#45 Has Fired FBI Director James Comey
-
I am sure the firing of Comey had nothing to do with the fact that he had gone to Congress last week and asked for additional money to fund the Russia investigation by the FBI. Now we all know that Not my President Donald would never react badly to more Russia investigation.
And for those claiming there is no collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russia…well you really need to become more objective. The only statement was that there so far has been no evidence of direct collusion between Donald and Russia. NO ONE SAID THERE WAS NO COLLUSION BY HIS TEAM. There are way to many members of his team talking to and travelling to Russia including his spoiled brat rich boy Son-in-law!!
I figure to have the last laugh on this one so enjoy the ride.
-
Well played sir jackny. Jeff Sessions' is a bigot, racist, treasonous traitor
-
I don't think this is a big deal. First off, live in DC, and Rod Rosenstein is a standup guy. Prosecuted corruption as DOJ lawyer against both Dems & GOP. Has been consistently reappointed by both sides, and after Sessions recused himself from Russia, Russia will be in his lap, and Rosenstein is not someone you want to take on.
As for Comey, Hillary was out there blaming Comey for losing the election. Trump was blaming Comey for spreading false Russia stuff. Let's face it, neither side has confidence in Jim Comey, and Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton meeting on a tarmac caused much of this because that meeting compromised the Department of Justice and put Comey into a difficult spot where he couldn't possibly be perceived by either side as objective, the FBI's job is to stay mum, pass the facts up the chain of command, and await their decision on whether or not to arrest. Instead, he became investigator and prosecutor. It also doesn't help that Comey allowed McCabe, who is now the interim to remain his #2, while McCabe's wife raised $700,000 while running for political office as a Democrat.
We can litigate the Clinton and Russia cases until the cows come home, but none of us are privy to the full set of facts that the FBI has, nor do we have the resources to followup leads like the FBI has. What we can do is ascertain whether or not the Bureau is adhering to protocol, and Comey has not been doing that for quite sometime. For better or worse, both sides have been complaining about that, and it's time to move on. Trump is going to have to appoint someone who can get bipartisan support, as he cannot count on Sasse, McCain, and Graham as votes, which leaves him one vote shy for Senate Confirmation.
Overall, I think this is a good move. Looking at public opinion polls before the firing, 17% of Dems had confidence in Comey & 26% of Republicans had confidence in Comey, and the fact that folks are polling this is not good news. When the process works, no one knows who the FBI Director is. How many would have even pondered polling on Mueller? We're going to get answers in due course, but the answers have to come from someone that both sides have over 50% respect for.
-
I am going to have buy some shares in Reynolds Wrap.
-
Once again, you can't expect people to just sit and say, "Well, I'll give #45 and his administration the benefit of the doubt. I mean, nothing else suspicious has happened." THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK. A foreign power was successful in helping one candidate win the presidency. There is an investigation to see if the Almighty Orange one and/or anyone in his inner circle cooperated with said foreign power. This is not going away no matter what you Almighty Orange worshipers say. And the more shady this gets due to situations like firing the FBI director at odd times, the worse this is going to get. Simple as that.
-
First off, the timing has already been debunked. Dep. AG confirmed less than 2 weeks before his underling is fired.
Trump wanted Comey gone, everyone wanted Comey gone, and Comey's boss agreed that Comey needed to go since he had been unwilling to admit errors he made in response to the extraordinary errors happening above him (Clintons, Lynch, Rice).
As for the oft-repeated lie that he was fired after asking for more resources, not only did the DOJ state there was ZERO VERACITY to that claim, Comey's #2 guy testified under oath that that wouldn't have happened because that wouldn't have been the process, and that the FBI had all of the resources it needs.
If you all would sit back and breathe, you may have a point in time when Trump does something truly wrong, but this continue boogeyman search is going to wear you out, and the continually wailing from the Left is going to fade into background noise to vast swaths of the American electorate.
One other thing, it is one thing to argue position or opinion, but it is highly distasteful to state claims as facts that are not verifiably factual, especially when there is no attempt to correct the record when the facts play out differently than you had claimed.
