As Labour Surges in UK, Comey Makes Trouble for Democrats

by William Skink

It’s hard to see the Labour Party surging across the pond under Corbyn and not wonder what might have happened had Bernie been allowed to fairly challenge Lord Clinton in the US primaries. Sure, Corbyn was openly derided by members of his own party early on, but that’s because members of his party are the UK version of neoliberal Democrats beholden to Wall Street and peddlers of war.

Back at home, it’s all Comey. I’m sure people will take what they want from today’s testimony, but I really can’t see how Democrats can view this as a win for the resistance. If the effort to depose Trump, after today, remains focused on Russia, it’s going to fail.

Mike Krieger thinks Democrats will stay with the Russia angle, and here is his reasoning:

“…Democrats will never let this go because it would force them to talk about real issues like Wall Street, oligarchy and imperial foreign policy, but they don’t want to do that. That’s the dirty little secret. Since the Democrats largely agree with Trump on many of his most heinous policy stances, they have to come up with an overseas bogeyman to obsess about. That’s what this has been about since day one. As such, there continues to be no functioning opposition party in American at this time. Unfortunate, but true.”

Yep, while the entire Middle East–including Turkey, a NATO member–prepares for war, Democrats will continue obsessing over Russia and ignoring the real reason people disdain the Democratic Party and its establishment tentacles that reach into media strongholds like the hallowed halls of the New York Times.

Comey didn’t have anything nice to say about one particular Times article that came out in February. For that story, let’s consult the source reporting on its reporting:

Answering a question about the Times article during an appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Mr. Comey said that “in the main, it was not true.”

The article was the first to reveal direct contacts between Trump advisers and Russian officials before the election — contacts that are now at the heart of F.B.I. and congressional investigations. Multiple news outlets have since published accounts that support the main elements of The Times’s article, including information about phone calls and in-person meetings between Mr. Trump’s advisers and Russians, some believed to be connected to Russian intelligence.

Mr. Comey did not say exactly what he believed was incorrect about the article, which was based on information from four current and former American officials, all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity because the information was classified. The original sources could not immediately be reached after Mr. Comey’s remarks, but in the months since the article was published, they have indicated that they believed the account was solid.

Translation: he says it’s not true but other rags ran this anonymous stuff, and though we haven’t met these anonymous people in secret since Comey called our article crap, they did tell us after we published it that it’s like totally solid man, so just trust us.

Another challenging aspect (for Democrats) of Comey’s testimony is his claim that Loretta Lynch used her position of authority to help the Clinton campaign by suggesting Comey use the word “matter” instead of “investigation” when talking about the INVESTIGATION into Hillary’s reckless, obstructive behavior with classified information.

If Democrats need another distraction, John McCain apparently provided some good theatrics. I didn’t watch any of it, but people on Twitter say it’s crazy, so, you know.

Closer to home, the Indy takes a look at Montana Democratic dysfunction to try and understand the special election loss. I think my favorite part of the article is this from Andrew Person, loser to Adam Hertz and signatory to the Russophobic MONTANANS FOR NATIONAL SECURITY:

Andrew Person, a former state representative from Missoula who lost his seat to Republican Rep. Adam Hertz in 2016, thinks the party needs a better-defined identity, one that distinguishes itself from the baggage that comes with the national party.

A 37-year-old veteran with a young family and an outdoorsy vibe, Person works as an attorney at the Missoula law firm Garlington, Lohn and Robinson. Sitting on the firm’s top-floor patio, he discusses economics and campaign finance with the approachable, animated accessibility you’d think voters would clamor for.

Isn’t this priceless? An urban lawyer, luxuriating on an upper-floor patio, musing about how Democrats need to better-define their identity. What a joke.

To further exemplify the tried-and-failed reliance on identity politics, one notorious Missoula State Rep. (being termed out) clamored on Facebook that no women were quoted in this article. I’m not sure if that’s the most important takeaway from this piece, but that might just be the closeted misogynist in me talking.

While Democrats go in search of a better, poll-tested identity, there are more US air strikes in Syria getting no attention, more weapons for Saudi Arabia, and chaos spreading across the Middle East.

It would be nice to have an opposition party, but I certainly am not waiting around for the Democrats to become something they are simply incapable of becoming.

About Travis Mateer

I'm an artist and citizen journalist living and writing in Montana. You can contact me here: willskink at yahoo dot com
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to As Labour Surges in UK, Comey Makes Trouble for Democrats

  1. djinn&tonic says:

    on a local level this may be of interest:
    One small issue in this Colorado town perfectly demonstrates the biggest flaw in U.S. capitalism: political corruption (From both wings of the endless corporate war party) …

    • Swede, this is two things now … climate change, and Russian meddling in the election being a hoax, that we agree on. We should think about picking out curtains.

      • Big Swede says:

        I was thinking about camo curtains with bullet proof shutters.

        • You’re nipping at the heels of understanding how we work. Keep at it. It is a lifetime pursuit.

        • JC says:

          “Castonguay said health care is growing 5.8 per cent a year as a share of the provincial budget, while total government spending increases 3.9 per cent annually.”

          So, the “father” of the Canadian health care system basically says the system isn’t working properly because expenses have outpaced funding. Pretty simple solution, increase government spending at a rate to match outlays.

          What goes unsaid at Hotair is that Castonguay went on after his role with Canadian health to become a financier, selling life and health insurance. So it hardly remains to be said that he is doing nothing more than trying to bolster his, and his heirs’, bottom line. Gambling with Canadian lives along the way.

        • Phew!!! I was beginning to worry there. If the supposed father of Quebec health care cannot see what private insurance has done to the American health care system, I suggest dementia is settling in. Private insurers ration care, prevent or discourage access to health care, and drive costs up with their top heavy bureaucracy. They have caused hundreds of thousands of premature deaths. Anyway, the “Father” of Canadian health care is Tommy Douglas, widely revered to this day. This guy sounds like Wendell Pitter, controlled opposition, and the piece reads like propaganda.

          Thanks for the assurance Swede, you’re still Swede!

        • I’ll not be around to discuss this Swede, as I am afraid it will be a long thread and I am but a guest here.

Leave a Reply