FBI Director Comey Fired

[RJ]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fbi-director-james-comey-fired/story?id=47309009

"FBI Director James Comey has been fired, according to the White House.

"Today, President Donald J. Trump informed FBI Director James Comey that he has been terminated and removed from office," the White House statement reads.

"President Trump acted based on the clear recommendations of both Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and Attorney General Jeff Sessions," the statement said."

Tend to support this. Comey might be a good guy, but he didn't have any friends on either side in DC after the election.

[Mjolnir]

About danged time!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[45dotACP]

No surprise there...

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[OnionsAndDragons]

See... I have a different take on that.

If he doesn't have (m)any friends on either side, he is more likely doing the job.

I'd much rather have the top end of our domestic LE have zero political friends whatsoever, than the backing of either side.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[45dotACP]

See... I have a different take on that.

If he doesn't have (m)any friends on either side, he is more likely doing the job.

I'd much rather have the top end of our domestic LE have zero political friends whatsoever, than the backing of either side.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Which is why I'm not surprised.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Drang]

See... I have a different take on that.

If he doesn't have (m)any friends on either side, he is more likely doing the job.

I'd much rather have the top end of our domestic LE have zero political friends whatsoever, than the backing of either side.
I'd agree if he hadn't half-assed it. "Clinton is obviously guilty of a myriad things, but since we can't prove she knew she was breaking all the laws she got briefed on..."

Phooey. Trimmers deserve what they get.

[Bart Carter]

I always wondered why "ignorance of the law is no excuse" didn't apply to those in power. Especially if in Clinton's position she should know the law. She even said that she didn't want anyone looking at her emails.

[voodoo_man]

Watching fox now they are talking about it.

Honestly, I can't see the next director giving Hilda a pass.

[HCountyGuy]

Good riddance, sackless bastard.

Now let's see who replaces him and if they'll do the job right.

[OnionsAndDragons]

I'd agree if he hadn't half-assed it. "Clinton is obviously guilty of a myriad things, but since we can't prove she knew she was breaking all the laws she got briefed on..."

Phooey. Trimmers deserve what they get.

I agree with that general stance that she deserves prosecution.

However, in fairness, Comey basically assured that she would not win the election by his timing and decision to make public the reopening of the investigation.

I'm not a lawyer or a prescient. I can envision a reasonable calculus where prosecuting HRC more likely than not turns out a giant waste of public time and funds. He may have made the distasteful decision of making the most impact with the least waste by tipping the scales against her getting the Oval Office.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ssb]

Part of me thinks this will be one of those rare moments where Trump satisfies both sides of the aisle. The rational part of me realizes that the Dems will spin this as Trump installing a yes-man to head off any investigation of him.

[JHC]

I'd agree if he hadn't half-assed it. "Clinton is obviously guilty of a myriad things, but since we can't prove she knew she was breaking all the laws she got briefed on..."

Phooey. Trimmers deserve what they get.

SCOTUS rulings side with Comey though. There must be intent to harm America. https://warontherocks.com/2016/07/why-intent-not-gross-negligence-is-the-standard-in-clinton-case/

What strikes me as bizarre is for Trump to introduce this controversy which may likely become a damaging scandal.

[voodoo_man]

While I know it's not gana happen but sheriff Clarke would move any LE agency into the right direction.

[blues]

No Comey fan here...but that said I have a feeling that this may end up being one of those poorly timed decisions that will be greatly regretted as time goes by and things begin going downhill.

[HCM]

While I know it's not gana happen but sheriff Clarke would move any LE agency into the right direction.

Remember the FBI is both an LE agency and a counter intel agency. Sheriff Clarke is a hell of a guy but this is a little outside his wheelhouse.

[Sensei]

I agree with that general stance that she deserves prosecution.

However, in fairness, Comey basically assured that she would not win the election by his timing and decision to make public the reopening of the investigation.

I'm not a lawyer or a prescient. I can envision a reasonable calculus where prosecuting HRC more likely than not turns out a giant waste of public time and funds. He may have made the distasteful decision of making the most impact with the least waste by tipping the scales against her getting the Oval Office.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But is it his job to make that decision?

His job is to oversee an agency that investigates possible federal crimes. The evidence gathered by the FBI is then presented to the US Attorney who can impanel a grand jury. That grand jury then weighs the evidence and may return an indictment if they determine there is probable cause that the defendant is guilty.

Thus, it is citizens from the community who determine if someone is indicted - not the FBI Director. The fact that the Attorney General compromised herself in the process in no way changes the law or the Constitution; a deputy AG should take over or Congress can empower an independent prosecutor (requiring new legislation) if they have lost faith in DOJ. Comey's actions in this arena were not only improper, but arguably illegal.

Moreover, Comey's media appearances and public scolding of Clinton was highly improper. Think what you want of Clinton, but none of us would want the FBI airing our dirty laundry if we were not being indicted.

[blues]

But is it his job to make that decision?

His job is to oversee an agency that investigates possible federal crimes. The evidence gathered by the FBI is then presented to the US Attorney who can impanel a grand jury. That grand jury then weighs the evidence and may return an indictment if they determine there is probable cause that the defendant is guilty.

Thus, it is citizens from the community who determine if someone is indicted - not the FBI Director. The fact that the Attorney General compromised herself in the process in no way changes the law or the Constitution; a deputy AG should take over or Congress can empower an independent prosecutor (requiring new legislation) if they have lost faith in DOJ. Comey's actions in this arena were not only improper, but arguably illegal.

Moreover, Comey's media appearances and public scolding of Clinton was highly improper. Think what you want of Clinton, but none of us would want the FBI airing our dirty laundry if we were not being indicted.

Due to the clusterfuck this miasma has been from the beginning, Lynch made sure the debacle would end up in Comey's lap after she recused herself following her unethical (at best) meeting with Bubba. Naturally, Comey took a bad situation and made the absolute worst of it. You couldn't even make this shit up for a direct to video TV movie of the week.

That said, I have a very bad feeling about what will come from this. (And I totally agree with you that Comey not only overstepped but went way beyond the pale with his actions, public and otherwise.)

I'm surprised my head hasn't exploded yet.

[JHC]

Imagine back last Summer if there was no indictment (for the reasons at the link above ) and just silence from Comey? THAT would have been explosive. Comey doesn't care about taking slings and arrows obviously. But he set it up that he took them, not the whole FBI. To me, that's a clue.

[45dotACP]

My thought is that Trump is letting him go because anything he comes across about Trump could be handled in the exact same manner as he handled Clinton's investigation... he's too unpredictable and either campaign would have fired him for just that reason.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[voodoo_man]

Remember the FBI is both an LE agency and a counter intel agency. Sheriff Clarke is a hell of a guy but this is a little outside his wheelhouse.

While I do understand this and my post about Clarke was a bit in cheek-ish, the counter Intel stuff can be run without a director who has experience in that field.

The way the FBI is looked at now they don't need another paper pusher, but someone who had a strong ethical and LE background.

[Drang]

The way the FBI is looked at now they don't need another paper pusher, but someone who had a strong ethical and LE background.

Art Mullen.

[jeep45238]

SCOTUS rulings side with Comey though. There must be intent to harm America. https://warontherocks.com/2016/07/why-intent-not-gross-negligence-is-the-standard-in-clinton-case/

What strikes me as bizarre is for Trump to introduce this controversy which may likely become a damaging scandal.

Every statute dealing with intelligence compromises, at any level, negates awareness of the action. The only time intent matters for this is treason.

My ass would have been in jail for a minimum of 25 years for even a minor amount of what she's done - SAP program and manual transcription between intel networks and the internet are HUGE.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Josh Runkle]

I'm sad. I was a Comey fan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JHC]

Every statute dealing with intelligence compromises, at any level, negates awareness of the action. The only time intent matters for this is treason.

My ass would have been in jail for a minimum of 25 years for even a minor amount of what she's done - SAP program and manual transcription between intel networks and the internet are HUGE.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The linked article is very detailed about the SCOTUS ruling on this junk law from 1917.

There aren't non UCMJ examples that lacked intent.

[HCM]

While I do understand this and my post about Clarke was a bit in cheek-ish, the counter Intel stuff can be run without a director who has experience in that field.

The way the FBI is looked at now they don't need another paper pusher, but someone who had a strong ethical and LE background.

Unfortunately, I don't see that happening. I believe they will get someone who will simply be a tool of Trump and Sessions.

[jeep45238]

The linked article is very detailed about the SCOTUS ruling on this junk law from 1917.

There aren't non UCMJ examples that lacked intent.

Executive orders, federal law, and DoD govern this, and all but dod directly apply to Clinton.

She was an original classifying official for fucks sake - one of the few who decide what is classified at what level, with what caveats/disiminations, and why it's at that level.

Was she guilty of the Espionage act? No, that's intent. Everything else is still illegal and not UCMJ derived. The article was written by someone who apparently hasn't worked in the IC- or has conveniently forgotten what governs these things.

Transcribing from a TS network to the internet can only be done by a human- and that's illegal as hell, intent be damned. Shit, taking it outside of a scif without authority/need is illegal - same with storing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[voodoo_man]

Unfortunately, I don't see that happening. I believe they will get someone who will simply be a tool of Trump and Sessions.

I agree, as much as I'd like to have a self-sufficient director of the nation's largest law enforcement agency, a part of me wants to see certain left leaning persons investigated and brought to grand juries.

[Kevin B.]

There aren't non UCMJ examples that lacked intent.

Intent to mishandle classified information or intent to deliver it to a foreign power?

[farscott]

Every statute dealing with intelligence compromises, at any level, negates awareness of the action. The only time intent matters for this is treason.

My ass would have been in jail for a minimum of 25 years for even a minor amount of what she's done - SAP program and manual transcription between intel networks and the internet are HUGE.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That was in line with what I witnessed. One colleague with a TS clearance accidentally emailed something to another colleague with the same level of clearance but working on a different program (thus, no "need to know"). The sender was arrested and stripped of his clearance for the error, and the recipient was arrested and stripped of his clearance for not reporting what he was sent. I know felony charges were entered for at least one of them. Not sure if charges stuck, but two careers were ruined due to two stupid mistakes.

[LOKNLOD]

SCOTUS rulings side with Comey though. There must be intent to harm America.
.

The dems were trying to put Hillary into the office of president, if that's not a flagrant show of intent to destroy America I don't know what is...

[holmes168]

Sorry- can't feel sorry for the guy- Hillary should have been charged for her mishandling of classified information. LEO's need to be LEO's.

[Grey]

Better appoint a special prosecutor for the Russia probe immediately to try to head off the already downhill shit storm the WH just unleashed.

[trailrunner]

The linked article is very detailed about the SCOTUS ruling on this junk law from 1917.

There aren't non UCMJ examples that lacked intent.

This legal hair splitting is irrelevant. She knew exactly what she was doing, and she deliberately did it. She didn't accidentally leave a classified document on her desk when she was rushing out the door to get in the slug line -- she deliberately directed people to deliberately circumvent the security procedures. Just like she tried to take her blackberry in the scif - the rules were too inconvenient for her, so she wanted to bypass them.

I have signed the forms, and taken the training, and I live with the rules daily. They are a pain, but I'm happy to do my part to be a good American. To anyone with a clearance, it's mind-boggling what she did. As jeep said, if I had done 1/10 of what she had done, I would have lost my job the moment it was discovered, and I'd be in jail right now.

When she wasn't charged, it was a huge injustice to those of us who deal with this. The other blow to us was when all of the information on our clearance applications was hacked by the Chinese. Yeah, that's a different subject, but sometimes us good Americans take it in the bum.

[littlejerry]

Not only did she knowingly violate the law with the server she also had her underlings destoy data after it was subpoenad.

The information available in the public domain should be enough to prosecute if everyone hadn't been granted immunity.

[blues]

The other blow to us was when all of the information on our clearance applications was hacked by the Chinese. Yeah, that's a different subject, but sometimes us good Americans take it in the bum.

Yep, and now they'd like to cut back on the monitoring services that are supposed to help us defend against the repercussions of basically handing over our personnel files.

Back on topic: I know when I still had a TS clearance there was hell to pay if anyone didn't follow the protocols down to the nth degree. Even trying to share info with sister agencies with a need to know was a major pain in the ass, but as you said, we did our part to keep the structure sound.

It still burns me how cavalier Clinton and her minions were in this regard...and still have the nerve to feel "entitled" in the aftermath.

[trailrunner]

Yep, and now they'd like to cut back on the monitoring services that are supposed to help us defend against the repercussions of basically handing over our personnel files.


I think I got three free years with some monitoring service, and I think it expires this summer. BFD. It should have been a lifetime of free monitoring. Not only for me, but for all my family members that were on my SF86.

Of course, shortly after the breach we all had to take extra training on protecting PII.

[blues]

I think I got three free years with some monitoring service, and I think it expires this summer. BFD. It should have been a lifetime of free monitoring. Not only for me, but for all my family members that were on my SF86.

Of course, shortly after the breach we all had to take extra training on protecting PII.

All they've ever notified me about aside from a compromised email account or two from several years ago, are when a so called "sexual predator" is registered in the surrounding area. It's been a huge help. :rolleyes:

[jeep45238]

When she wasn't charged, it was a huge injustice to those of us who deal with this. The other blow to us was when all of the information on our clearance applications was hacked by the Chinese. Yeah, that's a different subject, but sometimes us good Americans take it in the bum.

Twice. My wife and I have both had identity fraud protection for the last several years due to government negligence, paid for by the government. Doesn't make me feel any better knowing the problems and that the same agency is charged with protecting our literary lives.

On the flip side, we get free monthly credit reports and scores, so there's that - I guess.

[blues]

Twice. My wife and I have both had identity fraud protection for the last several years due to government negligence, paid for by the government. Doesn't make me feel any better knowing the problems and that the same agency is charged with protecting our literary lives.

On the flip side, we get free monthly credit reports and scores, so there's that - I guess.

I instituted a freeze at all the credit bureaus. Now, not even the so-called monitors the gov't assigned to track on our behalf can check on it and I prefer it that way. (We have no need to take out loans and a temporary release is easy enough to arrange if need be.)

