragmatism here at DU is on short-supply. (Re: Comey)

[Tommy_Carcetti]

Before I elucidate, let me tell you what pragmatism is and isn't.

Pragmatism isn't about giving up on your heartfelt beliefs, positions and principles for the matter of expediency or avoiding all conflict, including necessary conflict.

Pragmatism is a matter of choosing one's battles and placing priorities of argument after taking into consideration the time and place and the appropriateness that arises therefrom.

Just as an example, over the past year or two, I've seen more than a few posts on DU with the message being (sometimes verbatim) "Fuck the media." And the underlying argument is that the media (which the poster will inevitably group together as a collective, even though in fact it represents thousands of different sources, mediums, personalities, viewpoints, etc.) gave Donald Trump a platform during the Republican primaries which essentially legitimized him as a candidate, where if it had ignored him, he would have been laughed away as the joke candidate he should have been viewed as. And as a result, the "media" has made its bed and now must lie in it in shame, and all further questions or criticisms of Trump by the media should be seen as self-inflicted wounds.

That's all well and good and you can argue that the media--in creating a "trainwreck" style of coverage towards Trump during his campaign where the inherent controversy he brings to the table means better sales and ratings--should not be afforded a pass.

But at this point, what good is that going to do? We already have Donald Trump claiming that the media (spare Fox News and a couple of other fawning outlets) is the "enemy of the people", a purveyor of lies, and shouldn't be trusted. So why in the hell should we have someone here at this Democratic/liberal message board echoing Trump's messaging and soundbites, even if for very different reasons than Trump?

Perhaps the "media" (in the collective sense) bears some degree of responsibility for creating the situation, but good luck trying to get out of the situation without the help of the media and quality journalism.

Now we have James Comey giving interviews regarding his book and the publication of his memos, and inevitably DU was hit with a whole host of "Fuck James Comey and we shouldn't care what he has to say because he totally screwed us earlier" posts. The reason for that sentiment, of course, is his handling/mishandling of the Clinton email investigation during the 2016 campaign.

And I'll fully admit for the record I'm just as miffed and puzzled by some of his decisions as to that regard myself, and perhaps the criticism and scrutiny of those decisions is well-warranted.

However, we don't have a time machine. The actual 2016 election has come and gone. We cannot change what happened in November 2016. The reality is now that we have a madman in the form of Donald Trump in the White House who did collude with Russia and who did act to obstruct the investigation of that collusion.

Considering the huge mess we find ourselves in, battles need to be picked for full impact. Right now, Donald Trump is launching an all out assault on James Comey and what he documented in his memo, his testimony to Congress, and his book. And there is nothing that should lead anyone to believe Comey is lying or acting out of a selfish agenda when it comes to his dealings with Donald Trump as President and his attack on the Trussia investigation. His claims are well-documented and supported by others and they need to be pushed forward, not hidden under the table because of past wounds.

Like him, dislike him, or have a completely indifferent opinion of him, James Comey is probably the very best witness there is as it relates to the Obstruction of Justice angle of the Trussia investigation. Attacking him personally and attempting to minimize his credibility does us absolutely no favors.

Echoing Donald Trump's talking points--albeit for very different reasons--creates needless self-inflicted wounds in which there would be only one winner: Donald Trump.

Don't do that.

Think.

Contextualize.

Pick only the smartest courses of action for the situation which you find yourself in.

Be sensible.

Be pragmatic.

[moriah]

1. If nothing else, he may be the epitome of "the enemy of your enemy" NOT being a friend, but...

... there's no need to interfere on your enemy's side whilst they duke it out.

[ck4829]

2. I think it's because pragmatism is not really needed or even used in US politics

I mean I get what you are talking about, but if the US political system was truly pragmatic, like choosing one's battles as you mentioned and taking into consideration time and place, as defined by dealing with things realistically and with facts, then...

The person who got 65 million votes would be President and not the person who got 63 million votes.

The person who is eminently qualified would be voted for and not the person who says "Let's build a wall and deport all the Muslims and Mexicans!"

