Maggie Haberman on Trump’s Revenge:

In the span of a few hours on Thursday, President Trump went from claiming no knowledge of a possible indictment of the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey to celebrating it as “JUSTICE IN AMERICA!” In reality, Mr. Trump had handpicked the prosecutor — previously one of his own personal lawyers — in an effort to ensure it happened.

It was a landmark moment in Mr. Trump’s retribution campaign, one that put on full display the relentlessness of his efforts to use the criminal justice system to get back at those he feels persecuted him. 

…

Throughout his first term, Mr. Trump — under investigation himself for possible ties between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russians seeking to influence the outcome of the race — sought to instigate investigations into his perceived enemies.

Mr. Trump’s zeal prompted his White House counsel at the time, Donald F. McGahn II, to write a memo explaining what the president could and could not do. “Strong constitutional norms of nonpolitical law enforcement should also guide your decision making and may caution against involvement in a specific matter,” Mr. McGahn wrote.

Yeah, Mr. McGahn might as well have written a poem in Urdu. Trump does not understand the words “constitutional” and “norms” and “should” and “nonpolitical” and “caution”.

In his second term, backed by a new cast of advisers who say he has the ability to direct investigations, Mr. Trump has abandoned any pretense of adhering to such advice. He publicly pressed his attorney general for the prosecution of Mr. Comey and other foes, fired a federal prosecutor who balked at carrying out his will, and installed an ally to do his bidding over the objections of career prosecutors who concluded the evidence against Mr. Comey was too weak to warrant charging him.

In short he is doing what dictators do and no one is stopping him.

Mr. Comey was high on Mr. Trump’s list of retribution targets, but the list is long.

Mr. Trump also has sought mortgage fraud charges against Letitia James, the New York attorney general, who successfully brought a civil fraud case against Mr. Trump and his company.

Mr. Trump may now put more pressure on his prosecutors to charge Ms. James, as well as Senator Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California, who while serving in the House was a leading force in investigating Mr. Trump.

The prosecutors should quit or force Trump to fire them rather than obey. I’m not holding my breath.

Getting an indictment is relatively easy for prosecutors, who have a lot of sway over grand juries. Winning at trial is much harder, and in the Comey case, many factors could make it challenging for the government to secure a conviction.

Line prosecutors in Virginia who had initially reviewed the evidence in the Comey case put in a memo why they thought the effort to convict him was too weak to take to court. The grand jury on Thursday rejected one of the three counts presented to it. And Mr. Trump’s string of invective about Mr. Comey and his repeated references to his own criminal cases provide a lot of evidence for possible defense motions about a vindictive prosecution.

Still, Mr. Trump has always understood that even absent a conviction, defendants face a reputational cost in a criminal case, not to mention the financial penalty in the form of legal bills.

In short he’s already won and he will win more as the case proceeds even if Comey is acquitted in the end.