[Drang]

Art Mullen.

This post inspired by Nick Searcy's Twitter Feed. :cool:


The linked article is very detailed about the SCOTUS ruling on this junk law from 1917.

There aren't non UCMJ examples that lacked intent.

Intent is a factor in espionage.

Not in " hundreds or thousands of counts of egregiously violating dozens of laws and regulations regarding responsible handling of classified material."

[HCM]

I agree, as much as I'd like to have a self-sufficient director of the nation's largest law enforcement agency, a part of me wants to see certain left leaning persons investigated and brought to grand juries.

Which will ultimately be a big waste of time and resources.

[RJ]

Art Mullen.

Yep. :)

Or, how about Trey Gowdy?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[HCM]

Yep. :)

Or, how about Trey Gowdy?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Trey Gordy? Where is the barf emoji ?

[Josh Runkle]

So, some people believe that Comey sucks because he failed to push charges against Clinton when she broke the law?

Let's consider the scenario for a minute: the current president at the time wouldn't make her the Vice President because he was afraid that he might have "an accident" one day. So, fast-forward 8 years; the same president still plays ball with his party. Comey can arrest her, and he and his family will end up "disappeared", and she'll just get a presidential pardon by the guy who plays ball for his party, and it will all be spun as politics, and the media will probably not report the facts, and half of the country will never know what happened, and refuse to believe it when confronted with the truth.

But, Comey's still a bad guy for choosing to live?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jeep45238]

Comeys a bad guy for not doing his job. When you let corrupt bastards turn your decisions by fear and nobody else is taking a stand, and you're the only one in position to put an end to it, yeah, you fit that category to me.

Can't blame him one bit for wanting to live. Blame him for not doing his job-and if those fears are legit, that's more ammunition for his agency to do the job fully, as they're the ones with CONUS as an AOR.

It's like not arresting Capone when you have all the evidence and laws on your side. Do it, take a stand, make an example, be aware of the dangers, and mitigate them - and tack them on in trials if said dangers are real and illegal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[idahojess]

Here's a good article, from the mainstream USA Today no less. (CNN is nuts on this stuff).

The bottom line was that Comey repeatedly made himself the issue. His mandate was to enforce the law fairly and impartially. Instead, he appeared time and again to be gaming the system. A March poll showed that only 17% of Americans had a favorable opinion of Comey.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/05/09/james-comey-fired-donald-trump-fbi-director-column/101488186/

[DMF13]

This legal hair splitting is irrelevant.Only if you don't believe in the rule of law, and the system of government actually laid out in the Constitution of the United States.
I have signed the forms, and taken the training, and I live with the rules daily. They are a pain, but I'm happy to do my part to be a good American. To anyone with a clearance, it's mind-boggling what she did. As jeep said, if I had done 1/10 of what she had done, I would have lost my job the moment it was discovered, and I'd be in jail right now.Same for me, but I'm also aware of the burden of proof in criminal cases, and the relevant caselaw (Gorin v US, 1941 as cited in the article) when it comes to these offenses. The forms and training are the wishful thinking of the various agencies that create them, and do not always translate well to a criminal prosecution.

[Josh Runkle]

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/05/09/cnn-grand-jury-subpoenas-issued-in-russian-collusion-investigation/

Allegations that he was fired in response to subpoenas issued against Trump.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wobblie]

Part of me thinks this will be one of those rare moments where Trump satisfies both sides of the aisle. The rational part of me realizes that the Dems will spin this as Trump installing a yes-man to head off any investigation of him.

This "rational" part doesn't require any spin. Clinton is old news and I'm not sure why people here are fixated on her. This is simply an attempt by the Trump crew to stall the Investigation of the Russian connections to the Trump family business and campaign. Since the Repubs in Congress are corrupt, stupid and running scared it might work.

[fixer]

The dude blew it on HRC's non-indictment.

He basically told the world that if the FBI doesn't think "you meant harm" you can get away with anything.

bullshit.

It is refreshing to see some accountability handed down for once.

[critter]

This "rational" part doesn't require any spin. Clinton is old news and I'm not sure why people here are fixated on her. This is simply an attempt by the Trump crew to stall the Investigation of the Russian connections to the Trump family business and campaign. Since the Repubs in Congress are corrupt, stupid and running scared it might work.

They're fixated because they watched as she lied her ass off to We the People, perjured herself before congress, deliberately set up a means to avoid scrutiny of the Clinton Foundation dealings and FoIA requests, destroyed evidence that was under congressional subpoena, stalled and stymied an investigation (though it was never a real investigation by normal procedural standards), and thus far has gotten away with making millions through pay to play politics. We probably need to go back to the days of Tammany Hall to find a more corrupt money grubbing politician -- who also never accomplished anything noteworthy -- nothing-- other than be at the very center of scandal after scandal ad nauseum her entire legal and political career. Old news? That 'fixation' is not going away any time soon.

[voodoo_man]

Which will ultimately be a big waste of time and resources.

I'll disagree with you.

The higher the profile the more serious the offense, politicians should be spared absolutely no headache for abusing public trust.

[Zincwarrior]

Arguments about HRC are irrelevant. He was fired just a few days after basically admitting the FBI was investigating Trump and Co. for Russia connections. Firing the guy investigating you...bad.

This just insured the House goes Democrat in the next election and Trump is a one term President. There will be continuous calls for a special prosecutor. The People's business will not be done. Leaks will continue about the now dead investigation. once the House goes Democrat every committee in existence-including the Committee on Baldness will launch investigations.

[voodoo_man]

Arguments about HRC are irrelevant. He was fired just a few days after basically admitting the FBI was investigating Trump and Co. for Russia connections. Firing the guy investigating you...bad.

This just insured the House goes Democrat in the next election and Trump is a one term President. There will be continuous calls for a special prosecutor. The People's business will not be done. Leaks will continue about the now dead investigation. once the House goes Democrat every committee in existence-including the Committee on Baldness will launch investigations.

Just like the calls for a special prosecutor for Hilda were ignored and she was a sure thing for the election?

Sorry, he's been fulfilling campaign promises and he's not done yet.

[JHC]

This legal hair splitting is irrelevant. She knew exactly what she was doing, and she deliberately did it. She didn't accidentally leave a classified document on her desk when she was rushing out the door to get in the slug line -- she deliberately directed people to deliberately circumvent the security procedures. Just like she tried to take her blackberry in the scif - the rules were too inconvenient for her, so she wanted to bypass them.

I have signed the forms, and taken the training, and I live with the rules daily. They are a pain, but I'm happy to do my part to be a good American. To anyone with a clearance, it's mind-boggling what she did. As jeep said, if I had done 1/10 of what she had done, I would have lost my job the moment it was discovered, and I'd be in jail right now.

When she wasn't charged, it was a huge injustice to those of us who deal with this. The other blow to us was when all of the information on our clearance applications was hacked by the Chinese. Yeah, that's a different subject, but sometimes us good Americans take it in the bum.

I would have loved to see her hung. But hair splitting is relevant in world of the law isn't it? I'm not aware of what other laws would have jailed a civilian besides The Espionage Act of 1917. I've only found consensus that this was the law in question and what she was investigated regarding. I get it that plenty of regulations would get someone fired and security clearances revoked. Comey noted the same in his June explanation.

From the linked analysis, it seemed clear via SCOTUS:

"Justice Stanley Reed wrote the majority opinion and disagreed that the law was unconstitutionally vague, but only on the very narrow grounds that the law required “intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States.” Only because the court read the law to require scienter, or bad faith, before a conviction could be sustained was the law constitutional. Otherwise, it would be too difficult for a defendant to know when exactly material related to the national defense. The court made clear that if the law criminalized the simple mishandling of classified information, it would not survive constitutional scrutiny, writing:

The sections are not simple prohibitions against obtaining or delivering to foreign powers information… relating to national defense. If this were the language, it would need to be tested by the inquiry as to whether it had double meaning or forced anyone, at his peril, to speculate as to whether certain actions violated the statute.

In other words, the defendant had to intend for his conduct to benefit a foreign power for his actions to violate 793(f)."

[JHC]

Arguments about HRC are irrelevant. He was fired just a few days after basically admitting the FBI was investigating Trump and Co. for Russia connections. Firing the guy investigating you...bad.

This just insured the House goes Democrat in the next election and Trump is a one term President. There will be continuous calls for a special prosecutor. The People's business will not be done. Leaks will continue about the now dead investigation. once the House goes Democrat every committee in existence-including the Committee on Baldness will launch investigations.

Yes Comey's merits and demerits are "the last war". How Trump is going to clean this up now I have no idea. I can't imagine political advisors signing off on this at this time.

[JHC]

This post inspired by Nick Searcy's Twitter Feed. :cool:



Intent is a factor in espionage.

Not in " hundreds or thousands of counts of egregiously violating dozens of laws and regulations regarding responsible handling of classified material."

OK. I just haven't seen anyone from Andrew McCarthy on one end to my linked resource on the other reference any other laws that would jail a civilian in this circumstance. Fired? Yes. Security clearance revoked? Yes. Which Comey noted in his June explanation.

It seems to me that I wanted something the law was not built to deliver with jail time.

[critter]

Arguments about HRC are irrelevant. He was fired just a few days after basically admitting the FBI was investigating Trump and Co. for Russia connections. Firing the guy investigating you...bad.

This just insured the House goes Democrat in the next election and Trump is a one term President. There will be continuous calls for a special prosecutor. The People's business will not be done. Leaks will continue about the now dead investigation. once the House goes Democrat every committee in existence-including the Committee on Baldness will launch investigations.

That may be true, I have no idea at this point. The fact at hand, however, is that a former Obama appointee, non political Deputy Attorney General - approved by the senate 94-6 (or 96-4 can't remember the numbers) - laid out the case (and 'letter') for Comey's termination. Did Trump 'decree' that? Perhaps, but highly unlikely. The Dems have gone utterly batshit insane over losing the election. They're continuing farther down that path into new levels of insanity. I doubt they'll win anything outside of their hard core conclaves of nutbaggery. I'm not a Repub either. Both sides would cause Jefferson to shit fairies and call for another Revolution at how they've usurped our supreme law -- but the Dems have lost any cohesion to a semblance of reality and won't regain anything until they rid themselves of the current crop of nutbaggified asshats.

[Zincwarrior]

but the Dems have lost any cohesion to a semblance of reality and won't regain anything until they rid themselves of the current crop of nutbaggified asshats.

I heard the Democrats saying similar things in the last decade. Yet here we are.

[critter]

I heard the Democrats saying similar things in the last decade. Yet here we are.

touche! (accent inferred) ;-) one thing is certain, we do live in an interesting and ridiculous political time.

[Josh Runkle]

Sorry, he's been fulfilling campaign promises and he's not done yet.

Lol. Wut?

Pretty easy to say he's not finished when the only thing he's done is appoint a Supreme Court Justice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chance]

With Lindsey Graham wanting to investigate Trump's business dealings with Russia, it'll be interesting to see who Trump picks. Probably won't matter if a special prosecutor is involved.


The other blow to us was when all of the information on our clearance applications was hacked by the Chinese.

It wasn't "hacked," it was literally given. I always make that distinction to emphasize how extraordinarily incompetent OPM was.

[OnionsAndDragons]

Just like the calls for a special prosecutor for Hilda were ignored and she was a sure thing for the election?

Sorry, he's been fulfilling campaign promises and he's not done yet.

I love you, VDM; but I think you are making a false assumption that campaign promises are why Trump won in the first place.

I'm fairly well convinced at this point that he won for 2 major reasons:

1) Continued FBI investigation into HRCs violations of security protocol and other illegal behaviors to cover up said.

2) Enough people that would never vote for a person like Trump under any remotely normal circumstances (but would not vote HRC) , were quite happy to use him like a dagger aimed at the heart of the elitist political class.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Grey]

Right or wrong in the firing the way it was done and the subsequent fuck ups is a colossal disaster. 2018 is going to be a very interesting year.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[Josh Runkle]

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/09/us/politics/trump-fbi-investigation-nixon.html?_r=0&referer=

"In Trump’s Firing of James Comey, Echoes of Watergate"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Josh Runkle]

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/10/comey-firing-trump-russia-238192?cid=apn

"Behind Comey’s firing: An enraged Trump, fuming about Russia"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JHC]

This is an interesting read on criminal statutes re classified information and the application of same. Chock full of recent examples.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41404.pdf

[Zincwarrior]

Right or wrong in the firing the way it was done and the subsequent fuck ups is a colossal disaster. 2018 is going to be a very interesting year.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Oh yea. WSJ is positing this may delay tax legislation in a big way. I think any meaningful legislation of anything is dead.

[voodoo_man]

Lol. Wut?

Pretty easy to say he's not finished when the only thing he's done is appoint a Supreme Court Justice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I love you, VDM; but I think you are making a false assumption that campaign promises are why Trump won in the first place.

I'm fairly well convinced at this point that he won for 2 major reasons:

1) Continued FBI investigation into HRCs violations of security protocol and other illegal behaviors to cover up said.

2) Enough people that would never vote for a person like Trump under any remotely normal circumstances (but would not vote HRC) , were quite happy to use him like a dagger aimed at the heart of the elitist political class.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Looks like you guys have all the answers.

Who am I to argue?

[blues]

All I've got to say is the following:

The White House, Congress and way too much of the Executive Branch at the highest admin levels is peopled with self-interested dirtbags who don't appear to care in the least about the United States, the American people, the Constitution, the rule of law or much else beyond furthering their own interests and lining their pockets. It would be laughable if it wasn't so maddening and sad.

They don't even make much of an attempt to mask this behavior as we've become so bombarded by the "news" of such on a daily basis that we've become numb to it and paralyzed by its enormity.

Trump, his daughter, son-in-law, their closest advisers and confidantes are not draining the swamp, they're filling it with different, mutant, resistant creatures and betting the American people are too stupid, lazy or a combination of both to do anything about it but watch the antics on TV and then get back to the latest episode of their favorite zombie show.