People saying people with funny religions are all coming to kill us but forgetting to mention more people are killed by their own fellow Americans would be treated as crackpots, not experts... like what we see today.

Between how our government works and how the media operates, there are few to nil applications of actual pragmatic behaviors in our political system. If anything; the US, I am almost sure of this, has a political culture that is rooted in anti-pragmatism.

Being pragmatic is noble, don't get me wrong, but wanting people to be pragmatic when it comes to US politics is like wanting a salad in a restaurant that serves only meat or ordering a cake from a hardware store.

[RandomAccess]

7. ?? You're overlooking the one right in front of your face

Tommy is suggeseting that we all GET PRAGMATIC on the issue of Comey, and perhaps other things that crop up.

Why are you resisting that sensible, PRAGMATIC idea -- and so hard?

[ck4829]

9. Because that's it. That's the drop of pragmatism in a sea of anti-pragmatism.

Support Comey - Because it's pragmatic.

OK.

One Man, One Vote - Because it's pragmatic.

Vote for the candidate who is more qualified rather than the one who appeals to your fears - Because it's pragmatic

Wanting pragmatic for just one thing but not needing it for anything else isn't being pragmatic at all.

[mr_lebowski]

3. EGG-F***ING-ZACTLY ...

So much THIS, Tommy.

We're SOOO easily divided and taken off-message (to the benefit of favoring/promoting the Right's 'storylines', often inadvertently) ... it's really quite infuriating.

[lunatica]

4. Purist activism only adds to the problem on both sides

So I agree with you. Thanks for the OP.

[StevieM]

5. Using that logic, we should not complain about right-wing judicial activism because Trump

is attacking the judiciary.

What Comey did was a threat to the democratic process. It cannot be ignored, or it is guaranteed to happen again.

[smirkymonkey]

6. Thank YOU!

[panader0]

8. Yup--pragmatism also must mean looking to the future and not into the rear view mirror.

[Squinch]

10. I'll take your word that they exist, but I haven't seen the posts that say,

"Fuck James Comey and we shouldn't care what he has to say because he totally screwed us earlier."

What I HAVE seen, and what I do agree with is "Fuck James Comey. He totally screwed us earlier, but he IS our best witness for an obstruction charge."

Many of us can hold two thoughts in our heads at the same time, and there is nothing non-pragmatic about that.

Our saying "Fuck James Comey" is not going to stop anyone from hearing his descriptions of the obstruction, and those descriptions are very well corroborated. So, yes, he is forwarding our cause and that's great.

But fuck him.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

14. I fully understand the bitterness towards Comey while believing him on the obstruction issue.

The problem is, people are putting their vents about the former on basically equal footing as the matters raised in the latter, and at this particular point in time, it doesn't help.

All the ranting about Comey's mishandling of the email investigation can be as easily done once Donald Trump is (hopefully) removed from office. Focusing on it so heavily now doesn't really help the immediate goal.

[Squinch]

18. Do you think people venting about it will reduce the likelihood that his testimony about the

obstruction will be taken?

I don't, and that's all we need from him.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

33. You got it EXACTLY right. We must keep our eye on the prize... impeaching tRump.

Comey may be a weasel who screwed over Hillary, but, right now, he's also the best witness we have to Nazi tRump's crimes that, hopefully, will lead to his eventual downfall.

[moriah]

38. I think the pragmatic concern IS not damaging Comey so much he's no longer credible on obstruction.

As I said, right now he's the enemy of our enemy. He sure as shit ain't our friend.

But, for example, I've seen people criticizing him for making decisions based on polls -- which is also what Trump is doing. But his decision was apparently more about transparency for the person everyone assumed would win. It could have looked damn bad for Clinton, made her election seem illegitimate, if the intelligence agencies suppressed information about the likely winner who was also of the incumbent administration's party.

You have to admit, had Hillary won, we'd probably still be mad at him but not enough to warrant him getting fired. Especially if that was his explanation to her for his actions. I think she'd rather have had a solid win under her belt rather than being vulnerable, as Trump has made himself, to allegations of a coverup after a questionable win.

