The Comey/Rogers Hearing

The headlines I'm seeing everywhere: "FBI confirms Trump campaign being investigated for Russia ties! Trump's wiretapping lies refuted!"

The actual news, as far as I can see, is that the FBI confirmed an investigation into something by someone having something to do with Russia, but refused to comment.

Then, the FBI and the NSA chiefs both confirmed that a number of serious felonies had definitely been committed.
NUNES: Would an unauthorized disclosure of FISA-derived information to the press violate 18 USC 798, a section of the Espionage Act that criminalizes the disclosure of information concerning the communication and intelligence activities of the United States?

COMEY: Yes[.]


COMEY: All FISA applications review by the court collection by us pursuant to our FISA authority is classified.

GOWDY: The dissemination of which is a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison?

COMEY: Sure, dissemination -- unauthorized dissemination.

GOWDY: Unauthorized dissemination of classified or otherwise legally protected material punishable by a felony up to 10 years in federal prison.

COMEY: Yes. Yes, as it should be.
Gowdy's second line of questioning, which is too long to excerpt, went through a list of candidates for the honor of having committed that felony.

So, in the Russia matter, it may yet prove that someone connected in some way to Team Trump did something wrong. However, it is definitely the case that at least one person in high position committed serious felonies -- and the list of people to investigate is not all that long. Most of them were ranking political appointees in the previous administration.

This is the point at which a smart, thoughtful opposition would ask itself, "Do we really want to have this fight, or might we quietly reach an accommodation that would let all this slide into the rear view mirror?"

I doubt that is what is going to happen here.


Dad29 said...

in the Russia matter, it may yet prove that someone connected in some way to Team Trump did something wrong

OK. That means that Trump's server in his HQ was under surveillance. There is a 1 in a 1,000,000 chance that such surveillance was NOT necessary to draw the italicized conclusion, of course.

You say "Wiretapped" I say "Surveillance." Smells just like Obozo either way.

Anonymous said...

I watched the whole thing on CSPAN, delayed by about 30 minutes.

As I struggled to see past my own partisanship, I saw people from what I used to see as my own party attempting to make temporary and illegitimate advantage of our intelligence chiefs' responsible and well-explained refusal to comment on an ongoing investigation.

Those idiots need my vote in the next election, and they really worked hard to avoid getting it. And some of them were from my current home state.

I am one of those people who remembers Nancy Pelosi visiting Syria

and John F'n Kerry meeting with the Vietnamese in Paris.

So no, I am not impressed by the grandstanding.


Grim said...

Do you know, I was recently told that the John Kerry meeting the Vietnamese in Paris thing never happened? It's just fake news, probably Russian propaganda -- and, to prove this, the lady making this assertion pulled up the issue on Google. Lo and behold, only wild-eyed right-wing sites even mentioned it in the first few pages of results.

Kerry testified before the Senate that it happened, himself. It's his own sworn statement before the body he went on to join.

She'd never heard of it, refused to believe it, and Google was doing its best to help convince her that I was the one who was trapped in misinformation.

Ymar Sakar said...

Humans are easy to fool. That is why many of their souls will burn for eternity. It'll make a nice bonfire at least.

Grim said...

You're at odds with Abelard, here. Being fooled isn't sinful, though fooling yourself can be.