By Rick Wells
Attorney Jay Sekulow finds it troubling “that the special counsel is letting James Comey testify at all. Because if he’s a witness that he’s using in an investigation, why in the world would you put your witness up to be examined. And James Comey, let’s face it, is not exactly the most credible witness. This is a guy that had to correct his testimony before the United States House and Senate on three separate occasions.” Comey is set to testify publicly and in a closed hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday.
“He’s not a credible witness,” says Sekulow, “and he’s discussing his testimony with the special counsel, I think this points to what we’re going to see on Thursday, which is, probably, basically, not much.” Sekulow warns, “James Comey better be very careful in what he says,” noting that the law required Comey to report any crime he knew to have taken place or be taking place, which would be a simple matter of walking across the street to the DOJ, and he failed to do so, he committed a crime.”
Sekulow says, “So the fact is, if he felt there was an obstruction of justice, he had an obligation to formally report that. He did not, case closed.” Shannon Bream notes and Sekulow agrees that is going to be one of the top questions he’ll be asked on Thursday.
Bream asks about the refusal of the FBI to provide any of the “Comey memos” and points out that House Oversight Committee Chairman Chaffetz sees those as federal documents that should be within the access of the House Committee. Sekulow agrees that they are federal documents, if they exist, and points out that he apparently had no problem “with his staff leaking it to the New York Times,” asking, “And by the way, how’d his staff get their hands on his private memos?”
“I’d like to ask that fundamental question,” says Sekulow, “how in the world did James Comey, then the FBI Director, do a private memorandum, got it to his staff and allowed that staff to leak it to a newspaper, while he’s testifying and discussing his testimony with a special counsel? What doesn’t look right here? Everything looks wrong; that’s the truth.”
Sekulow says, “This whole thing is a setup. I’m afraid to say that the memos would be self-serving at best, may not exist, at worst, but what they’re doing is trying to paint a picture here.” He warns, “The left better be very, very careful, because If I was on that committee, I would bear down on James Comey and I’d ask him first, ‘You are under oath again, former Director Comey. Three times you’ve had to correct your testimony. By the way, if you or I had to do that, we could be facing jail.
Bream notes a time during previous testimony by Comey when he was before the Senate Judiciary Committee, that he stated nobody had tried to interfere with him in this investigation he said no. He actually said it had never happened to him under any circumstances, not just in reference to this investigation. She asks if Sekulow thinks Comey will be able to explain that away.
He replies, “Well, he’s going to have to try to explain it away, but I’ll tell you this, if even what the President [is alleged to have] said is true, it would be a big bag of nothing. That is not obstruction of justice. That is not by threat or coercion, I mean that doesn’t rise to the high level of obstruction of justice.”