CNN Interviews Comey on Every Alleged Violation of the Rule of Law . . . Except His Own

Former FBI Director James Comey sat down for a remarkable interview on CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360” this week. The interview was able to evade any mention of the findings of misconduct and false statements made by Comey. It was impressive how in a target rich environment CNN was still able to hit the small spaces between the scandals.

Cooper cut to the chase and raised the current campaign for president. Comey did not disappoint and declared Trump a “threat to the rule of law.”

I do not object to Comey voicing such an opinion. Comey then went further to declare that the GOP was now a “cult” and held forth on the need to protect the rule of law against political bias.

For those of us who have been long critics of Comey, the interview was almost a mocking parody.

Comey recently celebrated the indictment of Trump by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg despite even some liberal experts denouncing the charges as a political prosecution. The political weaponization of the criminal justice system was declared by Comey to be “a good day.”

The former FBI director, who has been teaching and speaking on government ethics, joined others in celebrating the upcoming arrest of Trump because nothing says “ethical leadership” like a patently political prosecution.

Comey declined to prosecute Hillary Clinton on her email scandal despite finding that she violated federal rules and handled classified material “carelessly.”

He declared, “Ethical leaders lead by seeing above the short term, above the urgent or the partisan, and with a higher loyalty to lasting values, most importantly the truth.”

Yet now Comey is heralding a raw political prosecution.

Cooper also did not ask Comey about the blistering report of Special Counsel John Durham on the repeated failure of his own leadership in pushing an investigation without sufficient evidence. Under his leadership, the FBI took a false Russian collusion theory pushed by the Clinton campaign and continued the investigation despite early refutation of the underlying sources and claims. That included warnings from American intelligence that the agency was using suspected Russian disinformation funneled through the Clinton campaign.

FBI leadership, including then-Director James Comey, was “fired up” about the alleged secret communications channel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank. That was also a false allegation created and pushed by the Clinton campaign.

It was Comey who was fired after former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein cited him for “serious mistakes” and violating “his obligation to ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the traditions of the Department and the FBI.”

It was Comey who violated federal laws and removed FBI material (including reported classified material) after being fired and then leaked information to the media.

None of that was relevant to an interview on allegations of misconduct at the FBI and protecting the rule of law.

It was akin to interviewing Joseph Hazelwood on good maritime practices without mentioning the Exxon Valdez.

For Comey, it was just another “good day” in the media.

93 thoughts on “CNN Interviews Comey on Every Alleged Violation of the Rule of Law . . . Except His Own”

  1. “None of that was relevant to an interview on allegations of misconduct at the FBI and protecting the rule of law.”

    The Left’s premise (yet again): When your goal is “noble,” it’s anything goes.

    I wonder: Do the pathologically dishonest grasp that they are destroying the integrity of the very institutions they work in? My guess is, no — that they have neither the knowledge nor the self-awareness to understand the swath of their destruction.

  2. The Honorable Mr. Turley:
    I have been watching analysis such as yours on the FBI Russia-gate scandal/investigation/witchhunt and almost everyone leaves out the probability that all federal employees, permanent or temporary (e.g. the Mueller investigation) committed the same felony during their investigations. If the FBI & DOJ knew that Hillary Clinton cooked up the Russian collusion theory way back in 2016, then they committed a misappropriation of federal resources, a felony, if they used any federal employees, databases, computers, employment payments, etc, etc, etc. during their investigations. This especially applies to the DOJ and upper FBI management. I haven’t even heard of this being in the Durham report.

    1. WHAT felony? Hillary Clinton did NOT “cook up” anything. Russians hacked into her email account and that of the DNC and released the information they obtained. She was a victim of the hacking. This is how and why the Mueller investigation started.

    1. Stephanie Wilson, thank you for your well thought out adroitly presented opinion so dramatically supported by nothing other than your emotions. If your going to troll you should make an attempt to present your argument with a greater style and panache. Short of these attributes your post must be filed in the weak sauce file. Surely you can do better than this. Then again, maybe you can’t.

