by This week, my colleague Eileen Sullivan and I
reported
that the Secret Service took the extraordinary step in May of surveilling the former F.B.I. director James Comey, a day after he
posted a photo
that President Trump’s allies claimed contained an assassination threat.
The story raised questions about whether Comey was tailed not because he was a legitimate threat but as part of a retribution campaign Trump has promised to wage against those he sees as his enemies.
To nail down the story, we had to do one of the most challenging tasks we face as reporters: pry loose details from the inside of a federal investigation.
But there was also something unexpectedly difficult about that story, compared with similar stories I’ve reported over 20 years at The New York Times. Some of the people we’ve previously called on to provide outside expertise refused to speak with us this time.
Tonight, I’m going to take you behind the scenes of our reporting, and explain why the speed bump we hit may be a sign of something more significant.
A chill in Washington
When we write a story like this, we reach out to experts who can put what we are writing about in context. Drawing on their work experience or academic expertise, they can help us — and our readers — understand whether and why an incident we are covering is unusual, or which laws might apply to it.
We are having trouble retrieving the article content.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and
log into
your Times account, or
subscribe
for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber?
Log in
.
Want all of The Times?
Subscribe
.
