One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
National Review’s Andrew McCarthy Slams President Trump’s Smear of James Comey
Jul 24, 2017 10:07:36   #
slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas
 
Posted at 10:01 am on May 21, 2017 by Jay Caruso

Nobody can accuse Andrew McCarthy of being anti-Trump. McCarthy defended Trump’s travel ban executive order in its original form. He’s said the Susan Rice unmasking revelation rises to the level of Watergate and disagrees with others that what’s contained in the Comey “memo” does not rise to the degree of obstruction of justice.

It’s important to buttress any sniping that McCarthy is just some NeverTrump hack who wants to stand in line to throw daggers at President Trump because his latest piece is a strong rebuke to Trump’s latest smear of Jim Comey.

He writes:

For what it may be worth, I think the “Russia collusion” aspect of the president’s remarks misses the point. Despite my admiration for my friend David French’s considerable legal sk**ls, I have been underwhelmed by his theory of obstruction by multiple steps (i.e., that Trump may have obstructed the FBI’s Russia investigation not merely by pressuring Comey to drop the probe of Michael Flynn, but by a series of actions of which the Trump-Comey conversation is just part). When it gets down to brass tacks, the “obstruction” issue hinges on whether there is any real proof of knowing collusion between the Trump camp and the Putin camp. If that were to emerge, the obstruction would be a slam dunk. If it remains a febrile Democrat hope forever in search of evidence, there is no step in David’s pattern that can’t be explained away.

He goes on:

No, the real question raised by the president’s latest intemperate remarks and the company in which they were made is whether the president knows the good guys from the bad guys.

Jim Comey is a patriot. That I have disagreed with him on some big things, does not change that. Disagreeing is what Americans do – that’s self-government by people who care passionately about how we are governed.

But let’s assume for argument’s sake that I am wrong. Let’s say that, as Sean Spicer says, Comey is a grandstander who has intentionally politicized an investigation in order to undermine the president. He’s still not the Russians. “America First,” remember? Comey is an American who believes in America; Lavrov and Kislyak are Putin operatives who oppose America at every turn. Comey believes in freedom and the rule of law; the Putin regime believes in Soviet tyranny and the rule of Putin.

Comey is one of us. Lavrov and Kislyak are two of them.

Wow.

There is no excuse for a president of the United States to run down an American for the consumption of our Russian adversaries – particularly an American who is fighting against Russia’s operations against our country. It is indefensible.

I hope some others are paying attention. There are pro-Trump people who are so reflexively willing to defend Trump, that while they may not agree with what Trump said, they’re certainly not calling him out.

McCarthy goes on to agree that he feels Jim Comey revealed too much about ongoing investigations but also made the argument the President could stop it. He could simply order Comey not to testify citing the necessity not to discuss ongoing investigations and that if there was anything Congress needed to know it should be made in a closed-door session.

Trump didn’t do that, instead, he smeared Comey to our Russian counterparts. McCarthy closes:

But I would not be laboring under the delusion that the leaking of what Trump said is more outrageous than the substance of what Trump said. What the president said, especially in light of whom he said it to, is reprehensible.

Yes, it is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Jay Caruso is the Assistant Managing Editor at RedState.com as well as a contributor to National Review, The Weekly Standard, & Conservative Review. The National Review is an American semi-monthly magazine focusing on news and commentary pieces on political, social, and cultural affairs. The magazine was founded by the author William F. Buckley Jr. in 1955. It is currently edited by Rich Lowry.

Since its founding, the magazine has played a significant role in the development of conservatism in the United States, helping to define its boundaries and promoting fusionism while establishing itself as a leading voice on the American right.

Reply
Jul 24, 2017 11:08:52   #
archie bunker Loc: Texas
 
slatten49 wrote:
Posted at 10:01 am on May 21, 2017 by Jay Caruso

Nobody can accuse Andrew McCarthy of being anti-Trump. McCarthy defended Trump’s travel ban executive order in its original form. He’s said the Susan Rice unmasking revelation rises to the level of Watergate and disagrees with others that what’s contained in the Comey “memo” does not rise to the degree of obstruction of justice.

It’s important to buttress any sniping that McCarthy is just some NeverTrump hack who wants to stand in line to throw daggers at President Trump because his latest piece is a strong rebuke to Trump’s latest smear of Jim Comey.

He writes:

For what it may be worth, I think the “Russia collusion” aspect of the president’s remarks misses the point. Despite my admiration for my friend David French’s considerable legal sk**ls, I have been underwhelmed by his theory of obstruction by multiple steps (i.e., that Trump may have obstructed the FBI’s Russia investigation not merely by pressuring Comey to drop the probe of Michael Flynn, but by a series of actions of which the Trump-Comey conversation is just part). When it gets down to brass tacks, the “obstruction” issue hinges on whether there is any real proof of knowing collusion between the Trump camp and the Putin camp. If that were to emerge, the obstruction would be a slam dunk. If it remains a febrile Democrat hope forever in search of evidence, there is no step in David’s pattern that can’t be explained away.

