NBC anchor Savannah Guthrie was ready to convict Donald Trump of criminal wrongdoing on Wednesday’s Today show, as she interviewed former FBI Director James Comey. However, she worried that the fired law enforcement official’s tell-all book might “mess up” Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s supposedly inevitable “prosecution” of the President.
“You have really made some pretty strong assertions against the President. You said he’s morally unfit, said he lies almost constantly,” the morning show host observed. Guthrie then fretted those attacks may jeopardize a criminal case against Trump: “You are the star witness, perhaps, in former Director Mueller’s investigation into obstruction of justice. Your testimony against President Trump’s testimony. Are you concerned that you’ve made that prosecution tougher?”
“Because you’ve now been out there and you’ve demonstrated that you do have a bias against the President,” she added. Comey dismissed the concern, pointing out that he had already testified under oath in the Russia investigation. Guthrie still worried about his book: “But you can help what you write. I mean, for example, did you ask Director Mueller, ‘Hey, do you mind if I write this book? Do you mind? Is it going to mess up your case?’”
Comey explained: “Not directly. But I submitted the book to the FBI for pre-publication review and nobody asked me not to do it.”
Guthrie continued her hand-wringing: “But that’s different than the Special Counsel, saying, ‘You know, I don’t want to get involved in your case, I don’t want to mess up your case. Would it be better if I just don’t say anything and keep it clean?’ You never had a conversation like that?”
The NBC host’s fears about Comey making it more difficult to prosecute the President echoed similar concerns from Monday’s CBS Evening News, when correspondent Paula Reid warned: “Comey’s attacks on the President could certainly complicate any future court proceeding or any kind of impeachment debate in Congress.”
Despite her anxiety over whether Comey harmed the investigation into Trump, later in the interview, she urged him to “put your old prosecutor’s hat on” as she built the case for charging the President with obstruction of justice:
Obstruction of justice, I know it’s complicated, but let’s take – and we don’t know all the facts – but let’s take two undisputed facts, you were fired and you were investigating the President with regard to Russia collusion and the campaign’s connection to Russia’s interference. And two, he told an interview, NBC’s Lester Holt, that when he fired you, the Russia investigation was at the forefront of his mind. Okay, so that’s action and that is, I think, tells you intent. On those facts alone, do you have a pretty strong case of obstruction?
Guthrie lead-off the 10-minute segment by lobbing this softball: “Is it liberating to have your book out there and be talking about it? Is it painful, cathartic? What’s your one-word answer on that one?” Comey, who has already done several media interviews and has several more slated, laughably claimed: “Terrifying. Just because of all the attention to it, I don’t crave that.”
The anchor did challenge him on his most personal jabs at the President:
You know, I don’t want to be an armchair psychologist, but I read the book, I’ve been watching your interviews. It still seems raw. It feels like you might have some scores to settle. You know, that you might have a little bit of anger left over and a little bit of bitterness. Would you plead guilty to all that?
Comey pled not guilty: “Yeah, I wouldn’t actually....I’m very worried, actually, which is why I’m doing something I don’t love, which is talking about it and writing about it. But not anger.”
Guthrie pushed back:
Some of the most widely cited parts have to do with your description and words about President Trump. I mean, including calling his skin orange and saying he looked like he had tanning goggles. And you know, some people said that was kind of, for lack of a better word, that was a little catty. Did you enjoy taking those shots at the President?
Again, Comey claimed innocence: “No I didn’t think of them as shots and I still don’t.” The host skeptically replied: “Really?” She continued: “But you’re talking about his hair, stuff like that. I mean, I guess some people are saying, ‘Wait a minute, James Comey, you just got into the gutter with President Trump,’ who, you know, is known for his name-calling....Did you stoop?”
During a live interview with Comey on Tuesday’s Good Morning America, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos similarly lamented that the ex-FBI Director was “getting down into the sandbox” with Trump.
On Wednesday’s Today, Guthrie repeatedly grilled Comey on his handling of the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation:
GUTHRIE: Okay. Let’s talk about the Clinton e-mail investigation. You are famous for saying that it made you a little bit nauseous, or nauseated as you correct in the book, to think that you might have had some impact on the election. And I just wanted to drill down on that because you would acknowledge that you had some impact on the election. We don’t know if it was decisive. But you know that you – what you did, in announcing that the Clinton case was going to be reopened and re-examined 11 days before the election, it had some impact, right?
COMEY: I actually don’t know that. I assumed that it might. I hope it didn’t. But I’m not expert enough to tell you.
GUTHRIE: But, I mean, it’s a very complex question whether or not it was determinative of the outcome, whether it all swayed and turned on what you did. But you had to know that it would have some impact.
(...)
GUTHRIE: Have you tried to look into it now? I mean, there’s lots of stuff you can read, you can see that, oh boy, in three states it was less than a percentage point that made the decision. You can look at the polls, where they were before you announced. Nate Silver, who’s a kind of a political prognosticator, said if the election had been held the day before Hillary Clinton – with this announcement was made – she would have won. Have you tried to figure it out now, just to kind of think, “Alright, was it a decisive factor?”