I still would rather have her in office even if it meant "Buttery Mails" became even more prevalent on TV than it is now, but would she? The woman Trump wants people to think she is would actively engage in cover-ups (sooo much projection) and influence people, do anything to win, etc. The woman I think she is, the nominee I voted for? I believe she would rather have lost than have a win with any taint of illegitimacy to it.

And, take the referral of the Cohen issues to the SDNY. It doesn't really matter if Trump had an affair a decade ago. What matters is he wouldn't own it, and got it "fixed" just before the election. They're really trying to keep the Russia/foreign money transfers issues/obstruction separate from sexual allegations, and having the SDNY vs Mueller do it helps that. It's not the sex that makes this a concerning issue -- even if they didn't, he didn't have to pay her to silence her, others had already accused him of much worse than holding out a job possibility to get consensual sex one time --- but the blatant coverup. Yet I've see posts here suggesting Stormy faked her description of the person who she says threatened her, and sharing RW sources to do it.

I find so much schadenfreude in watching the Republicans destroy themselves I feel no need to hold long-term grudges against Comey right now. He doesn't have a job, which is what we wanted when we blamed him for the election being lost. He's getting to peddle a book, which I may read when I find it in a library, and the book is making Drumph lose his shit.

We're going to see anti-Trump conservatives who certainly aren't our friends. The strategic thing would be to promote the most critical articles that lack heavy tea party/evangelical content amongst people who recognize and trust those Conservative names. But not to buy into any idea that these people are our friends unless they actually decide to align with core Democratic values -- the big tent that knows if small groups who have similar interests in justice and equality work together, their voices can be heard in a way they can't alone.

[orangecrush]

11. AGREE 100%

You hit the nail on the head.

[pnwmom]

12. YES. THANK YOU. We play into their hands if we're attacking Comey now. n/t

[FreepFryer]

60. THIS

[DDySiegs]

13. Cogratulations on Your Well Thought Out Analysis, Tommy

[Hortensis]

15. I just wonder why you keep hitting this topic and theme.

HOW many threads from you alone does this make?

And now this new push that people who feel investigation into the FBI's actions is in order lack "pragmatism"?

But please don't feel a need to explain. I suggest just moving on while events play out further and we see what we have.

[Me.]

27. I Wonder Too

Now that we've been schooled on 'pragmatism' perhaps we should just ignore the harm Comey has done, close our eyes and pretend we're blind.

[mtnsnake]

16. No doubt about it

Wells said, and thank you.

[FakeNoose]

17. There ARE Republicans who want to put Cheeto in jail - Comey is one of them

Regardless of his past behavior, Jim Comey is going to do everything he can to get Cheeto out of the White House and into prison. I think we have to be ready to look past a few things, because after all he is a Republican.

So is Robert Mueller for that matter. And quite possibly Andrew McCabe and probably many of the guys on Mueller's team. We're going to be counting on these guys whether we like it or not, so let's remind ourselves to look at the big picture. They're not liberals, they're not angels, but they are the only heroes we have now.

I'm with you Tommy Carcetti!

[Denis 11]

19. I'm reading his book,

He comes across as earnest, honest and likable.
My R. In-laws are rabid haters of Mr. Comey now they have been told the woo by fox news.
I believe Comey would be a strong V.P. choice in 2020.
He would appeal to disaffected Republicans and draw the votes of all but the worst of the dense deplorables.
We really need to think out of the box to carry all future elections, play chess not checkers.

[Squinch]

20. A VP for Democrats? Uh.. no.

[Denis 11]

25. So lose again on the electoral college states.

I face my Republican in laws wrath all the time , maybe I'm not democrat enough in your eyes but I'll play it safe to get a win.
In their eyes we are just flag hating socialists, one step away from making the US endure the turmoil in Venezuela.
My democratic leanings come from being the son of immigrants. My model for government that responds to the people's needs is perhaps Norway.
They have oil and a population numbering 5 million just like Louisiana, however they have a soveriegn fund of 800 billion and Louisiana is the second poorest state in our nation. If I point this out to my in laws they disregard it because my referance isn't fox news.
We need to appeal to the Republican voters that swallow their parties hyperbolic nonsence to get us in position to do some good.

