Psyched to read “Donald Trump v. The United States” by my colleague @nytmike - now out! 
Here are three interesting nuggets from my colleague @nytmike’s book which I haven't seen people picking up on yet elsewhere. (There's a lot more than these; anyone interested in this stuff should definitely get this book!)
1. When Comey in 2007 told the Senate & the public about the dramatic “Stellarwind" fight in Ashcroft’s hospital room 3 years earlier, he had been fighting stage 3 colon cancer and believed he would die soon and that hearing would be the last time he would testify publicly. 96-99
Thoughts: Comey's expansive public discussion violated norms for a law enforcement official but led Obama to make him FBI director. Perhaps a Greek tragedy here: did that experience fuel the norm-busting Clinton email presser, which arguably wrecked his legacy as director?
2. When Trump flirted with pulling Gorsuch’s Supreme Court nomination bc the judge mildly criticized his attack on a “so-called” judge for ruling against his travel ban, McGahn drafted a resignation letter. McGahn gave Gorsuch the letter as a memento after his confirmation. 154
Thoughts: That was VERY early on. McGahn’s hire-wire act to keep his job (& avoid legal trouble) so he could keep filling the courts with Federalist Society-style judges made him both the architect of Trump's clearest achievement & Mueller’s most important obstruction witness.
3. After NYT reported in March 2017 that Comey had asked DOJ to make a statement denying Trump’s false accusation that Obama wiretapped Trump Tower but DOJ refused, Sessions assigned Durham to open a leak investigation into Comey & had his own office, not the DAG, oversee it. 169
Thoughts: So John Durham (then just an AUSA whom Trump later made US attorney) has been carrying out politically-tinged investigations of FBI officials for Trump’s attorney generals from almost the start – not just Barr’s current investigation of the Russia investigators.
Parting thought: This book makes clear that McGahn’s lawyer William Burck is a very interesting guy and has been a big behind-the-scenes orchestrator of events. But there’s not just one nugget that shows that – you’ll need to read the book to appreciate it.
Oh one other parting thought: I've seen some people criticizing Mike for hoarding these kinds of nuggets in his book, rather than printing them months ago in the NYT. This line of criticism I think misses something I learned while writing two Washington books myself: /1
This presupposes there is a choice. But often you only learn things because you are researching for a book. People are more willing to talk for books because it seems more like history, and what they disclose will come out months or years later rather than the next morning. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
