#ComeyMemo: “The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo”

Readability

#ComeyMemo: "The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo"

The lat­est pearl-​clutching news cycle comes from the NYT: Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Inves­ti­ga­tion. The Gray Lady asserts on the third paragraph,

The doc­u­men­ta­tion of Mr. Trump’s request is the clear­est evi­dence that the pres­i­dent has tried to directly influ­ence the Jus­tice Depart­ment and F.B.I. inves­ti­ga­tion into links between Mr. Trump’s asso­ciates and Russia.

Clear­est evi­dence, they say? On para­graph six, the NYT declares they have not seen the memo at all,

The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclas­si­fied, but one of Mr. Comey’s asso­ciates read parts of it to a Times reporter.

Say again?

The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo,

They claim that this is “clear­est evi­dence” that the Pres­i­dent has tried to directly influ­ence an inves­ti­ga­tion, but they haven’t even looked at it?

which is unclassified,

It’s unclas­si­fied because Comey wrote the memo to himself.

Comey is a lawyer. Lawyers rou­tinely write memos to them­selves on all sorts of sub­jects, includ­ing on ways to cover their butts. That does not make this memo (or its parts) as of itself a fac­tual state­ment that would present “clear­est evi­dence” of anything.

Not only that,

one of Mr. Comey’s associates

not Comey him­self, who has been per­fectly able to come for­ward any­time dur­ing the past three months (Michael Flynn was fired on Feb­ru­ary 13th) and present this “clear­est evi­dence,” if it exists.

Why wait until after he was fired? Why not just quit in protest when it allegedly happened?

One thing Comey could have done short of quit­ting is inform the Sen­ate Intel­li­gence Com­mit­tee of Trump’s alleged statement.

Comey didn’t make the call but instead had an unnamed asso­ciate, who

read parts of it

I’ve read whole arti­cles over the phone when peo­ple asked me to. Just how long is this memo?

to a Times reporter.

Not to Michael Schmidt, who actu­ally wrote the arti­cle, but to some unnamed per­son in the news­room or somewhere.

So you get this,

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Not to pick on poor Rubin, but the pat­tern is a NYT-​WaPo-​CNN pearl-​clutching cir­cle over leaks pro­vided by anony­mous peo­ple over an inves­ti­ga­tion which has dragged on for sev­eral months and has pro­duced no evi­dence regard­ing Trump’s links to Russia.

In plain Eng­lish: An unnamed per­son read parts of a note Comey wrote to him­self (and kept in a drawer for three months), to an unnamed NYT employee.

The NYT calls it “clear­est evi­dence;” the WaPo says it’s obstruc­tion of justice.

Some are talk­ing of impeach­ment over this — over some news­pa­per play­ing Mad Libs with stuff they haven’t actu­ally seen.

Instead, I join with Char­lie Mar­tin in demand­ing, Show Me the Memos!

Here are some Tips For Read­ing Wash­ing­ton Post Sto­ries About Trump Based On Anony­mous Leaks. Pay spe­cial atten­tion to #5, “Com­pare sources will­ing to put their name and rep­u­ta­tion on the line.” Comey cer­tainly hasn’t.

Like­wise, John Pod­horetz has valu­able advice to Pres. Trump: STOP TALK­ING.

Fausta Rodríguez Wertz writes in U. S. and Latin Amer­ica at Fausta’s blog.

The latest pearl-clutching news cycle comes from the NYT: Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation. The Gray Lady asserts on the third paragraph,

The documentation of Mr. Trump’s request is the clearest evidence that the president has tried to directly influence the Justice Department and F.B.I. investigation into links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia.

Clearest evidence, they say? On paragraph six, the NYT declares they have not seen the memo at all,

The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of it to a Times reporter.

Say again?

The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo,

They claim that this is “clearest evidence” that the President has tried to directly influence an investigation, but they haven’t even looked at it?

which is unclassified,

It’s unclassified because Comey wrote the memo to himself.

Comey is a lawyer. Lawyers routinely write memos to themselves on all sorts of subjects, including on ways to cover their butts. That does not make this memo (or its parts) as of itself a factual statement that would present “clearest evidence” of anything.

Not only that,

one of Mr. Comey’s associates

not Comey himself, who has been perfectly able to come forward anytime during the past three months (Michael Flynn was fired on February 13th) and present this “clearest evidence,” if it exists.

Why wait until after he was fired? Why not just quit in protest when it allegedly happened?

One thing Comey could have done short of quitting is inform the Senate Intelligence Committee of Trump’s alleged statement.

Comey didn’t make the call but instead had an unnamed associate, who

read parts of it

I’ve read whole articles over the phone when people asked me to. Just how long is this memo?

to a Times reporter.

Not to Michael Schmidt, who actually wrote the article, but to some unnamed person in the newsroom or somewhere.

So you get this,

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Not to pick on poor Rubin, but the pattern is a NYT-WaPo-CNN pearl-clutching circle over leaks provided by anonymous people over an investigation which has dragged on for several  months and has produced no evidence regarding Trump’s links to Russia.

In plain English: An unnamed person read parts of a note Comey wrote to himself (and kept in a drawer for three months), to an unnamed NYT employee.

The NYT calls it “clearest evidence;” the WaPo says it’s obstruction of justice.

Some are talking of impeachment over this – over some newspaper playing Mad Libs with stuff they haven’t actually seen.

Instead, I join with Charlie Martin in demanding, Show Me the Memos!

Here are some Tips For Reading Washington Post Stories About Trump Based On Anonymous Leaks. Pay special attention to #5, “Compare sources willing to put their name and reputation on the line.” Comey certainly hasn’t.

Likewise, John Podhoretz has valuable advice to Pres. Trump: STOP TALKING.

Fausta Rodríguez Wertz writes in U. S. and Latin America at Fausta’s blog.