Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

A looming ‘cloud’ over Trump just grew darker

WASHINGTON — Upset about the investigation into Russian interference in last year’s election, United States President Donald Trump sought relief from Mr James Comey, then the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) director.

Former Federal Bureau of Investigations Director James Comey departs after testifying before a closed session of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., June 8, 2017.  Photo: Reuters

Former Federal Bureau of Investigations Director James Comey departs after testifying before a closed session of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., June 8, 2017. Photo: Reuters

Follow TODAY on WhatsApp

WASHINGTON — Upset about the investigation into Russian interference in last year’s election, United States President Donald Trump sought relief from Mr James Comey, then the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) director.

By Mr Comey’s account, Mr Trump asked him to help “lift the cloud”.

But thanks to Mr Trump’s own actions, the cloud darkened considerably on Thursday (June 8), and now seems likely to hover over his presidency for months, if not years, to come.

Rather than relieve the pressure, Mr Trump’s decision to fire Mr Comey has generated an even bigger political and legal threat.

In his anger at Mr Comey for refusing to publicly disclose that the president was not personally under investigation, legal experts said Mr Trump may have actually made himself the target of an investigation.

While delivered in calm, deliberate and unemotional terms, Mr Comey’s testimony on Thursday was almost certainly the most damning j’accuse moment by a senior law enforcement official against a president in a generation.

In a Capitol Hill hearing room, the astonishing tableau unfolded of a former FBI director accusing the White House of “lies, plain and simple” and asserting that when the president suggested dropping an investigation into his former national security adviser, “I took it as a direction”.

Mr Comey gave ammunition to the president’s side, too, particularly by admitting that he had orchestrated the leak of his account of his most critical meeting with Mr Trump with the express purpose of spurring the appointment of a special counsel, which he accomplished.

The president’s defenders said Mr Comey proved Mr Trump was right when he called the former FBI director a “showboat” and a “grandstander”, a conclusion Democrats once shared when he was investigating Mrs Hillary Clinton last year.

But Mr Comey also revealed that he had turned over memos of his conversations with Mr Trump to that newly appointed special counsel Robert Mueller, suggesting that investigators may now be looking into whether Mr Trump obstructed justice by dismissing the FBI director.

“This was a devastating day for the Trump White House, and when the history of the Trump presidency is written, this will be seen as a key moment,” said Mr Peter Wehner, who was White House adviser to President George W Bush.

“My takeaway is James Comey laid out facts and was essentially encouraging Mueller to investigate Trump for obstruction. That’s a huge deal.”

The White House was left in the awkward position of trying to minimise the damage. Mr Trump himself remained uncharacteristically silent, while his advisers kept the daily briefing off camera and sent out the backup to Mr Sean Spicer, the press secretary.

“I can definitively say the president is not a liar,” Ms Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the principal deputy press secretary, told reporters.

Washington has not seen a spectacle quite like this since the days of Watergate, Iran-Contra or President Bill Clinton’s impeachment.

Whatever the controversies under Mr Bush and President Barack Obama, neither was ever accused of personal misconduct by a current or former law enforcement official in such a public forum.

Indeed, Mr Comey highlighted the difference by noting that he had never taken notes of his conversations with either of those presidents because he trusted their basic integrity, but he did write memos about each of his one-on-one encounters with Mr Trump because “I was honestly concerned that he might lie about the nature of our meeting”.

In any other presidency, the events laid out by Mr Comey — Mr Trump asking for “loyalty” from the FBI director who was investigating the president’s associates, then asking him to drop an investigation into a former aide and ultimately firing him when he did not — might have spelled the end.

But Mr Trump has tested the boundaries of normal politics and upended the usual rules. To his supporters, the inquiries are nothing more than the elite news media and political establishment attacking a change agent who threatens their interests.

“This is like an explosive presidency-ending moment,” said Professor John Barrett, a law expert at St. John’s University in New York and an associate independent counsel during the Iran-Contra investigation during Ronald Reagan’s presidency. “But we have a different context now.”

The articles of impeachment drafted against President Richard Nixon and Mr Clinton both alleged obstruction of justice, in effect making clear that such an action could qualify under the “high crimes and misdemeanors” clause of the Constitution.

The “smoking gun” tape that doomed President Nixon in 1974 recorded him ordering his chief of staff to have the CIA block the FBI from investigating the Watergate burglary. Critics said that Mr Trump’s comments to Mr Comey effectively cut out the middle man.

The House impeached Mr Clinton in 1998 for lying under oath and obstructing justice to cover up his affair with Ms Monica Lewinsky, a former White House intern, during a sexual harassment lawsuit.

The obstruction alleged in Mr Clinton’s case was persuading Ms Lewinsky to give false testimony, advising her to hide gifts he had given her to avoid any subpoena and trying to find her a job to keep her happy. After a trial, the Senate acquitted him.

“The polarisation seems even worse than during the Lewinsky investigation, which I hadn’t thought possible,” said Mr Stephen Bates, an associate independent counsel during the investigation into Mr Clinton.

“Everyone gets judged in terms of helping or hurting Trump. Whatever Mueller does, half of the country will call him courageous and half will call him contemptible. We just don’t know which half is which.”

The defence on Thursday was left to Mr Trump’s personal attorney, Mr Marc Kasowitz, who selectively used Mr Comey’s testimony, disputing the damaging parts while citing the parts he considered helpful. He denied that the president had ever asked Mr Comey for loyalty or to let go of the investigation into Mr Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser.

But he cited Mr Comey’s statement that the president himself was not under investigation at the time the FBI director was fired.

Tellingly, the Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee paid no heed to the talking points distributed in advance by the Republican National Committee (RNC) at the behest of the White House.

Instead of attacking Mr Comey’s credibility, as the RNC and Donald Trump Jr did, the Republican senators praised him as a patriot and dedicated public servant. They largely accepted his version of events, while trying to elicit testimony that would cast Mr Trump’s actions in the most innocent light possible.

Mr Comey cooperated to some extent by trying not to go too far beyond the facts as he presented them, declining, for instance, to say whether he thought Mr Trump’s statements amounted to obstruction of justice.

“In a credibility battle between Trump and Comey, everybody knows Comey is going to win that war,” said Mr Adam Goldberg, who was an associate special White House counsel under Mr Clinton during Mr Kenneth Starr’s investigation.

For Mr Trump, the battle with Mr Comey now overshadows much of what he wants to do. Major legislation is stalled. Mr Kasowitz said the president was “eager to continue moving forward with his agenda, with the business of this country, and with the public cloud removed.”

For now, though, the cloud remains. THE NEW YORK TIMES

Read more of the latest in

Advertisement

Advertisement

Stay in the know. Anytime. Anywhere.

Subscribe to get daily news updates, insights and must reads delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking subscribe, I agree for my personal data to be used to send me TODAY newsletters, promotional offers and for research and analysis.