Book Review: 'A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership' by James Comey
Comey is an excellent writer. Although the book discusses complex legal issues, the narrative is at once both understandable for the general reader and interesting to the typical lawyer.
April 27, 2018 at 01:30 PM
7 minute read
'A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership'
By James Comey
Flatiron Books, New York, NY, 290 pages, $29.99
In a recent essay by the president of the New York City Bar Association, John Kiernan laments that the obligation to tell the truth, “as a matter of professionalism and personal character,” seems to be an “undervalued commodity” in contemporary public discourse.
These themes dominate the explosive new memoir of the former FBI director and federal prosecutor, James Comey. At its core, the book describes how Comey has steadfastly fought throughout his long law enforcement career to stave off political pressure and critics to uphold the integrity, standards, and independence of these preeminent federal law enforcement agencies.
Comey is an excellent writer. Although the book discusses complex legal issues, the narrative is at once both understandable for the general reader and interesting to the typical lawyer.
Throughout the book, Comey stresses that principled leaders recognize the importance of the obligation to tell the truth, respect our public institutions, uphold our common values, abide by limitations on power, and observe accepted standards of discourse. As such, the book can be seen as an indictment of the bona fides of President Donald Trump.
As U.S. Attorney, Comey made the controversial decision to prosecute Martha Stewart for making false statements to investigators in connection with her stock trading. Looking back on the criticism he took for prosecuting Stewart, Comey writes that the “justice system is an honor system.” Prosecutors cannot always tell if someone is lying, but “when we are able to prove it, we simply must do so as a message to everyone.”
Regarding the Scooter Libby false statements case, Comey lauds Attorney General John Ashcroft for his ethical decision to recuse himself, given his many prior dealings with Libby and his boss, Vice President Dick Cheney, in President George W. Bush's cabinet. According to Comey, the credibility of the DOJ “is its bedrock[,]” and the public “must see the administration of justice as independent of politics, race, class, religion, or many of the other things that divide humans into tribes.”
One of the most dramatic parts of the book examines Comey's role in revising the Stellar Wind counterterrorism program. After 9/11, the DOJ wrote opinions that authorized “aggressive counterterrorism activities.” By 2003, the DOJ had concluded that the opinions were “dead wrong,” and had enabled the NSA to conduct surveillance that “didn't comply with a law Congress had passed a generation earlier.” According to Comey, Bush violated that “statute in ordering the surveillance” in a series of short-term emergency orders.
As the date for a new short-term order approached in March 2004, Ashcroft was incapacitated with pancreatitis. Knowing that Ashcroft's top deputy (Comey) opposed a new order, Bush's chief of staff, Andrew Card, “tried to do an end run around” Comey by secretly visiting the ailing Ashcroft in the hospital and convincing him to overrule Comey. Alerted by Ashcroft's wife, Comey rushed to the hospital to foil Card. Supported by then-FBI director, Robert Mueller, who “respected [Comey's] legal position and cared deeply about the rule of law,” Comey states that they convinced Ashcroft to reject Card's power play.
In 2013, President Barack Obama nominated Comey to head the FBI. Comey writes that he soon became impressed with Obama's acuity and professionalism. He writes that Obama understood that “a president and the FBI director must be at arm's length.” Furthermore, he states that Obama possessed a healthy sense of humor, a superb temperament, diligent analytical skills, and patient listening abilities. Comey considers Obama to be a “compelling leader.”
In July 2015, the FBI received a “referral from the inspector general in the intelligence community” about “the issue of whether Secretary of State Hillary Clinton mishandled classified information while using her personal email system.” Comey states that the ensuing FBI investigation centered on whether: (1) Clinton moved classified documents and/or topics of discussion outside of classified systems; and (2) she engaged in such illegal activity with willful intent.
In a masterful narrative, Comey describes the Clinton investigation, the crack team of DOJ professionals who conducted it, the rigorous analysis of the evidence, the team's July 2016 interview of Clinton, Comey's doubts as to the independence of Attorney General Loretta Lynch, the team's recommendation “not to prosecute,” Comey's final decision not to prosecute, and Comey's decision to announce the decision himself.
Constrained by national security concerns, Comey does not reveal the entire Clinton story. But he convincingly writes that: (1) Clinton's email practices exposed 36 email strings containing classified material; (2) all of the people who received such emails were entitled to see the material; and (3) Clinton's interview disclosed that she had not acted with the high level of intent necessary to prosecute.
In making these crucial points, Comey adroitly compares Clinton's case to that of CIA director, David Petraeus, who disclosed classified materials to his mistress and biographer, Paula Broadwell, who possessed neither a security clearance nor a legal right to see the material. According to Comey, the evidence in the Petraeus case was much stronger than in the Clinton case. For his wrongdoing, Petraeus pleaded guilty to a single misdemeanor, was fined, and sentenced to probation.
In early October 2016, the FBI obtained the laptop computer of Anthony Weiner, estranged husband of Clinton aide, Huma Abedin, during an investigation of Weiner's alleged sending of lewd messages to minors. On the laptop, the FBI found thousands of Clinton's emails that had not been previously made available. This created a conundrum for Comey, because he had already publicly disclosed that the FBI's investigation had not turned up a prosecutable offense. Thus, just two weeks before the November 2016 election, Comey possessed a difficult choice: disclose or conceal.
Seeking to protect the integrity of the FBI, Comey chose to disclose. Predictably, Democrats attacked him. In hindsight, it appears that Comey made the principled and courageous decision not to conceal. Had Comey tried to conceal the new material, such machinations likely would have surely leaked, causing massive damage to the FBI's credibility. Instead, Comey took the heat to protect the FBI.
For Clinton's part, the Weiner laptop hurt her election prospects. But she has to take responsibility for the fact that Weiner, of all people, possessed her classified emails. As Flannery O'Connor once wrote, the truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it.
The final portion of Comey's book is devoted to Donald Trump's shortcomings, his affinity for lying, his lack of character, his insecurities, his amateurish statecraft, his deleterious effect on the quality of public discourse, his inappropriate attempt to convince Comey to curtail the Russian influence investigation, and Trump's decision to fire him as the FBI director.
Although Comey's observations of Trump ring true, his comparison of Trump to a Mafioso is both unnecessary and unfortunate. By going down this dark path, Comey has cheapened public discourse, not improved it.
On balance, however, Comey's book is a positive contribution to the public discussion of several of the most compelling moral, legal and political issues of our time. Like Albert Einstein, Comey teaches us that a person who is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.
Jeffrey M. Winn is an attorney with the Chubb Group, a global insurer, and a member of the executive committee of the New York City Bar Association. The views expressed herein are solely those of the author.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'We Learn Much From the Court's Mistakes': Law Journal Review of 'The Worst Supreme Court Decisions, Ever!'
6 minute read'Midnight in Moscow': A Memoir From the Front Lines of Russia's War Against the West
9 minute read'There Are Heroes in Every Story': Review of 'The Eight: The Lemmon Slave Case and the Fight for Freedom'
9 minute readTrending Stories
- 1New Research Study Predicts Continued Growth for Generative AI in Legal
- 2Litera Acquires Document Automation Startup Offices & Dragons
- 3Patent Trolls Come Under Increasing Fire in Federal Courts
- 4Transforming Dispute Processes in Law: The Impact of Large Language Models
- 5Daniel Habib to Serve as Next Attorney-in-Charge of NY Federal Defender Appeals Unit
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250