  3. Comey on CNN. Anyone still buying any of that deserves exactly what they endure. Liz Cheney is undoubtedly the ‘Conservative’ they still trust, too. Whatever. The rest of us have SO moved on.

    My only caveat at this point is that in certain places overseas, this is quite literally the only American news many folks get, even if it is filtered through The Guardian or Al Jazeera on the surface. The man is a clown that belongs behind bars or at the least in exile. Thank god for internet video archives of people speaking actual words with their actual mouths.

    They really do think we are stupid and beneath them.

  4. What a total political animal is this Commy? and how do we know? Because like every crooked political hack from this failed administration, when they swear to something they are not,
    you can be sure that is their actual identity… Except for Biden who really doesn’t know who he is until he is given his lying points to read to whoever will listen. These days, even CNN
    doesn’t want to listen… (must be too painful for them to hear an echo of their own vacuous propaganda).

  5. “It was akin to interviewing Joseph Hazelwood on good maritime practices without mentioning the Exxon Valdez.”

    Very true.

    I would also be willing to wager that Cooper was instructed that he was not allowed to ask those questions. Or that he voluntarily made the decision that he would not ask those questions.

  6. Rule of Law??? Traitor jimbo comey Knowingly, Lied to the fisa court so the “agenjcy” could Spy on Candidate, President and Former President Trump!!! They ALL knew this was a Bogus Witchhunt, from the Start! jimbo Illegally gave an Enemy documents in an Attempt to take down the President of the United States of America and More…

    Hey jimbo comey! Come on down! There’s NO Statute of Limitations on TREASON… I hope to watch jimbo Hang in person! His trial would be a joke ” Well… between your statements and the Durham Report… you get to choose Hanging or Firing Squad… Let’s set the Gallows up on the Capital Steps/Grounds!!! Once WE break the ice I believe there will be Thousands of Traitors in on this Scam Against the American People! I think that Ashli Babbitt Day would be a good time to kick this little party off! Hopefully that will discourage attempted Coups for another couple hundred years… I want the Hot Chocolate concession!!!

    Kind of an Ironic ending for mr “rule of law”, eh?… 🙂

  7. Finally….the question millions of Americans are asking, is thrown in the face within the White House itself, on their turf, their dime, while the cameras are rolling. Bravo

    New York Post reporter Steven Nelson, Q: “What do you say to the majority of Americans who believe that the president is himself corrupt?”

    National Security Council spokesman John Kirby, A: “Wow… The president has spoken to this and there’s nothing to these claims….”

    1. Estovir, this is just a variation of Noxon’s “the people have to know that their president isn’t a crook” line. Sadly our young people have no knowledge of or interest in history. Also sadly, the media used to care about the president being a crook, but then again the president wasn’t a D.

  8. Much like the other members of the DOJ and FBI Russia/Trump collusion Clinton criminal conspiracy cabal, Comey knows he is an “untouchable” when it comes to the crimes those agencies committed. All of them know where the “other bodies are buried” and know it is in their best interest to keep pretending they were just upholding “the rule of law”.

  9. When you look in the dictionary the word “Pompous” ass there is a picture of James Comey .

  10. The former FBI director, who has been teaching and speaking on government ethics . . .

    In other news, Bernie Madoff is teaching a course on investment ethics, Jeffrey Epstein is teaching a course on sexual ethics, George Santos is teaching a course on electoral ethics, and Elizabeth Holmes is teaching a course on business ethics.

    1. Old Man from Kansas, don’t forget to sign up for the class Svelaz is teaching on how not to become a Democrat operative.

  11. JT should have provided the following interview context to help the reader. While AC asked a few upfront questions on current issues, the purpose of the interview was to discuss Comey’s new book — a crime novel.

