"Patriots are not revolutionaries trying to overthrow the government of the United States.
Patriots are Counter-Revolutionaries trying to prevent the government from overthrowing the Constitution."
The Coach’s Team (TCT) offers the best in conservative essays along with articles taken from various internet sites. The victory of Donald Trump has provided a God-sent opportunity to reverse the years of willful damage done our nation by Barack Hussein Obama.
Have you ever
wondered how people of the caliber of James Comey ever rose to the lofty
heights of the Department of Justice and the FBI? After all, these are
two of the premier agencies of the federal government, known for attracting
talented and dedicated people. It should now be evident that Comey never should
have been entrusted with serious law enforcement powers and responsibilities,
based on his sneaky, partisan, weaselly behavior, his lack of candor, and his
willingness to bend the rules.
Recall that Comey was
presented to the American people as enjoying wide bipartisan respect, with
sterling reputation, and was easily confirmed as FBI Director by a shocking (in
vote. (It probably will be no surprise to you that the only senator willing
to oppose the next FBI chief and stand against the tide of adulation was Rand
So how does a
self-righteous prick get so far in life?
The answer, I am
afraid, is based on the iron law of bureaucracy. No matter how noble ostensible
goal of any bureaucratic agency – helping
the victims of natural disasters, for instance – inevitably the
organization ends up serving the interests of the members of the bureaucracy.
Self-interest comes first, and those who best protect those who make decisions
on career advancement rise to the top.
A very valuable clue
about Comey (and his close allies) comes from Andrew McCarthy, writing in National
Review. You probably know that McCarthy was a career prosecutor working as
an assistant US Attorney in the Southern District of New York, widely
considered the most prestigious and influential of the US Attorneys’ offices.
In that capacity, McCarthy led the prosecution of the first World Trade Center
Bombing and obtained a convection of the Blind Sheikh. McCarthy is a man that I
admire greatly. In an article very critical of Comey, in the interest of full
disclosure, he writes:
I am fond of Jim Comey and have been for 30 years.
No doubt because of my personal regard for him and respect for his
high-end ability, I am inclined to cut the former director slack. He was thrust
into a no-win situation: It is not his fault that Democrats nominated a
criminal suspect, or that Republicans nominated an irregular politician
heedless of the norms of discretion and distance that a president should maintain
when dealing with his law-enforcement subordinates. Comey aside, I had no
better friends in nearly 20 years as a federal prosecutor in New York than Dan
Richman, the Columbia Law School prof through whom Comey transmitted
information to the New York Times,
and Pat Fitzgerald and Dave Kelley, Comey’s lawyers. These aren’t just former
colleagues of mine; they are old friends. I haven’t tried to speak to any of
them about this matter, but my esteem for them weighs on me — as does my duty
to be an honest analyst. How well I resolve that tension is not for me to say;
I can just tell you it is real.
Comey and Mueller
certainly earned this regard through a combination of factors. Personal
affability, a willingness to help others, hard work, and of course native
intelligence and an accumulation of expertise, all tend to earn respect,
admiration, and friendship from colleagues. These qualities also serve an
executive well in dealing with those in a position to help with career
advancement. At senior executive levels in private industry, the board of
directors, who must approve top executive appointments, and critical outside
constituencies, such as key customers, suppliers, and regulators, as well as
media, must be cultivated using these same qualities. In the federal
government, it is legislators, media figures, and pressure groups that must be
won over, spreading the impression of competence, honesty, diligence, and other
But there is another,
less sunny, side to the equation: ruthlessness in ridding oneself of rivals or
obstacles to persona advancement, or to the preeminent goal of the organization
– its self-interest.
Comey, McCabe and Strzok
his calculating mind when he admitted that the likelihood (as everyone saw it
at the time) that Hillary Clinton would win the presidency affected his
decision to not prosecute her for obvious violations of the law in her handling
of classified emails. He was helping out his DOJ boss, Loretta Lynch, by doing
her dirty work, even though she had not formally recused herself (an
embarrassment) after being caught in a covert airport tarmac meeting with Bill
Clinton, exercising powers that he did not possess, but which a willing media
and many GOP pols were willing to overlook, having been convinced that he was a
“man of integrity.”
The combination of
affability and ruthlessness is one of the most useful tools for advancement in
any large and hierarchical organization. Comey’s mistake was in believing that
Hillary would win, and once Trump became president, believing that the deep
state, within which he had flourished, would succeed in defending its own
interests by casting him out of offie, with James Comey in the lead.
Corporate lore is
full of examples of ruthless executives who end up badly when the market no
longer rewards their talents, and their karma comes due. “The smiling cobra” and
smiling barracuda” are two such instances. Come deserves his own
expression, “The smiling weasel.”