Unfair to the Enquirer

Guilty reading pleasure: My former landlady always
picked up the current copy at the supermarket.

South Carolina representative Trent Gowdy (R) on the "Trump dossier": [bold added]

"I want to know whether the nation's premier law enforcement agency relied on a document that looks like the National Enquirer prepared it."

Hey, Trent, you're being unfair to the Enquirer.

ABC news, 2010: National Enquirer Now Legit, According to Pulitzer Prize Board

The National Enquirer is now legit, according to the Pulitzer Prize Board.

The body behind journalism's most prestigious award conceded Thursday that the self-proclaimed tabloid can compete with mainstream news outlets for its prizes. Because it broke the story about former presidential candidate John Edwards's mistress and love child, the Enquirer's staff is eligible for the Pulitzer in two categories: "Investigative Reporting" and "National News Reporting."

Of course, the National Enquirer raising its standards is only one possible explanation of how the supermarket tabloid is becoming like the rest of the industry.

Modest Pushback

The Trump Administration's counter-attack begins:

Despite so many false statements and lies, total and complete vindication...and WOW, Comey is a leaker!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 9, 2017

A leak complaint will be filed against James Comey:

President Donald Trump’s private attorney plans to file a leak complaint [that] will focus on Mr. Comey’s testimony Thursday that he passed his notes about his conversations with the president to a friend after his firing, and authorized that friend to release them to a reporter. Mr. Comey said he released only unclassified notes about his recollections of his meetings with the president.

A "leak complaint" seems like modest pushback. It's very likely that this is only the first move in a long battle that will encompass much more than James Comey's conflict with Donald Trump.

Reasoned Reactions from the WSJ

James Comey and NSA Head Michael Rogers (WaPo photo)

The Wall Street Journal is one of the few national publications that aren't rankly partisan. Witness the variety of reactions to l'affaire Comey.

From the news summary of the former FBI Director's testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee: [bold added]

Former FBI Director James Comey told senators Thursday that he felt President Donald Trump had directed him to drop an investigation into a former adviser, and that after his firing he leaked accounts of his conversations with the president in hopes of sparking the appointment of a special counsel.

His comments came in a highly anticipated hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee that included Mr. Comey’s testimony that he believed that he was receiving an order when Mr. Trump said he “hoped” he would be able to end the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s inquiry into former national security adviser Mike Flynn.

Mr. Comey declined to offer his opinion on whether he thought Mr. Trump was trying to obstruct justice, but he said that issue is something that the recently appointed special counsel would examine. He also confirmed he told Mr. Trump that he wasn’t under investigation as part of the FBI’s probe into Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election.

On balance the testimony appears to help more than hurt President Trump. Mr. Trump is not under investigation for the alleged Russian election hacking; he has displayed ignorance about Washington's protocols and unwritten rules.

Peggy Noonan: The president has no understanding of the norms, rules and traditions of his job.

Presidents don’t lean on FBI chiefs in this way. It is at odds with traditional boundaries, understandings and protocols. It was embarrassing to read. It was the move of a naïf who’s a cynic—I know how the big boys play. Actually it’s not how the big boys play, it’s how someone who learns about government by binge-watching “House of Cards” would play. It was bumptious with the special bumptiousness of those who think themselves savvy.

...inappropriate does not mean illegal...

he harmed the president by documenting, again and persuasively, that Mr. Trump does not understand the norms, rules and traditions of his job.

WSJ lead editorial on Friday: The former FBI director should have resigned if he believes what he now says. [bold added]

James Comey’s first post-FBI appearance in front of the Senate on Thursday turned out to be a political anticlimax, with no major revelations about the alleged Trump-Russia nexus or the President’s supposed attempt to derail the investigation. But nearly three hours of testimony did expose the methods of the highly political former FBI director.

...Mr. Comey is no Jack Ryan. He’s a government official motivated by political self-interest who should have resigned if he believed what he now says he did. That he failed to act at the time suggests his motive now is more revenge than truth-telling.

Kimberley Strassel: What his Thursday testimony made clear is how much he [Comey] has damaged the country.

Mr. Comey could have spared us this by simply stating, as he acknowledged Thursday, that Mr. Trump wasn’t under investigation. One could argue he had a duty to explain, given that he’d taken the unusual step of confirming the probe, and given the leaks from his FBI and the flood of fake news that resulted. But no. James Comey judged that (in this case, at least) it would be improper to speak out. So we’ve had all Russia all the time.

...When he was fired, he leaked to the media, through a “close friend,” highly selective bits of his privileged communications with the president. And then he stayed silent and let the speculation rage. Thus, for the past month the nation has been mired in a new scandal, fueled by half-leaks. Thank you, yet again, Mr. Comey.

Takeaway: The President was never under investigation for colluding with Russia. So what has the wall-to-wall media coverage been about for the past six months?

It's Not the Firing, It's the Reaction

2013: Obama's GOP FBI Pick a Folk Hero for Democrats (ABC)

Regarding the President's firing of FBI Director James Comey, the Economist gives two choices:
The sacking of James Comey: Was Donald Trump being incompetent, or malign?

If anything, the subheadline understates the vitriol in the editorial. [bold added]

Is the administration chaotic and unworthy of its place in a mighty tradition, but more farcical than corrupting—a madcap approximation of government by a reality-television star? Or is Mr Trump, who has just become the first president since Richard Nixon to fire a man who was leading a formal investigation into his associates, and perhaps himself, a threat to American democracy.

Ex-Director Comey wasn't exactly a paragon of leadership. Per the Economist, on November 7th:

FBI directors do not need to be popular, but they do need to have the confidence of their staff and, ideally, America. It is hard to think James Comey, who made a second belated intrusion into the general election on November 6th, has much of either currently...

Everything about Mr Comey’s performance on this issue seems lamentable. His criticism of Mrs Clinton’s “carelessness” in July was as irregular as it was damaging to the Democratic nominee. According to FBI protocol, he should have limited his remarks to the progress and outcome of his investigation...

It has been a truly wretched affair.

I am not a Donald Trump partisan--I didn't vote for him--but there's a plausible case that Mr. Trump has acted responsibly by firing a subordinate whose actions have harmed the effectiveness of the agency he leads. Getting rid of a man whose own competence was questioned for half of 2016 would have made sense to the Economist (inferred by its November 7th editorial) if done by President Obama.

The fact that the action was initiated by President Trump has triggered an over-the-top response by the Economist's editorial page and demonstrates how extreme partisanship ("If the president nominates one of his stooges, such as Rudy Giuliani or Chris Christie, to replace Mr Comey, that opposition will grow"---note: stooges are the former Mayor of New York City and the current Governor of New Jersey) has overwhelmed the pages of a once-august publication.

Sad!