,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
There is a world of difference - and I'm sure @RichLowry knows it - between saying "The FBI can't criminalize a President's decision to change policy" (true) with "the FBI must assume that any action by the President is a policy decision and therefore not investigable" (nuts). /1
The FBI has determined that Russia is a threat to U.S. national security based on years of executive direction - with Congressional approval - to find it to be so, and has acted on years of reaffirmation of that finding. "Russia is a threat" is not some kooky rogue FBI idea. /2
Even were it not Russia - Russia! - it is the FBI's job to maintain the security of U.S. institutions against any foreign interference or spying. From China. From Israel. From France, for crissakes. That does not mean "up to the point it gets itchy for the President." /3
More to the point, there is no evidence that there was a "policy" to criminalize. If the President had said: "I'm dumping NATO and cutting defense spending in half and appointing Bernie Sanders Secretary of Defense," that's his prerogative. But that's not what happened. /4
Instead, the FBI said: "Your natsec adviser is trouble about Russia," and Trump said: "Lay off the guy." Then he fired the FBI director *admitting that he is trying to squash an investigation into an enemy power, and then bragging it about to reps of that enemy power*. /5
Apparently, the FBI was supposed to go all Sgt. Shultz at that point, seeing NOTHING, knowing NOTHING. That's ridiculous. That's not why we pay counter-intelligence agents. And conservative writers defending Trump damn well know this. Shame. /6x