Anyone who can't see the corruption and cancer in Washington (and state and local gov't) needs to take the blinders off and stop acting like a minion.

To say I'm thoroughly disgusted with Dems, Republicans and special interests pretending to be interested in the welfare of the United States would be the grossest of understatements.

Thanks for letting me vent.

American Lives Matter!!! (at least they used to.)

[Drang]

Administration: Comey fired because of handling of Clinton email investigation | Power Line (http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/05/administration-comey-fired-because-of-handling-of-clinton-email-investigation.php)

The reason the Trump administration is giving for the firing of James Comey is that the newly confirmed Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein recommended it. Upon taking office, Rosenstein reviewed the matter of Comey’s fitness and concluded that he needed to go.
Rosenstein states his reasoning for this conclusion in a memo to Attorney General Jeff Sessions. You can read the memo here (https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3711113/Comey-White-House-DOJ-DAG.pdf), along with Sessions’ letter to President Trump and Trump’s letter of discharge to Comey.
Rosenstein says Comey needed to go because he mishandled the email investigation of Hillary Clinton and then continued to defend his conduct, most notably in recent congressional testimony. Rosenstein says Comey was wrong to “usurp” the Attorney General’s authority and announce that Clinton wouldn’t be prosecuted and wrong to hold a press conference in which he released derogatory information about Clinton.


I find it hilarious that people who wanted Comey's head three days ago because he (allegedly) cost Clinton the election are now crying about how horrible it is that he's been shit-canned.
Instapundit » Blog Archive » MICHAEL GOODWIN: Why James Comey had to go. The suddenly-former FBI boss was long cavalier about … (https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/264553/)

The suddenly-former FBI boss was long cavalier about making enemies among both Democrats and Republicans, as if going rogue repeatedly proved his rectitude. On occasion it did, but Comey increasingly wore his self-righteousness on his sleeve, confident he was too big to fire.
That was his fatal mistake. And it’s why Trump made the right decision to show him the door.
Comey’s power-grabbing arrogance is why I called him “J. Edgar Comey” two months ago. His willingness to play politics, while insisting he was above it all, smacked of Washington at its worst. He was the keeper of secrets, until they served his purpose.
As such, the president did to Comey what no president had the courage to do to J. Edgar Hoover. Five presidents wanted to fire Hoover, with Harry Truman accusing him of running a police state and of blackmail. But all were afraid of Hoover, so he died in office.
Trump acted before Comey could get that kind of lifetime protection, which has no place in American democracy. At our best, we are a nation of laws, not of people who accumulate power and ruthlessly wield it without accountability.
The president didn’t have just one good reason to act. He had a choice among many.

Basically, Comey didn't have the confidence of th President, the Attorney General, or, RUMINT has it, FBI agents. The only mistake Trump made was in keeping Comey on past January 20.

[Zincwarrior]

Administration: Comey fired because of handling of Clinton email investigation | Power Line (http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/05/administration-comey-fired-because-of-handling-of-clinton-email-investigation.php)

I find it hilarious that people who wanted Comey's head three days ago because he (allegedly) cost Clinton the election are now crying about how horrible it is that he's been shit-canned.
Instapundit » Blog Archive » MICHAEL GOODWIN: Why James Comey had to go. The suddenly-former FBI boss was long cavalier about … (https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/264553/)


Basically, Comey didn't have the confidence of th President, the Attorney General, or, RUMINT has it, FBI agents. The only mistake Trump made was in keeping Comey on past January 20.

[/INDENT]

Its interesting that this occurred the same day as its being reported a grand jury has approved subpoenas for Flynn aides related to the Russia thing.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/grand-jury-fbi-russia/index.html

[Grey]

Administration: Comey fired because of handling of Clinton email investigation | Power Line (http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/05/administration-comey-fired-because-of-handling-of-clinton-email-investigation.php)

I find it hilarious that people who wanted Comey's head three days ago because he (allegedly) cost Clinton the election are now crying about how horrible it is that he's been shit-canned.
Instapundit » Blog Archive » MICHAEL GOODWIN: Why James Comey had to go. The suddenly-former FBI boss was long cavalier about … (https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/264553/)


Basically, Comey didn't have the confidence of th President, the Attorney General, or, RUMINT has it, FBI agents. The only mistake Trump made was in keeping Comey on past January 20.

[/INDENT]
And on the other side you have leaks coming out that Trump was mad about the Russia investigstion. I doubt trump even knows who Hoover was.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[Bart Carter]

Only Comey was fired. Not the other 35 thousand in the FBI that are still there. They have not been stopped from continuing investigations into Russia.

[RoyGBiv]

Comey had to go. Because Clinton.
Lay out the evidence for espionage, publicly. A crime that does not require intent. Then tell us she shouldn't be prosecuted because there was no intent.
Either you are the Top Cop, or you are a political cop out. If you are the Top Cop, have some backbone, otherwise, get lost.

I'm still waiting for HRC to be prosecuted. I know... snowball/hell... but I'm still waiting.

[Grey]

Only Comey was fired. Not the other 35 thousand in the FBI that are still there. They have not been stopped from continuing investigations into Russia.
That's one way to look at it until someone replaces him and tells them to stop investigating.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[hufnagel]

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/225587/trump-american-press

An article I read a while back, and bookmarked. Take it as you will.

[Zincwarrior]

Comey had to go. Because Clinton.
Lay out the evidence for espionage, publicly. A crime that does not require intent. Then tell us she shouldn't be prosecuted because there was no intent.
Either you are the Top Cop, or you are a political cop out. If you are the Top Cop, have some backbone, otherwise, get lost.

I'm still waiting for HRC to be prosecuted. I know... snowball/hell... but I'm still waiting.

If that was true it wouldn't have occurred on the same day prosecutors subpoena Flynn's associates for all their financial records, but when Trump first took power-which would have been a good move. In the timeline of "where there's smoke there's fire" I think we're starting to see some of the burning embers in the smoke.

Its ok, I'm sure he'll put Ivanka in charge and she'll get to the bottom of it.

[ssb]

This "rational" part doesn't require any spin. Clinton is old news and I'm not sure why people here are fixated on her. This is simply an attempt by the Trump crew to stall the Investigation of the Russian connections to the Trump family business and campaign. Since the Repubs in Congress are corrupt, stupid and running scared it might work.

And yet, despite all these media kids running around acting like they're *this* close to breaking Watergate v2, not one of them has produced anything other than coincidental timing. Lots of inferences being made today, drawn from rather little information.

[Zincwarrior]

And yet, despite all these media kids running around acting like they're *this* close to breaking Watergate v2, not one of them has produced anything other than coincidental timing. Lots of inferences being made today, drawn from rather little information.

Turn it around. If President H Clinton fired Comey shortly after he refused to comment on whether she was being investigated, and Huma was subpoened, you'd be losing your mind.

[ssb]

Turn it around. If President H Clinton fired Comey shortly after he refused to comment on whether she was being investigated, and Huma was subpoened, you'd be losing your mind.

Even if that were a good method of arguing against my point -- I don't think it is -- that doesn't change the fact that there's very little information available to base the current speculations on. CNN's quite literally running articles based entirely around the speculation that Comey discovered some new piece of information and that led to the firing.

Regarding Comey's refusal to disclose to Congress whether Trump was being investigated, you should look at the context of that statement. Sen. Blumenthal attempted to get Comey on record as saying whether Trump or members of the Trump campaign were definitively under investigation. Comey refused all attempts. He did note, however, that he had provided a list of Americans the FBI considered of interest to the investigation -- to the top D and R on the committee. Somebody has a pretty key piece of missing information here, and it isn't CNN.

[Palmguy]

I would have loved to see her hung. But hair splitting is relevant in world of the law isn't it? I'm not aware of what other laws would have jailed a civilian besides The Espionage Act of 1917. I've only found consensus that this was the law in question and what she was investigated regarding. I get it that plenty of regulations would get someone fired and security clearances revoked. Comey noted the same in his June explanation.

From the linked analysis, it seemed clear via SCOTUS:

"Justice Stanley Reed wrote the majority opinion and disagreed that the law was unconstitutionally vague, but only on the very narrow grounds that the law required “intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States.” Only because the court read the law to require scienter, or bad faith, before a conviction could be sustained was the law constitutional. Otherwise, it would be too difficult for a defendant to know when exactly material related to the national defense. The court made clear that if the law criminalized the simple mishandling of classified information, it would not survive constitutional scrutiny, writing:

The sections are not simple prohibitions against obtaining or delivering to foreign powers information… relating to national defense. If this were the language, it would need to be tested by the inquiry as to whether it had double meaning or forced anyone, at his peril, to speculate as to whether certain actions violated the statute.

In other words, the defendant had to intend for his conduct to benefit a foreign power for his actions to violate 793(f)."

The link that you keep citing is not authoritative. The author is conflating several issues.

First, and absolutely most importantly, the defendants in Gorin weren't charged with violating 18 USC 793(f). The sections that the defendants were charged with are listed at the end of this post (quoted from the SCOTUS decision). The findings of the court in this case don't relate to 18 USC 793(f).

Leaving aside the issues inherent to attributing the findings of the court in Gorin to 18 USC 793(f); when they applied to 50 USC 31, 32, and 34....

The existence of both 793(e) and 793(f) is pretty basic evidence that there is an intentional legislative distinction between intent and gross negligence and both represent criminal behavior with respect to mishandling classified information. Additionally, it is nonsensical to assert that, in the linked author's words, "the defendant had to intend for his conduct to benefit..." to constitute a violation in a definitionally non-intentional action.


'Title 1. Espionage. Section 1. That (a) whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over, or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, coaling station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or signal station, building, office, or other place connected with the national defense, * * * or any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time of war are being made, prepared, repaired, or stored * * *; or (b) whoever for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts, or induces or aids another to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blue print, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense; * * * shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000, or by imprisonment for not more than two years, or both.

'Sec. 2. (a) Whoever, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to, or aids or induces another to, communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign government, or to any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, or to any representative, officer, agent, employee, subject, or citizen thereof, either directly or indirectly, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blue print, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than twenty years: Provided, That whoever shall violate the provisions of subsection (a) of this section in time of war shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for not more than thirty years; and (b) whoever, in time of war, with intent that the same shall be communicated to the enemy, shall collect, record, publish, or communicate, or attempt to elicit any information with respect to the movement, numbers, description, condition, or disposition of any of the armed forces, ships, aircraft, or war materials of the United States, or with respect to the plans or conduct, or supposed plans or conduct of any naval or military operations, or with respect to any works or measures undertaken for or connected with, or intended for the fortification or defense of any place, or any other information relating to the public defense, which might be useful to the enemy, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for not more than thirty years.

'Sec. 4. If two or more persons conspire to violate the provisions of sections two or three of this title, and one or more of such persons does any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as in said sections provided in the case of the doing of the act the accomplishment of which is the object of such conspiracy. * * *'

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Oh yea. WSJ is positing this may delay tax legislation in a big way. I think any meaningful legislation of anything is dead.

To veer away from this decision, I'm interested in what Trump and the GOP will do on real issues. I think anyone who thought that there were would be legislative action on RKBA issues will be sadly disappointed. As I said before, there was just bluster on the issue before the election but nothing proactive will be done.

The focus should be on the economy and defending the country. All this theater just serves to keep the political rich classes of the GOP and Democrats in their plush offices and cushy jobs. Two corrupt candidates for president - neither of which will do much.

For my personal focus issue of gun rights - I knew the Dems would denounce them. Would they do anything on the Federal level besides bluster? Hard to say. Obama didn't. The Republicans blusters for them but leaped into action on health care in an incompetent cluster fuck that boggles the mind. I don't expect anything from them on the 2nd Amend.

Oh, well - all of a sudden Gorsuch will lead the court to overturn the lower court state bans and other gun laws - IN YOUR DREAMS.

The government is a total clown college.

[txdpd]

If Donald Trump came up with a solution to end world hunger, the only thing we would hear about is how he's such a horrible person for making kids in Ethiopa fat.

IMO Comey needed to go. The timing could have been better, but it never would have been the right time.

[JHC]

The link that you keep citing is not authoritative. The author is conflating several issues.

First, and absolutely most importantly, the defendants in Gorin weren't charged with violating 18 USC 793(f). The sections that the defendants were charged with are listed at the end of this post (quoted from the SCOTUS decision). The findings of the court in this case don't relate to 18 USC 793(f).

Leaving aside the issues inherent to attributing the findings of the court in Gorin to 18 USC 793(f); when they applied to 50 USC 31, 32, and 34....

The existence of both 793(e) and 793(f) is pretty basic evidence that there is an intentional legislative distinction between intent and gross negligence and both represent criminal behavior with respect to mishandling classified information. Additionally, it is nonsensical to assert that, in the linked author's words, "the defendant had to intend for his conduct to benefit..." to constitute a violation in a definitionally non-intentional action.

Interesting stuff. I'm still digesting this: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41404.pdf

I'd prefer to keep studying it rather than expect law by common sense, since they don't always overlap. So far I'm seeing a lot of "knowingly disclose to . . ." stuff across multiple statutes.

[voodoo_man]

https://twitter.com/StockMonsterUSA/status/859838922548846592/video/1


KABOOM!!! Lynch Stated: "She would do WHATEVER it took to PREVENT Charges frm being brought against Hillary."

Burn her down.

[Grey]

If Donald Trump came up with a solution to end world hunger, the only thing we would hear about is how he's such a horrible person for making kids in Ethiopa fat.

IMO Comey needed to go. The timing could have been better, but it never would have been the right time.
Probably because that solution would of involved selling them Trump steaks and vodka.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[RoyGBiv]

If that was true it wouldn't have occurred on the same day prosecutors subpoena Flynn's associates for all their financial records, but when Trump first took power-which would have been a good move. In the timeline of "where there's smoke there's fire" I think we're starting to see some of the burning embers in the smoke.

Its ok, I'm sure he'll put Ivanka in charge and she'll get to the bottom of it.
I'm certain that Comeys motivations to further investigate Flynn/Trump/Russians have absolutely zero to do with politics. So, you must be right. /sarc

[Zincwarrior]

I'm certain that Comeys motivations to further investigate Flynn/Trump/Russians have absolutely zero to do with politics. So, you must be right. /sarc

As a grand jury felt there was sufficient cause to issue the search warrants your point is not relevant.

[RoyGBiv]

As a grand jury felt there was sufficient cause to issue the search warrants your point is not relevant.

The same GJ that handed down the indictments against HRC, I suppose?

[Zincwarrior]

The same GJ that handed down the indictments against HRC, I suppose?

Its 2017. A different GJ would have been impaneled regardless of whatever you're trying to impugn.
Had a GJ handed down search warrants on HRC I would be supportive of that as well.

[Palmguy]

Interesting stuff. I'm still digesting this: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41404.pdf

I'd prefer to keep studying it rather than expect law by common sense, since they don't always overlap. So far I'm seeing a lot of "knowingly disclose to . . ." stuff across multiple statutes.

Understood, and I don't necessarily disagree.....that said, if we're at the point where intent is required for a violation of 793(f) (especially when considering the entirety of section 793), then words have absolutely no meaning anymore about anything.

The previously linked article made mention of [former AUSA] Andrew McCarthy....I'd recommend reading him on this issue.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437560/fbi-director-comeys-suggestion-congresss-gross-negligence-statute-invalid
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447318/james-comey-fbi-director-hillary-clinton-no-criminal-intent-email-classified-information

[Hambo]

In my cynical and distrustful view of all politics and politicians, I think it was sleight of hand.

On Monday Trump tweeted several times during or after Yates' testimony, so he was obviously glued to the tube. The testimony left a lingering question about why she would have been ignored. Then Tuesday Trump fired Comey, and voila, redirected all media coverage to that.

[RoyGBiv]

Its 2017. A different GJ would have been impaneled regardless of whatever you're trying to impugn.
Had a GJ handed down search warrants on HRC I would be supportive of that as well.

I'm trying to infer that with FAR more evidence in the public domain, including a very clear, concise list of felonies laid out against HRC by Comey, nobody ever empaneled a GJ to hear charges against HRC, but now we have a GJ to hand down warrants to investigate Trump/Flynn. And I'm still certain that there's no politics in play in Comeys behavior. (last part /sarc).

Maybe there's fire somewhere on the Trump/Flynn/Russia line of inquiry. Certainly possible. But Comey is spoiled goods. The fucking guy laid out an indictment, clear as day, against HRC, then failed to empanel (or even recommend that one be empaneled) a GJ to consider charges. WTF. Is that what a Top Cop does?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2071

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

Skip to 9:30 in video below... or watch the whole thing.

"For example, 7 email chains concerned matters that were TS/SAP at the time they were sent or received. Those chains involved Sec Clinton both sending emails about those matters and receiving emails about those same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Sec Clintons position, or in the position of those whom she was corresponding about those matters should have know that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation....." and it goes on from there...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neoaIY_us3s

If you're gonna employ a double standard, and come down heavy on the sitting President after failing to do so on ex Sec State, candidate Clinton, anyone surprised or butthurt that Comey got fired isn't firing on all cylinders. Comey bet on HRC winning the election, and lost. I'd have fired him on January 20th.

[Zincwarrior]

Irrelevant. HRC is not in office nor did she fire him. Trump fired the person who's group is investigating him. Thats a major conflict of interest and when the Democrats retake the House in 2018, a potential charge for impeachment. Its unprecedented to have a politician fire the person investigating them (ok obviously anything is possible in Illinois and Louisiana, but that just proves the point).

An independent prosecutor is almost mandatory now. This is going to snowball on a geometric scale, daily.

[blues]

If Donald Trump came up with a solution to end world hunger, the only thing we would hear about is how he's such a horrible person for making kids in Ethiopa fat.



Really? Forget Comey. This guy is checking off all the boxes so far? I must be living on a different planet or have old school standards that are no longer relevant in today's world of "relative" values.

Facts problematic? No problem...provide alternative facts. News is negative? No problem, it's fake news. Ethics? Nepotism? What's ethics? We gotta make a living. The truth is a twitter feed.

[JHC]

Understood, and I don't necessarily disagree.....that said, if we're at the point where intent is required for a violation of 793(f) (especially when considering the entirety of section 793), then words have absolutely no meaning anymore about anything.

The previously linked article made mention of [former AUSA] Andrew McCarthy....I'd recommend reading him on this issue.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437560/fbi-director-comeys-suggestion-congresss-gross-negligence-statute-invalid
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447318/james-comey-fbi-director-hillary-clinton-no-criminal-intent-email-classified-information

I've read Andrew's stuff on this. I never saw him take on Gorin directly and not squaring the quote from the majority opinion. And legal analysis that jives with my first linked piece is not too hard to find.

Words don't have any meaning anymore was my conclusion reading this last Summer.

[NEPAKevin]

I can see the catch-22 with HRC while she was a candidate, but his excuse for not going after Huma for sending classified information to Carlos Danger's sticky laptop for all intents and purposes was that she was stupid? If cops didn't charge stupid criminals, the jails would be empty.

[Zincwarrior]

I can see the catch-22 with HRC while she was a candidate, but his excuse for not going after Huma for all intents and purposes was that she was stupid? If cops didn't charge stupid criminals, the jails would be empty.

Agreed. Everything around that has been mishandled. But you can't fire the guy now that he's investigating Trump, not unless there is another special prosecutor in some form.

[Josh Runkle]

Agreed. Everything around that has been mishandled. But you can't fire the guy now that he's investigating Trump, not unless there is another special prosecutor in some form.

Bingo. And Trump needs to learn to stop telegraphing his moves on Twitter.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170510/70fe66265dd0e0fe56e5243505df445a.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NEPAKevin]

Agreed. Everything around that has been mishandled. But you can't fire the guy now that he's investigating Trump, not unless there is another special prosecutor in some form.

I'm pretty sure that if the quarterback admits to choking in the last game, he doesn't have to be kept on the team just because its a new game. The timing is lousy, but the sooner you drop the ax, the sooner the head drops into the basket and the body stops twitching.

[Zincwarrior]

I'm pretty sure that if the quarterback admits to choking in the last game, he doesn't have to be kept on the team just because its a new game. The timing is lousy, but the sooner you drop the ax, the sooner the head drops into the basket and the body stops twitching.

In this instance the quarterback sucks but he's found evidence the coach maybe taking bribes from the owner of the other team, and then gets wacked by the coach.
This is not hard. Conflict of interest is a thing. Thats why the FBI director has a 10 year set term. Sure if you put in a special prosecutor, but that hasn't happened.

[Serpico1985]

Respectfully, two wrongs don't make a right. Comey majorly dropped the ball with Hildog, no doubt. He should have been fired for it, no doubt. But that issue clearly has nothing to do with why Trump fired him. Reasons matter folks. It is unmistakably clear that he fired Comey because he is worried/unsatisfied/angry/whatever about the Russian investigation. If you can't see that your blind. I reluctantly supported Trump and this stuff is turning my stomach.

[critter]

In this instance the quarterback sucks but he's found evidence the coach maybe taking bribes from the owner of the other team, and then gets wacked by the coach.
This is not hard. Conflict of interest is a thing. Thats why the FBI director has a 10 year set term. Sure if you put in a special prosecutor, but that hasn't happened.

This 'Russia' connection has been a blame shifting fishing expedition from day one -- from hacking the election (sorry, with Wiki Vault Seven, even were that the case, no one can trust it wasn't the CIA framing the Russkies.. they shot off their own foot there) to all sorts of nefarious alleged ties. I'll take the allegations of 'bribery' and 'conflict of interest' more seriously after those jackasses go after the Clinton foundation. Handle the criminality in the order in which it was received. ;-) Until that time, I think the most expedient and logical course of action is to just build the damn wall. Not on the southern border, but around D.C.... for any who try to escape, simply toss them back over... then let the Navy have at it with their tomahawks. The legitimacy of government would increase a thousand fold overnight.

[Bart Carter]

One, after all this time and after all the investigation, no one has seen one piece of evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia. Even the Democratic politicos admit that.

Two, the firing of Comey does not stop any current or future investigations.

So, why all the hand wringing about the firing being so nefarious? It is just left-wing crap that is always spewed because the left has nothing to keep them relevant.

[RoyGBiv]

Irrelevant. HRC is not in office nor did she fire him. Trump fired the person who's group is investigating him. Thats a major conflict of interest and when the Democrats retake the House in 2018, a potential charge for impeachment. Its unprecedented to have a politician fire the person investigating them (ok obviously anything is possible in Illinois and Louisiana, but that just proves the point).

An independent prosecutor is almost mandatory now. This is going to snowball on a geometric scale, daily.

Unfortunately, the precedent is to have an AG and a Top COP willing to collude and obfuscate in order to prevent a real investigation. Unfortunately.

I'd like to see an independent investigator on the Russia/Flynn thing but all of it is politics.

I'll let you have the last word. Peace.

[critter]

Respectfully, two wrongs don't make a right. Comey majorly dropped the ball with Hildog, no doubt. He should have been fired for it, no doubt. But that issue clearly has nothing to do with why Trump fired him. Reasons matter folks. It is unmistakably clear that he fired Comey because he is worried/unsatisfied/angry/whatever about the Russian investigation. If you can't see that your blind. I reluctantly supported Trump and this stuff is turning my stomach.

I would plainly see it were that actually the case. The case for terminating Comey, again, came from a former Obama appointee -- the nonpartisan DAG who was overwhelmingly approved by both parties in the senate.

Deputy Attorney General’s Memo Breaks Down Case Against Comey (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/09/us/politics/comey-fbi-memo-rod-rosenstein.html?_r=0)

*Why* did the dag want rid of Comey? Did he decide to suddenly go 'all in' for Trump? Maybe, but I'm not buying it.

[Serpico1985]

I think it's nieve to think that just because that's the reason Trump sighted that that is the actual reason. Come on, look at all the indications that it wasn't over hildog:

1) Trump is angry over Russian investigation as evidenced by that bizarre line in the firing letter saying "While I greatly appreciate you informing me, on three separate occasions, that I am not under investigation,..."

2) Trump has been using twitter to bash the investigation.

3) It took the White House some 18 days to decide to fire Flynn after being informed by acting attorney general Sally Yates that Flynn had been compromised by the Russians. It took the White House five seconds to fire Comey after receiving a letter from Rosenstein.

4) This was a spur of the moment thing as evidenced by the unpreparedness of his staff.

5) Trump praised Comey for the October 28th letter and many times since. It's simply crazy to believe he suddenly had a change of heart.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/16274/here-are-5-pieces-evidence-trump-didnt-fire-comey-ben-shapiro

[critter]

I'm not asserting that it isn't a convenient coincidence. Here's the thing: this has been not a witch hunt but a windmill hunt. The batshit dems have been firing 'Impeachment' spit wads in every direction since election night hoping that something will stick somewhere... anywhere. It's naive to think this is anything more than yet another spit wad on a prayer -- until actual evidence is provided.

I love speculating as much as anyone, but so far we've had an entire political party and all of its supporters crying wolf, er, I mean 'Literally Hitler', and "WAAAAAHHH the Russians did it", "Misogyny! We would have won were it not for misogyny!", "We'd have won were it not for Comey.... WAAAhHHHHHhhhHH Comey's helping Trump..." every hour of every day until the day their scapegoat is fired and then? "AuUUGH! The utter destruction of our justice system! It's the Judicial Apocalypse!"

We'll see where it goes. IF there is actual evidence, the case will continue forward.

[Palmguy]

I've read Andrew's stuff on this. I never saw him take on Gorin directly and not squaring the quote from the majority opinion. And legal analysis that jives with my first linked piece is not too hard to find.

Words don't have any meaning anymore was my conclusion reading this last Summer.

There's nothing to take on with respect to Gorin; as I mentioned in my previous post, the gross negligence statute was not at issue in that case. The section of the opinion you're referring to defers to the plain language of the statute and the clear legislative intent. The cited statutes (the ones that the defendants were convicted of) explicitly require intent. Another statute (now 793(f)) explicitly doesn't require intent. Legal analysis that makes the case that Gorin means 793(f) requires intent in a similar manner (like that of Dan Abrams, for instance) misses the fundamental issue that gross negligence was irrelevant in Gorin.

[GardoneVT]

When the POTUS blatantly fires someone at the station of former Director Comey,it's not an administrative action- it is a mesaage to every tenured public official in DC.

Time will tell if it was received and acknowledged as such.

[Drang]

it is a mesaage to every tenured public official in DC.

How, exactly, does "tenure" work for political appointees?

[HCM]

16488

[idahojess]

Good letter from Comey:

To all:

I have long believed that a President can fire an FBI Director for any reason, or for no reason at all. I'm not going to spend time on the decision or the way it was executed. I hope you won't either. It is done, and I will be fine, although I will miss you and the mission deeply.

I have said to you before that, in times of turbulence, the American people should see the FBI as a rock of competence, honesty, and independence. What makes leaving the FBI hard is the nature and quality of its people, who together make it that rock for America.

It is very hard to leave a group of people who are committed only to doing the right thing. My hope is that you will continue to live our values and the mission of protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution.

If you do that, you too will be sad when you leave, and the American people will be safer.

Working with you has been one of the great joys of my life. Thank you for that gift.

Jim Comey

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/05/10/james-comey-fbi-letter-president-trump-firing/101534528/

[Serpico1985]

I think if nothing else this goes to show just how incompetent Trump and his people are. I'm not convinced there was any collusion between Trump and his campaign and Russia. At this point there has been zero evidence to show that. So the idea that he's trying to stop the investigation into him and his people, knowing they didn't do anything wrong, doesn't quite fit.

