Comey watch: Milbank gives us Comey the God!

MONDAY, JULY 11, 2016

Just as it ever has been:
Back in 1935, novelist Robert Graves gave us Claudius the God.

The novel was a sequel to Graves' previous effort, I, Claudius. According to the leading authority, "the Modern Library ranked I, Claudius fourteenth on its list of the 100 best English-language novels of the 20th century."

Was the emperor Claudius really a god? We can't exactly tell you. But just last Wednesday, a leading "journalist" presented us with his successor:

He gave us Comey the God.

Dana Milbank performed the service in the Washington Post.Believe it or not, his column bore this headline:

"On Clinton's emails, no 'reasonable person' can disagree with Comey"

Imagine! Comey, the head of the FBI, had just unloosed a set of pronouncements. Displaying the unmistakable world view of the modern Potemkin press corps, Milbank announced that no reasonable person could disagree with his great decrees!

You'll note that Milbank's editor put quotation marks around two words in that headline. In the body of his piece, Milbank performed no such dodge.

Skepticism be damned! Milbank quoted at length from Comey's "powerful rebuke of Clinton's conduct." He then quoted Comey saying that no reasonable prosecutor would bring criminal charges in the Clinton case.

Plainly, these were the decrees of a god! Here's the way Milbank ended:
MILBANK (7/6/16): Much will, and has, been said about what my colleague Chris Cillizza described as Comey's "devastating" description of Clinton's antics. Conversely, many were saying before Comey even announced his decision that the investigation was rigged to exonerate Clinton.

But the bottom line is that a man whose reputation for integrity is as unimpeachable as it gets here in the city of Satan has said unequivocally that Clinton shouldn't be prosecuted. And she won't be, given that Justice Department prosecutors have no reason to overrule the FBI.

[...]

Comey's opposition to prosecution is what counts, not his words. He took pains to defend the FBI's integrity, reporting on the "thousands of hours" and the technical sleuthing of the investigation. "Only facts matter," he said, "and the FBI found them here in an entirely apolitical and professional way."

No reasonable person can disagree with Jim Comey.
No reasonable person can disagree with Comey the God!

According to Milbank, the only thing that matters here is Comey's opposition to prosecution. Given the way the upright director savaged Clinton for her alleged misconduct, that strikes us as an extremely naive assessment.

But of one thing there can be no doubt—Milbank had announced the presence of a god. No reasonable person can disagree with the judgments of Comey the Deity!

In a slightly more rational world, it would seem extremely strange to see a journalist say such a thing. But all through the years of the Clinton/Gore wars, our "journalists" have been strongly inclined to see accusers as gods.

For ourselves, we'll assume that Comey was sincere in the judgments he stated last week. But no public official is a god, not even the transplendent Comey. At one time, it was assumed that journalists understood this.

Did Comey show good judgment last week? Were his basic factual claims even accurate? Were his claims perhaps misleading in some way?

These questions need to be hashed out. We'll do so in a series of posts, but acolytes should make no mistake:

At the Washington Post, the accusers of the Clintons and Gore have always been understood to be gods. Last Wednesday, Milbank revived an ancient cult. Yesterday, on the front page, Helderman followed suit.

Some have disagreed with Comey the God. Voters should know what they've said.

22 comments:

  1. Hard to believe that Clinton could be innocent of wrongdoing when reporters use phrases like "Clinton's antics." That Hillary -- what's she up to now?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ask that mendacious c*nt David in Cal. He still thinks the GOP (and the media) didn't try hard enough during the Clinton wars.

      Delete
    2. After decades on the front lines of Arkansas politics, three Presidential campaigns, one impeachment, and multiple Congressional investigations, it is even harder to believe a Clinton would forget about the Clinton rules.

      Well, as they say, why let the pettiness of others get in the way of your convenience.

      Delete
  2. This is not a useful response to Milbank but a tantrum.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sure that if one would respectfully explain to Mr. Milbank that he should not bow to power, then he would stop doing it.

      Delete
    2. Mr. Milbank is the stupidest man in journalism. Chuck Todd is a close second. Calling out either is like shooting fish in a barrel.

      Delete
    3. An embarassment as a leader of Team Liberal. But he pleasures us dumb rubes so much.

      http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/liberal-columnist-dana-milbanks-ugliest-hits-an-instant-classic/

      Delete
  3. So, does anyone think that when the FBI finds no actionable incidents occurred that they should smear the individual publicly? Really? Is this in every instance or just when they don't like the individual's politics?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, I don't. Yes. Clinton Rules - only when a Clinton is involved.

      Delete
    2. Someone should have sent Hillary an e-mail reminder those rules were still in effect when she became Secretary of State. She probably just forgot.

      Delete
  4. I'm waiting to see Bob defend Hillary (and Bill) from Maureen Dowd's devastating article yesterday. It begins

    The Clinton Contamination
    Maureen Dowd

    WASHINGTON — IT says a lot about our relationship with Hillary Clinton that she seems well on her way to becoming Madam President because she’s not getting indicted.

    If she were still at the State Department, she could be getting fired for being, as the F.B.I. director told Congress, “extremely careless” with top-secret information. Instead, she’s on a glide path to a big promotion.

    And that’s the corkscrew way things go with the Clintons...


    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/10/opinion/sunday/the-clinton-contamination.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She would never have been fired over her email use. Obama might have suggested she change servers and that would have been that.

      Delete
    2. D in C, quoting Dowd to support your irrational anti-Clinton position is ludicrous. She is batty in her obsessive loathing of Clinton.

      Delete
  5. Little perspective here might be on order David. The Dowd article was neither devastating nor requiring a defense of Hillary. It was an expression of sour grapes.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Even the liberal Maureen Dowd is against Hillary! Thank you for sharing this vital information, David. I'd better vote for Mr Trump.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You mean "Even the journalist who hates Hillary the most continues to write anti-Hillary pieces".
      I hope you now realize how stupid you are.

      Delete
    2. A Perez, I'm pretty sure impCaesarAvg was being sarcastic.

      Delete
  7. More and more often, we think of the Robert Graves novel, I, Claudius, when we read the works of Bob Somerby.

    In the 1970s, the novel became a heavily watched PBS series. We watched the series first, read the novel later (along with its successor, Claudius the God).

    We forgot about it until Bob Somerby began repetitively using it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. anon 10:54, we well know you are a twerp. Do you have to keep reminding us?

      Delete
    2. Ah, but you repeat yourself, AC/MA

      Delete
  8. Many pundits have portrayed James Comey as God in the sense that he called Hillary "extremely reckless". But Somerby won't say anything, because his narrative has changed. He's rooting for Trump now in order to tell us "I told you so" in November.

    ReplyDelete
  9. HOW TO SAVE YOUR RELATIONSHIP
    Life is all about good and bad experience...i was hurting REAL bad when my husband left me but now i can't really believe that i am with my Ex-Husband again and With this little short time and just want to use it in thanking the great man that brought joy back to my life within 48 hours by bringing back my lover. Yes it was true that i had some difficulties with my lover but today i am back here to tell the world that Dr.goodluck brought my lover back to me. I have always heard of love spell but i never had an idea of how effective it can be. Well my time is up just contact Dr.goodluck at his email goodluck05spellcaster@gmail.com and you can also whatapp him or call with his mobile +2349059610309. To enable you have a taste of his great work

    ReplyDelete