We will see plenty of Comey recriminations. Will any of them be coherent and soundly developed?

[usmbguest5318]

I'm sure we'll for a few days, maybe even weeks or longer, see and hear all manners of personal effrontery pertaining to Jame's Comey. You know...Comey's this, Comey's that, mentally ill, etc. We'll see bald assertions about Comey and what he's written/said.

But will so much as one USMB member present a rigorous/coherent case that is sound/cogent and that:

• Shows that Comey's testable assertions, that is assertions about objective matters, are materially factually and contextually inaccurate using the neutral, non-emotional language of pure reason?
• Shows that Comey's observations are materially inapt, and shows such using the neutral, non-emotional language of pure reason?

I have to ask because far too often on this site we see folks fire off baldly banal aspersions -- USMB member or public figure -- without presenting a sound/cogent case to support them. While such hackneyed drivel is typical, it's rare to see someone simply assert another person's conclusions are errant and with analytical rigor show how and why they are.



Note to the "peanut gallery":

• Don't even try saying Comey isn't well respected and liked by folks on both sides or that he hasn't been.
  • 2013 -- Senate confirms James Comey for FBI chief
    
    With the 93-1 vote, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) became the first senator to vote against any FBI director nominee since it became a Senate-approved post in 1968. Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) both voted "present."
    
    Comey, the former No. 2 official at the Justice Department under President George W. Bush, was tapped in June by President Obama to replace Robert S. Mueller III, whose term of 12 years expires in September.
• There's a huge difference between disparaging a person and refuting or rebuking his/her ideas and actions.

 

[Mac1958]

Our entire political landscape has devolved into little more than a third grade rhetorical food fight.

How anyone can believe anything that anyone says at this point is a mystery.

This is what it looks like when the lunatics take over the asylum.
.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Trump continues to disgrace himself and the country.

Please stay on topic. The thread is not about Trump in any way shape or form.

The book is about Trump, Trump is very much the topic - it's why the right is attacking.

That's true, but this thread is about the quality/nature of attacks, the nature/quality of the arguments, we can expect to see, not the individuals about whom the arguments are made.

Other members have posted threads about Trump and Comey, but AFAIK, nobody's got one about the "bitching and moaning" that Comey's book will engender.

To wit, here is a fine thread to say, for example, "So and so presented such and such an argument. that argument is lame because it suffers from....." This is not the thread for ragging on "so and so," however.

 

[Kat]

Please stay on the topic of the OP.