[Squinch]

26. So the only way we can win is to have as VP candidate the Republican who trashed the

Clinton campaign?

And you think VP Comey will bring us Norwegian policies?

OK, now just stop a moment and think about what you are saying. Then rethink.

And perhaps your republican in-laws should not be the ones who define your goals for the Democratic party. Because we are not the republican party. They have the republican party. That's why they are republicans. We are the Democratic party. It is different.

[Denis 11]

31. The Republican party left Comey.

They fund a lying Comey website and are trying to humiliate him. How much of a right winger could he be now.
Hillary was unfairly tainted by years of a huge, well funded opposition effort. She was sunk by that.
I believe Comey walked gingerly through that minefield, and in the end still got destroyed.
Trump couldn't show his head in Texas at Barbara Bush's funeral for the shame associated with his name but he would still beat Hillary.
That is the result of the never ending effort of the 1% ers that spent a colossal amount of money to destroy anyone with a (D) behind their name. You may take comfort in believing this is not a fact in the world but it is.
Only super stars like Obama can escape their quicksand laden trap. Given I don't see another President Obama on the horizon I would take a chance seeing a Comey on the ticket to beat a Republican in 2020, hopefully Trump would be impeached by then.

[Squinch]

35. Okie dokie then. You start that movement to put republicans onto the Democratic ticket.

What could go wrong?

[Demit]

36. I remember we flirted with the idea of McCain as VP in 2004.

Ooo, he was so mavericky. LOLOLOL

People grab onto one positive thing somebody does and fashion a whole imaginary persona around it. Comey has the same outsize ego that McCain had/has, and is just as much a Republican. The only difference is McCain didn't ascribe to himself the lofty morality Comey does.

[Squinch]

37. Is it me or is it really, really weird around here these days?

[Denis 11]

39. Yes it's weird

The Trump voters I meet spit bile towards me after getting their twisted logic from the right wing news machine.
I remember the dread I felt when our side force fed us Hillary for President.
The republican strangle hold on the executive and legislature has ignited a nightmare for this country.
We are the party of the big tent.
We can't afford to just blindly hope for a better outcome in future elections. The opposition is to well funded, and smart.
We have to try something to ensure a successful blue wave that will eventually come, the sooner the better.

[Demit]

40. You were not "force fed" Hillary for president. You had a vote in the primary, if you used it.

If you did, and the candidate you voted for in the primary didn't win—there were several running, you might recall—well, that's democracy.

[Squinch]

42. If you were "force fed" Hillary for President, you may be in the wrong place.

Maybe you'd be happier in a place full of friends who, like you, want to put Comey on their ticket.

[Hortensis]

45. May be in the wrong country. Not everyone is emotionally

or intellectually suited to democracy.

Nice authoritarian nations only give everyone one choice, or none if they don't bother with fake elections. That spares their citizens any resentment of learning more people voted for the other candidate.

Denis, may I suggest Cuba, Yemen, and Russia as possibilities to start? They all have their advantages, and since the elections are fake no one's "force fed" democratic choices.

[lunamagica]

44. Hillary won the nomination receiving 4 million more votes than Sanders

That is not "force Feeding" She WON.

Do you think that our side should have given the nomination to sanders after he lost, by millions?

Wouldn't that be the definition of "force feeding"?

[Denis 11]

48. She was a better candidate in theory than in practice.

I certainly wish she won, but she didn't. She lost to this unfit fool, and I still hear "but he is better than Hillary" from the deplorables.
It's passed time to dissect 2016.
Nominate a poor ticket in 2020 I'll support them again and the deplorables will dance happily while they drive the country off the cliff.
Comey will remind the Republicans that Trump is a through miscreant just by remaining in the public eye.
Of course if you have a better alternative I am all ears.
I just hate watching the Democrats getting beat at every turn.
In a perfect world we would run the table without running compromise candidates, if insulting me makes your day have fun. I have a thick hide from being the sole democrat at family gatherings for years.
Our candidates get defined as less than honorable by the Republican reputation grinding misinformation cannon that they have perfected.
James Comey appears well able to defeat their bullshit spewing machine, that's the first thing I wish for in any candidate.