One thing we have seen from Trump is that he has a temper and makes spur of the moment, knee-jerk reactions and apparently doesn't have anyone around him to tell him "that's stupid" or "don't do that", or "that will look really really bad". He simply doesn't have patience. So I think it's perfectly plausible and even likely (absent actual evidence of collusion), that Trump simply wanted his way and is tried to hearing about the Trump-Russia investigation, which he likely knows isn't going anywhere, and fired Comey for that reason. It's still not good, but it's not as nefarious as everyone is making it out to be. If this is true, then it proves just how completely incompetent the Trump Admin is because it makes this whole thing look 10 times worse than it actually is.

[TGS]

I think if nothing else this goes to show just how incompetent Trump and his people are. I'm not convinced there was any collusion between Trump and his campaign and Russia. At this point there has been zero evidence to show that. So the idea that he's trying to stop the investigation into him and his people, knowing they didn't do anything wrong, doesn't quite fit.

Well......of course there wouldn't be evidence yet. Evidence is usually found by an investigation, not the other way around.....

...so stopping an investigation before any evidence comes to light is exactly what "would fit."

A lack of evidence during an investigation is also not proof that they "didn't do anything wrong".

I'm not taking sides or disagreeing with other points in your post, though.

[Hambo]

it is a mesaage to every tenured public official in DC.

Tenured employees, like those who work under a contract, can only be fired for cause. As Drang points out, political appointees serve at the pleasure of the someone, in this case, the POTUS. This isn't the first appointee Trump has canned (he even fired the White House Chief Usher) so it's not news to anyone.

[Serpico1985]

Well......of course there wouldn't be evidence yet. Evidence is usually found by an investigation, not the other way around.....

...so stopping an investigation before any evidence comes to light is exactly what "would fit."

A lack of evidence during an investigation is also not proof that they "didn't do anything wrong".

I'm not taking sides or disagreeing with other points in your post, though.

Yea I get what your saying, I don't disagree. I'm just speculating.

[jc000]

I didn't vote for President Kushner so can't say I'm pleased at all with how this administration is turning out. However, the continued hysterics over the regime is now evolving from chuckles and lulz to a dull, throbbing, high-pitched whine.

The left is behaving so outrageously that if the total elimination of this vile and absolutely destructive ideology (by any means necessary) isn't at the forefront of your mind, then I can't help but see that you're part of the problem.

So far, two things have happened: moderate enforcement of immigration laws and no new attacks on gun rights. At this stage of the game, that's all I expect from "government".

The fact that people are dismissing #fakenews (https://pistol-forum.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=fakenews) on here is mindblowing. Trump-inspired hate crime wave sweeping the nation only to be proven 95% false? Absolute and total failure around the 2016 election narrative, that they still can't get right? Rivers of lies, bile, and hatred dumping out of these talking-heads' sewer mouths 24-7, and yet we're supposed to do anything other than be completely repulsed by these creatures?

Think on HER choice of the word "resist" as to what people should be doing. Resistance: "the refusal to accept or comply with something; the attempt to prevent something by action or argument". This is a (failed) presidential candidate pushing this. What sort of reaction should we be having to that? Compromise?

A what if it were ok to be friends with Russia? I have yet to see any evidence AT ALL, that we should have any sort of conflict with the Putin regime.

Really I'm just angry that Trump and Putin haven't entered into a pact to invade and liberate Europe from their liberal oppressors.

[HCM]

16490

[Drang]

16493

[RoyGBiv]

Then there's this...

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/05/11/fake-news-russia-investigation-is-adequately-resourced-deputy-fbi-director-says/


Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe told senators on Thursday that contrary to news reports, the FBI’s investigation into Russian interference in the elections, including any collusion by Trump’s campaign, is “adequately resourced.”

“I believe that the Russian investigation is adequately resourced,” he told the Senate Intelligence Committee at a hearing.

The night before, two unnamed officials told the Washington Post that former FBI Director James Comey had requested more resources from the Justice Department for the investigation days before he was fired. Justice Department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores called reports of such a request “totally false,” and that the request “did not happen.”

[RJ]

Then there's this...

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/05/11/fake-news-russia-investigation-is-adequately-resourced-deputy-fbi-director-says/

Woah.

So you are saying that the Director of the FBI was not personally leading the investigation of Trump, and that it will go ahead as needed?

Unpossible. :cool:


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[AMC]

16490

Oh, well played, sir.

[Wobblie]

One, after all this time and after all the investigation, no one has seen one piece of evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia. Even the Democratic politicos admit that.

Two, the firing of Comey does not stop any current or future investigations.

So, why all the hand wringing about the firing being so nefarious? It is just left-wing crap that is always spewed because the left has nothing to keep them relevant.
Follow the money. Trump is owned by the Russians. His whole family business is.

[MistWolf]

Looking at President Trump's hair, I can't help but think he fired the wrong Combey

[voodoo_man]

Follow the money. Trump is owned by the Russians. His whole family business is.

https://media.giphy.com/media/ZUK8wfzr3WtX2/giphy.gif

[LittleLebowski]

Follow the money. Trump is owned by the Russians. His whole family business is.

http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Jennifer-Lawrence-ok-thumbs-up.gif

[Kyle Reese]

Some of the posters here are still upset that Hillary lost, I see.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[JohnO]

Follow the money. Trump is owned by the Russians. His whole family business is.

https://i.imgflip.com/opmk8.jpg

[NEPAKevin]

Some of the posters here are still upset that Hillary lost, I see.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

OTOH, since the election, there seems to be less blaming of George W. Bush. Only took eight years and a regime change.

[Sensei]

I'm not suprised or disappointed that Comey is gone. It should have happened much earlier. Having said that, the manner in which it happened plays into this media narrative of the White House being a circus. First, think what you want of Comey (I think very little of him), but having the guy learn of his firing from the media is poor form. There are a lot of people who irk me, plenty down right piss me off. However, I've never taken pleasure in humiliating people, and I can't see why Trump would want this to go down just minutes before Comey was supposed to give a speeches at a recruitment event of all places. There is never an up side to publicly humiliating a subordinate - ever. That is leadership 101..

Moreover, they should have kept the press release short and sweet - something along the lines of, "I thank him for his service, but the Bureau needs new leadership." All this distraction about who made the decision and when it occurred could have been avoided by not publishing a dissertation on the firing to the media.

I agree with a lot of what Trump has done, but the manner in which he does it leaves me scratching my head.

[voodoo_man]

Some of the posters here are still upset that they voted for a criminal, I see.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

Ftfy

...and just so there's no misinterpretation, I mean Hilda, who will hopefully be in jail soon.

[blues]

My wife and I both voted for Trump. That doesn't mean I have to endorse his antics or his bullshit. He's supposed to work for us, not vice versa.

But of course, I wasn't asked for a loyalty pledge nor do I have any "secret recordings"...so, we'll see where that gets us.

Voting on any given day doesn't afford carte blanche to the recipient.

[Joe in PNG]

Of course, when it come to the whole "owned by the Russians" thing, I have every bit of confidence that they also had a pretty good financial interest in Hillary as well.

[blues]

BTW, I see where Ray Kelly's name is among those being considered for head of the FBI. God help 'em if he's selected.

This guy was a complete zero when he ran our agency. His primary concerns were, (and I am not exaggerating much, if at all):

1. Preventing agents in the field from using the letterhead. It was only allowed to be used by HQ after his ascension.

2. Selecting a snazzy new uniform for our uniformed personnel.

3. Selecting a new paint scheme for our marked vehicles.

I can't remember one directive which assisted us with our investigations in the field. Sounds like just the right guy to drop any investigations needing closing. :rolleyes:

[TGS]

1. Preventing agents in the field from using the letterhead. It was only allowed to be used by HQ after his ascension.

Say what now?

Wow. What did you guys do for making routine investigative requests with other agencies?

[blues]

Say what now?

Wow. What did you guys do for making routine investigative requests with other agencies?

I can't remember if we were allowed to use the phone or talk with other agencies. Seriously, though, I remember having my knuckles rapped for using the special HQ only letterhead. (Which is what we had used for years before it became "special".) I think we had some black and white mimeographed stuff. Nothing with "color".

"Popeye" was an inspiration. My partner and I kept a portrait of him in our cubicles to remind us that excellence was within our reach.

ETA: Speaking of priorities, I forgot he wanted to redesign our credentials and badges as well.
(And finally in 2003 the final dagger was thrust into the agency that was created in 1789. But no longer under his watch.)

16536

[RJ]

Some of the posters here are still upset that Hillary lost, I see.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

Not referencing anyone here, obviously, but I'm still amazed some of my Progressive friends *still* haven't worked out how bad a candidate Hillary had to have been, in order to make Trump look like a viable alternative..

Just amazing.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Rich - did you miss the whole fight with Bernie (described as a gun nut by Hillary) episode? That was the progressive wing and they are still fighting to rid the party of the Hillary folks and move more to the left. Hillary was not a 'progressive'. She was a latte liberal, still playing for the money but spouting minority pleasing cliches (like she gave a crap). The Obama voters left her in droves because they saw though her and thought Trump would be a better economic issue alternative. Unfortunately, all this crap will divert from any real economic work or gun rights progress. Health care is not the issue that drives folks that went to him. It's an old GOP focus and they were too stupid to take the 8 years and come up with a plan.

Anyway, quite a few folks knew Hillary was a monster.

Folks were left with two horrible candidates or a protest folk. It depended on which one you saw as the least monstrous. Many folks went for Trump (despite his flaws) as a stopping of the RKBA attack of that Hillary would have launched. It wasn't that Trump was any picnic.

The standard Democrat party loyalists and Hillary fanatics, I grant you, still don't get this. It was the Russians!

In any event, if Trump doesn't get his head out of his crazy ass and make economic progress, his majority in the ignored states will switch (if the Dems - haha - have a decent candidate for their issues). The RKBA folks will be disgusted if all he offers is I'm not Hillary. That leads to reduced turnout.

[BJXDS]

Not referencing anyone here, obviously, but I'm still amazed some of my Progressive friends *still* haven't worked out how bad a candidate Hillary had to have been, in order to make Trump look like a viable alternative..

Just amazing.

Agreed but the Republicans could not come up with a better choice and when Trump got the nomination they did not support him.

[critter]

Not referencing anyone here, obviously, but I'm still amazed some of my Progressive friends *still* haven't worked out how bad a candidate Hillary had to have been, in order to make Trump look like a viable alternative..

Just amazing.

If I hadn't lived it I wouldn't believe it. We have about half the country identifying with Marxist ideology and policies. We have the Stasi style invasive spying factions of government - some we know and others of which there is no public knowledge. We have government who has given itself the authority to 'disappear', detain indefinitely, torture and/or murder U.S. citizens (or anyone for that matter) anywhere in the world for any reason it deems or arbitrarily declares a threat. We have a government that funds and arms 'terrorist' groups for proxy wars, or outright blows the shit out of other sovereign nations to facilitate regime change. We have an economy and fiat monetary system based a debt growth Ponzi scheme, created from magical fairy dust and backed solely by belief. A banking system controlled by an outside cartel with no real oversight nor accountability. Corporations are now 'people'. Congress votes on bills its elected members have neither written nor read. The list of shit no one would have believed 20 years ago goes on and on, including the most scandalous and most likely criminal presidential candidate in U.S. history.

Yeah, I can definitely see the allure of someone claiming to Make America Great Again, Drain the Swamp, shut down the borders, get rid of globalist trade agreements, tell the UN to fuck off, bring manufacturing and production jobs back to US soil... I get it, however, let's say for the sake of argument he is absolutely 100% sincere (and I'm not asserting that he is or isn't) -- the quagmire of shit of that is "The Swamp" would take more than one president or one group as well decades of measures taken to unravel even were it possible which at this point I'm doubtful that it is. We are simply going to march along the path to inevitable collapse. The only question, IMO, is how long of a march that will be.

[NEPAKevin]

Of course, when it come to the whole "owned by the Russians" thing, I have every bit of confidence that they also had a pretty good financial interest in Hillary as well.

It would probably be easier to say who did not have a financial interest in Team Klinton. They were cashing checks from everyone from the Saudi royal family to Elton John.

ETA: Clinton Foundation Contibutors (https://www.clintonfoundation.org/contributors)

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Breaking news - Trump directly asked Comey to drop investigation of Flynn.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/politics/james-comey-trump-flynn-russia-investigation.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=a-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Just one source, others confirming. Now whether it holds up, we will see. I'm empirical and not a tribal partisan. I'll believe reliable evidence. I've seen politicians lie and tribal folks of both parties ignore evidence. I've also seen all sides of the media be full of crap.

The game is afoot.

[ssb]

Breaking news - Trump directly asked Comey to drop investigation of Flynn.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/politics/james-comey-trump-flynn-russia-investigation.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=a-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Just one source, others confirming. Now whether it holds up, we will see. I'm empirical and not a tribal partisan. I'll believe reliable evidence. I've seen politicians lie and tribal folks of both parties ignore evidence. I've also seen all sides of the media be full of crap.

The game is afoot.

At this point they need to start producing the memos or sworn testimony. Personally, my willingness to trust a constant stream of anonymous sources reporting hearsay is next to zero at this point.

Comey declined the opportunity to testify before the Senate last week. If the unknown source's allegations are true... why?

[JHC]

At this point they need to start producing the memos or sworn testimony. Personally, my willingness to trust a constant stream of anonymous sources reporting hearsay is next to zero at this point.

Comey declined the opportunity to testify before the Senate last week. If the unknown source's allegations are true... why?

He declined to appear in closed session, requesting public testimony.

[ssb]

He declined to appear in closed session, requesting public testimony.

Hmm. I didn't see that. Thanks.

[Drang]

I kind of wonder if the left is just getting desperate. It's really tempting to don the tin foil hat and posit a conspiracy in which The Evil Mastermind, AKA George Soros, is about to start throwing his minions in the real shark tank if they don't start producing.

[JHC]

Hmm. I didn't see that. Thanks.

Yeah that lagged the decline a few days. It should be interesting.

[Drang]

Hmm. I didn't see that. Thanks.


Yeah that lagged the decline a few days. It should be interesting.

Reporting it would not support The Narrative.

