Art of Conservatism for May 10, 2017
Comey Going....
So, Donald Trump fired Jim Comey as
head of the FBI on May 9. So? So what?
On this one, I have to agree with
Trump. And he didn't do it out of thin air, either. He had solid
advice from someone I trust even though I've only heard of him less
than 48 hours (as I write this).
My point is, Comey had it coming. I
fall on the side of those who say he politicized the Office of
Director of the FBI. Whether he did it by calculation or by just
being caught up in the events of the moment makes no difference. He
did things that made me wonder about what the FBI was coming to and,
more importantly, question his own judgment. Any head of the FBI must
not have that baggage. That's enough for me to believe that a Jim
Comey had outlived his usefulness.
And the process was both swift and
sure. The Statist Party screams that the timing of the firing was not
by accident, that this was planned to happen at this time to further
Trump's political agenda. BS. Double BS, actually. The Statist
Party's own actions was the source of the timing of what happened.
Why? Because of the Senate's
molasses-like sloth in dealing with Trump's nominees for their own
political gain. The statists spent over two months fighting the
nomination of Jeff Sessions as Attorney General, so that he didn't
get to take the reins at Justice until late March. They've been even
more obstructionist with Trump's nominees to the lesser offices in
the various cabinets, and that included Ron Rosenstein, who by all
accounts is a man of incredible integrity and is, also by all
accounts, as non-partisan a man as can be found in government
service. So politically pastel is he that, when he was nominated for
US Attorney by both Presidents Bush and Obama, his confirmation
sailed through the Senate with considerable bi-partison support. How
does a final vote of 94-6 look to you?
The thing that shows the Statist Party
for what it is, came when, as Trump's nominee for Deputy Attorney
General, the Senate refused to confirm him until just a couple of
weeks ago. Once confirmed and in the saddle, Jeff Sessions gave
Rosenstein the assignment to evaluate Jim Comey's performance as
Director of the FBI and to report his findings to President Trump.
On Monday, Rosenstein's report was
complete. Both his evaluation letter, and the letter from Sessions on
the same topic, reached the President's desk by Tuesday. The
difference was that Sessions merely informed the President that Comey
should not be retained. Rosenstein's letter actually told Mr. Trump
why. Apparently that letter
was so compelling, that Mr. Trump had little choice but to act
swiftly on the matter, and the rest is now history. The Statist
Party, which had blamed Comey to the skies for poisoning the election
waters for Hillary Clinton, and who six months ago were demanding his
head on a stick in retribution, are now screaming that his firing was
politically motivated, in order to take the heat off of Donald Trump
in the investigation of the Russian thing. Sorry, folks, but you
can't have it both ways, even though you feel you can.
No--In this
instance, Donald Trump did the right thing to let Comey go. In my
mind, there was a question regarding Comey's impartiality from the
moment he opened his mouth during the election campaign. I know that
I was nowhere near alone in that feeling. Comey's departure, and a
worthy replacement of him, will give the FBI the aura of impartiality
that it needs to get
back. And, as to the question of the investigation of the Russian
matter, Comey's departure will most likely have no effect on that
grinding of the wheels of justice.
Now,
who can best replace Jim Comey? I have two ideas, one of which is
plausible. My first choice is the one who is not: Ron Rosenstein. His
reputation for impartiality is impeccable. He'd be a boon to law
enforcement in this country. The problem is that it is not considered
good form to give the job of anyone whose head was just chopped off,
to the person who handed the ax to the executioner.
My
second choice is an ultimate law enforcement man: David Clarke,
Sheriff of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. Anyone who doesn't know him,
should simply get to. He's a down-and-out conservative when it comes
enforcing the law, which will likely be a problem when his nomination
gets to the Senate. Yes the obstructionists must, after all, have
another day in the limelight, but once in office he will be the kind
of bulldog on crime that will ultimately endear him to the
Conservatives in this country, then to more than just the
Conservatives, with the result that there will be yet another feather
in Trump's crime-fighting hat.
It
would be interesting to find out what other nominees are out there.
If you have any ideas, I'd love to hear from you. You can comment
here at Art of Conservatism.
For
Art of Conservatism, I'm Art Reis
