Why Comey doesn't emerge 'entirely clean' from his testimony

JamesComey'sriveting testimony Thursday may have done no political favours for U.S. President Donald Trump, but the former FBI director himself didn't come out unscathed.

Comey spoke for about three hours with theSenate intelligence committee, which isinvestigating whether Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election andwhethermembers of the Trump campaign teamco-ordinatedefforts with officials from Moscow.

• LIVE BLOGRECAP:Highlights and reaction from Comey testimony
• Comey admits he orchestrated memo leak to spur special counsel appointment

He made a number of troubling statements about Trump, accusing the president of:

• Lying.
• Demandinga loyalty pledge.
• Firing him because of his investigation into Russia election tampering.
• Pressuring him todrop a Russia-related probeinto Trump's former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

Trump denies all those accusations.

Some of Comey's testimony, however, also raised questions about his own actions. For example, Comey testified abouta memo he wrote describing his conversations with U.S. President Donald Trump that he then shared with a friend to leakit to the press.

The former FBI director said heneeded to get that out into the public square, that he didn'tdo it himself "for a variety of reasons." But he thought that his leak might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.

It was a surprising statement, given that Comey himself has criticized leaks.

Notsurprisingly, Trumplawyer Marc Kasowitz seized on this admission and fired back,saying Comeyadmitted that he "unilaterally and surreptitiously made unauthorized disclosures to the press of privileged communications with the president."

MarkRozell, dean of George Mason University'sScharSchool of Policy and Government, agreed that Comey, by admitting to the leak, "doesn't come out looking entirely clean."

"Rather than giving the information out himself and bearingdirect responsibilityfor that action, hesnuckit through a personal friend,auniversityprofessor, knowing that hewould leakit tothe New York Times," Rozell told CBC News.

'Deeply troubling'

Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University lawprofessor, wrote in his blog that he found Comey's admission about the leak "deeply troubling from a professional and ethical standpoint."

"If Comeywas sure of his right to release the memo, why use a law professor to avoid fingerprints?"

That Comey may have been motivated to leak the memo out of good intentionsdoesn't negate the concerns over his chosen means of a leak, Turley wrote.

• No smoking gun, but narrative against Trump strengthens after ex-FBI director's testimony
• Take it from the Republican faithful Trump's not a liar, just an idiot: Robyn Urback

And the timing of the leak, he wrote, most clearly benefitted Comey and not the cause of a special counsel.

"Comeyclearly understood that these memos would be sought. That leads inevitably to the question of both motivation as well as means."

In his testimony, Comey also explained why he didn't take his concerns about Trump to officials in the Justice Department. Hesaid it didn't make sense toinform Attorney General Jeff Sessions, since Sessionswas going to recuse himself from the Russia election related probe.

As well, Comey saidthere were no other Senate-confirmed leaders in the Justice Department at that point to take his concerns to, so he said itwas decided the best move would be to "keep it in a box" and "then figure out what to do with it down the road."

'Can't buy the argument'

"Frankly, I can't buy the argument that there was no one he could go to," George Terwilliger, former deputy attorney general under president George H. W. Bush, said on PBS Newshour.

Terwilliger said Comey could have gone to the acting deputy attorney general at the time to express his concerns.

"It's part of a pattern of Mr.Comeyresorting to self-help because he feels like he's the lone ranger who is out there carrying the sword of righteousness forward," he said.

Writing in the New York Times, ElizabethGoitein, co-director ofthe Liberty and National Security Program at theBrennanCenter for Justice, said that much ofComey'sconduct struck heras bizarre.

"The vicarious leaking of his memo probably tops that list, and his reason for not alerting Sessions of Trump's misconduct, at a time when Sessions was still overseeing the Russia investigation, is pretty thin."

Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, a member of the Senate intelligence committee, seemed to slightly criticize Comey for saying nothing to the president about his concerns over the president's behaviour.

"You're big, you're strong,I know the Oval Office, and I know what happens to people when they walk in. There is a certain amount of intimidation," Feinstein said."But why didn't you stop and say, 'Mr. President, this is wrong, I cannot discuss that with you'?"

"Maybe if I were stronger, I would have," Comey replied. "I was so stunned by the conversation that I just took it in."

Comey'stestimony didn't take aim at only the president. Others were criticized too. And one of the surprising bits of testimony had nothing to do with Trump.

"The bombshell was how former attorney generalLoretta Lynch attempted to interfere in the [Hillary] Clinton email investigation by trying to make it less damaging to Clinton from a PR perspective," said Republican strategist Evan Siegfried.

'Concerned me'

Comeytestified that the FBI was getting to a place where Comey and Lynch were going to have to talk publicly about the investigation. Comey said he wanted to know if Lynch was going to authorize them to confirm an investigation was taking place.

"At one point, the attorney general had directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a 'matter,' which confused me and concerned me."

Comey said it gave him the impression that Lynch was looking to align the way they talked about it with theway Clinton's political campaign was describingthe same activity, "which was inaccurate."

"So that gave me a queasy feeling."

The media, as well, came in for some bruising based on Comey'stestimony. Hewasasked about some of the stories published regardingthe Russia investigation,allegations of collusion and whether he was "stunned about how wrong they got the facts."

"Yes.There have been many, many stories reportedlybased on classifiedinformation, about, well, about lots of stuff, especially about Russia, that are just dead wrong,"Comeysaid.

New York Times story

Comey took aim specifically at a New York Times blockbuster articlepublished in Februaryheadlined: "Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence."

"In the main, it was not true," Comey said.

He was questioned about the story again by Senate intelligence member Senator Tom Cotton, who asked if it was fair to characterize the story as "almost entirely wrong."

"Yes," Comey said.

Later, in a statement, the Times said it was standing by its story.