Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
In the last of this week’s Commentary podcasts, the gang (John Podhoretz, Abe Greenwald, and Noah Rothman) break down former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony before Congress: The headlines that are bad for Trump, the headlines that are good for Trump, and the revelations that will ultimately haunt the country. On that note, the hosts ruminate on the prospect of America’s norms prohibiting the corruption of federal public officials are gone forever. If they are, how can the country survive as we know it? Cheery stuff! Give a listen.
Subscribe to The Commentary Magazine Podcast in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.
The memos were leaked to the NYT the day before Trump tweeted about the tapes so the idea that Comey leaked them because of Trump’s tweets has been proven false. That you, “Journalists,” don’t know this is hilarious.
Not true. Trump tweeted on May 12th. The NYT’s story was May 16th.
Wow! This was a hard slog! My opinion of John Podhoretz went way, way down from where it had been. I toyed with canceling my Commentary subscription, plus the gift subs for my brothers — and then remembered I just renewed them all … but wait a minute: I don’t think I paid yet … hmm …
I was pretty much a Trump hater during the Republican primaries, and would have preferred any of the other 16 (17?) candidates to him. (I was planning to vote Libertarian but never got to the polls.) However, it seems JP’s ego is wrapped up in seeing Trump fail, just to prove him right. And I felt sorry for the cringing lackeys, who sounded like they were clearly reluctant to contradict their master. It’s only after listening to the podcast that I discovered that, yes, he really is their master; i.e., employer.
Well, they warned us they weren’t lawyers. Just a few minutes earlier, I had heard the great Andrew McCarthy explain that Trump had every right to exercise prosecutorial discretion, to redirect the FBI from one investigation to others he considered more important: potential cases far outstrip the resources available. (Thus, earlier Presidents ordered the FBI to make the KKK a priority.) It would be obstruction of justice only if there were a corrupt reason to permit Gen. Flynn to retire to obscurity, and no one has come up with one.
Then there is the absurdity of claiming Trump’s behavior is somehow a historic break with the “honesty and high standards” of prior Washington practice! I became a Republican because of Janet Reno’s behavior during the ever-proliferating Clinton scandals of the late Nineties. Some branch of the government in the hinterland would start investigating a looted bank or a crooked land deal; and Reno would announce that only she can investigate the Clintons and Gores, and send all the documents to Washington. And then, of course, the investigations would somehow fade away. Even the NY Times urged her to appoint special counsels, as the law required at the time, but she simply refused.
Now, that’s what I would call obstruction of justice but, being a Democrat, Reno did not suffer even a cursory investigation.
My question to John, Abe and Noah is this: OK complain all you want, what is the solution? Everyone can complain…
To quote the great Thomas Sowell: there are no solutions, only tradeoffs. If, alternatively, one asks “What tradeoff do you recommend?” my answer is to first take care that you have diagnosed the problem correctly. From what I can tell John, Abe, and Noah are doing about as well as anybody in seeking a valid diagnosis.
I like the Commentary podcast and respect the guys, but on this podcast I disagreed with them, and was conflicted because I do respect their opinions.
So I listened/read some other opinions on the matter (ie: Law Talk podcast Richard Epstein & John Yoo(Obstruction of Bachelorhood) and NRO/WaPo Andy McCarthy (It’s not Obstruction)) and I am relieved that my take on the matter has been vindicated and that on this particular topic the Commentary guys are, in my opinion, talking out of their blow holes.
Which only proves that things like the Comey hearings (or anything Donald Trump related) usually turns into a Rorschach Test on your opinion of Donald Trump.
@edisonparks – It is worth noting that what Epstein, Yoo, and McCarthy have in common is that they are all first-rate lawyers. The Commentary Musketeers should probably have discussed the legal aspects with some experts before they, er, spouted.
Yes, democrats are awful and have done awful things and gotten away with it. Doesn’t make Trump any better.
I just read Alan Dershowitz JWR (Trump did not obstruct justice) after I wrote the post … so add another.
Politely, Mr. Podhoretz may need to refresh himself on the implications and powers of the Unitary Executive under our Constitution. (Psst…I’m a #NeverTrumper who is still delighted that HRC is not POTUS.)
Comey’s admission that he is a coward is a good thing?!? Why would we want a coward as head of the FBI?