BloggeRhythms

As good a recap of the Comey testimony yesterday in Congress comes from Colin Madine @breitbart.com who listed 6 major points.

"1) Trump was not under investigation by the FBI

2) James Comey leaked documents to the media

3) The obstruction of justice case against Trump just went up in smoke

4) Comey says the New York Times published fake news"

This one’s particularly important because it addresses the left’s continued “fake news” assault on Trump. 

Mr. Madine writes: “James Comey had a few things to say about the reporting of the New York Times which reported on collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

“Senator Risch questioned Comey about the Times, asking “So the American people can understand this, that report by the New York Times was not true, is that a fair statement?”

“It was not true,” Comey said. “Again, all of you know this, maybe the American people don’t. The challenge — I’m not picking on reporters about writing stories about classified 
information… [the challenge is] that people talking about it often don’t really now what’s going on and those of us who actually know what’s going on are not talking about it.”

"5) Loretta Lynch meddled in the Clinton investigation"

This is one that should instigate further Congressional inquiry and very well may turn out to be the smoking gun that leads to the culpability of both Clinton’s and the Obama White House. 

“Comey discussed the involvement of President Obama’s Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, in the investigation of Hillary Clinton. He stated that Lynch made an odd request for how the FBI investigation should be described.

“At one point the attorney general had directed me not to call it investigation, but instead to call it a matter, which concerned and confused me,” Comey said.

"6) James Comey sounds like every disgruntled former employee ever."

Verification of how fruitless the Democrat fabrication against Trump turned out to be came from none other than the ultra-leftist MSNBC host Chris Matthews who, according to Eddie Scarry @washingtonexaminer.com, said “the accusation that President Trump directly colluded with Russia to interfere in the U.S. election "came apart" following former FBI Director James Comey's testimony in front of Congress.

“The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers, you might say, is that somewhere along the line in the last year is the president had something to do with colluding with the Russians … to affect the election in some way," Matthews said on MSNBC, following the testimony.

"And yet what came apart this morning was that theory," Matthews said, listing two reasons why. First, he said Comey revealed that "Flynn wasn't central to the Russian investigation," and secondly, he said that kills the idea that Flynn might have been in a position to testify against Trump.

"And if that's not the case, where's the there-there?" Matthews said.

And then, another perspective from one who’s no friend of Trump’s was presented by Senator John McCain during the public congressional hearing itself. 

While McCain’s line of questioning seemed out of place at the start and very well may have gone over the heads of many, he was spot-on with his inquiry.

In that regard, the CBS outlet newyork.cbslocal.com, titled its article yesterday: “Comey, Twitter Users "A Little Confused By McCain's Questions During Hearing"

“Senator John McCain had some interesting questions for former FBI Director James Comey during his appearance in front of the committee on Thursday.

“While other committee members focused on meetings and phone calls between President Donald Trump and the former FBI director, McCain harped on a probe into Hillary Clinton’s emails.”

McCain asked: “In the case of Hilary Clinton you made the statement that there wasn’t sufficient evidence to bring a suit against her although it had been very careless in her behavior, but you did reach a conclusion in that case that it was not necessary to further pursue her. Yet at the same time in the Trump case Mr. Comey, you said that there was not enough information to make a conclusion. Tell me the difference between your conclusion as far as former Secretary Clinton is concerned and Mr. Trump.” 

Comey told McCain that while the Clinton investigation had been wrapped up, the Trump probe was ongoing when Comey was fired.

“The American people have a whole lot of questions out there particularly since you just emphasized the role that Russia played. And obviously she was a candidate for president at the time so she was clearly involved in this whole situation where fake news as you just described it ‘big deal’ took place,” McCain continued, “You’re gonna have to help me out here. In other words, we’re complete in the investigation and anything that former Secretary Clinton had to do with the campaign is over and we don’t have to worry about it anymore?”

The former FBI director replied that he didn’t understand the line of questioning.
“I’m a little confused senator,” Comey said.

So were a considerable number of people watching the proceedings who took to Twitter to express their confusion with many wondering what McCain was getting at.

McCain, however, continued to press the point asking again how one investigation could be closed, while another remained open.

“So you’ve got one candidate that you’re done with, and another candidate that you have a long way to go, is that correct?” he continued.