(...)
GUTHRIE: Some people say this all really stemmed from – because you felt like, in that moment, “I’ve got to say something because I’ve already said publically the case is closed. So I sort of have a duty to correct the record, now it’s open again and it’s right before the election.” So here’s the impossible situation you find yourself in. But you know, you decided that you were going to announce, unilaterally, that there were – you did not recommend charges against Hillary Clinton. You did that in the summer. That was unorthodox, that was unprecedented. Why didn’t you just go to the Justice Department and say, “This is my recommendation”?
(...)
GUTHRIE: But is the system set up that the FBI – investigators investigate, prosecutors decide whether to prosecute. In this case, you did – you performed both those functions because, as I understand, that you thought the Attorney General appeared compromised.
(...)
GUTHRIE: Why didn’t you just go straight to Sally Yates, who was the Deputy Attorney General, who I don’t think was accused of having any kind of conflict, and saying, “This is what I think you should do.” As opposed to saying, “I’m not going to tell them, I’m going to go publicly, I’m gonna announce it, and I’m gonna step out into it and make this statement that Hillary Clinton shouldn’t be charged, but that she was extremely careless”?
(...)
Turning back to Comey’s despise of the President, Guthrie demanded to know why did not “stand up to the President” more forcefully:
Let’s talk about your interactions with President Trump....there were many moments that made you deeply uncomfortable....And in your telling, the President is doing things that are inappropriate....Why, in all of those situations, did James Comey, of all people, not stand up to the President?....Why wouldn’t you speak up to President Trump?
Wrapping up the lengthy sit-down, Guthrie wondered if he had any political ambitions: “Do you think you’d ever run for president or any other political office?” He promptly shot down the idea: “Never.” Guthrie laughed and replied: “Well, that was a very direct answer, very un-Washington-like.” Comey reiterated: “Yeah, never. I want to say it again so my wife heard it twice.”
It would certainly be difficult for Comey to run for office if he upsets the liberal media dream of Trump’s impeachment.
Here is a transcript of Guthrie’s questions to Comey in the April 18 interview:
7:32 AM ET
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: We’ll begin this half hour with the man at the center of the political firestorm surrounding the 2016 presidential election, former FBI Director James Comey. Hillary Clinton, of course, blamed him for partially costing her the White House, the FBI opened the Russia investigation under his watch, and the President fired him. Well, now, he’s out with a new book, it’s called A Higher Loyalty, and his comments this week challenging the President’s credibility have landed him right back into the middle of the storm. So, Director Comey, good morning, it’s good to have you with us.
JAMES COMEY: Great to be with you.
GUTHRIE: Is it liberating to have your book out there and be talking about it? Is it painful, cathartic? What’s your one-word answer on that one?
COMEY: Terrifying.
GUTHRIE: Really?
COMEY: Just because of all the attention to it, I don’t crave that. It’s a little – it’s hard for me to hide because I’m a giraffe. And so, it’s a little freaky.
GUTHRIE: Yeah, you are shorter in person, I did have to say. You know, I don’t want to be an armchair psychologist, but I read the book, I’ve been watching your interviews. It still seems raw. It feels like you might have some scores to settle. You know, that you might have a little bit of anger left over and a little bit of bitterness. Would you plead guilty to all that?
COMEY: Yeah, I wouldn’t actually.
(...)
COMEY: I’m very worried, actually, which is why I’m doing something I don’t love, which is talking about it and writing about it. But not anger.
GUTHRIE: There’s been a lot of reactions to the book so far. Some of the most widely cited parts have to do with your description and words about President Trump. I mean, including calling his skin orange and saying he looked like he had tanning goggles. And you know, some people said that was kind of, for lack of a better word, that was a little catty. Did you enjoy taking those shots at the President?
COMEY: No I didn’t think of them as shots and I still don’t.
GUTHRIE: Really? Really?
(...)
GUTHRIE: But you’re talking about his hair, stuff like that. I mean, I guess some people are saying, “Wait a minute, James Comey, you just got into the gutter with President Trump,” who, you know, is known for his name-calling. He’s called you a “slimeball” and a “nutjob” and any number of things. Did you stoop?
COMEY: I really don’t think so. Again, maybe I’m missing it.
(...)
GUTHRIE: So you don’t think you’ve diminished yourself?
(...)
GUTHRIE: You have really made some pretty strong assertions against the President. You said he’s morally unfit, said he lies almost constantly. You are the star witness, perhaps, in former Director Mueller’s investigation into obstruction of justice. Your testimony against President Trump’s testimony. Are you concerned that you’ve made that prosecution tougher? Because you’ve now been out there and you’ve demonstrated that you do have a bias against the President.
(...)
GUTHRIE: Well, he did fire you, but you’ve gone further than that, there’s nothing you can do about that. But you can help what you write. I mean, for example, did you ask Director Mueller, “Hey, do you mind if I write this book? Do you mind? Is it going to mess up your case?”