I have no great affection for Trump, although I like the way he seems to be living in the heads of progressives everywhere, but maybe, just maybe, when the dust settles we'll actually have functional, objective, professional journalism...

Well, a man can dream, can't he?

[ssb]

Yeah that lagged the decline a few days. It should be interesting.

At this point, he needs to. The NYT article notes the acting director denied any attempts to influence the investigation in his sworn testimony before the Senate. It'll be interesting to see whether he chooses to supplement that testimony.

[JHC]

At this point, he needs to. The NYT article notes the acting director denied any attempts to influence the investigation in his sworn testimony before the Senate. It'll be interesting to see whether he chooses to supplement that testimony.

McCabe may not have been aware of the MFR, or McCabe parsed his words defensibly. IDK. It will play out. Comey knows he'll be called. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/james-comey-willing-to-testify-in-public-report/article/2623023

[Josh Runkle]

but maybe, just maybe, when the dust settles we'll actually have functional, objective, professional journalism...

Well, a man can dream, can't he?

The NYT has been a massive paper throughout history that has faced lots of lawsuits over time regarding sources and what they print. A person would expect that while they are a very liberal paper which seems not to have much of a spine when it comes to politics or morals, that they would have a spine when it comes to telling the truth about sources, just to avoid litigation.

The NYT has quoted that they have had over 30 sources from within the Whitehouse, or within extremely high levels of the government that talk to the Whitehouse every day, on the President's motivations for firing Comey. The NYT only lists one source for this new Comey memo, however, ABC and CBS both say they have called their sources and have confirmed by their own sources that it is true.

So, we have reached an impasse where one of two things seems to be true. Either:

1). Trump is a massive failure on an Obama level.
2). Almost ALL journalism, including traditionally "reliable" (although liberal) sources seems to be fake news.

The implication here is that something is wrong on a massive scale. If it is Trump that is the problem, he might ruin everything for Conservatives for the next few decades. Or, if traditional press has become this corrupt, we are looking at something so ridiculous that it cannot merely be solved through judicial means, and would most likely result in some pretty terrible things for society. A revolution would be terrible in one direction. And a journalistic oversight committee would be terrible in the other direction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GardoneVT]

The NYT has been a massive paper throughout history that has faced lots of lawsuits over time regarding sources and what they print. A person would expect that while they are a very liberal paper which seems not to have much of a spine when it comes to politics or morals, that they would have a spine when it comes to telling the truth about sources, just to avoid litigation.

The NYT has quoted that they have had over 30 sources from within the Whitehouse, or within extremely high levels of the government that talk to the Whitehouse every day, on the President's motivations for firing Comey. The NYT only lists one source for this new Comey memo, however, ABC and CBS both say they have called their sources and have confirmed by their own sources that it is true.

So, we have reached an impasse where one of two things seems to be true. Either:

1). Trump is a massive failure on an Obama level.
2). Almost ALL journalism, including traditionally "reliable" (although liberal) sources seems to be fake news.

The implication here is that something is wrong on a massive scale. If it is Trump that is the problem, he might ruin everything for Conservatives for the next few decades. Or, if traditional press has become this corrupt, we are looking at something so ridiculous that it cannot merely be solved through judicial means, and would most likely result in some pretty terrible things for society. A revolution would be terrible in one direction. And a journalistic oversight committee would be terrible in the other direction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Option 3: "Traditional" Journalism is a business which sells news as a commoditized product. No more,and no less.

[Sensei]

Option 3: "Traditional" Journalism is a business which sells news as a commoditized product. No more,and no less.

To some extent yes. But the fact that MSNBC, NPR, NYT, et al are still adhering to the same "business model" despite declining viewership, circulation, and profits suggests that factors other than traditional market forces are driving their decision making.

Whether it is bias for profit vs. bias for ideology, the net result is almost identical; #2 was more a statement of being than a description of motivation.

[Hambo]

If this keeps up the Republicans will abandon Trump because they've got midterms to think about and he's not really one of them anyway.

Sometimes you drain the swamp, sometimes the swamp drains you.

[farscott]

It is now being reported that Director Comey wrote a memo covering his "contemporaneous" thoughts after each meeting and phone call with President Trump. One of those memos claims that President Trump asked Director Comey to drop the investigation into General Flynn because "Flynn is a good guy".

If that is true -- and memos from other FBI personnel including Director Webster have been considered evidence in other cases -- this could be the beginning of a valid impeachment process. Using the office to quash investigations is a big "no-no" for reasonable people of any party.

[TAZ]

So, we have reached an impasse where one of two things seems to be true. Either:

1). Trump is a massive failure on an Obama level.
2). Almost ALL journalism, including traditionally "reliable" (although liberal) sources seems to be fake news.


Well, there is another option. Trump is really an idiot AND the media are corrupt political puppets or simply greedy asshats who only want to make a buck and stirring the shit sells copy. Given the media treatment of Obama, Fergusson, Zimmerman... it's pretty obvious that there is something amiss there. I believe the rot is DEEEEEEP, but I have no facts to back that claim.

In this instance we may have a perfect storm of stupid.


It is now being reported that Director Comey wrote a memo covering his "contemporaneous" thoughts after each meeting and phone call with President Trump. One of those memos claims that President Trump asked Director Comey to drop the investigation into General Flynn because "Flynn is a good guy".

If that is true -- and memos from other FBI personnel including Director Webster have been considered evidence in other cases -- this could be the beginning of a valid impeachment process. Using the office to quash investigations is a big "no-no" for reasonable people of any party.

Last few conversations I had with someone they said they would pay me $100000000. At least that is what my notes say.

Unless he has recordings of the conversations his notes carry the same weight as toilet paper IMO.

Seems to me we are going down a path where the concept of Justice is going to get redefined in a manner that not many will like. I have little issue with the GOP being crushed as a whole because of Trump, so long as that crush is based on solid evidence and facts vs innuendo and self taken, unwitnessed "notes". The GOP is a bunch of spineless shitheads who have done little to further a true conservative agenda. Their replacement by another group to balance the scales would IMO be a good thing in the long run.

However, any kind of Justice dispensed at the point of a bullhorn aka he who screams the loudest and flings the most poop wins is NOT Justice but a violation of every tenet of the word and IMO the Constitution. It's NOT the path we want to go down. I really do not want to go back to living in a world where a member of the party said you did X so you're guilty. Been there, done that and it ain't all it's cracked up to be.

Give me factual evidence to show Trump violated the law and I'll happily pick up a shovel and start digging a hole under Leavenworth to build him a special cell to rot in.

[Palmguy]

So, we have reached an impasse where one of two things seems to be true. Either:

1). Trump is a massive failure on an Obama level.
2). Almost ALL journalism, including traditionally "reliable" (although liberal) sources seems to be fake news.


These two things aren't mutually exclusive.

[Zincwarrior]

Unless he has recordings of the conversations his notes carry the same weight as toilet paper IMO.

Legally that is not correct however.

[RoyGBiv]

More bread and circuses. Woe is US.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

When Putin releases the transcripts of everything that occurred in the White House, we will know the truth. I recall watching the Clinton scandal unfold with him lying through his teeth and his poor old surrogates spouting that he was truthful. Didn't work out well. It is arguable that his scandals moved enough votes to GWB or Nader to sink Gore. We know the GWB worked out so well.

Thus, I suggest that Trump just have a hissy fit and give it to Pence. Even liberal friends of mine think Pence isn't nuts and normal GOP vs Democratic politics could resume. We don't need the problems of the country to be swamped by the psychodrama we have every day. If Pence could adopt a focus on the economy and jobs for the voters who switched to Trump, he could maintain control of the Congress. If he wastes energy on crap like Planned Parenthood, ill formed health care plans or Sessions drug crusade, it's a mistake. The folks who went Trump from the Obama votes don't give a crap about those and are unimpressed by health care debates that can't put forward a coherent plan that helps them. They want economic security and jobs. Unfortunately the classic GOP was happy to send your job to China (as were many Democrats). Just a thought.

Now, as I said before - you can kiss any Congressional positive action on Second Amendment rights good bye for the foreseeable future. Some folks are all excited that Peruta might make it to SCOTUS. I'm not sanguine about that. They might not take it and just say state bans on carry are just fine. They might take it and say state bans are just fine (see Kennedy). They might take it and put forward some half-assed decision that has poison pills in it like Heller. Those being the interpretation that has carried the day on state mag and EBR bans, so far.

If the GOP spent has much time on the RKBA as they did about ranting about Planned Parenthood, maybe there would be something done in a positive manner. But no - all they offer is : Well, we aren't Hillary, Chuck and Diane. That's ok, but playing defense is a long term loosing position. State bans may increase. Bloomberg pushes locale bans to make carry useless (and 'conservatives' are ok with them because of property rights for busineses open to the public, - while we babble about hiding a NPE weapon in your butt crack).

Bah.

[blues]

Comey was fired? Huh.

(Stock up on ammo now while the gettin' is good.)

[ssb]

Legally that is not correct however.

Not having seen the memo, obviously, but:

- It purports to memorialize what Comey says the President said.
- Our law frowns upon that (hearsay).
- A hearsay exception may apply to Comey's testimony and/or the memo, but that depends on the contents.

In any potential obstruction prosecution, I don't see that issue being very clear cut. Congress is another matter.

[TAZ]

Legally that is not correct however.

I don't doubt that at all. There is a reason it's a legal system and not a justice system. Hate to burst some bubbles, but Legal doesn't necessarily mean right and right doesn't necessarily mean legal. I see that as a problem.

[blues]

Sources close to the White House report that Trump, totally unfazed by current events and a YUGE "Culture Club" fan, was heard singing "Comey Chameleon" in the oval office this morning...


"Deserter director, lying all the way
If I listened to your lies would you say

I'm a man without conviction
I'm a man who doesn't know
How to sell a contradiction
You come and go
You come and go

[Chorus:]
Comey Comey Comey Comey Comey Chameleon
You come and go
You come and go..."

[Peally]

I was listening to Coast to Coast last week and the fairly obvious answer was given there.

It's rare in human beings but sometimes an occasional person will have the innate ability to communicate with extra terrestrial life on a subconscious level while they sleep. This can give them unusual insights and precognition, and in the case of Comey it's almost guaranteed he knew too much about too many things he shouldn't have as a result. Therefore the administration needed to fire him immediately and seemingly out of the blue to protect our black project security.

Also North Korea's missiles keep failing due to alien energy shielding but that's another story entirely.





Thank you lady that called in that night to let me know what was really going on.

[blues]

I don't doubt that at all. There is a reason it's a legal system and not a justice system. Hate to burst some bubbles, but Legal doesn't necessarily mean right and right doesn't necessarily mean legal. I see that as a problem.

And "not guilty" doesn't (necessarily) mean innocent.

[StraitR]

It would probably be easier to say who did not have a financial interest in Team Klinton. They were cashing checks from everyone from the Saudi royal family to Elton John.

ETA: Clinton Foundation Contibutors (https://www.clintonfoundation.org/contributors)

THAT list, and that much money... is just downright scary.

[RJ]

Hey, how about this guy as a new Director?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Rogers_(Michigan_politician)

Heard a talking head mention him this morning as a candidate.

Thoughts?

[Totem Polar]

I was listening to Coast to Coast last week and the fairly obvious answer was given there.

I used to love coast to coast on those long nighttime drives back from work. I was listening live every time Art Bell retired (that guy returning to broadcast is like an Eagles reunion tour: if Art comes out of his underground airstream and sees his shadow, we will have 6 more months of alien abduction stories from his guests on the radio...)

I do put more faith in coast callers than either huffpo, or the average FB feed, though.

[Peally]

I used to love coast to coast on those long nighttime drives back from work. I was listening live every time Art Bell retired (that guy returning to broadcast is like an Eagles reunion tour: if Art comes out of his underground airstream and sees his shadow, we will have 6 more months of alien abduction stories from his guests on the radio...)

I do put more faith in coast callers than either huffpo, or the average FB feed, though.

Coast to Coast and Art Bell are national treasures.

[jc000]

Thus, I suggest that Trump just have a hissy fit and give it to Pence. Even liberal friends of mine think Pence isn't nuts and normal GOP vs Democratic politics could resume. We don't need the problems of the country to be swamped by the psychodrama we have every day. If Pence could adopt a focus on the economy and jobs for the voters who switched to Trump, he could maintain control of the Congress. If he wastes energy on crap like Planned Parenthood, ill formed health care plans or Sessions drug crusade, it's a mistake.

Translation: I'm ok with the exponentially growing destruction of the middle-class and the complete erosion of the values necessary to maintain a cohesive and healthy society as long my ruling masters aren't at each others' throats in a way that makes me feel uncomfortable.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I think you missed the center when you fired at the target. Your projection of what I said was rather irrelevant to what I actually was analyzing. But that is your right to do. The core issues for the country are not fringe social issues of the left or right. I know that gets folks worked up. Not one plant will restart in the USA if Planned Parenthood is funded or not. If Session's goes after the states with legalized marijuana, that's a job creation plan for the cartels (see Al Capone and Prohibition). As far as health care - if you have 7 years to come up with an alternative and you cluster fuck it - those leaders are incompetent.

As far as psychodrama - if you go to a Coast Guard graduation and talk about how you are being picked in - you can be described by various types of genitalia. That's not the place to whine.

[Drang]

If Session's goes after the states with legalized marijuana, that's a job creation plan for the cartels (see Al Capone and Prohibition).
I suspect that this is intended as incentive to get Congress to change the law. Congress is proving rather obtuse when it comes to hints, though.

[jc000]

I think you missed the center when you fired at the target. Your projection of what I said was rather irrelevant to what I actually was analyzing. But that is your right to do. The core issues for the country are not fringe social issues of the left or right. I know that gets folks worked up. Not one plant will restart in the USA if Planned Parenthood is funded or not. If Session's goes after the states with legalized marijuana, that's a job creation plan for the cartels (see Al Capone and Prohibition). As far as health care - if you have 7 years to come up with an alternative and you cluster fuck it - those leaders are incompetent.

