► LISTEN NOW
DONATE
SEARCH
October 29, 2016

James Comey, meet Lawrence Walsh. It's time you get to know him because, as far as historical reputations go, you're about to have a good deal in common.

Comey’s October surprise seems to rank as a “meh” regarding the matter under investigation. It’s also not likely to change the trajectory of the race.

Still Republicans get to enjoy a moment of glee at the expense of the Clinton campaign (and the truth, by the way) while Democrats howl at the inappropriate behavior by the FBI Director just 11 days before the election.

I can’t quite make out what the FBI is doing here, and I join illustrious company—just about all political talking heads who are eating this up but digesting very little.  The early evidence suggests the coverage yesterday of what is actually going on--they are not reopening an investigation into Hillary Clinton, for example--was mostly incorrect.

But it does remind me of another inglorious moment in unseemly interventions in a national election: Lawrence Walsh’s decision to indict former Secretary of Defense Cap Weinberger and others the weekend before the 1992 election.

Walsh indicted Weinberger for lying about his involvement in the Reagan era Iran-Contra scandal which also implicated President George H.W. Bush.

Walsh’ previous indictment of Weinberger had been thrown out on technical grounds. His November 1992 indictment came close on the heels of a Gallup poll showing that incumbent President George H.W. Bush was gaining ground on Democratic challenger Bill Clinton. It’s not likely, given the fundamentals of the 1992 race, that the indictment stalled Bush’s momentum. The race did not favor the incumbent party.

But, the indictment of Weinberger just a few days before the election was an outrageous abuse of prosecutorial authority. The federal judge who threw out the indictment, just over one month later, did so on the grounds that a newly minted JD could have easily understood: the statute of limitations had expired, and the indictment improperly broadened the original charge against Weinberger.

The indictment did serve to change the conversation during a crucial weekend before voting. It accomplished Walsh little regarding his investigation. Worse, the stain of intervening in a presidential race in a wholly unjustified manner will never be removed from his historical reputation.

As goes Lawrence Walsh, so goes James Comey.

Lawrence Walsh, Iran Contra, James Comey, Clinton emails

Previous Post

Breaking: Keyser Client Endorses Keyser Client

Next Post

Is "Moore Better" for Baker?

comments powered by Disqus