COMEY: Not directly. But I submitted the book to the FBI for pre-publication review and nobody asked me not to do it.
GUTHRIE: But that’s different than the Special Counsel, saying, “You know, I don’t want to get involved in your case, I don’t want to mess up your case. Would it be better if I just don’t say anything and keep it clean?” You never had a conversation like that?
COMEY. No. Although I know they’ve known for a long time I’ve been working on a book.
GUTHRIE: Okay. Let’s talk about the Clinton e-mail investigation. You are famous for saying that it made you a little bit nauseous, or nauseated as you correct in the book, to think that you might have had some impact on the election. And I just wanted to drill down on that because you would acknowledge that you had some impact on the election. We don’t know if it was decisive. But you know that you – what you did, in announcing that the Clinton case was going to be reopened and re-examined 11 days before the election, it had some impact, right?
COMEY: I actually don’t know that. I assumed that it might. I hope it didn’t. But I’m not expert enough to tell you.
GUTHRIE: But, I mean, it’s a very complex question whether or not it was determinative of the outcome, whether it all swayed and turned on what you did. But you had to know that it would have some impact.
(...)
GUTHRIE: Have you tried to look into it now? I mean, there’s lots of stuff you can read, you can see that, oh boy, in three states it was less than a percentage point that made the decision. You can look at the polls, where they were before you announced. Nate Silver, who’s a kind of a political prognosticator, said if the election had been held the day before Hillary Clinton – with this announcement was made – she would have won. Have you tried to figure it out now, just to kind of think, “Alright, was it a decisive factor?”
(...)
GUTHRIE: Some people say this all really stemmed from – because you felt like, in that moment, “I’ve got to say something because I’ve already said publically the case is closed. So I sort of have a duty to correct the record, now it’s open again and it’s right before the election.” So here’s the impossible situation you find yourself in. But you know, you decided that you were going to announce, unilaterally, that there were – you did not recommend charges against Hillary Clinton. You did that in the summer. That was unorthodox, that was unprecedented. Why didn’t you just go to the Justice Department and say, “This is my recommendation”?
(...)
GUTHRIE: But is the system set up that the FBI – investigators investigate, prosecutors decide whether to prosecute. In this case, you did – you performed both those functions because, as I understand, that you thought the Attorney General appeared compromised.
(...)
GUTHRIE: Why didn’t you just go straight to Sally Yates, who was the Deputy Attorney General, who I don’t think was accused of having any kind of conflict, and saying, “This is what I think you should do.” As opposed to saying, “I’m not going to tell them, I’m going to go publicly, I’m gonna announce it, and I’m gonna step out into it and make this statement that Hillary Clinton shouldn’t be charged, but that she was extremely careless”?
(...)
GUTHRIE: Let’s talk about your interactions with President Trump because we certainly heard your testimony in Congress and you get into it in the book. What I took away from it is there were many moments that made you deeply uncomfortable. And in your telling, the President is doing things that are inappropriate, for one thing. In the first meeting, with all the intelligence leaders, kind of gaming out the political consequences of Russia’s interference in the election. Later asking for your loyalty, according to your testimony. Later saying, “I hope you can let the Flynn investigation go,” according to your testimony.
Why, in all of those situations, did James Comey, of all people, not stand up to the President? You’re the person most famous, from your time as the Deputy Attorney General, going into the bedside of John Ashcroft and standing up to the White House. I mean, that’s your reputation. Why wouldn’t you speak up to President Trump?
COMEY: Well, I guess the question is, what does standing up mean in that context. I stared at him, didn’t blink, didn’t make a sound.
GUTHRIE: You can say that’s inappropriate, “Are you asking me to let go of an ongoing criminal investigation”?
(...)
GUTHRIE: Let me ask you to put your old prosecutor’s hat on. Obstruction of justice, I know it’s complicated, but let’s take – and we don’t know all the facts – but let’s take two undisputed facts, you were fired and you were investigating the President with regard to Russia collusion and the campaign’s connection to Russia’s interference. And two, he told an interview, NBC’s Lester Holt, that when he fired you, the Russia investigation was at the forefront of his mind. Okay, so that’s action and that is, I think, tells you intent. On those facts alone, do you have a pretty strong case of obstruction?
COMEY: You might. It would depend upon what all the other facts were around that, about his intent, that I can’t see and that you can’t see yet.
GUTHRIE: So you really haven’t made a judgment in terms of just the publicly available evidence?
COMEY: Well, my judgment is it could be obstruction of justice.
(...)
GUTHRIE: Do you think you’d ever run for president or any other political office?
COMEY: Never.
GUTHRIE: [Laughs] Well, that was a very direct answer, very un-Washington-like.
COMEY: Yeah, never. I want to say it again so my wife heard it twice.
GUTHRIE: Never, never, never. Got it. James Comey, thank you so much. Thanks for your time and taking the questions. Again, the book is called A Higher Loyalty.
