FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

The Comey Show

“A man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest.”

Simon and Garfunkel, “The Boxer” (1970)

No one could say that Donald Trump has not made politics interesting.  In so doing, he may well have distorted it, mangling its practice with ingredients of corrupting alt-reality. That same process has seen a distinct cheapening as well, but it could not be anything else.

Trump has revealed, within political practice, the virus that has afflicted it, the theatre that takes place from the White House, to Congress, to the Deep State.  Life may be a stage, but Trumpland is a flickering pantomime, destroying any pretence of virtue in politics. There are only positions, opponents, and resolutions through bullying force.

The entertainment reality show got another instalment on Thursday with the testimony of former FBI director James Comey before members of the Senate intelligence committee.  The various birds of prey wishing to find smoking carrion were left only partially satisfied.  The Republicans were left confused, and the right wing media felt that Trump had been exonerated. There was something for everyone.

Comey did serve a few titbits, and in a political environment rich with conspiracy and assumption, these were converted into main courses.  He did not, for instance, suggest that Trump was literally the subject of a counterintelligence investigation (go for the “satellites”, urged the former director), but garnished it with the following:

“As I explained, the concern of one of my senior leader colleagues was, if you’re looking at potential coordination between the campaign and Russia, the person at the head of the campaign is the candidate.  So, logically, this person argued, the candidate’s knowledge, understanding, will logically become a part of your inquiry if it proceeds.”

As for those circling satellites, one stood out as a rich prospect on the Russian connection: the attorney general, Jeff Sessions.  Comey’s testimony was notably slanted in that direction.  His recusal from the Russia-link investigation in March pointed to a deeper connection.

Then, the old suggestiveness about special facts, the sort that revealed as much as it concealed: “I can’t discuss in an open setting that would make his continued engagement in a Russia-related investigation problematic.”

Whether the President’s plea on behalf of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn to call off the dogs constituted an obstruction of justice was not something Comey wished to opine on.  “That’s a conclusion that I’m sure the special counsel will work towards to try and understand what the intention was there and whether that’s an offence.”

The whole occasion played into a reality show that has assumed monumental proportions.  Unwittingly, participants are playing to the Trump tune, following his direction.  For one, the president could triumphantly claim that Comey had himself leaked, and deserved investigating himself.  He may well have also lied, dangled Trump tantalisingly before the press corps, though he then claimed to have said nothing of the sort.

Trump also offered his “100 percent” willingness to testify under oath about his engagements with Comey to counter the former director’s claim. “I would be glad to tell him,” he said in the White House Rose Garden, “exactly what I told you.”

On cue, the impeachment brigades were also tossing a few confected ideas about, finding in the Comey revelations molehills fit for vast mountains.  Democrat Representatives Al Green from Texas, along with fellow Texan Sheila Jackson Lee and Brad Sherman of California have stated that their scribes are working on articles of impeachment.

Green, however, has taken the enthusiastic lead, calling the act of firing Comey an “obstruction of justice”.  “Obstruction of justice by the President is the problem.  Impeachment by Congress is the solution.”[1]  Green has been of such a persuasion from the start, and while he exudes principle on this score, he has already reached judgment on the matter. Constitutional lawyers, however, differ.

Green’s views received the backing of two anti-Trump resistance groups, MoveOn.org Civil Action and Invisible.[2] The executive of MoveOn did not “make this call [for impeachment] lightly” but it is hard to imagine anything not having an element of lightness when dealing with the relentless Trump vortex.

Invisible, having concluded that Comey’s testimony was ample, accurate and sufficient, felt that Trump had, in fact “tried to obstruct justice.”[3]  Stating the obvious point that obstructing justice was impeachable, the organisation did not pause to consider that ethical abuse and legal manipulation straddles a grey area.  But anger is the enemy of circumspection. “Impeachment takes time but we need to start the process now.”

Former ethics czar during the Obama years, Norm Eisen, provided another reading, claiming that the testimony was a “significant inflection point”.  Leaked and hearsay evidence had existed before but “for the first time, we had direct evidence of obstruction of justice.  It was a giant step towards accountability for Trump, but there will be many more giant steps necessary.”[4]

The emphasis should be on the sheer gigantic nature of those steps.  In this postmodern theatre of competing views, each group stuck to their stubborn, already minted interpretations.  Prior to the testimony, minds had already closed.  Even Comey added a tantalising number to the tenor of the whole session, a nod to the Richard Nixon White House.  “I have seen the tweet about tapes.  Lordy, I hope there are tapes.”

