--Former FBI Director Comey
Right now, special prosecutor Meuller wants to interview President Trump about Russian collusion and whatever else he can come up with, as part of an investigation. So I have some suggestions (courtesy Sheryl Atkisson on Twitter) for how he should set up this interview. Here are the rules:
- Prior to the interview, lead official meets privately on a plane at the airport with Trump's wife.
- An exoneration letter is drafted in advance.
- Immunity is given to top Trump aides (and they’re allowed to sit in on interview)
- The interview isn’t recorded.
- Lead official (Mueller) doesn’t attend.
- Interviewer's family and boss has received large donations from Trump political friends.
- Main interviewer has expressed disdain for Trump’s opponents, such as discussing an “insurance plan” with higher-ups to undermine them.
- As long as they believe Trump didn't intend any harm, he's let off the hook for any violations.
These are the terms Trump should do the interview under. What's that you say, that sounds unjust, rigged, even ridiculous? There's no possibility of justice under these conditions? That reads to you like some kind of ridiculous piece of fiction, that no prosecutor or law enforcement official would ever agree to?
That's what Comey set up for the Hillary Clinton email server and espionage law violations interview. That's how the investigation was handled for her. These exact, precise conditions are how her "interrogation" was agreed upon and carried out.
All that Sheryl did is say Trump should get the same deal as Hillary Clinton.
As long as there have been rich and powerful, the rich and powerful have gotten away with more than you or I could possibly consider. The difference here is that the American system and philosophy of equality under law should be the last place on earth it should take place.
Yet what McCabe, for instance did in lying three separate times to federal officers and leaking materials to the press, we'd be in federal prison for doing. He's still free with his pension.
And the more people come to see this happen and realize its taking place, the less likely people are to continue following and obeying the law. If people can get away with rigging the system and breaking the law without consequence, that simply undermines any trust and faith in the law across the entire society.
You probably stopped at a stop sign or light today. What makes people keep doing that, even when nobody is watching? Honoring the law, trusting that its good for us, and obeying a system we agreed upon. What happens when that honor, that obedience, and that trust is undermined far enough?
There cannot be anyone "too big" or "too important" to prosecute and punish. In fact, there's a good argument for the idea that the more powerful, public, and wealthy you are, the more the law should come down upon them for violating it. Doing so publicly and severely proves to the nation that there is no one above the law, and hence we all are treated fairly and equally. Failing to do so proves the opposite, and leads to chaos.