back
17 comments
This is bewildering to many who believe that his "Hillary's emails" investigation was a major, if not decisive factor in Trump's first election bid.

Then again, Trump never forgets the slightest slight. I've got Belleek china that isn't as fragile.

It shouldn't be, dude has come after a lot of people who started on his side and then ran afoul of his interests.
Comey thinks of himself as somebody who is simply pursuing justice. To hear him tell it, he was in a no-win scenario with the Clinton email servers. If he had failed to say anything it would have been perceived as partisan.

That makes him neutral, pursuing crimes by both sides. Which means Trump sees him as an enemy.

(Note: I don't buy Comey's explanation. He dropped that investigation two weeks later. It had already been investigated, finding no problems worth prosecuting. So choosing that particular day does not seem neutral to me.)

Comey also investigated Russiagate which wasn't a good look for Trump.
Trump is trying his Greatest Hits through the winter. Barack Obama will eventually be called to answer for having too white a voice.
> The federal prosecutor in Virginia who had been tasked with pursuing the case resigned last week after drawing Trump's wrath for expressing doubts about the case

What's Alina Habba doing these days?

> What's Alina Habba doing these days?

She’s being corrupt in New Jersey. Totally different.

Ken White aka Popehat is an interesting account to follow if you want an informed take to keep up with the terrifying judicial coup that's been going on for a while and seems to have metastized more recently.

It also contains the appropriate level of anger that befits the situation which you don't get as journalists calmly take dictation on the next domino toppling in the fall of the American empire:

https://bsky.app/profile/kenwhite.bsky.social

As a christian right-wing man he's allowed to be angry at this kind of stuff in a way that isn't socially acceptable for some other people.

Emotional takes and angry takes specifically aren't helping. Would prefer well reasoned, detached takes. Also not sure why the race or religion of the speaker is relevant.
What if the well reasoned, detached take is that you should be angry about this?
Is there a big list of Republicans that have been fucked over by Trump?

We all need cheered up sometimes with the world being so crazy and everything from Ted Cruz's wife getting called ugly to Bolton and Comey getting arrested is a small salve of schadenfreude for the utter chaos they've collectively helped unleash.

Instead of wading into the partisan morass of the current topic, perhaps we could reflect upon this parallel:

https://ccrjustice.org/ccrs-assessment-obama-administrations...

>Despite the fact that the prosecution of officials responsible for serious human rights abuses is required under both domestic and international law, President Obama has repeatedly indicated his reluctance to pursue prosecutions for these crimes, saying that he prefers to look forward rather than backward.

>In August, the Obama administration announced new transfer policy recommendations that endorse the continued practice of rendition: the forced transfer of a person to another country to be detained, interrogated and possibly tortured.

That might be better suited for a post on that topic?
When what-aboutism is the hammer, everything looks like a nail
This isn't really a great parallel - Trump feels he himself was slighted, Obama chose not to go after the crimes of his predecessors' officers. A better parallel to what you posted is ICE relocating "illegal immigrants" (some of which are, some of which got denaturalized, some of which were just in the wrong place at the wrong time) into countries they've never been to and imprisoning them and torturing them. I'm not sure how this parallels what is clearly Trump going after his sworn enemies, as he has said he would do time and time again.
>Instead of wading in...

I regard it as important context. Yes, the country seems to be devolving into partisan recrimination. Similarly the comments...

However, there was a time when obvious crimes like torture and false pretenses for war were excused in the name of decorum. Whether Comey is guilty or not, whether the Russia Hoax was criminal or not, it is easy to see how the proceedings are becoming untenable.

But then, was a system that excused torture and false pretenses for war on a sound footing to begin with? Something is rotten on the Potomac.

The narrow partisan takes supporting or reacting with outrage to their opponent's weaponization of the judicial system seem irrelevant in comparison. There's a larger picture worth looking at if we can expand beyond the narrow view.

Everything the Center for Constitutional Rights is doing lately is far more important.