Friday, May 19, 2017

Donald Trump just staked his presidency on 4 words - CNN

Donald Trump just staked his presidency on 4 words
By issuing such a blanket denial, Trump leaves himself very little wiggle room
Trump placed the biggest bet of his political career on Thursday
Washington (CNN) - At a joint news conference with Colombian President Juan Manual Santos Thursday, President Donald Trump was asked a very simple question: Had he urged then-FBI Director James Comey to slow or stop an FBI investigation into deposed national security adviser Michael Flynn ?
" No, no. Next question Donald Trump responded.
It was over in a flash. But in those four words, Trump staked the viability of his presidency.
Why? Because he directly contradicted the reporting around a memo that Comey had written in the wake of a February 14 meeting in which Trump told him to see if he could find a way to end the Flynn investigation, The New York Times first reported and CNN confirmed.
Both of those things can't be true.
Comey, who was fired by Trump 10 days ago, is expected at some point in the not-too-distant future to come to Congress and testify about his meetings with Trump. And the relevant congressional committees have already requested the February 14 memo as well as any other memos -- and CNN has reported there are more of them -- that Comey wrote about his interactions with Trump.
Between his testimony and the memo(s), Comey's side of the story is going to get out there. And, presuming that what we know of the February 14 memo is true, then Trump's former FBI director will be on record directly disagreeing with the President's version of events.
By issuing such a blanket denial, Trump leaves himself very little wiggle room. In order for Trump to emerge unscathed, there can be no evidence that emerges that props up Comey's side of the story. Anything that shows Trump was not being entirely truthful with his "no, no, next question" response calls into question his credibility on a whole range of issues and could well lead to open revolt from within his own party.
Trump's situation here is not dissimilar to that of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, one of the early Trump converts. After the news broke that two of Christie's top gubernatorial aides had been involved in a political payback ploy that involved closing lanes of traffic in Fort Lee, New Jersey, Christie went on record to say he was totally unaware of any of this plotting.
Had anything come out that proved Christie even slightly wrong in that total denial, it would have been curtains for his political career. It never did -- and Christie survived. (As it was, the Bridgegate scandal badly hamstrung Christie and he never was a real factor in the 2016 race.)
In short: The story of the February 14 meeting is currently a "he said, he said" one. If it never progresses beyond that, Trump will almost certainly survive, politically speaking. There will be plenty of grumbles from Republicans -- many of whom are on the record praising Comey as a trustworthy guy and able public servant -- but short of evidence that tilts the scales in Comey's favor, it will be very hard to abandon Trump.
If, on the other hand, tapes -- like the sort Trump floated he might have of his conversations with Comey -- or any other sort of documented evidence emerges that poke holes in Trump's four-word denial, he and his presidency will be in deep trouble.
Donald Trump is a gambler by nature. Repeatedly during his presidential campaign, and now in the White House, he has rolled the dice and reacted once they settled. But, whether he realized it at the time or not, Trump placed the biggest bet of his political career on Thursday.

Now he waits to see if it pays off -- or if he goes bust.

Here's the real reason why Donald Trump fired James Comey - CNN

Here's the real reason why Donald Trump fired James Comey
Story Highlights
Trump has reversed himself, again, on exactly why he fired former FBI Director James Comey
What we are witnessing is a rare political feat: The flip, flop, re-flip
Washington (CNN) - On Thursday in a joint news conference with Colombian President Juan Manual Santos, President Donald Trump reversed himself, again, on exactly why he fired former FBI Director James Comey.
"Director Comey was very unpopular with most people," said Trump. "I actually thought when I made that decision -- and I also got a very, very strong recommendation, as you know, from the Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein."
Er, OK.
Here's the thing: A week before -- to the day! -- Trump sat down with NBC's Lester Holt and said this:
"I was going to fire Comey -- my decision. There is no good time to do it, by the way. I was going to fire regardless of recommendation."
And that, of course, ran directly counter to the argument Vice President Mike Pence, White House press secretary Sean Spicer and White House counselor Kellyanne Conway were making last week: That Trump acted after receiving the Rosenstein memo laying out the case for why Comey should be let go.
What we are witnessing is a rare political feat: The flip, flop, re-flip. (It's sort of like the Triple Lindy.)
The reason for the political acrobatics? Because neither Trump nor the White House want to say -- or think it is politic to say -- the real reason why Trump fired Comey: Because he didn't like him.
Where might that distaste have arisen?
It could have been Comey's ongoing push to get to the bottom of how Russia sought to meddle in the 2016 election and whether any Trump campaign officials colluded with them.
It could have been the reported loyalty pledge Trump sought from Comey in a late January dinner that Comey refused to give.
It could have been Trump's ongoing frustration with the fact that Comey didn't bring an indictment against Hillary Clinton despite the fact that many Republicans believed there was ample evidence to do so.
It could have been that Trump didn't like Comey's flair for the dramatic. (He referred to the fired FBI director as a "showboat" in the Holt interview.)
It could have been that Comey was an Obama pick, not a Trump one.
It could have been all of those things, a combination of some of them or none of them.
The point is still the same. Trump didn't like him.
Which, actually, might have been a semi-defensible reason to let Comey go. Trump could have easily said that he decided to part ways with Comey because the FBI director had just grown too political for his liking in the 2016 campaign and that a fresh start was the best thing for the law enforcement community and the country.

Instead, Trump and his senior officials tried to lay it all at the feet of Rosenstein. Then Trump, always wanting to be seen as decisive, took credit himself. And now, apparently, back to  Rosenstein. 
None of those explanations made that much sense because, well, they weren't the real reason. The real reason was that Trump didn't like Comey and/or was sick of him.