"Comey is describing here conduct that a society committed to the rule of law simply cannot accept"

[kpete]

"Comey is describing here conduct that a society committed to the rule of law simply cannot accept in a president."

Initial Comments on James Comey’s Written Testimony

By Benjamin Wittes Wednesday, June 7, 2017, 3:09 PM

James Comey’s seven-page written statement, released by the Senate Intelligence Committee this afternoon in connection with Comey’s impending testimony tomorrow, draws no conclusions, makes no allegations, and indeed, expresses no opinions. It recounts, in spare and simple prose, a set of facts to which Comey is prepared to testify under oath tomorrow. Despite this sparseness, or maybe I should say because of it, it is the most shocking single document compiled about the official conduct of the public duties of any President since the release of the Watergate tapes.

Let me begin by walking through the document and annotating it a bit with those reasonable inferences that Comey leaves implicit but which a member of Congress, or a member of the public, should certainly consider. That is, let me start by considering in a narrow-bore way what some of these facts mean. Having done so, I’ll zoom out and try to make sense of the big picture as Comey takes the stand tomorrow. Comey proceeds in his statement chronologically. I am going to treat matters more thematically—which will mean bouncing around a bit in the document. The following comments will make more sense if readers first take the time to read the statement in its entirety, something I think it incumbent on citizens and other stakeholders in this society to do.




More with annotations HERE:
https://www.lawfareblog.com/initial-comments-james-comeys-written-testimony

[TygrBright]

1. Exactly. There's really nothing in the text.

Except EVERYTHING.

Everything about those interactions stinks to high heaven.

It sounds like a mob boss trying to feel out a DA on whether he can corrupt his way out of indictment, without further incriminating himself. Up to and including the dangling of other bait-- "'satellite' associates".

It all just reeks, revealing the fundamental ethical and moral bankruptcy of the man and his machine, without giving them a wall to push against.

Brilliantly crafted, and we are sure to hear some interesting/horrifying expansions and details tomorrow.

somberly,
Bright

[The_jackalope]

2. That's an excellent analysis.

It's a must-read before tomorrow's testimony for sure.

I don't expect anyone to use the words "obstruction of justice" tomorrow, though - that will have to wait for a prosecutor's determination. Uttering them in an open hearing would simply result in a "Yes it is", "No it isn't", "Your mother wears army boots!" exchange, that would coat the political arena in mud overnight. That wouldn't further the impeachment, but would hold it back or even derail it.

That said, this could be the most significant Senate hearing since Watergate.

[lamp_shade]

3. This was well worth the longish read. Thank you.

[ucrdem]

4. They're both jerks but I have to disagree.

When you get down to it Comey's just another corrupt cop and a society committed to the rule of law doesn't give cops godlike powers. He interfered repeatedly and dishonestly in an important election. The man is lucky to have gotten off with just a pink slip.

[madokie]

5. There is no doubt that this guy,

tRump, thinks he is above the law. We have to get his sorry treasonous criminal ass out of our Oval office.