Notes.

[1] http://www.houstonpress.com/news/al-green-calls-for-trump-impeachment-again-9505509

[2] https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/06/10/president-donald-trump-impeachment-impeach-james-comey-testimony/22135883/

[3] https://www.indivisibleguide.com/resource/truth-or-trump/

[4] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/10/trump-james-comey-testimony-obstruction-justice-analysis

More articles by:

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

June 19, 2019
Matthew Stevenson
Requiem for a Lightweight: the Mayor Pete Factor
Kenneth Surin
In China Again
Stephen Cooper
Abolishing the Death Penalty Requires Morality
George Ochenski
The DNC Can’t Be Allowed to Ignore the Climate Crisis
John W. Whitehead
The Omnipresent Surveillance State
William Camacaro - Frederick B. Mills
Guaidó’s Star Fades as His Envoys to Colombia Allegedly Commit Fraud With Humanitarian Funds for Venezuela
Dave Lindorff
What About Venezuela’s Hacked Power Grid?
Howard Lisnoff
Try Not to Look Away
Binoy Kampmark
Matters of Water: Dubious Approvals and the Adani Carmichael Mine
Karl Grossman
The Battle to Stop the Shoreham Nuclear Plant, Revisited
Kani Xulam
Farting in a Turkish Mosque
Dean Baker
New Manufacturing Jobs are Not Union Jobs
Elizabeth Keyes
“I Can’t Believe Alcohol Is Stronger Than Love”
June 18, 2019
John McMurtry
Koch-Oil Big Lies and Ecocide Writ Large in Canada
Robert Fisk
Trump’s Evidence About Iran is “Dodgy” at Best
Yoav Litvin
Catch 2020 – Trump’s Authoritarian Endgame
Thomas Knapp
Opposition Research: It’s Not Trump’s Fault That Politics is a “Dirty” Game
Medea Benjamin - Nicolas J. S. Davies
U.S. Sanctions: Economic Sabotage that is Deadly, Illegal and Ineffective
Gary Leupp
Marx and Walking Zen
Thomas Hon Wing Polin
Color Revolution In Hong Kong: USA Vs. China
Howard Lisnoff
The False Prophets Cometh
Michael T. Klare
Bolton Wants to Fight Iran, But the Pentagon Has Its Sights on China
Steve Early
The Global Movement Against Gentrification
Dean Baker
The Wall Street Journal Doesn’t Like Rent Control
Tom Engelhardt
If Trump’s the Symptom, Then What’s the Disease?
June 17, 2019
Patrick Cockburn
The Dark Side of Brexit: Britain’s Ethnic Minorities Are Facing More and More Violence
Linn Washington Jr.
Remember the Vincennes? The US’s Long History of Provoking Iran
Geoff Dutton
Where the Wild Things Were: Abbey’s Road Revisited
Nick Licata
Did a Coverup of Who Caused Flint Michigan’s Contaminated Water Continue During Its Investigation? 
Binoy Kampmark
Julian Assange and the Scales of Justice: Exceptions, Extraditions and Politics
John Feffer
Democracy Faces a Global Crisis
Louisa Willcox
Revamping Grizzly Bear Recovery
Stephen Cooper
“Wheel! Of! Fortune!” (A Vegas Story)
Daniel Warner
Let Us Laugh Together, On Principle
Brian Cloughley
Trump Washington Detests the Belt and Road Initiative
Weekend Edition
June 14, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Michael Hudson
Trump’s Trade Threats are Really Cold War 2.0
Bruce E. Levine
Tom Paine, Christianity, and Modern Psychiatry
Jason Hirthler
Mainstream 101: Supporting Imperialism, Suppressing Socialism
T.J. Coles
How Much Do Humans Pollute? A Breakdown of Industrial, Vehicular and Household C02 Emissions
Andrew Levine
Whither The Trump Paradox?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: In the Land of 10,000 Talkers, All With Broken Tongues
Pete Dolack
Look to U.S. Executive Suites, Not Beijing, For Why Production is Moved
Paul Street
It Can’t Happen Here: From Buzz Windrip and Doremus Jessup to Donald Trump and MSNBC
Rob Urie
Capitalism Versus Democracy
Richard Moser
The Climate Counter-Offensive: Secrecy, Deception and Disarming the Green New Deal
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail