What Has Me Bothered About James Comey Getting Fired?

 

If you ask me if I’m bothered about James Comey being fired by President Trump, I would have to ask you, “What do you mean by being bothered?”

Am I bothered the president fired the FBI director? The answer is no. The president can fire whomever he chooses to fire whenever he chooses to fire them. Now, it is unusual for an FBI director to be fired during a term instead of at the start of a term or during the transition. The last time it happened was to William Sessions in 1993 by then-President Bill Clinton.

Am I bothered that Comey is fired during an investigation into possible Russian influence in the presidential election? Well, no. As Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) said, quite beautifully, the FBI wasn’t fired. The FBI director was fired. So if we believe the FBI is an organization of professionals, why wouldn’t an investigation — or all investigations they’re working on — continue?

Investigations, too often, are about politics and not truth. One must understand this to understand that Democrats don’t want any one specific investigation, what they want is any investigation. Whether or not there is collusion between President Trump or his top team and Russia regarding the election is almost secondary to what the Democrats really desire.

Time and again we have learned there is no collusion between President Trump, his top team, and the Russians. We have the former DNI director James Clapper saying no collusion. We have Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) saying no collusion. We have others, time and again, telling us there is no collusion between Trump and the Russians trying to influence the election.

Even the conversation about former NSA director Michael Flynn falls away because he’s already been fired. It’s obvious that Flynn didn’t properly report his dealings with foreign nations. But he was fired. It’s over. Democrats can make the claim that it shows bad judgement by Trump, but not that there was collusion.

Democrats would love to prove this collusion. But what they really want is for an investigation to continue into Trump so they can say Trump is being investigated; the power of the investigation is more important to them then the results of the investigation. This is what happens when government agencies are used as cudgels against the American people. See, IRS vs. Tea Party (2009-2017).

This is why it’s hard to accept that the Democratic Party is bothered by the firing of James Comey, when just a few months earlier aides were desperate for then-President Obama to fire him. Look at the words of Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) asking why Comey wasn’t fired going back to November. Or the words of Rep. Maxine Waters, in January 2017:

And if going back just a few months is “ancient history” for you, let’s go back to just a week ago when 2016 presidential election loser Hillary Clinton was on her, “It’s Not My Fault I Lost The Election” tour; blaming the FBI and Comey for re-opening an investigation 11 days before the election regarding emails between long-time Clinton aide Huma Abedin and her husband, disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner. Abedin sent Weiner classified emails to print off for Hillary. Weiner had no security clearance.

Democrats were infuriated with Comey, and wanted him gone. They couldn’t believe that he “threw” the election. We heard Comey himself during his testimony talk about the great pains this caused him — it made him “mildly nauseous.” But he felt he had no choice. He could conceal, or he could reveal. He chose reveal.

That pain meant nothing to the Democrats just a week ago. A week later, President Trump has created a constitutional issue, according to Sens. Dick Durbin(D-IL) and Brian Schatz (D-HI):

Sen. Schumer advised President Trump not to fire him, calling it a “big mistake.” The Progressive Intelligentsia on Twitter exploded in a chorus of “cover up” and comparisons to former President Richard Nixon. More on the “comparisons” in a bit.

Republicans as well were not happy. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said there was “not sufficient rationale” for firing Comey. Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) stated, “I’ve spent the last several hours trying to find an acceptable rationale for the timing of Comey’s firing. I just can’t do it.” Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) said he was, “…troubled by the timing and reasoning of Director Comey’s termination.”

The President doesn’t have to worry about whether the senators from Arizona accept his “rationale” in firing anyone. Sun stroke, you know, is a real condition.

I can’t tell you whether or not James Comey is a good or decent man. I would only assume that he is, but then again I always assume that most people are good and decent until they truly prove otherwise.

Which brings us to President Trump. I’m not a fan of the letter he sent to Comey where he made sure to say I appreciate you exonerating me, but get your stuff and get out!

Focusing on being exonerated when firing a guy? That wasn’t smart. It seems like the paragraph is forced, because it is forced. Jonah Goldberg of National Review described it as akin to saying, “It’s not about the money.”

That’s how it looks. It looks like President Trump fired Comey because he wasn’t going to do what Trump wanted done; putting an end to this nonsense idea of investigations regarding collusion between Trump and his team and the Russians and the election. For a guy who is very into optics, to not notice these are bad optics, is very strange indeed.

But bad optics, and a bungled roll-out of the announcement, does not make for criminal activity. Bad optics does not make for criminal intent. Bad optics does not make one a criminal. And, bad optics does not make the action any less valid. I can’t tell you whether President Trump is a good or decent man, but I can tell you that he had every right to fire James Comey, and certainly had every reason to do so. To say otherwise is just untrue.

As for those Trump-Nixon “comparisons,” let’s just put down that book of cliches. The people screaming about Nixon on Twitter don’t know what they’re talking about. They’re the same people who were experts on Emmanuel Macron after the French election, and experts on Middle East warfare when Trump bombed Syria. They scream about Nixon the same way they scream about a Kendall Jenner Pepsi Ad, the myth of white privilege and how Steve Bannon is a nazi. (He’s not.)

Even the Nixon presidential library tweeted out that President Richard Nixon never fired the FBI director. (You’ve got to admit, that’s kind of funny. The Nixon Library wants to distance themselves from Donald Trump.)

What has me bothered? Bad optics … a bit. Democrats who want a charge but don’t care about the crime, definitely. And, without a doubt, a media that won’t clearly speak the truth that there is no proof of collusion between President Trump and Russia.

But what has me bothered most? Americans don’t trust the most “trustworthy” institutions. The issue isn’t Trump or Comey, nor the firing nor the inane responses and reaction. It’s one question: Do Americans trust any part of government anymore? The FBI, the intelligence community, the people who gather the information: Do Americans believe that any of these organizations are beyond politics and above partisanship?

The answer, horrifically, is no. That bothers me. They don’t trust the FBI, and they don’t trust the CIA. They don’t trust the Administration, they don’t trust Congress and you can bet all the money in your pocket they don’t trust the media. And until they do again, even to some degree, all the investigations and firings in the world will mean nothing, no matter how loud the screams.


Cross-posted from WIBC.com.

Published in General, Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 34 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    profdlp (View Comment):

    Karl Nittinger (View Comment):
    Some anectdotal connections to a paranoid environment might be, for example, references to, “this entire partisan Government (and captive media)”, which is, “undeserving of our trust”, or obsessions with, “the deep state”, “globalist elites”, “the establishment”, and the “swamp”.

    I guess I am paranoid in your eyes, then, since I believe that those things exist and are real problems. (Except for the globalist “elites”part. I prefer globalist ‘troublemakers”.)

    Me, too. I’m fine with the term globalist elites, though.  If we say globalist troublemakers it sounds like we’re less paranoid than we ought to be.

    • #31
  2. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):
    Yes. This loss of trust in government is a serious thing. It didn’t happen with the election of Donald Trump. It’s been a slow-motion trainwreck for years, as politicians create rules and regulations that benefit themselves and their pals, while leaving regular Americans out in the cold. As we watch politicians walk free from crimes that would send regular Americans to prison. As we see the federal bureaucracy politicized and weaponized to destroy anyone who might even meekly suggest the government is too powerful and abuse citizens who are just trying to make ends meet.

    Back in the mid 60s I was surprised to hear from a distant “uncle” that he trusted the government to regulate food safety — that if certain foods that were being denounced were so bad the government wouldn’t allow them. I had not expected to hear such trust in government from someone in our own family. I had heard there were people who trusted the government, but to actually talk to one up close and personal? This is something I’ve not forgotten.

    Most of the four million government workers are doing their jobs, though I believe their performance would improve if it were not so difficult for the poor performers to get fired.   In the main, though, FDA workers really do want food to be safe.  OSHA workers want employees to have safe workplaces, FHWA workers want state DOTs to maintain safe roads while keeping honest and fair practices when it comes to bidding highway work, etc., &tc.

    The problem is that the management levels have become Leftist.  They all have degrees from Leftist elite universities (or elite wannabes), or, sometimes worse, advanced degrees.  This is because the whole system was shaped as a meritocracy, in order to prevent political partisanship.  But the universities have been overtaken by Progressives, so unless the degree is in engineering, accounting or hard sciences it came with Leftist indoctrination.  And Team Obama magnified the problem for the past eight years by promoting Leftist ideologues at every opportunity (from their point of view the most partisan true Progressive believers were, of course, the most competent for management positions).  Thus, the weaponization of the agencies.

    We really need for Trump to drain the swamp.  This is more important and more urgent than the wall or taxes or even the budget.  It is the overreaching creep of bureaucratic power over our lives and schools and workplaces that is killing our economy and pruning back American dreams.

    • #32
  3. Ford Penney Inactive
    Ford Penney
    @FordPenney

    MJBubba ‘Thus, the weaponization of the agencies.’

    Nice.

    And this is why I’m confused about all the hand wringing about Trump, the great and powerful ‘O’ tried an entire progressive overhaul and the sound from the media, the Dems and even the Republicans… to quote Paul Simon- ‘The Sound of Silence’.

    • #33
  4. Pony Convertible Inactive
    Pony Convertible
    @PonyConvertible

    Guruforhire (View Comment):

    Tony Katz: Americans don’t trust the most “trustworthy” institutions. The issue isn’t Trump or Comey, nor the firing nor the inane responses and reaction. It’s one question: Do Americans trust any part of government anymore? The FBI, the intelligence community, the people who gather the information: Do Americans believe that any of these organizations are beyond politics and above partisanship?

    No, that would be stupid.

    Another reason for smaller government.  If government is small their impact on our lives is less, and it matters less if they are trustworthy or not.

    • #34
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.