Comey chameleon

Make it a Carl Curtis Open Comment Friday afternoon for your commenting, battling and otherwise arguing pleasure!

And to start the ball rolling, here is a post from Harvard Constitutional Law Professor, Alan Dershowitz:

Dershowitz: Comey confirms that I’m right – and all the Democratic commentators are wrong

A key graph:

Comey confirmed that under our Constitution, the president has the authority to direct the FBI to stop investigating any individual. I paraphrase, because the transcript is not yet available: the president can, in theory, decide who to investigate, who to stop investigating, who to prosecute and who not to prosecute. The president is the head of the unified executive branch of government, and the Justice Department and the FBI work under him and he may order them to do what he wishes.

But don’t confine yourself to the Comey hubabaloo.
And see if you can work in a Nebraska angle.
(See, I just did, right there.)

Have a great weekend!
Stay cool!

Follow @LeavenworthSt on the Twitter
Like Leavenworth Street – the talk of Nebraska politics on The Facebook


    • Bluejay says:

      He indicts and convicts Power, Rice or Brennan; all three or a combination thefeof.

      The three of them are about on par with Reality Winner. There is a computer audit trail for all of their unmasking. They thought they were above the law or would never be caught. Big mistake.

      • Then there's that says:

        According to a tally by U.S. spy agencies, the House Intelligence Committee, lead at the time by the now disgraced Devin Nunes (R-CA; Trump Toady) requested five to six unmaskings of U.S. organizations or individuals related to Trump or Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton between June 2016 and January 2017.

  1. Dreamer, SuperTrump says:

    From Lawfare:
    “In the View of the Supreme Court, Alan Dershowitz is Wrong About the Powers of the President”

  2. tm says:

    Perhaps a chemistry professor isn’t wiser than legal genius and Leftist Democrat Alan Dershowitz on such matters. You stab at Sweeper rather than refute the law expert. Bad form that.

    Relax or risk ending up stumbling and drooling like Pelosi, McCain and Hillary.

    • repenting lawyer says:

      tm, since law profs are all over the map on this, the chemistry professor is supported by a fair number of legal wonders left and right and you are cherry picking Alan, hardly fair comment..

      • Gerard Harbison says:

        Thanks, RL.

        I think I’m going with the sober-sounding NYU Professor of Constitutional Law on this one, and not the reckless self-promoting Dershowitz.

      • anon says:

        You freiking constitutional lawyers, too bad the corrupt DOJ is making law on the fly, so argue on, you guys are clowns especially you lawyers

  3. Reality Loser says:

    So Trump is the danger to Democracy??? Hmmmm. From what I have seen since election day the Deep State, the unresponsive Congress, and the biased press presents the the biggest danger to democracy. All Trump has done is Tweet, repeal regs, enforce laws and make a great appointment to the Supreme Court.

    • Millennial voter says:

      This is an exercise in futility, but let’s give it a try anyway. What would Dershowitz spew and Leavenworth St. regurgitate if the shoe had been on the other foot?

      What if:

      Comey testified under oath in front of a Senate committee that Barack Obama ordered his staff out of the room and asked Comey to pledge his loyalty?

      Comey testified Obama “hoped” he would drop the Clinton email investigation because “she’s a good woman who’s been through a lot?”

      Obama fired Comey and had a lackey draw up a memo giving a transparently bogus reason, and two days later on national TV said he wanted Comey out because the Clinton email investigation “was a made up thing?” (I’m paraphrasing).

      Obama then disparaged Comey to foreign adversaries, indicating now without the email investigation, a lot of “pressure” had been taken off?

      We all know what partisans like Sweeper would say, because they demonstrate over and over again that IOKIYAR. The party of “the rule of law” and “Blue Lives Matter” sure seems to abandon those principles when it suits them best.

      • they have a short memory says:

        Pay attention youngster,

        We have already seen how Comey handles Dems who break the law. He makes up new laws to excuse them.

      • Millennial voter says:

        I am paying attention, geezer. Last summer, Comey said that despite “extremely careless” practices tied to Clinton’s email server, the FBI did not find evidence of intent, which under the law was required to bring up charges. He stated that in plain English.

