Here’s a way Trump could escape Comey-firing mess
Mona Charen
President Donald Trump has obeyed the law since taking the oath of office. That is a better record than some feared. It is a better record than he himself promised many times during the campaign. In addition to expressing contempt for a sitting federal judge due to his ethnicity, he also volunteered that he would order the U.S. military to torture suspects. Told that this would be asking servicemen to violate the law, he scoffed, “They won’t refuse. They’re not gonna refuse me. Believe me.” He lauded tyrants and strongmen. He encouraged violence at campaign rallies. And he refused to say that he would accept the legitimacy of the vote if it went against him.
So, when he made a number of solid appointments, chose a stellar Supreme Court justice, and — most importantly — acquiesced to the rulings of federal courts, fears of a lawless presidency eased.
Trump is not going to be an American dictator. He is, however, proving to be his own worst enemy — which is an amazing feat, considering the intensity of feeling against him. Trump’s emotionalism, recklessness and unseriousness are weighing down his presidency.
Of course there were reasons to fire James Comey. The Wall Street Journal editorial page recommended that Trump dismiss him in January, due to Comey’s history of letting political judgments affect prosecutorial decisions. Judge Laurence Silberman elaborated on them in a recent op-ed, and newly appointed Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein summarized those misjudgments in a memo. In short, Comey arrogated power to himself that the FBI chief does not possess: “There is a well-established process for other officials to step in when a conflict requires the recusal of the Attorney General,” Rosenstein wrote. Worse: “We do not hold press conferences to release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation.”
I believe that Silberman and Rosenstein have scruples. As for Trump, it’s possible, but consider that A) he effusively praised Comey for those very acts at the time, B) he assured Comey after those acts, i.e., in January, that his job was secure, and C) he tweeted recently that Comey was too soft on Clinton (not too tough).
Also, a person motivated by punctilious concern about the proper role of the FBI director would not have praised Comey on Oct. 31, 2016, for making Hillary Clinton’s life more difficult when he announced the reopening of the email investigation. “It took a lot of guts,” Trump told a rally. “I was not his fan, but I’ll tell you what: What he did, he brought back his reputation.” I don’t know about you, but I’m willing to say that Trump’s views of Comey track with whether Comey’s latest acts help or hurt Trump.
Trump did not think this through. Members of his leaky staff have expressed surprise at the outcry. They figured Democrats would not stick up for Comey, out of loyalty to Clinton, which betrays a staggering level of naiveté about Washington. Firing Comey now instead of in January renews suspicion that the president has something to hide.
If this is sheer incompetence and petulance and nothing worse, the president could save himself and the country a lot more heartburn by releasing his tax returns. No one will care if he’s not as rich as he claimed. The burning question is whether he has a Russia connection.