[lunamagica]

50. You were the one who said that Hillary was "force fed" to us

So I ask you, based on your comment, how nominating the candidate who won by millions is "force feeding" her to us, and if nominating sanders despite losing by millions wouldn't have being "force feeding" a candidate to us.

Tou completely ignored what I asked you.

[Denis 11]

56. I was tossed off the Hillary board on DU,

For just looking for a debate with those defending her candidacy, I was shocked.
Plus, it would not be wrong for Bernie supporters to feel the DNC with their super delagates and funding pushed Sanders out of the picture before he could make his case.
However she still should of beaten the orange shitstain, but didn't.
There is little to gain by focusing on that.

[lunamagica]

65. So you think we should have been force fed Sandes even though he was the loser (by millions)

Go it.

[Denis 11]

66. Both of them didn't have the horsepower to win the race.

The vast right wing conspiracy is real dammit!
We can think out of the box to combat it, or continue getting our asses kicked.

[Demit]

41. People need a hero, and they don't want to see his feet of clay.

[lunamagica]

21. Why VP? Why not president?

Is this still DU?

[Denis 11]

24. I like Elizabeth Warren,

It's time for a woman in the Whitehouse.

[Me.]

30. Where Is This Coming From

It feels to me like a Con scam...put up a flawed candidate and we'll win, yessiree Bob. Along the lines of don't believe your lying eyes because you know we've all got to learn to be 'pragmatic'. Rather insulting to try to pawn Comey off as a candidate on the Dems.

[Adrahil]

22. It's why we lose.

The MAGAts will do anything they can to win. They will lie and don;t care if others do. They will cheat.

I'm not suggesting we do those things, but we can't even get past our own self-righteousness long enough to actually win and do some good. It's fuckin' depressing.

To be clear.... this is political war. We need wins.

[mtnsnake]

23. +1000 n/t

[GoCubsGo]

28. Yes. Thank you.

One can recognized that Comey fucked up, while also recognizing that the whole situation was not black-and-white. There's too much focus on Comey, and not enough on the other characters involved (Guiliani, individuals in the New York field office of the FBI, the complicit media...) Many of them behaved FAR worse than Comey.

[Orsino]

29. Pragmatism is more valuable in the real world.

It has its uses on DU, particularly in organizing, but this thing right here is first and foremost an Internet discussion board. That means a lot of venting not necessarily connected to useful strategy.

[Demit]

32. I fail to see how criticizing Comey for the crap he pulled last year is "echoing Trump's talking

points." I fail to see how it "creates self-inflicted wounds."

What are you afraid of happening? That less-bright people on this board will think they must disregard everything Comey is doing & saying now? You think DUers are binary thinkers like that?

Chiding, nagging posts like yours don't do anything but annoy people who can think for themselves. Stop trying to shush people who are actually able to hold nuanced views. Who understand that people can do good in one instance and bad in another. Well, you don't have to stop, I suppose, that's what a discussion board is for. But I think, instead of the tedious lecturing, you should have more faith in other people's intelligence.

[Me.]

34. And One Has To Wonder

why there is such a push to back someone who would be a flawed candidate and carries so much baggage. When does misplaced pragmatism turn into bad judgment?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

46. Nowhere did I say that Comey is beyond criticism.

I certainly think he entitled to a good share of criticism for his handling of the email investigation.

My issue is that some people here have taken it to the obsessive extent where they are questioning his credibility, which creates unintended consequences for the Trussia investigation. Because he is by far the best witness as it pertains to the question of obstruction of justice.

And after hearing his testimony and reading portions of his book, his credibility and believability on his dealings with Trump are rock solid, IMHO. And that being the issue at hand (as opposed to the email investigation, which is a closed book), constantly wanting to bring up old wounds is not the best course of action.