  12. ‘The usual suspects’ have regaled us with their predictable diatribes in support and defense of the besotted of moral and ethical turpitude infesting and corrupting the legislative and executive branches, aided and abetted by their equally wretched and depraved minions on CNN and elsewhere. Some are gone, yet too many still remain.

  13. Just like Benedict Arnold Comey will be declaring his loyalty on his death bed. Comey knew all along that the RussiaGate rumors were untrue but he continued his quest to save the nation. There was Trump and there was Comey but only one of these men is a traitor to his nation and it’s not the guy in the red hat. However, there is a bit of sadness to see a man without a nation on TV.

    1. The Biden family is possibly more corrupt than most political families. But this is not really about the Biden’s.
      Nor is it about sending anyone to jail.

      The “story” here is about the left as a whole – not the Biden’s.

      It is about the enormous conspiracy to lie to the american people about the Biden’s about pretty much everything.
      It is about the CONTINUING complicity of those in government.
      It is about government targeting people politically while turning a blind eye to the malfeasance of the politically favored
      It is about the complicity of the media, and social media in this.

      It is not about the corruption of the Biden’s, it is about the corruption of “the deep state”, the media, the left.

  14. Comey meant to say “threat to HIS rule of law.”.
    Comey is a living joke. He a disgrace to the law and his Alma mater. Is he the kind of product and ethics for which the University of Chicago Law School wishes to be known?
    Anderson Cooper does not fail to deliver yet another mediocre performance.

  15. Jonathan: Sorry to barge in on the interesting discussion of James Comey but I have a Q that has been bothering me for some time–and maybe you or your loyal followers can help me. The Q is how so we define an “authoritarian”? Now the first names that naturally come to mind are Hitler, Mussolini, Batista in Cuba, the generals in Argentina or Pinochet in Chile. But I have someone in mind closer to home–who is a candidate in next year’s presidential election. I have listed below some of the characteristics that might help us in our quest for the answer:

    1. The person I have in mind lost the last presidential election fair and square. But he didn’t like the voter’s choice so he sent his supporters to violently overturn the election results. When that didn’t work and he was forced to leave office he illegally took government top secret and other confidential docs back to his presidential residence in exile. There he hid the docs from the government claiming they belonged to him not the government.

    2. Now this same person is facing a host of civil and criminal prosecutions for his illegal acts. He claims, as the former president, he is immune from prosecution. He doesn’t recognize the judiciary as a co-equal branch of government. He claims he is the victim of a “witch hunt” by judges and government prosecutors who he labels “Communists and Marxists”. He hurls personal insults at the judges and prosecutors–even at their families. He calls for his supporters to rise up and defend him with another insurrection.

    3. This person believes that he and he alone can solve world and domestic problems. He says: “In 2016, I declared, ‘I am your voice'”. Now he says: “Today, I add: I am your warrior. I am your justice and for those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution”.

    4. During this campaign season this candidate for the highest office in the land promises to abolish the 14th Amendment. As one of his first acts this candidate promises to use an Executive Order to bar the children of undocumented immigrants from receiving citizenship at birth. He says he can do this because of his “correct interpretation of the law”.

    Now I know what you are thinking. If these actions and rhetoric by a candidate happened in some third world country, Latin America or the Middle East you might readily conclude this guy fits the description of an “authoritarian”, a caudillo or dictator–a person who believes and acts as he were above the law and wants to hold onto power by any means.

    Now we pride ourselves on being a beacon for the world because of our commitment to the rule of law and an independent judiciary. But the candidate I have in mind doesn’t believe in any of that. He thinks he deserves to be president again so he can overturn the Constitution and hold onto power forever. Sounds like the character in South Park who declared “I am above the law”. That was funny in 1997 but it’s not funny now. So tell me all of you out there. Does my description of an “authoritarian” type fit the leading GOP candidate in next year’s election? If so, does it even matter to you?

    1. he sent his supporters to violently overturn the election results.

      right out of the gate, you start with a bald faced lie. Don’t even work into some subtle word play. Just lie.