        On the other hand, Trump has demonstrated intent to obstruct justice at every turn, even publicly. We’ll be waiting with bated breath for Trump to give his side of the story — under oath — to the Senate committee, just as we’ll be waiting for him to fulfill his other promises like making his tax returns public…

      • just because, says:

        Millennial sheep,

        Show us anywhere in the law where intent is needed in the things Hillary did wrong. Show us anywhere in the law where it is law enforcement and not the prosecutors who decide what charges are filed.

        Just because he did it and wasn’t called on it, doesn’t make it legal. Although I am sure if I am wrong, RL will be right here to correct the record.

  4. Patrick J. Borchers says:

    Being within the bounds of the Constitution is a low hurdle. Acting like a President and wisely is a high hurdle. Trump may be clearing the low bar but he isn’t close to the high bar. Trump is whom I feared he is. He has no idea what he’s doing. He thinks like he’s still on that horridly stupid show where he got to “fire” people. He is no worthy successor to be the leader of the party led by Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Reagan.

    • Anonymous says:

      Exactly whom did you fear he was? Status quo or someone who actually did something other than to talk it to death? In business, you fire people for all sorts of reasons of which Comey is the poster boy. In government, you make excuses not to do anything except talk, take tax dollars, run up debt and point fingers in a weird kind of win at all costs political battle. Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan are all dead. Maybe they’d not be thought so great today as seen in a rear view mirror of selective recall.

    • Bluejay says:


      Chill out. Cool your jets. It takes a different kind of guy to drain the swamp. Trump has to take on the Dems, the Deep State and MSM. He needs all of the help he can get from our side. That means you and Ben Sasse. A Harvard lawyer ain’t up to the task.

      Trump has already saved us billions by pulling out of the Paris Treaty. He put a stellar guy on SCOTUS. He is kicking the asses of ISIS. My personal favorites are approving KXL and DAPL. Every day Trump is in office is another day that drives Janie Kleeb (the loser) nuts.

      I used to be somewhat of your view but I changed my mind once I focused on what he could do and actually has done. Deeds, not words.

      • Gerard Harbison says:

        “Drain the swamp”? You still buy that? LOL!

        No health care reform. No corporate tax reform. No infrastructure bill. All promises Trump made.

  5. Perceptus says:

    Professor Borchers, we must have read different history books. Lincoln screwed America and the GOP by dumping an effective GOP VP and replacing him with a Democrat who as POTUS established Jim Crow, encouraged the KKK, and put racial equality back 100 years. Teddy Roosevelt formed his own party to defeat Republicans. Reagan was elected by “Reagan Democrats”. His big tent is like Trump being elected by Democrat blue collar voters. We agree with you that Abe, Ted and Ron made America great but they had more in common with Trump than Bush, Obama and the Clintons which are business as usual. Perhaps key to our differing views is that you demand pretense above substance, politeness before policy, nice over real results, and that Trump be stupid.

    You speak of “acting like a President”. You say he doesn’t know what he’s doing. So his naysayers rise to impale themselves because Trump is lucky? Many of his supporters, who value his unapologetic national policies yet don’t like his demeanor and tweeting, would agree with you. They want him to simmer down and be nice. Because draining a swamp is exhausting work. We being human want to quit manning the pumps and go back to paddling around in it for the afternoon. — However, real change is not so lax or forgiving, it is soul scarring and relentless. It starts on Lexington green in smoke and shot and only later ends up in flowery words on documents. It is us acting not nice but rudely real. Painfully real.

    Your world view is from inside the swamp. Academia, media, bureaucracy, politics, law; professionals who sell wordy opinions not actual products of use; and who don’t go to jail, flunk, or lose money along with their clients and students, no matter how wrong you are. It’s a fat low risk deal. And people who work for a living and produce know that better than you do. That leaves your professional class vulnerable to being blindsided. PC most blinds those most sure of their own politic infallibility.

    Fiorina rose to defend Rosy O’Donnell’s feminine virtue, Jeb Bush to dump on his own Mexican in-laws, Carson so stumble over his momma stabbing statements, Cruz and Kasich to suicidally collude to divide up votes, Hillary to hang her hat on the Constitution not having an electoral college, and now Comey testifying so irrationally that the “spy” isn’t Russia but Comey himself. Trump is at the center of all this yet you think he doesn’t know what he’s doing. Strategy works because you cannot see it coming. When it hits you and later you again don’t see it coming, then the problem is you.

    Trump said he’s “really smart”. You demand he be stupid. That means he is one super lucky guy. Yet the NYT, WP and DNC, in late 2015 and again early this year, ran deep analysis of his thousands of tweets and speeches and found him “methodical” and on point. Yet you feel he’s aimless.

    Feeling our way forward isn’t like doing a lemming leap but it gets us off the cliff just the same.

    Caveat: We’d not write all this if we didn’t value your usually insightful opinion. We figure you are driven mad by Trumpophobia. As others have noted, its got Pelosi and McCain drooling.

    • Millennial voter says:

      Trump was born into a millionaire family. That took exactly 0 smarts and 100% luck on his part. He fails differently than others because he had daddy’s money to start with. Throwing crap out on social media to see what sticks sure is an intellectually “methodical” strategy.

      • ignorance is devastating says:

        business and youngsters,

        Why is it you folks believe because some one gives you a lot of money, you will automatically be successful? Look at the lottery winners, who almost to the person, after winning hundreds of millions went broke. Even after getting all that expert advice. Look at all the rich kids, by inheritance, who ended up broke. Not to mention all the folks who worked hard enough to get rich and then lost it all. The lack of historical business knowledge among the young is troubling. It is one reason the young like socialism so much. You just don’t know how good the other side is and there is no risk in being a socialists country. Except the risk you will remain poor and have the government run every aspect of your life for the rest of your life.

      • Millennial voter says:

        No one in this post has advocated socialism, bynd. You are the only one here benefitting from the socialism you decry, while simultaneously shrieking every time someone asks the country to look to the future. You are the suck on the system you keep projecting onto the rest of us.

      • more millenial crying, says:

        millennial snot nose,

        You don’t seem to understand what you believe in. As for the rest, you’ve become quite the defensive little spoiled brat. Number one socialist principle, attack the rich.

        But let’s go the other route then.
        Prove Trump was lucky and you are not just parroting headlines. Prove he has exactly 0 smarts, business or otherwise.
        Backup your throwing crap out on social media to see what sticks.

      • Millennial voter says:

        @ more millennial crying 10:26 a.m.:


        You don’t understand what I believe in either, because you are either

        a. Too ignorant
        b. Too selfish
        c. Too shamed

        to understand or admit it. YOU are the one on government benefits. YOU are the taker of my tax dollars. YOU are the socialist. You lecturing others about the dangers of socialism is especially ironic. I have not advocated for socialism, or redistribution of wealth, or any of these strawman arguments you keep putting up. Just admit that you are the practicing socialist and we can move on.

        It is common knowledge in the world that Trump’s father got rich building apartments for servicemen and their families, and even Trump has admitted on the campaign trail last year he received a “small loan” from his father to start his business. Trump’s definition of small loan and my definition of small loan are not the same. I know very few people that have received millions of dollars from their families just out of college. He was born into wealth — that is a fact — which takes exactly no skill whatsoever.

        At the same time, Trump has filed four bankruptcies on his businesses. This is also what those of us living in reality call a fact — we have documents to show this. Trump makes sure to distinguish the point that his businesses have declared bankruptcy, and not him personally. (Like how he makes sure to distinguish that Comey assured him that he was not under investigation). Although how you lose money on a casino is beyond me, and really makes me question his business acumen.

      • your sucking the progressive teat, says:


        Being lectured by the innocent Millennial who has now become the mean zealot.

        But unlike you who has accomplished squat, I live in your house, I eat your food, I watch your TV and sit in your arm chair. You pay for all of that and it may gall you, but there isn’t squat you can do about it. I did more in one day that you will accomplish in your whiny life time.

        Trying to shame some one. How bush league juvenile. Go back down in mommy’s basement. You add nothing of value nor anything valid to the discussion. How easy one becomes useless when they aren’t smart enough to not get sucked in by the snowflakes.

      • Millennial voter says:

        “I did more in one day that you will accomplish in your whiny life time.”

        Responding to every comment on this website doesn’t make you accomplished. Every time someone points out that you are actually on government benefits (a point you won’t refute or correct) while railing against anyone else being on government benefits, you transcend into the ultimate whiner.

      • the courts will be the legacy says:


        Every time someone points out that you are actually on government benefits (a point you won’t refute or correct)

        So, you’re answer to that is try and shame one into some kind of answer?

        After 34 years between the military and Fed government yes I retired on a government pension. also health care that the government pays 75% of. It was all earned.

