The president’s interference with law enforcement

Jennifer Rubin says what we know, which isn’t much.

So what does this all mean? “If it turns out that McCabe was pressed to accelerate his planned early retirement by a month or so by Sessions or on behalf of Trump, this would strengthen the argument for a pattern of obstruction of justice,” constitutional law scholar Laurence Tribe tells me. “But without proof of such pressure, this development isn’t likely to have major significance.”

The main job for Congress now is to find out what happened. “It’s entirely possible that this was entirely McCabe’s decision, but given the president’s calls for his ouster and his constant meddling with the FBI and DOJ, we need to hear answers immediately,” says Matthew Miller, a former Justice Department spokesman. “Those answers need to come from Chris Wray, they need to come in person, and preferably they would come under oath to Congress. The president’s interference with law enforcement has infected the Justice Department, and we need to know whether this departure is a result of that interference.”

McCabe is still a witness in the Russia probe, she points out.

What she doesn’t touch on, and what I would like to know, is who will replace McCabe and who decides that.

Meanwhile the intolerable Donald Trump Junior is talking smack on Twitter.

A degrading day, all told.

One Response to “The president’s interference with law enforcement”

Leave a Comment

Subscribe without commenting