‘Revenge tit-for-tat’: Why Trump’s retribution campaign is a slippery slope for American politics

Case Strength & Legality - The case against Comey is potentially weak due to a former US attorney with Republican ties declining to bring charges and an inspector general report finding Comey credible [3] - The involvement of political appointees alone in the grand jury indictment process raises concerns about the case's integrity [4] - Legal malpractice is a potential risk, especially considering the US attorney with no prosecution experience seeking the indictment [8] - Selective prosecution is a concern, suggesting the case might be biased against an individual for their beliefs or lawful actions [17] - Only 14 out of 23 grand jurors voted to indict on two counts, with a third count declined, further indicating a lack of consensus [15] Political Implications & Justice System - Concerns exist that the prosecution is driven by revenge and could set a precedent for future administrations to target political enemies [6][10] - The Department of Justice is potentially being used as a tool to target critics or those who have investigated or prosecuted the president [19] - There's a fear that the current actions could lead to a vicious cycle of revenge and tit-for-tat prosecutions in future administrations [11] Evidence & Credibility - The case appears to be a "he said, he said" situation between Comey and McCabe, with McCabe's statements not necessarily contradicting Comey's [13][14] - The inspector general's finding of a lack of candor by Andrew McCabe raises questions about his credibility as a witness [22]