Comey is out!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ha! Love it, about time.

I can't stand Hillary but that entire thing was handled poorly.

I read the termination letter and all true imo. This has been a long time coming, it took someone with guts to follow through on the right decision.

The guts not to be able to fire someone in person? So that they learn about it from a CNN news crawl? Right.

[Anonymous]

You people are acting like Comey was personally conducting every investigation being done by the FBI.
You are acting like the work of the Bureau will cease in his absence.

In a nutshell, you are totally overreacting. Get a grip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There is a process for dealing with a president who breaks the law: he can be impeached and removed from office or he can be voted out of office at the next election.
Alternatively the elected representatives who are not performing their duty should be voted out of office.

If the duly elected representatives don't want to impeach him or the voters decide at the next election to reelect him, perhaps it is because the perceived illegal actions - which may bother some - is still not sufficiently egregious to others.

But that is how a democracy works ........ we have to trust the voters even though it sometimes results in an outcome we may not agree with.

This makes an assumption of fair and free elections. News yesterday that over 200,000 registered voters in Wisconsin were turned away last November and examples of other issues in North Carolina, Florida and other states suggests otherwise.

Trust the voters? Good one as the GOP systematically attempts to disenfranchise minority and predominantly lower income voters throughout the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You people are acting like Comey was personally conducting every investigation being done by the FBI.
You are acting like the work of the Bureau will cease in his absence.

In a nutshell, you are totally overreacting. Get a grip.

When did you decide to stop posting about Hillary's emails and neurological disorders?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You people are acting like Comey was personally conducting every investigation being done by the FBI.
You are acting like the work of the Bureau will cease in his absence.

In a nutshell, you are totally overreacting. Get a grip.

Please read the thread in full if you are going to engage here. Multiple posts have already explained that no one here believes Comey is the only employee at the FBI and the only one doing the investigating. But he was the DIRECTOR, and the person to replace him will DIRECT investigative priorities, as he did. Trump picking that person could undermine the investigation INTO TRUMP, if the new director lessens the priority - many possible ways to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This claptrap about our democracy being threatened is just ludicrous. We have been hearing this since Trump's nomination and even more so after Trump was elected.

He has been in office for well over 4 months and what has he done so far that represents a real threat to our democracy? We still have a free press, our elected representatives still openly express their opposition to Trump, late night comics still make fun of Trump, the courts still function and issue injunctions on EOs that they deem constitutionally questionable, people are still posting on this and other forums expressing their strong opposition to Trump both personally and in terms of policy and sometimes in quite offensive language.

I have lived for brief periods in countries where freedoms are proscribed to some degree or the other and the US is not even remotely akin to these countries and it would take a serious erosion of our democratic institutions for us to get anywhere close to those countries.

This hysteria about what Trump can do or is about to do is sheer nonsense. We have multiple safeguards to prevent autocracy in this country.

Did you ever consider that one of those safeguards is the actual act of people here and elsewhere, standing up and saying what he wants to do/is doing isn't right based on our democracy and constitution and history and precedent, i.e. what you refer to as hysteria?

Also, I assume you saw that a reporter was arrested yesterday for asking Secretary Price a question?

I assume you saw that the US media was kept out of Trump's meeting with the Russians today?

I assume you've seen how Trump called the press the enemy of the state, and has constantly tried to undermine reporting by calling any stories he doesn't like fake news?

I assume you've seen how he fired the FBI director because he doesn't like that the FBI director is looking into Trump's possibly treasonous ties with Russia?

AND SO ON AND ON AND ON

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm assuming it has to do with this article which just hit the news wires 30 minutes ago. He misstated the number of emails that Abedin forwarded to Weiner, the FBI issued a correction to his testimony. Seems like the WH has been waiting for any excuse to can him.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/comey-misstated-key-clinton-email-evidence-at-hearing-say-people-close-to-investigation/2017/05/09/074c1c7e-34bd-11e7-b373-418f6849a004_story.html

I would have fired him after negotiating with Hillary over taking the email server with classified material on it. You don't negotiate, you confiscate it immediately, no questions asked.

Exactly, that's what was suppose to be done. Did they negotiate with Martha when she erased that message on the answering machine? She got 6 mo in club Fed.

JFC are you still litigating Hillary's EMAILS? All the things going on, and you still think SHE is the criminal?

I don't get it. Was there lead in the water where you grew up? Were you a victim of fetal alcohol syndrome? Or were you one of these kids who liked torturing cats?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ha! Love it, about time.

I can't stand Hillary but that entire thing was handled poorly.

I read the termination letter and all true imo. This has been a long time coming, it took someone with guts to follow through on the right decision.

The guts not to be able to fire someone in person? So that they learn about it from a CNN news crawl? Right.

Really? If it were you, you would prefer getting fired by him in person with his big hand pointing at you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ha! Love it, about time.

I can't stand Hillary but that entire thing was handled poorly.

I read the termination letter and all true imo. This has been a long time coming, it took someone with guts to follow through on the right decision.

The guts not to be able to fire someone in person? So that they learn about it from a CNN news crawl? Right.

