FBI nominee James Comey: Did he ace confirmation hearing?

James Comey, a Republican who served under George W. Bush, told the senators he considered waterboarding torture. The FBI nominee sailed through his confirmation hearing with bipartisan support.

|
Evan Vucci/AP
FBI Director nominee James Comey is sworn in on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, July 9, prior to his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Comey spent 15 years as a federal prosecutor before serving in the George W. Bush administration, where he is best known for facing down the White House over a warrantless surveillance program.

James Comey is no Chuck Hagel.

It’s true that both men are Republicans who are – or, in Comey’s case, soon will be – serving in high Obama administration posts.

But ex-Senator Hagel struggled through his Senate confirmation hearing to be secretary of Defense earlier this year, appearing ill-prepared to answer tough questions he must have known were coming. In contrast, Mr. Comey, Obama’s pick to be the next director of the FBI, sailed through his Senate hearing test Tuesday like an America’s Cup yacht with following winds.

It was clear from the start that Comey’s day would be relatively easy. Sen. Pat Leahy (D) of Vermont, the Judiciary Committtee chairman, has long pushed for the harsh interrogation practice known as waterboarding to be considered torture. Comey, as an official in the George W. Bush administration, objected strongly to the practice.

So Senator Leahy started off with the question on which he knew he and Comey would agree: Is waterboarding torture?

“Yes,” said Comey, flatly.

“Would you agree to answer this question the same way no matter who was president?” Leahy continued.

“Oh certainly,” said Comey.

Following that, other senators of both parties praised Comey’s independence, referring several times to his role in facing down the Bush White House over a warrantless surveillance program.

Comey, meanwhile, agreed in principle with many senators on particular questions, while avoiding committing himself to policy details.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D) of California, for instance, asked him what he thought about the force-feeding of prisoners at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp. Comey replied that “I frankly wouldn’t want [that] done to me,” but noted that that FBI isn’t in charge of Guantanamo and so the question was outside his scope.

“I don’t think it’d be worth much, my opinion, at this point,” he said.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R) of Texas asked Comey whether he was concerned that in the Benghazi, Libya attack and the Boston Marathon bombing the FBI had failed to connect dots of evidence beforehand that might have enabled the US to thwart the plots.

“I don’t know enough from this vantage point, senator, to comment on the particular cases. Obviously I think it’s always important to connect the dots as best you can,” said Comey.

Comey used the word “transparency” often, saying he saw it as a key value for the FBI, particularly when dealing with Congress. But he also to some extent defended the US government’s collection of vast amounts of its citizens’ telephone metadata via National Security Agency snooping.

“As a general matter … the collection of metadata and analysis of metadata is a valuable tool in counterterrorism,” Comey said.

He also held that the secret court that authorizes NSA surveillance activities is not a “rubber stamp,” as some critics charge.

“Folks don’t realize it is a group of independent federal judges who sit and review requests by the government, who gather information, and it is anything but a rubber stamp,” he said.

Comey was a federal prosecutor for 15 years prior to becoming an appointed official in the Bush administration, rising to the office of deputy attorney general. After leaving government he became general counsel at Lockheed Martin. Later he moved to the same position at hedge fund Bridgewater Associates.

As was definitely not the case with Chuck Hagel, Comey seems assured of confirmation in his new post.

“I’d be surprised “if confirmation is not unanimous, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R) of Utah told the FBI nominee.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to FBI nominee James Comey: Did he ace confirmation hearing?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/DC-Decoder/2013/0709/FBI-nominee-James-Comey-Did-he-ace-confirmation-hearing
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe