James Comey testified Thursday that he was “stunned” by requests President Donald Trump made to curtail federal investigations related to Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and thought the President’s remarks were of investigative interest— and it seems other senior FBI officials agree.
Though the ousted FBI director did not go as far as accusing Trump of attempting to obstruct justice, Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee offered the clearest indication yet that the President may already be under scrutiny for exactly that.
Part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s job is to “sort that out,” Comey said, dismissing questions from the assembled senators on whether he personally believed Trump obstructed justice. His testimony made the case for why he felt “sure” that Mueller would look into the multiple one-on-one conversations that Trump requested of his then-FBI director.
Comey says Trump asked him to quash the FBI’s investigation into ousted national security adviser Michael Flynn in one Feb. 14 exchange in the Oval Office. In a March 30 phone call, Comey says Trump requested that he lift the “cloud” that the Russia probe was casting over his administration.
“I don’t think it’s for me to say whether the conversation I had with the President was an effort to obstruct,” Comey said of the Feb. 14 meeting. “I took it as a very disturbing thing, very concerning, but that’s a conclusion I’m sure the special counsel will work towards to try and understand what the intention was there, and whether that’s an offense.”
Importantly, Comey noted that Trump asked other senior officials, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, to clear the room before initiating the conversation about the Flynn probe. He noted those officials hesitated before complying.
“Why did he kick everybody out of the Oval Office?” Comey said. “That, to me as an investigator, is a very significant fact.”
Senior FBI officials briefed on that conversation said it was “of investigative interest” to determine the intent of Trump’s statements about Flynn, Comey testified.
Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe made similar remarks in separate testimony before the committee on Wednesday, telling Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) that it was “accurate” to assume that Comey’s private conversations with Trump either already are or are “likely to become part of a criminal investigation.”
These loaded comments apparently did not trouble Trump’s legal team or his defenders on Capitol Hill, who insisted that Comey’s testimony actually vindicated the President. They noted that, as Trump previously said, Comey confirmed that he informed Trump on three separate occasions that the President was not the subject of a counterintelligence investigation.
Republican lawmakers, the White House and Trump’s own family members also argued that the President was merely looking out for the interest of Flynn, a longtime adviser, and never explicitly ordered Comey to end any investigation. Those defenders neglected to mention that Comey testified that a senior FBI official cautioned him against telling Trump he was not a part of the federal investigation, because that person believed that “inevitably his behavior, his conduct will fall within the scope.”
Whether Trump requested or ordered that Comey drop the investigation into Flynn is an irrelevant semantic distinction. As Comey testified, Trump asked him to swear “loyalty” and repeatedly brought up the status of his job in their conversations, leaving the former FBI director with the impression that his continued tenure at the bureau was “contingent upon how he felt I conducted myself and whether I demonstrated loyalty.”
He did not comply with Trump’s requests and was fired only four months into Trump’s term. By the President’s own admission, Comey was dismissed because of the “Russia thing.”
“I was fired in some way to change, or the endeavor was to change, the way the Russia investigation was being conducted,” Comey testified. “That is a very big deal.”
Is Trump Under Federal Scrutiny NOW?
Let’s see. I’m going to guess you may be under scrutiny if … a former federal prosecutor is appointed as Special Counsel and his team includes his longtime law firm partner James Quarles, who got his start in Washington as an assistant prosecutor in the Watergate scandal; Andrew Weissmann, the head of the Justice Department’s criminal fraud unit, who is best known for his work in prosecuting the Enron accounting scandal and for trying dozens of cases related to the notorious Genovese and Gambino crime families; and Jeannie Rhee, who previously worked at the Department of Justice while advising the White House and the attorney general on executive power and national-security issues.
Of course, that’s just a hunch.
What’s the Best Part of Trump Being ‘Under Scrutiny’?
In my book it’s the fact that not one single law firm capable of handling his criminal defense will represent him because “he doesn’t pay and he doesn’t listen.”
To my understanding, Donnie is not any investigation, YET. However, Mr. Mueller is undoubtedly going to uncover the myriad of connections tying the Mango Mussolini to the rest of his criminal enterprise, and expand the scope of the scrutiny.
Melanoma might really want to re-think moving into the White House. Bad times a’coming…
Trump under investigaton? The worst thing that can happen is that His form of corruption would be declared the cleanest and legalest in world history
As patriotic Americans, after waiting 241 years, we have a President, Prehitident Trump, who is finally concerned about the status of pee hookers who provide golden showers. Long overdue recognition for a much maligned group of individuals.
Based on the team that Special Counsel Mueller has recruited, I would say it is HIGHLY PROBABLE that Trump is under a criminal investigation. No doubt!
It’s all about Trump for pete’s sake! How could he not be targeted?