Really? If it were you, you would prefer getting fired by him in person with his tiny child hand pointing at you?

FIFY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Threatened to dismantle the Ninth Circuit
Called a federal judge a "so-called judge"

Tweets like this:

Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 5, 2017

Splitting the Ninth Circuit has been discussed many times well before Trump because it is unwieldy among other reasons.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/politics/lawmakers-trying-again-to-divide-ninth-circuit.html?_r=0

With regard to the "so-called judge" remark it was totally inappropriate but it did not change a thing really.

Yes, he makes comments disparaging decisions he does not like - and a president should not do so especially in the language he uses - but from a practical standpoint has it changed the outcome one iota?

The issue is this: does he know the implications of his words? Or is he just trying to see what he can get away with?

The answers to both questions are pretty serious because, so far, he's getting away with everything that goes against convention. He's been hostile to every constraint - the press, the judicial sytem, the Congress - and even hostile to the American people and private industry.

It's all well and good to say "that will never happen". But at what point do you look up and realize THIS IS HAPPENING?

[Anonymous]

Not one person on the witness stand in these hearings has indicated that there is evidence of collusion. Not one.

If there were evidence, we would have heard long ago.

No Democrat has indicated that he/she has seen evidence of collusion. (They just desperately want to see it.)

This investigation has been going on for quite some time. There are people who have been unmasked--and still no evidence.

Get over it. Only person in trouble is Flynn--and we still are not sure what he did for the campaign that was illegal. His troubles are outside the campaign. (He did lie to Pence--but that is not a federal offense. It does make him subject to blackmail--which is the only thing )

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Threatened to dismantle the Ninth Circuit
Called a federal judge a "so-called judge"

Tweets like this:

Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 5, 2017

Splitting the Ninth Circuit has been discussed many times well before Trump because it is unwieldy among other reasons.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/politics/lawmakers-trying-again-to-divide-ninth-circuit.html?_r=0

With regard to the "so-called judge" remark it was totally inappropriate but it did not change a thing really.

Yes, he makes comments disparaging decisions he does not like - and a president should not do so especially in the language he uses - but from a practical standpoint has it changed the outcome one iota?

The problem is that too many Americans believe our democracy is only enshrined in our laws and founding documents and not also in our political norms. Washington warned that this was not the case, but even now we refuse to believe him.

It's a good thing, in general, for a claimant to have to show standing in a court-of-law. But now we have almost universal agreement that Trump is flagrantly violating the Emoluments Clause, but no one can show standing to challenge this in court. Our best hope for holding him accountable is for the Congress to act as a check on his corruption, but they seem unwilling to do so...and decades of gerry-mandering is going to be difficult to vote them out.

Trump is violating every political norm Americans have ever held dear, and he's using our Constitution and judicial precedent to protect himself while he openly fleeces the American public. I'm less disgusted that he's doing it, because lots of people are selfish a$$hol3s, than that people are defending it by citing our democratic ideals.

There is a process for dealing with a president who breaks the law: he can be impeached and removed from office or he can be voted out of office at the next election.
Alternatively the elected representatives who are not performing their duty should be voted out of office.

If the duly elected representatives don't want to impeach him or the voters decide at the next election to reelect him, perhaps it is because the perceived illegal actions - which may bother some - is still not sufficiently egregious to others.

But that is how a democracy works ........ we have to trust the voters even though it sometimes results in an outcome we may not agree with.

Unless the election was rigged.

I'm one who felt this panic last fall when Trump started throwing that out there. In my mind, the only reason for doing so was because it WAS rigged. If Clinton won, he could completely undermine her presidency by revealing the evidence. And if he won, well, no one would ever believe it.

I also felt he moved fast to start making deals (Kushner companies) because he knew he was on borrowed time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not one person on the witness stand in these hearings has indicated that there is evidence of collusion. Not one.

If there were evidence, we would have heard long ago.

No Democrat has indicated that he/she has seen evidence of collusion. (They just desperately want to see it.)

This investigation has been going on for quite some time. There are people who have been unmasked--and still no evidence.

Get over it. Only person in trouble is Flynn--and we still are not sure what he did for the campaign that was illegal. His troubles are outside the campaign. (He did lie to Pence--but that is not a federal offense. It does make him subject to blackmail--which is the only thing )

Thanks to your reassuring words I am no longer concerned that the grand juries that have been subpoenaed are even worthwhile. Let's just disband them now. Clearly there's nothing to see or find out here. It's great that Comey was fired because he was wasting so much taxpayer dollars even looking into this nonsense!

[Anonymous]

But the bs PP.

Did you read the 35 page dossier on Trump. There's lots of smoke, but no proof yet.

Trump has anhistory of destroying evidence when he's sued. Google it. He's up to hisnoldnyricks, refusing to comply with subpoenas, simply refusing to tuen ovwr documents, etc. classic Trump.

He will slip up and then someone, maybe the NY AG, will get him, and he'll spend the rest ofnhis life in jail.

[Anonymous]

Sorry for all the typos!!