      1. Just HOW and WHY did his fans happen go to Washington on Jan. 6th? Answer: after going on a multi-state “Stop the Steal” campaign, in which he lied about losing the election, which was the result predicted by every single poll, in an election that came after 4 years of setting records for low approval ratings, the results of which were borne out by counts, recounts, re-recounts and audits, on election certification day told the faithful: “Fight like hell or you’re not going to have a country any more.” Sat for 187 minutes watching his fans force their way into the Capitol, breaking in doors, smashing windows, defecating and urinating all over the place and erecting a gallows while shouting “Hang Mike Pence”. Refused entreaties from even his own daughter to call off the violence, but he sat, watching television, mesmerized by the power and adulation of his followers. His plan was to stop the true election winner’s victory from being certified, based on a plot that goes something like this: because Congress didn’t certify Biden’s win, the election had to be sent to state legislatures, which he believed would award him the election, all to overcome the will of the American people. Even had fake electors in swing states lined up, who signed false Electoral College certificates claiming he won, which he did not. When he finally called off his fans after more than 3 hours of ransacking the Capitol, he told them he “loved them”. Promises to pardon every one of them if he can somehow, anyhow, get back into office. Called the Secretary of State in a swing state he thought he should have won, but didn’t, and said “I just need you to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have”. Filed 60+ lawsuits claiming widespread election fraud, all dismissed due to lack of evidence that the election was rigged against him, something he still refuses to admit. Sound familiar? These are PROVEN FACTS. Explain how this fact pattern does NOT constitute the very definition of authoritariansim.

        Oh, and as to Dennis’s point about the 14th Amendment, the right to citizenship of persons born in the US is specified in the Constitution. Your hero claims that such persons, if born to parents who are not US citizens, are not subject to US law, and therefore, according to the cockamamie theory cooked up by his lawyers to appeal to you xenphobes out there, the 14th Amendment does not apply. Where are your “originalists” that you Cult 45ers rely on so much? Why hasn’t Turley weighed in on this absurd theory?

    2. He could lessons from the guy in the White House now with the fbi and doj and cia doing his bidding and the 87000 irs agents not waiting to put people in jail and heavy fines for just mathematical errors.

    3. How do you define fair and square? How do you feel about denying valuable plentiful energy resources to crush a once growing economy…by fiat- even blowing up a pipeline other countries depend on? I say that’s authoritarian. Prove me wrong. You can’t. Wake up.

    4. Dennis – “Now we pride ourselves on being a beacon for the world because of our commitment to the rule of law and an independent judiciary.”
      Commitment to the rule of law. That’s why Hillary Clinton was not prosecuted for obstruction of justice; nor Eric Holder for contempt of Congress; nor Barack Obama and Bill Clinton for campaign finance violations; nor James Clapper for perjury in testimony before Congress; nor Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton for perjury in depositions; nor Ted Kennedy for vehicular manslaughter; nor James Comey for taking classified documents and leaking their contents; nor why a jury acquitted Michael Sussman despite clear evidence that he had lied to the FBI. Basically, the “rule of law” in Washington DC means that no Democrat is subject to the law and people like you try to prosecute or impeach Trump for every imaginably applicable law, or rule, or norm.
      As to the “independent judiciary”, I suggest that you ask any of the J6 Defendants in prison on long sentences about the “independence” of their judges.

      1. Edward: Thx for staying up so late to respond to my comment. I have several reactions to your claims. First, the federal judiciary is composed of judges appointed by Republican and Democratic presidents. Obama appointed 55 federal appellate judges. Trump appointed 54–flipping the balance on several appeals courts in favor of Republicans. Trump also got to appoint 3 conservatives to the SC. It’s highly unlikely Biden will get the same chance during his first term. The SC is now a 6-3 conservative majority. So it’s farfetched to believe the judiciary favors the Dems.

