McCabe’s out. Who’s next?

Re “Trump’s war with FBI looks far from over,” Opinion, March 18

The firing of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe after repeated attacks on him by President Trump is a worrying sign of the erosion of the rule of law.

If McCabe’s firing turns out to have more to do with his interview with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III about whether it was Trump or James Comey who lied, than his alleged false statements under oath about investigations involving Hillary Clinton, then it is really an attempt by the president to obstruct justice.

The handling of the Clinton investigation was also used by Trump as a pretext to fire Comey, the former FBI director, before the president admitted that wasn’t the real reason.

Trump lawyer John Dowd’s calling for an end to the special counsel’s investigation makes it hard to believe there is no connection between the firing and Mueller’s work. The special counsel investigation must be allowed to follow the facts wherever they lead; ending it because of fears about what might be uncovered is completely unacceptable. David Bendall

Aliso Viejo

Why was McCabe fired? He claims in effect that there was a plot in the White House to single him out for the role he played in the aftermath of Comey’s firing. The other view is that the Justice Department inspector general investigated McCabe for mishandling the Clinton email investigation and for lying, and it recommended his termination. McCabe’s boss, Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions, followed that recommendation Friday.

Which version is more probably true?

If the White House thought that Mueller could use McCabe as a witness against Trump, the last thing it would want to do would be to retaliate against McCabe for past deeds by causing him to delay collecting his pension and thereby turn an objective witness into an enemy with a score to settle.

It seems more reasonable that McCabe was fired because of the inspector general’s report. Bill Gravlin

Rancho Palos Verdes