Benjamin Wittes just proved Trump a liar about Comey — with over 100 FBI documents
No, Uncle Dotard. The FBI had NOT “lost confidence” in James Comey. The opposite, in fact, was true.
The documents were NOT leaked to the Lawfare blog. In the days following the firing of then-FBI Director James Comey,
a wealth of evidence emerged to suggest that [Donald] Trump and [Attorney General Jefferson Beauregard] Sanders were playing fast and loose with the truth. But we now have the documents to prove that decisively. Their disclosure was not a leak but an authorized action by the FBI, which released to us under the Freedom of Information Act more than 100 pages of leadership communications to staff dealing with the firing. This material tells a dramatic story about the FBI’s reaction to the Comey firing—but it is neither a story of gratitude to the president nor a story of an organization in turmoil relieved by a much-needed leadership transition.
The Lawfare writers followed up with phone calls to several senior members of the FBI:
Nora Ellingsen—who served as a counterterrorism analyst at the FBI for several years—talked with roughly 20 of her former colleagues. She characterized the opinion of Comey among the FBI’s rank and file as almost universally positive. “Nearly everyone loved him,” she wrote, and the “degree of consensus on this point … has been incredible.” She went on: “All of the people I talked to described having the same reaction when they heard that the director had been fired: complete shock, followed by deep sadness.”
The president of the FBI Agents Association, Thomas O’Connor, called Comey’s firing a “gut punch.”
Wittes made his FOIA request for the internal communication in the wake of the Comey firing on late June of last year, and the materials were received over the weekend. The materials were provided with few redactions. And what do the e-mails and communications say?
Ellingsen nailed it when she described a reaction of “shock” and “profound sadness” at the removal of a beloved figure to whom the workforce was deeply attached. It also shows that no aspect of the White House’s statements about the bureau were accurate—and, indeed, that the White House engendered at least some resentment among the rank and file for whom it purported to speak. As Amy Hess, the special agent in charge in Louisville, put it: “On a personal note, I vehemently disagree with any negative assertions about the credibility of this institution or the people herein.”
You owe it to yourself to read the article — and sample the over 100 FBI documents embedded as a PDF therein. One cannot help but conclude that the narrative spelled out by the communications greatly bolster the argument that the firing of Comey was prima facie obstruction of justice.
You also should bookmark Lawfare and follow them on Twitter and Facebook.