[Demit]

47. WHAT course of action? What are you talking about? What "action" do you think people are taking

here on DU? What "unintended consequences for the investigation" do you think are being created by people on DU? What are you afraid will happen in the outside world because of discussion here? What are you warning against?

And please, I implore you, be specific, because for the life of me I don't know what the hell you're talking about. I am not following your logic at all.

[TheBlackAdder]

43. Pragmatism ONLY works when all sides are pragmatic. If one side is not, pragmatists lose every time

[Denis 11]

49. True

[rzemanfl]

51. +1. I will side with Comey vs. Drumpf. However, should he have the misfortune to

catch fire, I could not piss on him to put it out because of a vow I took about Republicans after the 2000 selection.

[guillaumeb]

52. Recommended.

[FreepFryer]

53. Pragmatism and sockpuppet control are both in short supply.

Juries don’t cut it.

[Denis 11]

58. I'm on the DU longer than you.

Denis is my real name
I hope you are not calling me a sock puppet.

[FreepFryer]

59. I was responding to your post, not characterizing you. Do you not agree DU has a sock problem?

Not sure why you felt my post was about you.

[Denis 11]

62. I just hope you we're not trying to tell me to stifle.

I bet we would be good friends if we met in person.
I'm sure there are many sock puppets, I don't have many posts. Now since I have retired I post more. I was a member of the CWA.
I post when something strikes a nerve only.
I believe we have the same goals.

[FreepFryer]

63. I wasnt even replying to a post of yours. I was replying to the OP.

Perhaps we might be good friends.

[elleng]

54. THANKS! Yes,

Be sensible.

Be pragmatic.

[greatauntoftriplets]

55. Thank you.

[Clarity2]

57. Ive been wanting to say that for a long time

I think faced with the battle we have, and how authoritarian dictators can wear down the public, I think its so important to pick and choose your battles. Its why I dont engage in Hillary or Bernie threads. Or comey much. I have strong opinions pro-hillary and negative opinions about Bernie, but its tiresome to keep looking at what went wrong threads. We just wont see the whole picture until this is over. Ive got so much energy to expend, and its wasted energy. Those with a strong constitution: have at it. I’m keeping my eye out on what is going on re this administration and russiagate. But keep in mind, the little chaos agents (trump, putin, gop) want to distract us with stupid shit and divide us with bickering.

[Blue_true]

61. I am sometimes stunned by the political and even life lack of awareness of some.

I think that people that voted for Nader and Stein in critical elections are very much example one in buttressing my case, both times their votes led to grotesque disasters, but none seemed to have learned anything. If Comey takes down Trump, I am all for Comey. I think that Comey is being honest, and I believe that he secretly would love to go back to 2016 and do things very differently, in a way that would not have hurt Hillary, he hasn't said it outright, but has alluded to that several times. Plus, the man's wife and daughters voted for Hillary, do you think that would have happened if he bashed Hillary behind the most private of closed doors?

[lunamagica]

67. Comey has firmly said he would do the same thing all over again. But you think he "secretly"

wishes he had done things very differently.

If this is true, he is lying, thus not being honest as you claim.

[Blue_true]

68. Wrong.

He said that he would have changed to words that he used in May to make it clearer that Hillary HAD NOT VIOLATED ANY LAW OR CAME CLOSE. It seem that he also indicated that he would not have sent out that October letter until what was on Houma's computer became clearer.

[lunamagica]

69. Link? because what I found is this

FBI director James Comey stood by his October decision to inform lawmakers that his agency had discovered new emails linked to the Hillary Clinton investigation, an event that Clinton and her allies continue to charge swayed the election at the last minute. Comey testified Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

https://www.weeklystandard.com/jenna-lifhits/comey-i-would-make-the-same-decision

[Blue_true]

70. The interview that he did with the GMA host. He said what I pointed out. nt

[lunamagica]

72. Did you read what I posted?

He stands by what he did.

[Hekate]

64. KnR

[Kirk Lover]

71. WORD. Be pragmatic and sensible. People lead with emotions all too often. nt