He goes on:

No, the real question raised by the president’s latest intemperate remarks and the company in which they were made is whether the president knows the good guys from the bad guys.

Jim Comey is a patriot. That I have disagreed with him on some big things, does not change that. Disagreeing is what Americans do – that’s self-government by people who care passionately about how we are governed.

But let’s assume for argument’s sake that I am wrong. Let’s say that, as Sean Spicer says, Comey is a grandstander who has intentionally politicized an investigation in order to undermine the president. He’s still not the Russians. “America First,” remember? Comey is an American who believes in America; Lavrov and Kislyak are Putin operatives who oppose America at every turn. Comey believes in freedom and the rule of law; the Putin regime believes in Soviet tyranny and the rule of Putin.

Comey is one of us. Lavrov and Kislyak are two of them.

Wow.

There is no excuse for a president of the United States to run down an American for the consumption of our Russian adversaries – particularly an American who is fighting against Russia’s operations against our country. It is indefensible.

I hope some others are paying attention. There are pro-Trump people who are so reflexively willing to defend Trump, that while they may not agree with what Trump said, they’re certainly not calling him out.

McCarthy goes on to agree that he feels Jim Comey revealed too much about ongoing investigations but also made the argument the President could stop it. He could simply order Comey not to testify citing the necessity not to discuss ongoing investigations and that if there was anything Congress needed to know it should be made in a closed-door session.

Trump didn’t do that, instead, he smeared Comey to our Russian counterparts. McCarthy closes:

But I would not be laboring under the delusion that the leaking of what Trump said is more outrageous than the substance of what Trump said. What the president said, especially in light of whom he said it to, is reprehensible.

Yes, it is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Jay Caruso is the Assistant Managing Editor at RedState.com as well as a contributor to National Review, The Weekly Standard, & Conservative Review. The National Review is an American semi-monthly magazine focusing on news and commentary pieces on political, social, and cultural affairs. The magazine was founded by the author William F. Buckley Jr. in 1955. It is currently edited by Rich Lowry.

Since its founding, the magazine has played a significant role in the development of conservatism in the United States, helping to define its boundaries and promoting fusionism while establishing itself as a leading voice on the American right.
Posted at 10:01 am on May 21, 2017 by Jay Caruso b... (show quote)


Yeah, The Donald does need to learn to keep his pie hole shut.
I don't like the way Comey did some things, but the president shouldn't be talking about it anywhere in public.

Reply
Jul 24, 2017 11:29:28   #
slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas
 
archie bunker wrote:
Yeah, The Donald does need to learn to keep his pie hole shut.
I don't like the way Comey did some things, but the president shouldn't be talking about it anywhere in public.

I agree, Arch. President Trump, often, is his own worst antagonist. I envision being his lawyer as tortuous.

Reply
 
 
Jul 24, 2017 11:57:30   #
archie bunker Loc: Texas
 
slatten49 wrote:
I agree, Arch. President Trump, often, is his own worst antagonist. I envision being his lawyer as tortuous.


Hey, one lawyer being tortured is a starting point!

Reply
Jul 25, 2017 11:21:36   #
CanSEE
 
Personal opinion . . .While Comey was being questioned he said he WAS NOT INTERESTED in finding out who was doing the leaking.
I think THAT was when Trump set his teeth against Comey. No one seems to remember that

Reply
Jul 25, 2017 19:39:35   #
GmanTerry
 
CanSEE wrote:
Personal opinion . . .While Comey was being questioned he said he WAS NOT INTERESTED in finding out who was doing the leaking.
I think THAT was when Trump set his teeth against Comey. No one seems to remember that


My concern about Comey is that he presented Hillary with a gold plated "Get Out Of Jail FREE" card. He bypassed the Justice Dept which we all know was going to give her the exact same "Get Out Of Jail FREE" card. That subverted the law and was criminal. Hillary should have been held to the exact same standards as any other American citizen. She wasn't, and Comey helped her escape. He may have been trying to bypass the uproar that indicting Hillary while she was the candidate of a major party for President, would have caused, but the law is the law and it is supposed to apply to all equally. If Hillary had been indicted the Democrats would have gone crazy. This is just another example of the sewer that American politics have become. Term limits would help. Nobody should be in Congress for decades. They become more attached to the lobbyists who supply them with piles of cash than the dumb American people who re-elect them constantly. It comes down to accepting piles of cash or doing what is good for the country. The cash always wins. Ask Maxine Waters, with her four and a half million dollar house.

Semper Fi

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.