I know titling an article with an anonymous quote is a blatant violation of journalistic standards, but in the modern traditions of the Washington Post, we’ll chalk it up to “when in Rome…” Specifically, when in Rome while it burned and Nero fiddled; that would be more apropos, perhaps, when describing Post standards. Nonetheless, I think it accurately and succinctly sums up my short interview with a friend who is a former Department of Justice appointee and current Law Professor.
I emailed him several times recently, trying in vain to put some perspective on some of the finer nuances of Mr. Comey’s wild ride into infamy. Eventually, I learned my friend was evaluating papers and was annoyed at the prospect of having to discuss the illogic and anti-intellectualism of Jame Comey while trying to maintain his legal reasoning. It was a fair point. I tried a different angle: Explain it to me like you were at dinner party with intellectual, but not politically or legally inclined guests. My attempt at creating an interesting new perspective was greeted with the blunt rejoinder, “that’s why I hate [expletive] dinner parties.”