Comey reiterated that the probes into the Clinton emails and the Trump campaign were separate investigations.

“So both President Trump and former candidate Clinton are both involved in the investigation, yet one of them you said there are going to be no charges, and the other one the investigation continues. Well, I think there’s a double standard there to tell you the truth,” McCain said.

Following the hearing, McCain acknowledged that his questions “went over people’s heads,” joking that the inquiry was affected by an evening spent watching the Arizona Diamondbacks.

Yet, what very well might be the most important element of McCain’s decision to take up this line of questioning is that he now plans to “submit that question to Comey in writing.” Which means that pursuing the Clinton involvement may be very far from over.

And while his questions certainly did go over the heads of many readers, there were plenty of others who undoubtedly understood McCain clearly as can be seen in samples of comments below: 

godbless commented: "Funny i understood perfectly what Senator McCain was asking Comey and i ask it too. How come hillary;s charges were dropped when not only did she make a deal with the Russians on our uranium after which her husband was paid millions for a simple speech, and she had a private email which allowed the world to see U.S. confidential 
information. Old slick willy meeting with the former attorney general means nothing while a minor conversation from President Trump called for serious charges and an investigation. meanwhile Comey called his so call friend a professor and told him everything so he could so his friend would demand the crooked investagition we saw today. Comey is a LIAR and simply covering up for the clintons. President Trump should have fired him when he won the election.

“The swamp which we call congress is attempting to drive president Trump out of office because he intends to stop the corruption and greed in our political parties..NEWS FLASH, the people put President Trump in office and any attempt to remove him will bring on a revolte from the people.”

Fiery Blue wrote: “I’m no big fan, but I actually was pleasantly surprised at the focus of McCain’s question, and am confused that other people are confused at what he was driving at.

“The apparent and obvious Double standard here should be clear to anyone who is listening to determine the truth.”

Randy Dandy wrote: “I agree. I understood where McCain was going with his line of q’s also.”

“Dropping the investigation against the most corrupt politician EVER to run for the presidency was nothing less than a conspiracy and Comey’s right in the middle.”

Don Zski wrote: “You did fine Senator….The Libs cannot follow rational thought, their bad, not yours…the Clintons are behind this whole mess, Hill-Bill Lost!”

Herb Rapoza wrote: “Seems pretty straight forward to me. McCain wants to know why the two “investigations” are being handled differently. I’d like to know that myself.”

Jonathan Miller wrote: “It was straight forward enough for me. McCain pointed out that Comey drew an early conclusion about Hillary with tons of evidence to the contrary, but here we are months later eating nothingburgers and Demwits turning to calls of obstruction instead of violation of laws. If you are innocent, how can you obstruct justice. The burden of proof is on the accuser”

Thus, if CBS New York truly concludes that a late night of baseball resulted in a confusing line of inquiry during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, they need to hire some writers having knowledge of simple English and an understanding of the intertwining's of basic law. And if they can’t grasp the context of issues themselves, they should cease disseminating their ill-conceived conclusions on others.    

Moving on, another indication of where the Democrats lack of a platform -other than bashing Republicans- is taking their party can be seen in an article @nytimes.com by Thomas B. Edsall, headed: “The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought.”

The text begins: “Sifting through the wreckage of the 2016 election, Democratic pollsters, strategists and sympathetic academics have reached some unnerving conclusions.

“What the autopsy reveals is that Democratic losses among working class voters were not limited to whites; that crucial constituencies within the party see its leaders as alien; and that unity over economic populism may not be able to turn back the conservative tide.

“Equally disturbing, winning back former party loyalists who switched to Trump will be tough: these white voters’ views on immigration and race are in direct conflict with fundamental Democratic tenets.

“Some of these post-mortem conclusions are based on polling and focus groups conducted by the Democratic super PAC Priorities USA; others are drawn from a collection of 13 essays published by The American Prospect.”

Applying polling data to prove his premise that today’s Democrats are very much out of touch with what has always been the heart of their party’s needs and wants, Edsall provides a considerable number of statistical results, well-worth reading: Here’s a link: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/08/opinion/the-democratic-party-is-in-worse-shape-than-you-thought.html?_r=0

In closing, whereas today’s items require some time and consideration due to their complexities, it’s best to stop right here and take up the subject once more tomorrow, so:

That’s it for today folks.

Adios