It's not (just) the firing and when it happened; it's HOW
I listened to Senator Sheldon Whitehouse being interviewed by Rachel last night and really respect his approach to this. He acknowledged the pent-up frustration that many have had with Comey's behavior and more or less praised the Assistant AG, a career guy, who wrote the "why" document. Whitehouse did not immediately jump on the "this is Nixonian" theme, which helps us in the long run, I believe. We need to seem reasonable, not jumping to conclusions, not matter how badly we want to. Then he went on to address the tremendously suspicious timing of the event.
What I have found completely missing in even these best of assessments is the "how." Given that the series of offenses Comey committed occurred months ago, why was he fired, not asked to resign? Why did Trump not meet with him? The "how" seems to compound the timing issue to the point that leads most to the Nixonian conclusion, but I didn't hear anyone discussing it.
The manner in which Comey was removed from his position is perhaps the best indicator, IMHO, that this firing is much more than what they say it is.
= new reply since forum marked as read
