For anyone who thought former F.B.I. director James Comey would drop a bombshell yesterday in his testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee, a good part of their day must have felt extremely unsatisfying. For those hoping that Comey would deliver some kind of knockout punch against Trump, his testimony must have surely brought them frustration, like rooting for a champion boxer while he dances around the ring for 12 rounds, jabbing here and there, but never really delivering an effective punch on his opponent or putting him in serious trouble. The expected knockout blow would never come.
In fact, a few of Comey’s jabs landed not on Trump, but on former Attorney General Loretta Lynch. During the FBI’s inquiry into Hillary Clinton’s private email server, Comey testified that then Attorney General Loretta Lynch asked him to refer to the inquiry as a “matter,” not an “investigation.” This directive came after a private meeting between Lynch and Bill Clinton on the tarmac at the Phoenix airport. Contrary to published reports that both of them spoke only about their grandchildren, the meeting, most believe, had something to do about the Justice Department’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server.
And, of course, the logical question is if Loretta Lynch took her desire to protect Hillary beyond simply trying to dictate how the FBI director would talk about the investigation to the media. Did her friendship with the Clintons and her commitment to protecting Hillary from prosecution lead to Comey’s decision not to pursue charges against Hillary in his investigation into her private email server?
The other surprising revelation to come out of Comey’s testimony was his admission that he leaked a memo he wrote regarding a private meeting he had with President Trump. Rather than leaking the memo by himself, he handed it to a law professor friend, who later shared it with various media outlets, including The New York Times.
The memo, written by Comey, was characterized as saying that Trump asked Comey to drop the FBI’s investigation into former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. By his own admission, Comey leaked the memo in hopes of triggering the appointment of a special counsel to look into Flynn’s possible ties with Russia and other foreign agents. Not long after the memo was made public, the Justice Department appointed Robert Mueller as a special counsel to investigate ties between the Trump’s campaign and Russian officials. Comey got what he wanted.
While Comey’s testimony failed to provide any hard evidence of Russian collusion with the 2016 election or make a solid case for an obstruction of justice case against Trump, it did portray Trump as someone who does not yet understand the differences in how a CEO may talk to his subordinates and how the President of the United States can, especially an FBI director who is investigating his campaign team.
If you are CEO of a company you can get away with asking questions like “can I count on your loyalty,” unless, of course, the question is directed to your human resources director who is investigating a subordinate’s claim of sexual harassment against you. But in most other situations, the CEO can use such language and no lines will be crossed.
But the same question or request for loyalty coming from the President of the United States to his acting FBI director, who was currently investigating his campaign and close friends– and asked after everyone in the room was asked to leave–seems completely inappropriate and, yes, a bit sinister.
But whether or not that conversation rises to the level of obstruction of justice will depend on which legal expert you ask. The consensus thus far, though, is that unless special counsel Robert Mueller can dig up something much more substantial, this whole affair will likely end with an anti-climatic thud.
fgvita