LETTER: James Comey and Trump lawfare
I read with interest your Sept. 30 editorial, “Ultimately, Comey case will rise or fall on the evidence.” Your point is well taken that progressives should not persecute, or prosecute, public servants who are making a good-faith effort to do their jobs, even if they find the results of that good-faith effort uncomfortable or inconvenient.
The point you appear to be missing is that the same standard should hold true for conservatives and the current administration.
U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert was tasked with evaluating the evidence for a case against Mr. Comey. He found that there was not sufficient evidence to file a case. For that, he was fired and replaced by Lindsey Halligan, a Trump loyalist with no experience as a prosecutor.
You note that Ms. Halligan convinced a grand jury to indict Mr. Comey on two of the three charges she made. While it is true that the Trump administration has had difficulty securing grand jury indictments in many recent cases, as New York Court of Appeals Chief Judge Sol Wachtler (a Republican) once said, a prosecutor could get a grand jury to “indict a ham sandwich.”
As you say, the case will rise and fall on the evidence. However, clogging the court system with attacks on the president’s political opponents demeans the presidency, takes up court time and increases the acrimony and divisions between Americans at a time that we need to build bridges between our people rather than destroy them.
