STILL WATERS RUN DEEP
STILL WATERS RUN DEEP: As I expected, Wednesday’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee didn’t provide many fireworks. Senators of both parties were frustrated by the bland non-answers from Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers. It would have been easy for both men to say, “No, there was no attempt to obstruct justice.” It would also have been easy for both men to say “Yes, there was an attempt to obstruct justice.” Both sides can now spin the non-responses as proof that they were right all along.
Until events prove me wrong, I will continue to believe that both senior members of the intelligence community are holding their cards close to their vest, saving their secrets for either closed door hearings (in which case we’ll soon see leaks), or for Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel investigation (in which case we’ll just have to wait).
One thing to keep in mind. The American intelligence community knows that they are prime targets in whenTrump attempts to scapegoat “the deep state.” They will bend over backwards to avoid the appearance of anti-Trump bias.
On the other hand, they say there’s no such thing as an ex-spy. Dan Coats’ predecessor, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper was remarkably blunt when he spoke earlier this week to Australia’s National Press Club. Clapper, who resigned on January 20, said that the Watergate scandal “pales in comparison” to the Russian’s successful attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election.
Fortunately for those who wanted to see some headlines on Wednesday, former FBI Director James Comey released a transcript of his opening statement to the Senate Intelligence Committee. It too can be spun in different ways. It appears to confirm that Comey did, in fact, tell Trump that he was not at that time the subject of a counter-intelligence operation. That will be enough for Republicans to celebrate – at least temporarily.
But Comey is a careful man. Responding very specifically to Trump’s literal question, he did not appear to rule out the possibility that Trump was the subject of a separate criminal investigation. Comey also made a point of noting that the counter-intelligence investigation could implicate Trump at at some future point. Comey was fired on May 9, almost a month ago. Who knows what investigators have learned in the past four weeks?
There was little comfort for Trump and his Republican enablers in the rest of Comey’s prepared testimony. Whether Trump crossed a legally actionable line or not, reasonable observers would conclude that he attempted to persuade Comey to shut down the investigation into Mike Flynn.
Similarly, Trump’s repeated insistence on personal loyalty from the FBI Director is obviously inappropriate. When government officials take their oath of office, they swear to support and defend the Constitution, not the President du jour.
Two other points worth noting. For some comic relief, Comey made a point of noting that Trump kept bringing up the infamous (and possibly apocryphal) pee tape kompromat that nobody really believes in but that everybody wishes were true. Finally, Comey wrote that Trump seemed quite willing to throw his “satellite” minions under the bus, if the FBI had the dead to rights. Typically, all he cared about was his own personal reputation. I wonder how many of those satellites are having serious talks with their lawyers today.
Now we know Comey's opening salvo. We'll see what else he chooses to say when Senators begin asking questions.