President Trump’s decision to can FBI Director James Comey was justified in every sense of the way, being previously called for by members of both the right and left for months now. That’s because Comey’s incompetence cast a shadow of uncertainty and perceptible injustice onto America from the newly politicized FBI in what appeared to be an attempt to retain power and relevancy.
Comey’s departing from the FBI was long overdue. Trump should have fired him the second he got into office. Instead, Trump decided to keep Comey on, thus granting some legitimacy to the original point of Comey’s interference with the 2016 presidential election having to do with some sort of personal gain. So, James Comey’s exoneration of Hillary Clinton, then his reopening of the case, and then his subsequent closing of it just days before the election was not the only thing that spawned an atmosphere of suspicion. Donald Trump’s putzing around with keeping Comey on for months despite apparent incompetence does just that too.
The reason behind the suspiciousness of Trump’s decision to oust Comey comes down to timing: there is an ongoing classified FBI counterintelligence investigation looking into Russian interference with the election. Comey was leading said investigation, so this is being looked at by Democrats as leading into a prospective termination of it, clearing both Trump and Putin’s names. There is no evidence that a coverup is the case. The main thing Democrats have to support this nefarious theory is a story that proclaims just days before Comey’s firing; he requested more money to be put towards the ongoing investigation. This is still being researched, and currently, the DOJ denies this ever took place.
Democrats, who just days before called for the firing of Director Comey, immediately attacked President Trump’s decision. Members of Congress detested Comey’s ouster, claiming that this is all part of a coverup. No evidence, however, has been cited. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand deemed Comey’s firing as “chilling,” on Twitter:
AG Sessions lied under oath about meetings with Kislyak. One way to exert control after recusal is by getting rid of FBI Director. Chilling.
— Kirsten Gillibrand (@SenGillibrand) May 9, 2017
Attacks from Gillibrand and Senators alike are not entirely unjustified. As mentioned before, the suspiciousness of the timing would lead anyone with a rational mind to at least theorize about the possibilities of the situation: it was an ouster fostered by legitimate reasoning, or it was meant to interfere with the ongoing investigation into the Kremlin interfering with America’s presidential election.
There is no hard evidence of nefariousness or unconstitutionality, no matter how many times folks on the Left paint it as such. It’s silly to not look at the Comey situation without the proper context, justifying any concerns that people may have over if this was an attempt from the Trump administration to cover up election wrongdoing. It is also equally as silly to take unproven theories as fact and promulgate them as such.
Trump has yet to name a successor to James Comey. There are names being thrown out there now as possibilities; some good and some bad. There is no doubt that Trump must make a smart pick here if he has any hopes of getting his guy through; Democrats will obstruct at every point possible if there are any hints the new FBI Director will kill the investigation.
In short: Democrats are being hypocrites. The timing was oddly suspicious. This should have been done and dealt with on day one.