-
The Deputy AG threatened to resign if all blame was pushed off on him, so no the timing has not been debunked; another layer of unknown has been added. Also #45 made things more complicated with his recent NBC News interview with Lester Holt. Why does the reason for Comey's firing keep changing?
-
Some unnamed source claims the Dep. AG threatened to resign and you take it as Gospel! It would have made zero sense to fire Comey BEFORE now. He fired him once he got his top 2 guys at the DOJ FINALLY confirmed so they could then BOTH be included in the search for a new head of the FBI, someone that would be responsible directly to the Deputy AG.
As for the Dep. AG taking the blame, it's a ridiculous claim because the only person that fired Comey was Trump. Now, if the highly respected Rosenstein didn't believe the following passage he should never have written it and his name to the bottom:_ "Although the President has the power to remove an FBI director, the decision should not be taken lightly. I agree with the nearly unanimous opinions of former Department officials. The way the Director handled the conclusion of the email investigation was wrong. As a result, the FBI is unlikely to regain public and congressional trust until it has a Director who understands the gravity of the mistakes and pledges never to repeat them. Having refused to admit his errors, the Director cannot be expected to implement the necessary corrective actions."_
The reason hasn't changed, btw. It is entirely possible that there were multiple reasons to fire Comey, but why is there a need to drag every single one out of the closet. Trump had a valid reason, and he used it. Everything else is a search in the hopes of finding a story! Just because a Republican does something it doesn't automatically mean that it was wrong; no matter what the "news" tells you!
(What is more of a story is how Vince Foster died of a "suicide" the day after President Clinton fired his fiercely independent FBI Chief, William Sessions.)
-
On Tuesday, Sean Spicer, when asked if the White House had anything to do with Comey's firing said:
"It was all him. … No one from the White House. That was a DOJ decision."
On Thursday, Donald Trump told Lester Holt:
"I was going to fire Comey. My decision."
Tell us again how the reason didn't change.
-
The Deputy AG threatened to resign if all blame was pushed off on him, so no the timing has not been debunked; another layer of unknown has been added. Also #45 made things more complicated with his recent NBC News interview with Lester Holt. Why does the reason for Comey's firing keep changing?
MORE FAKE NEWS!!! He never threatened to resign:
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/11/deputy-ag-rosenstein-reportedly-threatened-to-quit-over-depiction-of-his-role-in-comey-dismissal.html -
(What is more of a story is how Vince Foster died of a "suicide" the day after President Clinton fired his fiercely independent FBI Chief, William Sessions.)
:ot:
-
On Tuesday, Sean Spicer, when asked if the White House had anything to do with Comey's firing said:
"It was all him. … No one from the White House. That was a DOJ decision."
On Thursday, Donald Trump told Lester Holt:
"I was going to fire Comey. My decision."
Tell us again how the reason didn't change.
Again, you are assuming that Spicer knows everything. Sometimes he screws up. The President HIMSELF has explained this to a biased reporter that is part of the biased media. Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor. This is one reason they need to do away with the press briefings. Submit questions and let the Press Office reply at their leisure.
-
Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor.
Blatant lie
http://filmsor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-fox-news.jpg -
Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor.
Blatant lie
http://filmsor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-fox-news.jpg8 years in office, 3 sit down interviews:
1st was in March '10 to try and get his Obamacare to poll better so he could get it passed.
2nd was the one you imaged was actually aired on the FOX channel in conjunction with their pre-SuperBowl coverage 4 years later. It also had him chiding Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly as being unfair for asking questions about ObamaCare’s shortcomings, the IRS scandal, and Benghazi.
Last was in April '16, to Chris Wallace, a registered Democrat and one of the moderators for the upcoming Presidential debates.Obama may have been many things, but he wasn't the greatest advocate for freedom of the press.
-
Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor.