        Second, you claim certain Dems were not prosecuted when they should have been. In the case of Obama his 2008 campaign was fined $375,000 for campaign finance reporting violations. That was a record at the time. The largest up to that time was Bob Dole in 1996 when his campaign was fined $100,000 for similar violations. The Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign was also fined for misrepresenting spending in connection with the Steele dossier. All these were civil violations and settlements and the DOJ rarely prosecutes them. The FEC does not favor either Republicans or Democrats. So there is no basis for you to claim “no Democrat is subject to the law”.

        As to the Durham prosecution of Michael Sussmann, he was found not guilty by a JURY. Durham simply could not prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Sussmann lied to the FBI. If the jury was not convinced what is the “clear evidence” you claim should have resulted in a different verdict? In the case of the J.6 defendants they were all convicted by JURIES–not judges. Stewart Rhodes and Enrique Tarrio were both convicted of “seditious conspiracy” by JURIES–not judges. This has nothing to do with the “independent judiciary”. JURIES decide guilt or innocence not judges. That’s the part you apparently missed when you took Civics in high school or college.

        I think you have fallen for Trump’s “big lie”–that the “deep state”, dominated by “communists and Marxists”, is out to get him. If/when Trump is charged in connection with the Georgia election, the Mar-a-Lago docs or the Jan.6 insurrection it will be because he violated both state and federal laws–not because he is a candidate for the presidency. It won’t be a “witch hunt” by judges who “hate” him. Trump will get the advantage of our criminal justice system–the right to a jury trial. He will presumed innocent until proved guilty by a JURY of his peers. If convicted Trump will get to appeal (just as he has done in almost all other cases) all the way to the SC. That’s how the system is supposed to work. The only difference here is that Trump thinks, as a former president, he is immune from prosecution. As pointed out in my earlier comment, Trump fits the description of an “authoritarian” who thinks he is above the law. I think he will soon find out that no person, under our system of justice, is above the law–not even a former president.

    5. Another left wing illusion: 1. there is a lot of evidence that the elections was tampered with. The actual evidence has not been reviewed any court. Usually the proceeds were halted by judges who are compromised by ruling the claimants had no standing. The case in AZ looks like the best case to actually prove corruption. Manly because Kerri Lake is a fearless fighter. The left has been illegally trying to stop Trump any way they can. They have, by far, the most dishonest lawyers in the world.

      1. Robert: What right-wing “illusion” are you living in? What “evidence”? When Giuliani trued to get the AZ election overturned the head of the state legislature asked Giuliani what evidence he had of widespread election fraud. Giuliani responded: “We have a lot of theories but no actual evidence”. That’s the problem Trump faced throughout the country. Over 60 judges (both Republican and Dem) ruled against Trump? Why? Because Trump could offer no evidence of election fraud. When you go into court you have evidence to back up your claims. Apparently, you have never been in court or you would know that! In Georgia Trump knew he lost the election so he tried to get the GA Secy of State to switch votes. That’s voter fraud and why Trump will probably be indicted by Fani Willis sometime this summer.

        You can’t turn a sow’s ear into a silk purse. Let’s face it. You are just a sore loser. Get over it before it warps your brain! Or maybe it’s too late for that.

    6. Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 states in plain English: “ The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof;”

      We know for fact that many states had SOS’s and Judges Unconstitutionally make changes to extend voting, add drop boxes, allow anyone to vote by mail and more. All of these actions violated our Constitution and were unlawful. We also had our SCOTUS refuse to hear 18 states case that pointed out these very facts. SCOTUS refusal was contrary to the Constitutional requirement of Article III, Section 2, Clause 1: “ to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State,—between Citizens of different States,”

      There was and is well documented Constitutional violation that took place that call into question the integrity of the election.

  16. Cooper, Comey and CNN – terminal TDS (Trump Derangement). Think of the wild ride should 45 be re-elected.

  17. Now that Fox News has decimated its own ratings, CNN can go back to believing that pushing the leftist agenda every night is a good business decision.

Leave a Reply