        So now instead of being a sheeple and following the POS progressives on here, make up your own mind. If the best they can argue is I am a government retiree, that is pretty piss poor on their part. But it is all they have. Certainly no ability to do other than personal attacks when they have no answer. Or the well known YAI. Now isn’t that just a sign of advanced intellect? (sarc). And yes I give what I get. But they don’t like their shi_ being thrown back in their face either.
        At some point and time, every jerk on here who thinks it is an insult to accuse some one else of doing the same, will be on the government teat. Medicare, SS what ever. It just galls them when they have no answer except to accuse one of being on the government teat. Which is to say, they are paying for my retirement and health care and SS. Such is life.
        You want a hint, work for the government, it is one of the few jobs where you carry your health insurance into retirement and that is one big plus. And then keep it when Medicare kicks in. It is a wonderful system if you can get into it.

  6. Perceptus says:

    Dean Borchers and Repenting Lawyer, albeit with the latter misspelling both my name and the word “intelligence” (we love irony, right?), both lawyers yet ignore the glaring point of Street Sweeper’s original comment, which is a simple quoting of Alan Dershowitz saying he was right and all the Democratic commentators wrong about the results of Comey’s testimony and this or any president’s constitutional duties. Yet Borchers and RL don’t address Dershowitz’s comment, perhaps because Alan having been the youngest Harvard law prof, Frankfurter chair, and a flaming liberal who worked for Goldberg and endorsed Clinton and Obama, is difficult to refute. So the lawyers go emotional. But then what good are they as lawyers? I am sure “Borchers is really smart”. A law school dean should be. But neither he nor RL dispute Dershowitz on the facts. When you remove fact and reason you are left with un-lawyerly emotional appeal.

    This is like a case study of surgeons who don’t know why they keep stabbing themselves.

    Dean Borchers speaks of vague emotional things like acting “wisely” and what he “feared” and magically knowing Trump “has no idea what he’s doing” because Borchers himself cannot see it. I can’t either. But we all have suffered strategy being opaque. After repeated instances of naysayers falling before this force, at some point you measure the gravity around the invisible singularity to infer its existence. It is that or he’s really lucky. But luck doesn’t exist.

    That a law school dean would go from reason to gnashing emotional teeth seems impossible. Yet all real potential one inch beyond our ken feels magic when it fruits. Being human isn’t seeing the banana beyond our reach and figuring how to get it, it’s us imagining fruit groves in lands we’ve never been to. Unfortunately, modern BFAs can imagine that but they come without a renaissance man’s grasp of math and science and thus are useless. Whatever is at work here, it targets the erudite like a homing missile. Its not HS grad coal miners being fried. It is BAs, JDs, and Ph.Ds.

    As for many “not widely” sharing my view of Trump’s intelligence, did I say I think he’s intelligent? He appears an aimless NYC cab driver. One can cultivate any image. He has two more Emmy noms than we do, so he has some grasp of human perception. I don’t know why his schick works but I am trying to understand. He beat GOP governors and senators, a former Sen/Sect. State even with Clinton, Obama and Bush machines pushing her, and was condemned by the RNC Chmn and the Pope. Lucid lawyers here are reduced to saying only a few people think he is smart. That’s the essence of what I said. And how’s that been working out for you?

    We need to stop bitching, start thinking and most of all be skeptical of our own certainties. Else Darwin relegate us to the heap.

    • Bluejay says:



      Two things are, I think, key to understanding Trump. 1. His experience in the WWE. He knows how to appeal to our reptilian brain. 2. His real estate developer background.

      His cunning handling of the Comey affair is instructive. Tweet, “Comey better hope I better not have tapes!” Comey is then boxed in. He can’t lie anymore because Trump may have the goods on him. The suggestion of tapes sends the media into orbit. When Trump reveals there are no tapes, media looks like fools.

      • Gratingly Obtuse Party says:

        “His cunning handling of the Comey affair”

        This daily embrace of lunacy on this site has become almost intolerable.

    • Armchair constitutional law scholars says:

      “Dershowitz fails to take into account that the Supreme Court has decisively rejected his view.
      In Morrison v. Olson (1988), a 7-1 Supreme Court turned back constitutional challenges to Congress’ creation of the Act that gave us the office of the Independent Counsel—and in doing so, dismissed exactly the argument that Dershowitz now seeks to invoke.”

      Talk amongst yourselves.

