3 things Comey said hurt Trump, but 1 may help him
WASHINGTON >>> Former FBI Director James B. Comey’s opening statement for Thursday’s hearing at the Senate Intelligence Committee deepens President Trump’s problems in at least three areas. One thing Comey said potentially helps Trump.
Comey really did tell Trump he wasn’t personally under investigation
When he fired Comey, Trump noted that the FBI chief had assured him three times that he was not under investigation. Comey confirmed that in his statement.
Republicans quickly seized on that as a major talking point.
Does that mean Trump is now in the clear?
No, on several grounds. To begin with, until Trump made his remark, the idea that the president might personally be under scrutiny was never at the center of the controversy. The main focus had always been possible coordination between Russian agents trying to influence the 2016 election and people close to Trump, not the president himself.
Moreover, Trump’s actions — especially his request, detailed by Comey, that the FBI drop the investigation of former national security advisor Michael Flynn — could be considered an effort to cover up wrongdoing.
And, of course, the investigation is continuing. We don’t know what else special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and his staff may turn up. The impeachment of President Clinton for lying about his affair with Monica Lewinksy, for example, grew out of an unrelated investigation into the finances of a real estate deal.
The f irst problem area for Trump — interceding for Flynn
Comey’s statement confirms widespread media reports that on Feb. 14 the president asked him to forgo the investigation of Flynn, the man Trump had fired the day before as national security advisor.
Comey did not share that request with anyone involved in the investigation, and there’s no indication that it impeded the inquiry. But just the attempt to get a case dropped, at minimum, violated longstanding government policy.
Whether Trump’s words also broke any laws is open to debate. Federal law makes it a crime to “corruptly” seek to “obstruct or impede” the “due and proper administration of the law.”
One question would be whether Trump’s intent in asking Comey to drop that part of the FBI investigation was “corrupt.” The fact that Trump ordered everyone else out of the Oval Office — including Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions, to whom Comey reported — before making the request of Comey could be evidence on that question, legal experts have said.
The second problem — the demand for ‘loyalty’
According to Comey, at a private dinner with Trump on Jan. 27, the president asked him if we wanted to stay on as FBI director and then declared that “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.”
That statement could bolster the case that the president’s decision to fire Comey was based on an improper motive — a desire for an FBI chief who would put loyalty to Trump ahead of the demands of the law.
The jeopardy on that point may be more political than legal. Polls show that while many Americans have made up their minds on what they think of the firing, an important segment is still deciding, and Comey’s personal account could be important to them.
The third problem — Trump seems unconcerned about his staff
Although Trump repeatedly asked Comey to say that he was not personally under investigation and insisted the FBI should make that public, he seemed much less interested in the fate of others caught up in the inquiry.
According to Comey, he was told by Trump that “if there were some ‘satellite’ associates of his who did something wrong, it would be good to find that out, but that he hadn’t done anything wrong.”
That comment may not sit well with those associates, some of whom are now confronted with grand jury subpoenas and need to weigh how much they’re willing to say to prosecutors.