Pixel Tracker

Sunday, March 24 , 2019, 12:49 pm | A Few Clouds 60º


Susan Estrich: Stomach Aches

"It makes me mildly nauseous to think that we might have had some impact on the election," FBI Director James Comey told the Senate Judiciary Committee, explaining his decision, in the closing days of the presidential campaign, to announce an investigation into emails Hillary Clinton's confidante Huma Abedin had forwarded to her husband, Anthony Weiner.

Many people in Clinton circles can tell you, state by state, exactly what happened to their lead after what amounted to a colossal false alarm. 

If it nauseates him so much, why did he do it?

Presumably he was "nauseous" because he is enough of a believer in the Constitution to know that the FBI must not even create the appearance of meddling in a presidential election, lest it lose its legitimacy in the democracy.

And since in the end his investigation reached no conclusions of wrongdoing, Comey's actions were not only reckless but also pointless. There was no reason to risk the appearance of meddling, and every reason not to.

This is, after all, the same student of the law who, when serving as acting attorney general while his boss John Ashcroft was in the hospital, refused to certify aspects of the Bush administration's wiretapping program because he questioned its legality. He held out under immense pressure, out of respect for the Constitution.

So his efforts to explain his actions did not really add up. 

The idea that he had to do something raises the question: Why? Because he had previously cleared Clinton?

There was no reason to believe that judgment was wrong. There was nothing to reverse. And Comey has been around long enough to know that the announcement of an investigation is enough to convince a significant number of folks that there must be something wrong.

That is true in a run-of-the-mill executive scandal; it is all the more so in the final days of a hotly contested and no-holds-barred presidential campaign.

If you can't believe the director of the FBI, whom can you believe?

That is what should have made Comey nauseous indeed. You can't reverse the outcome of an election. Whoever wins wins, and there's no fairness court, as Al Gore learned.

In a democracy you concede. Clinton did.

But a significant part of this country no longer sees the FBI as anything but a political tool, and the idea that such a political tool could be wielded by President Donald Trump is probably what is keeping Comey in place. His replacement could only be worse.

The politicization of the FBI is why Sen. Dianne Feinstein pushed Comey so hard to state what he will do to restore trust in his agency.

For the past several decades, if you said the FBI would come in to investigate a highly partisan incident, it meant you were looking for the truth (the way they did on an old TV show, if you're old enough to remember).

It was not the old FBI of J. Edgar Hoover: Can you imagine anyone wanting that again -- that kind of power to play with people's privacy and their lives?

Millions of Americans have just heard that if the Republican Senate does not stop the American Health Care Act, they lose their health coverage; and if they have pre-existing conditions, they will have to pay for them; that all the things they hated about the old system are back; and the lower premiums are going to folks who are young and healthy while the only people who vote health insurance as an issue are not.

You see, elections matter.

Director Comey was "mildly nauseous." For many of us, it is a stomach ache that doesn't go away.

Susan Estrich is a best-selling author, the Robert Kingsley Professor of Law and Political Science at the USC Law Center and was campaign manager for 1988 Democratic presidential nominee Michael Dukakis. Click here to contact her or click here to read previous columns. The opinions expressed are her own.

Support Noozhawk Today!

Our professional journalists work tirelessly to report on local news so you can be more informed and engaged in your community. This quality, local reporting is free for you to read and share, but it's not free to produce.

You count on us to deliver timely, relevant local news, 24/7. Can we count on you to invest in our newsroom and help secure its future?

We provide special member benefits to show how much we appreciate your support.

I would like give...
Great! You're joining as a Red-Tailed Hawk!
  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.