The Mueller Report
Volume II, Section D
The Comey Firing
Section D is found on page 62 through page 77 of Mueller’s volume 2. In the PDF copy this section begins on page 274 continue to page 289. The analysis begins on page 74 (286) concluding on 77 (289). When the document is referenced the page number in the report is provided along with the PDF page numbers in parenthesis.
This review of the report contains conclusions I have reached from reading this section of the report. In some places it is difficult to explain or justify a conclusion without extensive quotes. However, the report is easily available in the complete, although redacted, form via a simple internet search. Here is a direct link to the document.
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf
Final Note: Please be reminded that this is my personal opinion derived from reading the text of the report.
From the analysis section P74 (286):
Firing Comey would qualify as an obstructive act if it had the natural and probable effect of interfering with or impeding the investigation-for example, if the termination would have the effect of delaying or disrupting the investigation or providing the President with the opportunity to appoint a director who would take a different approach to the investigation that the President perceived as more protective of his personal interests.
This is congruent with the legal definition of obstruction of Justice that is posted here with further links: https://ca23rd.org/mueller/vol_2_obstruction.htm
From the report P71 (283): The President also told the Russian Foreign Minister, "I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job. I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off ..... I'm not under investigation."
Did Trump really think that Comey was and is a real nut job? Trump never provided any evidence to support this position. While thinking down that line, Trump provides very little evidence for any of his claims. The reasonable observe can easily conclude that those words were nothing more than self-rationalization for his behavior. Made up claims. Director Comey was not and is not a nut job. This is important to mention as it goes to the veracity of Trump and the things he says. There is none, veracity that is.
So why might Trump behave in that manner? Why did he feel there was a need to tell this to the Russian Foreign Minister? Note that this was to the RUSSIAN foreign minister. The minister would find out soon enough, so why?[1]
A reading of Trump’s statement clearly shows that he felt that he was under pressure from Comey’s investigation of Russia and himself. From Trump’s own words, I conclude that Trump probably thought of the FBI’s investigation as one initiated and conducted by Directory Comey himself. Notice that Trump said “I felt great pressure…” and after the firing he continued with “That’s taken off.…” Trump’s intent was to relieve that pressure by getting firing Comey.
Recalling the definition of obstruction of justice and this behavior is a classic example.
Was Trump aware of this possibility? The fact that he publically declared that Comey was fired because of his mishandling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation indicates that he wanted to divert attention from his possible true motive. Recall also that the referenced Comey behavior occurred before the election, that Trump benefited from that behavior, and that Trump had publically stated that he wanted Comey to stay as FBI director. The shift in Trump’s attitude toward this particular Comey behavior indicates that Trump was grasping for any excuse he could for firing Comey. In other words, to hide his true motive. That indicates that Trump was aware that he was obstructing justice by firing Comey.
P 76 (288): The President complained to Rogers that "the thing with the Russians [ was] messing up" his ability to get things done with Russia, and told Coats, "I can't do anything with Russia, there's things I'd like to do with Russia, with trade, with ISIS, they're all over me with this."
The last few words are key: “… they’re all over me with this.” The word “they’re” clearly refers to people that represent Russia. Not only did Trump want to stop the investigation, obstruction of justice, he was concerned about Russia putting pressure on him to stop the investigation. This is an indicator that the President of the United States is subject to undue influence by not just a foreign government, but by a foreign government that has the intent to destroy our democracy.
Throughout this section of the report, Trump clearly attempts to control the behavior of Director Comey. Trump is very clear that he wants Comey to exonerate him. Comey refused to do that in the Congressional hearing. These behaviors by Trump, to control the person in charge of the investigation, meet the definition of obstruction of justice.
My perception is that before the election Trump may have perceived Comey as an ally. Comey made a public announcement, close to the election, that provided material support to Trump by casting significant aspersions upon H. Clinton. After the election Comey was not about to play according to Trump’s rules. He would not defend Trump so Trump fired him. That Trump claimed pressure was off after firing Comey makes the case the Trump fired him with the goal of obstructing justics.
Quoting P62 (275): Comey stated that it made him "mildly nauseous to think that we might have had some impact on the election," but added that "even in hindsight" he "would make the same decision."
I find this more than a bit interesting in that I suspect that the combination of Russian interference and that the very late public revelation of Clinton emails, did indeed have an impact, to the point of giving Trump the election. I wish I ask could pose that statement to Comey and see how nauseous he might feel. I suspect that between the Russian meddling in our election and the Comey announcement about the Clinton emails just before the elections they did sway the election. So, Directory Comey, if you were to presume that your behavior did indeed sway the election: How might you really feel about that? You, personally, played a major role in getting Trump elected. Do you keep a barf bag by your bedside at night?
Other than that incredible faux-pas Comey has mostly behaved with honor, unlike Trump.
Returning to Trump, he again castigated A.G. Sessions for not protecting him like Kennedy’s AG did and AG Holder did. Never mind that neither Kennedy nor Obama needed such protection. And never mind the Trump provided no evidence of such behavior. Further, Trump appears to be the only one that has decided that the Attorney General of the United States has the primary purpose of protecting Trump from any and every thing that might offend him. (Emphasis mine.)
Sessions had reviewed the situation with other members of the DOJ and determined that he had no option. Trump would not hear any of that, it went against Trump’s opinion of the purpose of the AG.
Trump went to significant effort to cultivate the appearance that Comey had cleared Trump in the investigation. Comey had not done that so why was it so important to Trump.
A copy of the termination letter was found here: https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/fbi-james-comey-fired-letter/index.html
In that letter Trump claimed that the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General both recommended Comey’s firing. The Deputy denied that.[2]
Michael Flynn enters this discussion here. Trump specifically askes Comey to: “let[] Flynn go.” Comey refused to do that. Trump fired him. This may not be a one to one relationship, but it is clear. The FBI was investigating Flynn, Trump wanted Flynn off the hook, Comey’s action said no, Trump fired him. Trump did not want Flynn prosecuted so he took action to prevent same.
Again, this is a classic case of obstruction of justice.
In part a of the analysis the report states:
Firing Corney would qualify as an obstructive act if it had the natural and probable effect of interfering with or impeding the investigation-for example, if the termination would have the effect of delaying or disrupting the investigation or providing the President with the opportunity to appoint a director who would take a different approach to the investigation that the President perceived as more protective of his personal interests.
Given Trumps insistence that Comey clear him, that Comey refused to do so, and that Trump claimed the pressure was off after Comey was fired, it is clear that Trump’s intent was to affect the investigation. That is obstruction of justice.
[1] A search for the city name Helsinki in the report returned no results. The events of the Helsinki and many other events lend credence to the concept that Trump is susceptible to pressure from Russia to behave as Russia might desire. At this point in my reading of the report it appears that this possibility is not addressed. This particular instance of behavior is cause for suspicion.