I’m a bit enamored with James Comey myself. I read last I night of an associate saying Comey had had reservations about another person who is now involved, someone Comey said he respected and hadn’t seen anything sketchy from. But Comey said “but he’s a survivor, and you don’t survive without making some compromises.”
I’m intrigued by the idea of a guy who potentially hasn’t made a ton of ethical compromises. I suspect if he hasn’t that he feels like he had a pretty fucking good run.
I also suspect he’s an intuitive because I think he conducts his business without a lot of ethical judgement. Like I guess I would say he seems interested in doing his job and that he isn’t all that moralistic. Like the kind of guy who would say “trump can’t be said to be reckless with classified information the way Clinton can. Because trump is the declassifier. Clinton was not.” And actually genuinely believe it.
Why do I feel like sensors are more judgemental? That’s probably not true. Huh. Maybe it is. Maybe intuitives are more likely systems thinkers and thus more cautious assigning ethical fault.
Like, I would enjoy being a defense attorney because I would enjoy trying to defend anybody and find the optimal scenario for any client, regardless of how guilty they are. I think it’s a super important part of a functioning society to have attorneys defending the guilty and the innocent. And I can imagine working with prosecutors who are the Comey type who may be like, in the backroom making some deal and like obviously not morally wrapped up in the crime, just determined to land at the optimal spot for their side. I’d love working with a prosecutor like that.