Sadly, Comeystock or Comeymass doesn't seem to be working out for the media quite as expected.
You would think the left would have learned its lessons from recent Comey history. Or what would happen when its fake news anonymously sourced stories came up against specific questions to a real named former FBI director.
The story, which was anonymously sourced, alleged that members of Trump's campaign team communicated with Russian agents at around the same time that hackers published personal emails stolen from Democratic National Committee staffers and Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta.
However, Comey flatly disputed all of that.
"That report by the New York Times was not true. Is that a fair statement?" Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, asked.
"In the main, it was not true," Comey replied. "The challenge, and I'm not picking on reporters, about writing on classified information is: The people talking about it often don't really know what's going on, and those of us who actually know what's going on are not talking about it."
The story, which was anonymously sourced, alleged that members of Trump's campaign team communicated with Russian agents at around the same time that hackers published personal emails stolen from Democratic National Committee staffers and Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta.
However, Comey flatly disputed all of that.
"That report by the New York Times was not true. Is that a fair statement?" Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, asked.
"In the main, it was not true," Comey replied. "The challenge, and I'm not picking on reporters, about writing on classified information is: The people talking about it often don't really know what's going on, and those of us who actually know what's going on are not talking about it."
So much for the anonymously sourced torrent of hit pieces that the Washington Post, the New York Times and CNN had come to specialize in. Comey's testimony had already shot down another CNN anonymously sourced story. Now he took down one of the New York Times' big hit pieces. But in a way it doesn't really matter.
The media game has fundamentally changed. In the past having a big prestigious story be disproven in this way would be damaging to the credibility of a major media outlet. Today it doesn't matter. The slew of anonymously sourced tales being vomited out as breaking news is a tactic. And the stories are disposable. They produce X amount of hits. And then it's Mission Accomplished.
The agenda is to reverse the results of the election and return the left to power. Fake news is one of the media's tactics. And that becomes obvious in moments like this when the narrative crumbles.
"The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers, you might say, is that somewhere along the line in the last year is the president had something to do with colluding with the Russians … to affect the election in some way," Matthews said on MSNBC, following the testimony.
"And yet what came apart this morning was that theory," Matthews said, listing two reasons why. First, he said Comey revealed that "Flynn wasn't central to the Russian investigation," and secondly, he said that kills the idea that Flynn might have been in a position to testify against Trump.
"And if that's not the case, where's the there-there?" Matthews said.
There's no there there.