The rule of law

This editorial appeared in the New York Daily News. T o no one’s surprise, the Trump re-election effort will be built in no small part on the well-worn grievance that necessary Obama administration counterintelligence efforts tracking 2016 Russian election interference actually amounted to dastardly spying on Trump’s campaign.

Last week, acting Director of National Intelligence Ric Grenell declassified the names of Obama officials (including Joe Biden) who’d been informed that former national security advisor Michael Flynn was caught on a monitored phone call with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Grenell handed that information to the Department of Justice, and two Republican senators, reaching through the looking glass, promptly insinuated Flynn had been illegitimately “unmasked.”

This follows the unprecedented decision by the Justice Department to withdraw its prosecution of Flynn. The DOJ move came despite Flynn’s pleading guilty twice to lying to the FBI about talking to Kislyak regarding plans to weaken sanctions on Russia for the interference. The sanctions had then just been imposed.

Ridiculous, and ripe to be rejected by a court.

Thankfully, America still has an independent judiciary, overseen by judges with good legal sense and stiff spines.

In response to DOJ’s move, Federal Judge Emmett G. Sullivan — first appointed to the bench by Ronald Reagan, if we’re still playing that silly Trump game — made clear he’s not ready to grant a get-out-of-jail free card: He appointed ex-Brooklyn Federal Judge John Gleeson to examine potential perjury charges against Flynn and how to respond to DOJ’s withdrawal request.

If President Trump wants to pardon his flunky, no one can stop him. Until that happens, the rule of law applies. Remember that?