    • repenting lawyer says:

      Perceptus, my spelling has always been atrocious as my freshman English teacher noted. Dyslexia combined with see and say as reading method I was taught. I miss my very smart secretaries in my retirement. My few certainties are of a religious nature.My Dad used thread the Spirit of Liberty at the dinner table, so I learned from Hand that”the Spirit of Liberty is not too sure its right.”I also like his formula. Bitching on this site may be low value but it is lower cost, therefore I bitch.

    • Anonymous says:

      You had me at banana and lost me in the fruit grove. Your first response was much better said without the lofty descriptions. In other words, you got in your car to drive to California (Point A) from New York (Point B) by way of Europe. Your point was lost.

  7. GOPariahs says:

    It was nice to see the neo-Nazi organized (Billy Roper) anti-Muslim hate marchers were hugely outnumbered by counter-protesters.

    • Bluejay says:

      Not anti-Muslim; anti-Sharia law. You know Sharia. The FGM and throw homosexuals off of buildings crowd. The suicide bomber guys at the Manchester concert. Do you favor those hate crimes?

      Dems are such idiots! Glad I left the stupid party.

      • Gratingly Obtuse Party says:

        And the imposition of Sharia law is a real and present danger to Americans?

        Childlike naivete’.

      • repenting lawyer says:

        Bluejay,, many provisions of Sharia are very out of date, about as likely to be adopted in US as are older Christian treatment of gays and heresy, so point of demonstrations is clearly aimed at Muslims under a veneer of criticism of Sharia. Suicide bombing is widely condemned by students of Sharia.

      • Bluejay says:


        The thugs run the Sharia sect. If they get much of a foothold in America they will revert to form. Just following the example of Mohammed, the Perfect Man. The bombing and killing will only continue. Islam totally and completely rejects all Western values. Churchill got it right. Don’t be naive.

      • Bluejay says:


        The Democrat party left us Irish Catholics a long time ago. My epiphany was the high tech lynching of Ginni Lamp’s husband. I was so proud of her during that ordeal. Proud to know her (slightly) and proud she is a Creighton alum.

  8. Anonymous says:

    8:54, when your family is murdered by Islamic terrorists, like some Americans are, then you can come here and wax poetic about sharia law. You need to be shot at as much as some of us have.

    You are the child. You are naïve. That makes you America’s worst cancer. Ignorance incarnate.

  9. Bluejay says:

    For you Muslim apologists, we will have legal polygamy in some America states in ten years. Already 100 known cases of FGM in MI. Sign your daughters up for both!

    You Dems have got to stop worshiping at the diversity altar. Islam is incompatible with American and Western values. The constitution is not a suicide pact. Get woke up.

    • Anonymous says:

      You’re more of a threat than any terrorist. I can kill a terrorist or die trying, but I have to live with your insufferable stupidity daily. Galling.

    • repenting lawyer says:

      Bluejay, I taught Ginni Lamp and I like her very much. Not all Ds were thrilled with the treatment of Justice Thomas with whom I regularly joined for the faculty breakfast when he taught. I do not agree with some of his positions but the is hardly a reason for not liking him, he has great charm, or for not respecting his great talent.
      I do not see how Sharia has much to do with danger of radical Muslims, just as I doubt the Bible has much to do with the so called Christians we have running around. We already have some polygamy in US, Mormon sects not Muslims. Most Muslims in US and elsewhere can not afford more than one wife. On the other hand the divorce and remarriage rate in US could be described as serial polygamy.

      • TexasAnnie says:

        We can always tell who the Christians are, they tell us who they are. And then when we watch what they do, we know we wouldn’t want to be Christian. I guess it works the same for Muslims…

      • humans are humans says:


        Works that way for everyone. Including you. The more you deny it, the more true it becomes.

        A judgemental self righteous ass. And you say you are not religious.

      • see spot run, says:


        Touched a nerve did we. “And including YOU, bynd,”

        I guess you just don’t comprehend what “Works that way for everyone.” means.

        Get over yourself. Not all of us are as a big a hypocrite as you exempting ourselves from our own criticism.

  10. Sure 'nuf says:

    McCain over the weekend: ‘American leadership’ abroad was better under Obama.

    But of course, for all except the dwindling Trump horde, that’s a statement no more surprising than saying, ‘Oreo cookies are better than shite in a Ritz.’

    • can you tell us says:

      McCain lover,

      You should become a Republican and help McCain resurrect the party. He loss the electoral and popular vote didn’t he? Your kind of guy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.