You think these are fringe issues. Luckily, you aren't the arbiter for what constitutes a fringe issue.

[Zincwarrior]

I think you missed the center when you fired at the target. Your projection of what I said was rather irrelevant to what I actually was analyzing. But that is your right to do. The core issues for the country are not fringe social issues of the left or right. I know that gets folks worked up. Not one plant will restart in the USA if Planned Parenthood is funded or not. If Session's goes after the states with legalized marijuana, that's a job creation plan for the cartels (see Al Capone and Prohibition). As far as health care - if you have 7 years to come up with an alternative and you cluster fuck it - those leaders are incompetent.

As far as psychodrama - if you go to a Coast Guard graduation and talk about how you are being picked in - you can be described by various types of genitalia. That's not the place to whine.

I guess being shot (TR, Reagan) and being assassinated (Kennedy, Garfield, Lincoln) don't count as being picked on in Trump's world.

[Zincwarrior]

You think these are fringe issues. Luckily, you aren't the arbiter for what constitutes a fringe issue.

Neither are you. Lets agree we're all just posting opinions here.

Unless you drive Glock of course. Friends don't let friends drive Glock. :cool:

[jc000]

Neither are you. Lets agree we're all just posting opinions here.

I'll do nothing of the sort to support your straw man argument, thanks.

[blues]

As far as health care - if you have 7 years to come up with an alternative and you cluster fuck it - those leaders are incompetent.

...if you go to a Coast Guard graduation and talk about how you are being picked in - you can be described by various types of genitalia. That's not the place to whine.

Can't disagree with either of these points. Regarding the second, it was the very thing I thought as well, and commented upon to my better half.

Sad indeed.

[Zincwarrior]

I'll do nothing of the sort to support your straw man argument, thanks.

Your statement is not opinion then? Please cite support in that case.
Or are you referring to friends not letting friends drive Glock? Thats proveable. Just get out a ouiji board and ask ghost John Browning.


Can't disagree with either of these points. Regarding the second, it was the very thing I thought as well, and commented upon to my better half.

Sad indeed. Like any other commencement speaker, its about the graduating class, not you. He er...doesn't get that.

[blues]

ZW, your "serious" points might be better made if you'd leave off the irrelevant Glock remarks.

(I don't at all mind folks ripping on my own particular choice in daily carry, but your arguments pro or con in this thread would come across more forcefully without the added schtick. Just a thought...from someone who enjoys repartee, humor and wit.)

[Zincwarrior]

ZW, your "serious" points might be better made if you'd leave off the irrelevant Glock remarks.

(I don't at all mind folks ripping on my own particular choice in daily carry, but your arguments pro or con in this thread would come across more forcefully without the added schtick. Just a thought...from someone who enjoys repartee, humor and wit.)

Just trying to keep it light. Typically political threads on gun forums turn it flamewars within 2 pages. This one looks like it is about to. I'll likely just step away at this point.

[jc000]

Your statement is not opinion then? Please cite support in that case.

Buddy – my original statement was a rightfully expressed opinion in response to another rightfully expressed opinion.

At no point did I state that I decide what is fringe or not.

Straw man.

[rauchman]

Some of the posters here are still upset that Hillary lost, I see.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

I would say it this way...

For some of the posters, voting for Trump was the lesser of 2 evils. With HRC, one kind of knew what one was getting. Trump was voted in on the belief that he was something different from the norm and could get things done through his negotiation skills. I think the frustration is, that while he is proving to be "different from the norm", it is not the "different" that was hoped.

[critter]

The most glaring aspect in this is that Trump was 'promoted to a level above his competence.' He hasn't transformed into the statesman I'd hoped he would, nor has he made much effort. He made campaign promises, or provided a 'plan' for vast improvement, which resonated with many of us. The implementation of such plans requires a level of maturity above Twitter foolishness and juvenile pissing contests. Unless he realizes that he is, in fact, incompetent at this level and chooses to take the steps necessary to become a leader of this echelon, this BS will be the status quo for long while.

[NEPAKevin]

THAT list, and that much money... is just downright scary.

And that's the money that they admit they got. Love the breakdown... greater than 250 million... Imagine giving over a quarter billion smackaroos to the pants suit brigade and poof, nothing.

[Rex G]

(Snipped.)

Thus, I suggest that Trump just have a hissy fit and give it to Pence. Even liberal friends of mine think Pence isn't nuts and normal GOP vs Democratic politics could resume. We don't need the problems of the country to be swamped by the psychodrama we have every day. If Pence could adopt a focus on the economy and jobs for the voters who switched to Trump, he could maintain control of the Congress. If he wastes energy on crap like Planned Parenthood, ill formed health care plans or Sessions drug crusade, it's a mistake. The folks who went Trump from the Obama votes don't give a crap about those and are unimpressed by health care debates that can't put forward a coherent plan that helps them. They want economic security and jobs. Unfortunately the classic GOP was happy to send your job to China (as were many Democrats). Just a thought.

(Snipped.)



Pre-election, I did see Pence as one factor that made Trump/Pence the lesser of two evils. I had figured that Trump would be likely to either explode or implode, leaving Pence to rise to the role of cleaning-up the mess. (The other factor was the SCOTUS vacancy.)

On election day, knowing that the Republican ticket was going to carry Texas by a safe margin, anyway, I did not have to vote for a lesser-of-two-evils.

[Peally]

Dunno about everyone else but Trump is doing about as well as I expected. Maybe a bit better, if that tells you how much of a (negative) trainwreck I was waiting for. If he does anything stupid or unusual it shouldn't be surprising, he didn't get where he is today being a crafty super-genius businessman.

[StraitR]

And that's the money that they admit they got. Love the breakdown... greater than 250 million... Imagine giving over a quarter billion smackaroos to the pants suit brigade and poof, nothing.

It was >$25,000,000, but who knows how high the donation actually was, and there were seven of them. Unlimited potential.

$10million - $25million, and there are 18 donors. Potential almost half a billion.

$5million - $10million, which had 14 donors. $140million potential.

$1million - $5million was eye opening, with 159 donors. That's minimum $159million with $800million potential.

$500k - $1million - Another 121 donors, totaling anywhere between $60 - $121million.

$250k - $500k - showing 163 donors. Potential of nearly $82 million.

The last I'll point out, since it's the last six figure category, is $100k - $250k, with 414 donors for a potential $103million.

Total in the thousands upon thousands of other donations that are less than $100k, which can be found in the drop down box, and this is easily a 1.5 Billion dollar foundation.

Shocking, absolutely shocking. And as you pointed out, donors vary from The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Commonwealth of Australia, Gov of the Netherlands, Coca-Cola, other global foundations, to private citizens, and it's my understanding that there is very little oversight of this money. I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, and I don't normally care about such things, but this makes my mind wander.

[Sensei]

Despite Trump bemoaning Mueller's appointment as bad for the country, I think that it is the best thing that could possibly happen. First, having a special prosecutor of Mueller's caliber conducting what amounts to a criminal investigation is likely going to have a profound dampening effect on all of the chatter and leaks. That includes Trump's off the reservation midnight Tweeting (if he is smart). It also means that Congress can basically cancel all of its dog and pony show hearings. Sure, Speaker Ryan is free think that Congress has a role to play. The GOP committee Chairs are free to call and subpoena whoever they want, but they had better get accustomed to hearing people say, "I would like to assert my 5th Amendment privilege, Sir." Nobody with half a brain involved in this matter is going to appear before Congress and say shit while a guy like Mueller is lurking in the shadows with the full resources of the DOJ and the power to empanel a grand jury.

Mueller is not Ken Starr or Comey who were men of the camera. No, Mueller is a man of purpose and focus. The most the media will see of him is when he walks from his car to his office at 5 AM, and back to his car sometime after 7 PM - just like he did virtually every day for 12 years at the FBI HQ. That means we can go back to focusing on issues that matter like healthcare reform, tax reform, spending cuts, etc. while we wait for a man of purpose to complete his task.

[TAZ]

The most glaring aspect in this is that Trump was 'promoted to a level above his competence.' He hasn't transformed into the statesman I'd hoped he would, nor has he made much effort. He made campaign promises, or provided a 'plan' for vast improvement, which resonated with many of us. The implementation of such plans requires a level of maturity above Twitter foolishness and juvenile pissing contests. Unless he realizes that he is, in fact, incompetent at this level and chooses to take the steps necessary to become a leader of this echelon, this BS will be the status quo for long while.

Lots of truth there. However, you make it seem like if Trump grew up a bit then the media, DNC and GOP would all be on board with his plan of record for the nation. I think you need to share whatever you're smoking on that one. The DNC, GOP, MSM and the establishment leeches have no intention of working with childish Trump or grown up Trump. They are not opposed to Trump. They are opposed to the roadmap he dared to bring forth. Protect the border, minimize illegal immigration, minimize unverifiable refugees, repatriate cash and jobs to balance the economy from almost pure consumption to consumption and production. These are not ideals that the political establishment actually want. The man child Trump just makes it easy to not have to argue against the policy and expose themselves as anti American.

[critter]

Lots of truth there. However, you make it seem like if Trump grew up a bit then the media, DNC and GOP would all be on board with his plan of record for the nation. I think you need to share whatever you're smoking on that one. The DNC, GOP, MSM and the establishment leeches have no intention of working with childish Trump or grown up Trump. They are not opposed to Trump. They are opposed to the roadmap he dared to bring forth. Protect the border, minimize illegal immigration, minimize unverifiable refugees, repatriate cash and jobs to balance the economy from almost pure consumption to consumption and production. These are not ideals that the political establishment actually want. The man child Trump just makes it easy to not have to argue against the policy and expose themselves as anti American.

I don't disagree with that. Never have. But, I can't share what I'm smoking because it is still (ridiculously) illegal, but luckily Doritos and Little Debbie Oatmeal Cream Pies are not. ;-) IMO, the difference between a Presidential Trump vs the 'not so much' is the last sentence of your post. Relating to that is the difference in a midterm super-majority. The midterms were virtually a lock with the dems headed for more losses, and they know it, which is the primary reason they've gone all out full bore Alinsky. A presidential Trump keeps the massive core support of the people who put him there and wins others over -- who would, in turn, continue to elect senators and representatives who would back him as well as put the necessary pressure on those already there. Anyone with any sense of how government works understands that it was designed to be a molasses creep process. It's a marathon. Unfortunately, many have severe attention deficit disorder when it comes to politics and a juvenile Trump doesn't assist in maintaining focus on the goals.

[UNK]

16687

[farscott]

Despite Trump bemoaning Mueller's appointment as bad for the country, I think that it is the best thing that could possibly happen. First, having a special prosecutor of Mueller's caliber conducting what amounts to a criminal investigation is likely going to have a profound dampening effect on all of the chatter and leaks. That includes Trump's off the reservation midnight Tweeting (if he is smart). It also means that Congress can basically cancel all of its dog and pony show hearings. Sure, Speaker Ryan is free think that Congress has a role to play. The GOP committee Chairs are free to call and subpoena whoever they want, but they had better get accustomed to hearing people say, "I would like to assert my 5th Amendment privilege, Sir." Nobody with half a brain involved in this matter is going to appear before Congress and say shit while a guy like Mueller is lurking in the shadows with the full resources of the DOJ and the power to empanel a grand jury.

Mueller is not Ken Starr or Comey who were men of the camera. No, Mueller is a man of purpose and focus. The most the media will see of him is when he walks from his car to his office at 5 AM, and back to his car sometime after 7 PM - just like he did virtually every day for 12 years at the FBI HQ. That means we can go back to focusing on issues that matter like healthcare reform, tax reform, spending cuts, etc. while we wait for a man of purpose to complete his task.

I wish I could like this post more than once. Special Counsel Mueller is a proven entity when it comes to speaking truth to power and in doing the long, hard work needed to run a high-profile investigation of this much complexity. If there are illegal acts to be found, he will insure they are found. He is also a man of integrity, being one of a few to get a sitting President to change his direction after threatening to resign his position.

[RJ]

I would say it this way...

For some of the posters, voting for Trump was the lesser of 2 evils. With HRC, one kind of knew what one was getting. Trump was voted in on the belief that he was something different from the norm and could get things done through his negotiation skills. I think the frustration is, that while he is proving to be "different from the norm", it is not the "different" that was hoped.

Troof.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[GardoneVT]

Taking an apolitical look at the matter, my objective is what is best for the country.

All of us -regardless of political leanings or viewpoints- must acknowledge that Trump would not go quietly into the night if he is charged with illegal acts,justified or no. The circus which was the 2016 elections would be a pregame special compared to the national riot of a Trump misconduct investigation - or impeachment proceedings.

Regardless of the legitimacy of such an investigation against Trump, it would be a national embarrassment of the highest order. The United States of America is not served by seeing its lawfully elected leader tweeting inane statements about personal persecution while layered investigations run rampant. What benefit to America is served if Trump is impeached?

One might say rule of law,ethics, and so forth- but then what of the nation when a Leftist of equally corrupt nature is elected ? I'm not sure eight more years of unchecked leftist policy is better then four years of Trumps antics. An impeached Trump equates to an impeached GOP, and a one-party America is a dangerous thing regardless of which party it may be.

[JHC]

Speaking of Comey and Mueller:
"Mueller and Comey already share a place in the modern history of the Justice Department and in the annals of civil liberties law. In March 2004, then-FBI Director Mueller and then-Deputy Attorney General Comey threatened to resign if the Bush White House reauthorized the administration’s so-called warrantless wiretapping program, which department lawyers had found to be unconstitutional. The threat, made in a dramatic and now-famous scene at the bedside of ailing-Attorney General John Ashcroft, ended with President George W. Bush effectively siding with Mueller and Comey."



http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/18/trumps-worst-nightmare-comes-true-215153

[littlejerry]

I would say it this way...

For some of the posters, voting for Trump was the lesser of 2 evils. With HRC, one kind of knew what one was getting. Trump was voted in on the belief that he was something different from the norm and could get things done through his negotiation skills. I think the frustration is, that while he is proving to be "different from the norm", it is not the "different" that was hoped.

