Good points Tulla, at least on the surface, about Comey. However, I think some second-level thinking might be in order. Comey looks and speaks the part, so he is able to generate a lot of favorable opinions. But, before one uses those favorable opinions to support an argument in favor of him, one should consider that virtually all of these opinions come 1) from within the Washington establishment; and 2) in a public forum. Do you doubt that Comey is part of the Deep State?
Additionally, consider that Comey has been involved, in one way or another, in:
1) the 9/11 intelligence failures
2) the weapons of mass destruction controversy
3) spying on Americans
4) leaking of meeting notes in order to spur the appointment of a special prosecutor
5) the indecision and back-and-forth on the Hillary investigation and two major public statements, which were highly criticized by Republicans and Democrats, alternatively. Comey just couldn't stay away from controversy.
As far as yesterday's hearing:
1) basing a potential obstruction of justice case on "hope" is pretty much a reach and I suspect that's why even Snowflake and Paycut have wisely remained quiet after yesterday's testimony. Or maybe they were taken hostage by Gingy or chuvalo or the long lost Blowout Comb. Either way, I am disappointed that they didn't humor us. I just hope that Sammy is safe!
2) Trump wasn't under investigation; as Rubio asked, why wasn't this fact leaked? This ought to reveal something to those who care to think that deeply.
3) for Loretta Lynch to have ordered Comey to call the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation a "matter" is telling. Again, why wasn't this leaked by Comey or been uncovered in an investigation by the media? Once again, that ought to reveal something; but you've got to want to get out from under the bias state of mind.
4) Comey loses major credibility by leaking. I guess he didn't have the smarts to realize that admitting this in such detail was going to damage his reputation. Again, telling.
With all that said, Trump could have easily handled things better, and needs to learn how to stay out of trouble. But, even if he learns to sidestep potholes, the media will continue to create artificial ones.
So, will the Dems give up from here? Of course not; they are clearly the "I'll take my ball home if I can't win" crowd. But if Trump can get 1) healthcare reform; 2) tax reform or at least a simply lowering of the rates; 3) infrastructure; 4) Dodd-Frank repeal or at least changing many of the more restrictive parts of the legislation, or at least tax reform and one of the other three items before 2017 is over, it's going to be hard to continue to trot out these stories and have a majority of the electorate believe them; although, there will always be some who will "buy-in."