Login

The President Sets Himself Up For Failure

There is no way the bureaucracy would ever say it spied on a Presidential campaign for political purposes.

The President should have been in church instead of tweeting on Sunday morning. He has set himself up for failure. Via Twitter, President Trump is demanding the Department of Justice look into whether or not the FBI and or Department of Justice infiltrated and spied on the Trump campaign for political purposes.

First, in his tweet he gives them an out. They can say it was not for political purposes, but for national security purposes. However, that is not the big deal.

The President, by pushing this so publicly, is going to have two institutions hell bent on defending themselves. If either organization spied on the Trump campaign for political purposes, the same bureaucracy is going to generate a report that says they did not. They will protect themselves.

If the President demands an outside investigation, it is going to be the DOJ that picks that outside investigator -- the same DOJ that picked Robert Mueller. Good luck getting an outside investigation to say the President was spied on by the DOJ or FBI for political purposes.

And that's the thing -- if it happened, there is no way the President is going to get a report back admitting it. If it did not happen, well it is not like his supporters will believe it. They will, instead, be convinced it is all a lie to protect the bureaucracy.

The only thing that will happen here is a further erosion of public trust in institutions. A "yes" to his question of spying for politics will completely undermine the organizations. A "no" will too because few of the President's supporters will believe it.

There are no winners here, except that the President will have a new grievance for his base to feed off of headed into the midterms and 2020. Oh…

@phantonym Yes. If the supposedly Anti-Trump FBI had truly wanted to scuttle the Trump Campaign all they had to do was phone up Maggie Haberman or someone else at the NYTimes and tell them off the record that the campaign was under investigation. Instead they kept it on the downlow. On the other hand, Comey did let the world know, right before election day, that he was reopening the investigation to Hillary's emails, causing the Democrats to squawk something awful.

(edited)
4

@Onlylivingboy I see Comey's actions back then as hedging his bets with some CYA in the case Trump was the one victorious. Given the disaster her campaign looks in hindsight, I'm wondering not whether her allies did see any warning signs, but how many did see said faultlines.
As far as the NYT angle of attack-- how many people actually read it anymore and take it at face value?

(edited)

Cynicalnerd - about 130M more people read the NYT than your idiotic nonsense. They also make more than $1B a year in subscription revenue - I'm guessing that's quite a bit more than the 10c a year your mom gives you for "The Cynicalnerd Herald" but I'm terrible with numbers.

(edited)
2

@cynicalnerd I agree with you that Comey did a whole lot of bet-hedging. I used to think Dems and Rrepublicans alike hated him because he was doing something right but now I think it's because he couldn't do anything right. That said imo he didn't have it in for Trump.

2

Eric are you saying that those who should be and claim to be the untouchables are in reality the Capone's of our day?

Stories