Blatant lie
http://filmsor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-fox-news.jpgA LIE? You had to go back to Feb 6, 2011 to find an instance where Obama got interviewed by Bill O'Reilly? Over 6 years ago? Really? That muslim terrorist was president for 8 years, and got a free-pass from the press.
-
Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor.
Blatant lie
http://filmsor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-fox-news.jpg8 years in office, 3 sit down interviews:
1st was in March '10 to try and get his Obamacare to poll better so he could get it passed.
2nd was the one you imaged was actually aired on the FOX channel in conjunction with their pre-SuperBowl coverage 4 years later. It also had him chiding Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly as being unfair for asking questions about ObamaCare’s shortcomings, the IRS scandal, and Benghazi.
Last was in April '16, to Chris Wallace, a registered Democrat and one of the moderators for the upcoming Presidential debates.Obama may have been many things, but he wasn't the greatest advocate for freedom of the press.
"Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor."
That was word for word what you said, was it not? That is a blatant lie, and I provided just one pic of Barack Obama doing an interview with Fox News anchor Bill O'Reilly who was very, very critical of President Obama. You then proceeded to list the other times Obama sat down with his critics, further proving you posted a blatant lie by saying he avoided them. If he avoided them, there would be NO EXAMPLES. You're a blatant liar. Simple as that.
-
Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor.
Blatant lie
http://filmsor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-fox-news.jpgA LIE? You had to go back to Feb 6, 2011 to find an instance where Obama got interviewed by Bill O'Reilly? Over 6 years ago? Really? That muslim terrorist was president for 8 years, and got a free-pass from the press.
6 years ago, 8 years ago; how is that relevant to the quote made by amicusets? The quote was that President Obama "avoided" his critics but there is proof that he did multiple interviews with his critics. No one said anything about how frequent or rare it was, the statement was that he avoided his critics which is a blatant lie.
-
Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor.
Blatant lie
http://filmsor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-fox-news.jpgA LIE? You had to go back to Feb 6, 2011 to find an instance where Obama got interviewed by Bill O'Reilly? Over 6 years ago? Really? That muslim terrorist was president for 8 years, and got a free-pass from the press.
6 years ago, 8 years ago; how is that relevant to the quote made by amicusets? The quote was that President Obama "avoided" his critics but there is proof that he did multiple interviews with his critics. No one said anything about how frequent or rare it was, the statement was that he avoided his critics which is a blatant lie.
I get it.. so RoyalCrown89 thinks that only doing 3 interviews with his critics in almost 3000 days is NOT avoiding his critics? Let me make a picture for you RoyalCrown89. This is 999 X's and one O which is 1 in 1000 (proportionate to 3 in 3000)
oxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxHmm… I'd say that Obama was avoiding his critics!
-
Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor.
Blatant lie
http://filmsor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-fox-news.jpgA LIE? You had to go back to Feb 6, 2011 to find an instance where Obama got interviewed by Bill O'Reilly? Over 6 years ago? Really? That muslim terrorist was president for 8 years, and got a free-pass from the press.
6 years ago, 8 years ago; how is that relevant to the quote made by amicusets? The quote was that President Obama "avoided" his critics but there is proof that he did multiple interviews with his critics. No one said anything about how frequent or rare it was, the statement was that he avoided his critics which is a blatant lie.
I get it.. so RoyalCrown89 thinks that only doing 3 interviews with his critics in almost 3000 days is NOT avoiding his critics? Let me make a picture for you RoyalCrown89. This is 999 X's and one O which is 1 in 1000 (proportionate to 3 in 3000)
oxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxHmm… I'd say that Obama was avoiding his critics!
:spam:
-
:spam:
Typical liberal democrat. When facts aren't on your side, try and obfuscate and twist meanings to fit an agenda so you can call people names. When that gets called out you call it spam or irrelevant.
FTR: O'Reilly was actually one of the "real" commentators who covered Obama. He called out what he believed to be his and his administration's failings, but he also called out others who were overly harsh or just plain partisan and discussed the things he thought Obama was doing right. I hate to admit is, because I have always hated O'Reilly, but the truth is the truth.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login