The Depth & Toxicity Of The Swamp

Although I used a swamp metaphor in describing the issues related to the Clinton Foundation nearly a year ago — before Trump began using the metaphor to refer generally to Washington DC — I did not fully appreciate just how appropriate it was at the time. The firing of Comey and the all but psychotic reactions to it by those I would have expected to welcome it made me realize that the swamp is far deeper and more toxic than I had initially thought. It is sadly apparent that we are all in effect in a swamp of corruption and we have no choice but to drain it or die.

Why Was A Corporate Lawyer In Charge Of The FBI? Why Does His Replacement Own A Racing Car Quality Porsche?

When I was in law school one of the quips quoted about the legal profession was that corporate lawyers (to be both truthful and more alliterative ‘corporate c*nts’) drink wine, whereas litigators (i.e., those interested in government prosecutorial work) drink beer. The underlying, genderless, and non-sexist truth to which that quip relates is that if you want to make money as a lawyer you go into corporate law, whereas if you really care about justice, ethics and all that sort of stuff, you seek out, ideally, political appointments to prosecutorial (and eventually perhaps judicial) work.

Given that context, the career of now former FBI Director Comey seems strange. He was originally on the political appointment/proscutorial track, but then he became a high level corporate attorney. That by itself is — or should be — the proverbial ‘red flag.’ But the fact that he subsequently was nominated to the most nitty gritty of positions in law enforcement is, to say the least, peculiar. It is as if someone was yanked from a penthouse wine sipping event and driven to a smoky roadside blues bar with only IPA on tap. WTF?

As odd as that storyline is, the fact that the de facto FBI Director owns a high end — racing car quality — Porsche is beyond bizarre. Nothing in the public record suggests that there is anything in his family like the wealth that allows for squandering the money it takes even to lease such a vehicle, much less to own and maintain it. That is not a ‘red flag’: rather it is a veritable red tarp that most people familiar with the machinations of money know to be used as often as not to cover any number of sketchy relationships and associations.

Rules Of Evidence Versus The Rules Of Logic Needed To Survive

The foregoing suggests a lot but proves nothing. But to be concerned with the issue of proof is to be distracted by the standards of the rule of evidence as applied in a court of law versus the rules of logic you need to apply on a daily basis simply to survive.