April 13, 2018

"James Comey is a proven LEAKER & LIAR. Virtually everyone in Washington thought he should be fired for the terrible job he did-until he was, in fact, fired."

"He leaked CLASSIFIED information, for which he should be prosecuted. He lied to Congress under OATH. He is a weak and..... ....untruthful slime ball who was, as time has proven, a terrible Director of the FBI. His handling of the Crooked Hillary Clinton case, and the events surrounding it, will go down as one of the worst “botch jobs” of history. It was my great honor to fire James Comey!"

Trump tweet tweets this morning. ("Tweet tweet" is my coinage for a run-on double tweet like this.)

I'm reading the tweet tweet at the NYT article "Trump Calls Comey ‘Untruthful Slime Ball’ as Book Details Released."

The book isn't out yet, and I'm not seeing any interesting new details. So I'll just say there shouldn't be any interesting new details, because Comey should have already told us the whole truth, not withheld morsels for the book — that is, for his own personal money making and career boosting.

I wasn't sure if "money making" should be one word, but I chose 2 words, so I could write this sentence connecting my deliberation on the subject to Trump's spelling "slime ball," because I'm utterly certain the correct spelling is "slimeball," although forevermore I will pause before writing "slimeball" and think of Trump and feel that it would be an allusion to Trump to write "slime ball."

In the 15-year history of this blog, I've used the word "slimeball" exactly once. In 2006, I called Glenn Greenwald a slimeball. (It was in self-defense: "Why not take a little trouble to try to understand the person you are criticizing before you write, you disreputable slimeball? (And your writing is putrid.)"

Anyway, if you want to buy the Comey book, here's the Althouse-supporting link to Amazon: "A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership."

What I want to talk about is the incredible badness of the title. You've got a set of loftily — preeningly — positive words — "higher," "loyalty," "truth," and "leadership," and then you've got the clunker — "lies." "Lies" is sitting there as if it belongs in the set of positive things, as if it's one of the virtues Comey means to claim as his own. I realize it's there to imply that Comey is fighting against lies, but then for parallelism, he should have written "lie fighting" or something.

Consider Superman's catchphrase "truth, justice, and the American way." Imagine writing "Lies, justice and the American way." You'd get that Superman was against the lies, because he's Superman (or, as I like to call him, Super Man).

But Comey isn't Superman. We're not sure he's the good guy. He should not have "Lies" in the title as if it's one of the things with which he means to associate himself.

And consider the alliteration. There are a lot of Ls: "Loyalty... Lies... Leadership." In the logic of alliteration, the outlier is "Truth"!

Also, consider the rhyming. You hear poetry whether you consciously acknowledge it or not. And the internal rhyme heard by your mind's ear is "High... Lie..."

So that's 3 reasons why "Lies" jumps out: rhyming, alliteration, and being the odd thing in the set. Maybe Comey is so steeped in virtue that something is making him say: I am lying.

224 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 224 of 224
pacwest said...

Remember Inga, you said you had no reason to discount the OIG report. Just the first blush and already it says one of the FBI's top men is a liar and leaker. The Comey implications are too obvious to miss.

I'm hoping you will be able to accept the DOJ investigation into the Clinton scandals as well.

Sebastian said...

Who you gonna pick?

"In a letter submitted by McCabe’s counsel after reviewing a draft of the report, McCabe argues that “the OIG should credit Mr. McCabe’s account over Director Comey’s” and complains that the report “paints Director Comey as a white knight carefully guarding FBI information, while overlooking that Mr. McCabe’s account is more credible for at least three key reasons ...”

Bay Area Guy said...

Crazy Comey wrote on Twitter, after the Flynn guilty plea:

“But justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream” Amos 5:24 https://www.instagram.com/p/BcKtEUUg4Qa/

10:01 AM - Dec 1, 2017

Biblical Scholar Comey botches the quote -it's actually "But LET justice roll down lke waters...," but that's a separate issue.

The problem is that Crazy Comey is celebrating a chickenshit process crime (misrecollection by Flynn), based on the illegal leak of an innocent, proper, conversation between Flynn and Kislyak, having not a thing to do with election tampering.

2 Questions:

1. After McCabe is indicted, will Biblical Scholar Comey favor us with more Biblical quotes?

2. If Flynn's guilty plea is withdrawn, will Biblical Scholar Comey convert to Judaism and become a Rabbi?

Bay Area Guy said...

Before Crazy Comey was fired, he was not very popular among Democrats:

Nancy Pelosi:

"So I think he made a mistake and these jobs, if you're not in it for a while, you can't take the heat and I think he just couldn't take the heat from the Republicans. It's really unfortunate because I do believe he is a good person Maybe, he's not in the right job." (CNN's "The Situation Room," 11/02/16)

Harry Reid:

MSNCB's JOY REID: "Do you believe Jim Comey should resign Senator Reid?" SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): "Of course, yes." (MSNBC's "AM Joy," 12/10/16)

Bernie Sanders:

ABC's GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: "Should he step down?" SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT): "I think he should take a hard look at what he's done and I think it would not be a bad thing for the American people if he did step down." (ABC's "This Week," 01/15/17)

There's a lot more, but I don't wanna cut and paste. It gets boring.

Of course, one could slog through "What Happened" by Ms. Hillary Clinton, or check the index for "Comey - pompous shithead" and cite those references. See, e.g., page 311.

walter said...

Maybe Stephie will replay that Bernie clip in the interview.....

tcrosse said...

I don't get it. Trump is supposed to be the Mob Boss, but Hillary is the one these guys fear. Of course, pissing Trump off will get you an angry Tweet. Pissing off HRC will get you dead.

walter said...

Maybe Biblical Scholar Comey was trying on the curtains in lieu of a proper Priest outfit.

Inga said...

“Remember Inga, you said you had no reason to discount the OIG report.”

Indeed I did. However, perjury is a crime, while lack of candor is an ethical violation. No crime has happened, hence no prosecution of McCabe.

Inga said...

“ Inga said...
Speaking of lying under oath, did Sessions lie during his confirmation hearings about never meeting with Russians?”

“Michael K said...No, next question.”

So he was engaging in “lack of candor”.

Michael K said...

So he was engaging in “lack of candor”.

Try not to be a fool, Inga. There was no "Talking to the Russians."

There was a group including a Russian who congratulated Sessions. Stop swallowing whole leftist lies.

Inga said...

“Try not to be a fool, Inga. There was no "Talking to the Russians."”

Try not be insulting Michael, unless you want me to insult you in return and you know damn well when I insult you, you’ll feel the sting.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

McCabe is a liar. Obama appointee lays it all out. Read it.

Scooter Libby was railroaded and Valerie Plame and her hack husband are both hack liars.,

Michael K said...

" you know damn well when I insult you, you’ll feel the sting."

Are you in Tucson ?

Try not to be a fool. I notice you made no effort to prove your allegation about Sessions, which has been disproven many times.

Inga said...

“Try not to be a fool. I notice you made no effort to prove your allegation about Sessions, which has been disproven many times.”

Michael,

It’s very fortunate that your intelligent FBI daughter has more good sense than her father, maybe she takes after her mother. I made no allegation about Sessions, I posed a question for the purpose of comparing the act of dissembling to outright lying. Sometimes you are very slow on the uptake, age maybe, who knows.

Achilles said...

Inga said...
“Remember Inga, you said you had no reason to discount the OIG report.”

Indeed I did. However, perjury is a crime, while lack of candor is an ethical violation. No crime has happened, hence no prosecution of McCabe.

Democrats suffer from a lack of candor.

Republicans commit perjury.

This is the stalinist world Inga's diseased thinking inhabits. They don't believe a thing they say. They are out for power over other people and they fully plan on killing/imprisoning their enemies.

The leftists are a cancer on a free society.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Inga said...

However, perjury is a crime, while lack of candor is an ethical violation. No crime has happened, hence no prosecution of McCabe.

Perjury is a crime. Perjury is what happened here. ( Maybe the oath that McCabe was under was some special sort that made lying under it not-a-crime, but I doubt it. )

If there is no prosecution here, then it will be for some reason other than the absence of a crime.

Note that there was nothing in the OIG report stating that there was no perjury or that there would be no prosecution. The OIG was not conducting a criminal investigation. The OIG does not have the authority to conduct a criminal investigation.

Unclebiffy said...

McCabe's latest defense (I was authorized to leak by my superiors) is a misdirection. He was asked twice by investigators whether he had leaked and he responded he had not been responsible for the leak. Once evidence showing that he was in fact responsible for the leak became apparent McCabe then revised his statements to investigators letting them know that he suddenly remembered authorizing the leaks but that he was given given approval to do so from his superiors.

Regardless of whether he was authorized to leak or not, he did perjure himself in his earlier statements to investigators by denying responsibility for the leaks. All the rest is just smoke and mirrors.

Inga said...

“The OIG does not have the authority to conduct a criminal investigation.”

The OIG has the authority to refer an investigation to the DOJ.

Inga said...

“When does the Inspector General refer an investigation for prosecution or civil action?

The Inspector General is required by law to refer cases to the Department of Justice if reasonable grounds exist to believe that a violation of Federal criminal law has occurred, and has the discretion to refer a case that merits civil action.”

https://www.nlrb.gov/who-we-are/inspector-general/oig-investigations

Michael K said...

I think the Utah USA will surprise some local lefties, and the lefties who clog the WSJ comments section, by indicting and convicting a few leftist heroes.

The timing seems pretty good for the November elections.

I would like to see Hillary in prison as retribution for her allies attacks on anyone associated with Trump, like the poor dope who paid a Playboy bunny $1.6 million.

There was no need to leak that except malice. Birth control pills are on every corner. A woman who gets pregnant from a brief encounter did it deliberately unless she is a retarded child.

Drago said...

Inga:

"The Inspector General is required by law to refer cases to the Department of Justice if reasonable grounds exist to believe that a violation of Federal criminal law has occurred, and has the discretion to refer a case that merits civil action.”

That would be the case...if there hadn't already been a Prosecutor assigned to work with Horowitz. But there has. His name is Huber. But again, pay no attention to him.

Nothing to see.

There are no other reports coming.

It's all good.

Drago said...

" He was asked twice by investigators whether he had leaked and he responded he had not been responsible for the leak."

He lied, under oath, multiple times.

We shall see what they do with that.

Bruce Hayden said...

As I noted in the next thread, the DoJ pretty much has to prosecute McCabe for his lying to the FBI, under oath, etc. otherwise, they will probably never get another conviction for that type of process crime. I would expect that any decent defense attorney would try to get the IG report issued today into evidence to counter any claim by the prosecution that the jury should believe FBI agents over their defendant. If they won’t prosecute the FBI #2 for egregious lying under oath, then why are prosecuting their client for less, maybe far less, in the case of Libby and Flynn.

Bruce Hayden said...

@Dr K - what I think Inga is talking about is that Sessions was one of a bunch of Senators who met with a bunch of diplomats. One of the diplomats was the Russian Ambassador. Which might mean that he met with the Russian Ambassador. But so did a bunch of other Senators. And he met with a bunch of other diplomats. Was he lying? Only someone with a pretty egregious double standard would believe that.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 224 of 224   Newer› Newest»