Three questions raised by the Comey hearings
| Washington
Former FBI Director James Comey鈥檚 testimony on Thursday about his interactions with President Trump riveted Washington like no such congressional appearance in decades. Yet in some ways Mr. Comey鈥檚 words were just the opening scene in a lengthy legal drama to come. Trump himself tweeted on Friday morning that he feels 鈥渢otally vindicated鈥� by Comey鈥檚 admission that he did tell the president on a number of occasions that Trump personally was not then a target of an FBI counter-terrorism investigation.
Trump and his surrogates moved to attack Comey as a 鈥渓eaker鈥� for the latter鈥檚 admission that he鈥檇 orchestrated the appearance of a New York Times story on memos he鈥檇 written following White House meetings. The Trump administration now faces a grinding investigation by Justice Department special counsel Robert Muller that will likely last years and could slow progress on the GOP legislative agenda. Comey, before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, previewed some of the most important themes likely to surface in this probe.
Trump鈥檚 behavior in pushing for an end to the FBI inquiry of fired National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, as outlined by the ex-FBI chief, might constitute obstruction of justice. Mr. Flynn and other top Trump officials, given Comey鈥檚 allegations, could be in deep trouble for their dealings with Russia and other matters.
Here are three questions raised by the day鈥檚 events:
HOW WILL DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS BE RECONCILED? Comey laid out his description of a number of key interactions with Trump. Trump鈥檚 response, via his lawyer鈥檚 statement and his Friday morning tweet, has been to call their veracity into question. For Trump, the problem here is that Comey testified in public, under oath, about what on their face appear to be Trump efforts to influence FBI actions. To charge him with lying is to charge him with perjury. This begs follow-up. Special counsel Mueller will now certainly want to interview Trump himself, under oath, in some venue. Will that occur?
WILL OTHER REPUBLICANS FOLLOW TRUMP鈥橲 DEFENSE LEAD? In the wake of the hearing, Trump鈥檚 personal lawyer issued a statement insisting that the president had never asked Comey for 鈥渓oyalty,鈥� as Comey said he did. The statement held that other things Comey said weren鈥檛 true, either. But Senate Republicans at the Intelligence Committee hearing appeared to largely accept the validity of Comey鈥檚 words. They picked instead, via lawyerly parsing, at whether Trump really meant to shut down the Flynn investigation. Other Congressional GOP leaders were similarly reticent to attack. Increasingly there seems to be a split in the party over continued defense of Trump鈥檚 behavior. After all, Thursday鈥檚 hearing was called by the Republican chairman of a GOP-led panel in a Republican-led Senate. Will the administration be able to lead a unified Trump defense?
WHO ELSE IS IN TROUBLE? Comey鈥檚 words 鈥� and, at times, his lack of words 鈥� may indicate trouble for people other than the president. Under questioning from Democratic Senators, he declined to answer 鈥渋n open session鈥� whether there were more unacknowledged meetings between Trump officials and Russian counterparts. That鈥檚 a hint there may indeed be more such meetings. In general, Comey鈥檚 account cast doubt on whether Attorney General Jeff Sessions had truly recused himself from anything dealing with Russia. And it raised questions about Obama administration Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who requested that Comey call his probe of Hillary Clinton鈥檚 emails a 鈥渕atter,鈥� not an 鈥渋nvestigation.鈥�
