Another day, another round of charges that politics influenced the FBI’s decisions as it investigated Hillary Clinton’s private email server, and President Trump’s alleged ties to Russia.
Did the FBI let Clinton off the hook because it’s stocked with Democrats? Did it make biased decisions to go after Trump for the same reason?
Would an FBI staffed mostly with Republicans decide to do more work probing former President Bill Clinton’s tarmac meeting with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, or prosecute former FBI Director James Comey for leaking to the press?
We can’t easily know. Congressional Republicans are livid after seeing just enough of the internal messages between left-leaning FBI agents and staff to suspect that the FBI is an anti-GOP organization, or at a minimum is anti-Trump.
But there are good reasons why the FBI shouldn’t reveal every last detail of how it does its work to Congress. The answer shouldn’t really be for the FBI to hand Congress every scrap of paper, or reveal every confidential source, information that would only create new problems once it’s leaked.
The answer to good government in this case is to give the FBI a new structure that gives it a chance at policing itself. Just two steps are needed.
1) Admit that the FBI’s staff is made up of people who have political leanings.
The last year has shattered the myth that law enforcement agencies are somehow able to staff themselves with neutral, apolitical workers.
But the Clinton-Lynch meeting, Comey’s odd and politically attuned decisions surrounding the Hillary Clinton probe, and the juvenile Peter Strzok-Lisa Page texts show that no one is immune, and that anyone could run the risk of poisoning an investigation with politics.
It shouldn’t be a big shock. Look at the Supreme Court, our highest legal authority, which split cleanly along party lines on whether the president has the right to impose tougher immigration rules for national security reasons.
We’re a nation of laws, not men. But until robots are running the show, we need people to implement the laws, and people come equipped with all sorts of political feelings, which means all agencies are at risk of being politicized.
2) Give Republicans and Democrats an equal say in political investigations.
Trump has hinted at how to solve the problem, every time he complains about the “13 angry Democrats” on special counsel Robert Mueller’s 17-person staff.
Why not split it 50-50? Why not have two captains lead these sorts of investigations into politicians and political parties, and let them pick an equal number of investigators?
A team structured this way would come with its own built-in system of checks and balances. If the Republican side tries to bend the rules to attack Democrats, the Democrats on the team can complain up the chain of command.
If the Democratic side suddenly feels like not prosecuting a Democrat who deserves prosecution, Republicans can force the agency to reconsider.
It’s not even a novel idea.
The U.S. International Trade Commission is charged with deciding whether a U.S. industry is being injured by imports of foreign goods. It’s pretty boring, and that’s partly because it’s equally staffed with Republicans and Democrats.
The Federal Election Commission is also structured this way, as are the House and Senate Ethics Committees.
When the government wants a nonpartisan decision, it gives Republicans and Democrats an equal say. It’s time to decide we want that at the FBI.