Knowing now what was once unknown, I'd still pull that lever for Trump over HRC every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Lack of statesmanship is a small price to pay for maintaining the supreme court in our favor and halting the Dems Federal agenda, even if we aren't making much progress at the moment.

[rauchman]

Knowing now what was once unknown, I'd still pull that lever for Trump over HRC every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Lack of statesmanship is a small price to pay for maintaining the supreme court in our favor and halting the Dems Federal agenda, even if we aren't making much progress at the moment.

Agree. Of the choices given Trump was the only option. Having said that, the choices given were,....well, less than great. Even with that said, I understand we're only a few months into this, but I would guess many were hoping for something better with Trump than so far witnessed.

[RoyGBiv]

Knowing now what was once unknown, I'd still pull that lever for Trump over HRC every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Lack of statesmanship is a small price to pay for maintaining the supreme court in our favor and halting the Dems Federal agenda, even if we aren't making much progress at the moment.

Easily

[StraitR]

Agree. Of the choices given Trump was the only option. Having said that, the choices given were,....well, less than great. Even with that said, I understand we're only a few months into this, but I would guess many were hoping for something better with Trump than so far witnessed.

Frankly, this is pretty much the Trump circus I was expecting when I voted against Hillary. As of yet, I'm not regretting my decision.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I think most folks of our ilk are still delighted that HRC was defeated. However, that was then and this is now. How do we move on to make the country great again if we are diverted by this show? My hope is that Trump has a serious look at his behavior and gets back on track. Personality is hard to change though.

I still note that RKBA issues are never mentioned when the 'agenda' is touted as being in trouble. Oh, we forgot about them - did we now?

[blues]

I still note that RKBA issues are never mentioned when the 'agenda' is touted as being in trouble. Oh, we forgot about them - did we now?

Buy low...(A word to the wise. Then you won't have to look back with regret about what you should've done when it was sunny days and fair skies.)

[StraitR]

Can we kick this back up to discuss Comey's hearing? I dislike MSM outlets and generally keep up with news by reading like minded opinions here anyway. Who's watching and what's your take?

[BobLoblaw]

I'm watching. I believe Comey is giving an honest representation of his interactions with Trump. I really thought this was going to be juicy but it's not that bad. Trump will be fine.

[Robinson]

On one hand, Comey confirmed Trump was never under investigation. On the other hand, he also confirmed that Trump told Comey he wants "total loyalty" and asked him to drop the investigation into Flynn.

[BobLoblaw]

On one hand, Comey confirmed Trump was never under investigation. On the other hand, he also confirmed that Trump told Comey he wants "total loyalty" and asked him to drop the investigation into Flynn.

Well, he confirmed that Trump said "I hope you'll drop [the Flynn investigation]." Technically, he did not direct him or request him to do so which is why nothing will come of this.

[rauchman]

Well, he confirmed that Trump said "I hope you'll drop [the Flynn investigation]." Technically, he did not direct him or request him to do so which is why nothing will come of this.

I'm far from a legal expert, but I have to agree in that everything I've heard so far doesn't seem to have the weight necessary to go after Trump. In the bigger picture, I can not believe the circus this whole Comey thing has turned into. Was at the gym last night and they have a bunch of TV's up so you can watch while hitting the tread mill/elliptical/etc. I had to switch from CNN to anything else. Watching them try to make this into something of such shock and magnitude that was so earth shattering made my head hurt. You would think it's the second coming of Christ or something.

[MSparks909]

CNN and MSNBC honestly make me want to vomit sometimes. I cannot believe people still believe they are an unbiased source of news. Fox News isn't that much better but I can at least tolerate that.

ETA watched the entire testimony at work. Wish I was a fly on the wall for the classified briefing...

[StraitR]

CNN and MSNBC honestly make me want to vomit sometimes. I cannot believe people still believe they are an unbiased source of news. Fox News isn't that much better but I can at least tolerate that.

ETA watched the entire testimony at work. Wish I was a fly on the wall for the classified briefing...

My feelings exactly.

Every network is getting ridiculously petty, even Fox, to the point that they're spending copious amounts of time just talking about other stations and things their reporters said. It's like watching a high school reality show.

[Totem Polar]

The other side of the coin:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/08/comey-lynch-told-me-not-call-probe-clinton-emails-investigation/102629702/

During the course of the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, former FBI director James Comey said he had a troubling exchange with then-attorney general Loretta Lynch.

During a meeting with Lynch, Comey said that the attorney general told him: “Don’t call it that (an investigation). Call it a matter. Just call it a matter.’’

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Can we all get along and agree that this past campaign was a championship match of Sleaze Bags? Comey laid out that both of these winners are morally deficient.

Now you may like the politics of A or B, and that tribalism blinds you to the flaws of your chieftain. Neither party is worth crap.

[mmc45414]

Can we all get along and agree that this past campaign was a championship match of Sleaze Bags?

Last year I was working with a French guy who is here for a couple of years. He is politically aware, and what a year for him to be here watching the circus. On one road trip on our way from Atlanta to Alabama we got to know each other pretty well and he asked about Trump, and was suprised about the level of support he had. My response was "I think he is an asshole. I don't like his ostentatious businesses, I don't like his contrived TV shows, I don't like his blowhard personality. But he is running against Hillary Clinton" I think my friend understood.

That said, I have been more supportive of the asshole since he won. [emoji3]

[blues]

Can we all get along and agree that this past campaign was a championship match of Sleaze Bags? Comey laid out that both of these winners are morally deficient.

Now you may like the politics of A or B, and that tribalism blinds you to the flaws of your chieftain. Neither party is worth crap.

Nor did Comey help the situation beginning somewhere around the middle of last year going forward. I say throw all the bums out.

(I don't let the R or D fool me for a minute. If only more would be I's and the "I" actually meant something to the "we".)

[voodoo_man]

The other side of the coin:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/08/comey-lynch-told-me-not-call-probe-clinton-emails-investigation/102629702/

During the course of the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, former FBI director James Comey said he had a troubling exchange with then-attorney general Loretta Lynch.

During a meeting with Lynch, Comey said that the attorney general told him: “Don’t call it that (an investigation). Call it a matter. Just call it a matter.’’

...so we were right. The right was....right...

#winning (https://pistol-forum.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=winning)

[Totem Polar]

Can we...


Last year...


Nor did Comey...

Dan Carlin said it best: "Most elections are a popularity contest; this one was an unpopularity contest, and Hilary won.


...so we were right. The right was....right...

Fun to say, three times fast...

[voodoo_man]

Since we have a good bit of RU hacking talk in this thread...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIH1DAE-bgY

The Kelly interview with Putin, where he utterly and mercilessly destroys her with every question she asked, especially the RU hacking case.

Now some of the translation was not literal and some appeared to be converted after the fact (like words added in places where they shouldn't have been) - for example he says nonsense several times but uses two different types of words, one of which is very condescending in nature.

Worth a watch.

[RJ]

I swear ta God this is legit.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170609/38f98259450178321b9009f3f1b6ccf3.jpg

(At least my guy at the NYT said it was.)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[UNK]

Since we have a good bit of RU hacking talk in this thread...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIH1DAE-bgY

The Kelly interview with Putin, where he utterly and mercilessly destroys her with every question she asked, especially the RU hacking case.

Now some of the translation was not literal and some appeared to be converted after the fact (like words added in places where they shouldn't have been) - for example he says nonsense several times but uses two different types of words, one of which is very condescending in nature.

Worth a watch.

What kind of journalism is that? She brought absolutely nothing to the table. Damn did he pay her to do this interview?

[voodoo_man]

What kind of journalism is that? She brought absolutely nothing to the table. Damn did he pay her to do this interview?

Not that I am going to defend her, she sucks and that's why she got kicked off FOX and has horrible ratings.

But.

Putin is probably 2x her IQ and on a completely different level of political understanding than she is, or could ever be. That's not saying Putin is awesome or anything, just stating a fact.

[WobblyPossum]

Wow. She was so outplayed I felt a little bad for her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bart Carter]

...During the course of the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, former FBI director James Comey said he had a troubling exchange with then-attorney general Loretta Lynch.

During a meeting with Lynch, Comey said that the attorney general told him: “Don’t call it that (an investigation). Call it a matter. Just call it a matter.’’
That would make him the head of the Federal Bureau of Matter. :p

[SecondsCount]

The most glaring aspect in this is that Trump was 'promoted to a level above his competence.' He hasn't transformed into the statesman I'd hoped he would, nor has he made much effort. He made campaign promises, or provided a 'plan' for vast improvement, which resonated with many of us. The implementation of such plans requires a level of maturity above Twitter foolishness and juvenile pissing contests. Unless he realizes that he is, in fact, incompetent at this level and chooses to take the steps necessary to become a leader of this echelon, this BS will be the status quo for long while.

I don't mean to come across as a Trump fanboy but I keep hearing this and wonder why? Did you really think that Trump would change the recipe once he got into office?

What is making him incompetent? That he tweets silly things or things you don't agree with? Has he not reversed a ton of Obama's policies that were so far left that Harry Reid cringed?

While he makes me cringe at times, what is see is a guy who is pretty transparent about things and is doing a far better job than his predecessor in getting this country moving without spending billions of dollars doing it. He's also pissed off a lot of people on both sides of the aisle that needed a wake up call :cool:

[Bart Carter]

It is very interesting that there were so many leaks about Trump's "people", but the one thing that he needed known, that he was not under investigation about Russia, not. How did Comey, now known by his own words as a leaker in chief, respond to that: :confused:

Most leaks were inuendos or twisted. Meet a Russian diplomat in you normal course of business as a senator, you are hiding something. :rolleyes:

[TAZ]

What I find interesting in all this is that even though senior political hacks in both houses were supposedly plainly told that Trump wasn't being investigated we still have those same folks referring to the Trump investigation in the press. Wouldn't that rise to defamation? You are knowingly saying something that isn't true that is defaming a person...

After reading the transcripts I got the following:

Trump is pretty stupid about how politics works. This is a double edged sword in that I like his lack of politics but at the same time it can hurt him. You DO NOT have closed door meetings with a subordinate and talk about letting go of investigations of your staff. Just not the smart thing to do. IMO technically he didn't cross the line into ordering Comey to do so, but it was a stupid move.

Trump was absolutely right about fake news. Comey admits that the reports about Trump being under investigation were not factual. We knew it, but it's good to get it on the record.

Comey is either a weak willed cuck or a Democrat sympathizer or a D.C. Insider not akin to the Trump agenda or all of the above. He is also a liar. Twice in his career he comes across superiors telling him change his approach and neither time does he have the balls to do what needs doing. Cuck. He claims he doesn't want to be bound by needing to correct himself if he publicly stated that at this time Trump is not being investigated. No issue clearing Hillary and making a correction later. Liar, Dem supporter. Claims to have an exact memory of conversations with the president down to wording used, yet claims he can't remember his boss' reaction to him saying he doesn't want to be in the same room with Trump alone. Liar. Makes claims of great memory but doesn't remember if he's ever spoken to Trump or staff about the importance of the Russian hacking efforts. Liar. After being fired leaks info to a third party to disseminate to the press. Cuck and total loss of credibility IMO.

This is all a bunch of BS. Unless something very specific is brought out during the closed door sessions this is just a political shit show intended to keep from having to do real work and cast votes on the record for items Americans want but congress doesn't.

[StraitR]

I like this ^^^^. I like all of this.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Until each member of the two tribes realize that their tribes are totally incompetent and screwed up, it's basically two packs of monkeys - each on one side of creek - jumping up and down and throwing poop at each other.

Each side only wants to maintain their personal positions and power and don't care one bit about people. Yeah, some of you buy into their jumping and throwing as real. Just as the 'other' side does.

None of it will help the average person. Nor do they care about that.

So praise Trump or Comey or attack Trump or Comey. Ain't going to get you more bananas. Let's attack Comey for Leaking, Let's attack Trump for threatening Comey - hey, where's that banana truck? I don't see it.

It's pathetic and like folks who think wrestling is real.

[OlongJohnson]

Circuses.

[blues]

Circuses.

And no bread.

[OlongJohnson]

Let them eat cake.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

The circus just went out of business. Maybe that bodes well for the future.

Get people good jobs, defend the country, figure out how folks can afford health care, have a reasonable budget - stop screwing around with your idiot 'social / culture issues. That means the personal control stupidity of both tribes. Mind your own damn business. Both tribes accept that folks do things that you don't like. You don't have to do them.

[critter]

I don't mean to come across as a Trump fanboy but I keep hearing this and wonder why? Did you really think that Trump would change the recipe once he got into office?


Nope. Not really. Hoping he'd transform himself to a higher level, even while being himself, is a bit different than having actual expectation that he would. :cool:



What is making him incompetent? That he tweets silly things or things you don't agree with? Has he not reversed a ton of Obama's policies that were so far left that Harry Reid cringed?


Well one glaring example is that some of his tweets undermined what others of his own staff have said in their professional capacity. This couldn't possibly have happened in a vacuum. If he can't at least get on the same page with those who are looking out for his best interest, one way or another, I'd say that doesn't yet represent the high level of competence necessary to git'erdone.



While he makes me cringe at times, what is see is a guy who is pretty transparent about things and is doing a far better job than his predecessor in getting this country moving without spending billions of dollars doing it. He's also pissed off a lot of people on both sides of the aisle that needed a wake up call :cool:

I still have hope that he will improve as he settles further in and understands the nuanced differences between CEO/Boss and President/Statesman. I also understand that I'm probably in the minority in thinking that a higher level of personal restraint and long term focus is actually necessary if he expects to get things done. It is what it is what it always was. I voted for him, and I'm still on the team. I'm also critical where I think honest criticism is necessary.

[mmc45414]

It has occurred to me that "Hope" was Obama's tag line but when it involves Trump many are inferring it is a crime.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

[Sensei]

Sessions did a very good job today. My assessment so far is that Comey is looking very bad as having leaked / fed rumor and innuendo to Congress and the press.

[Wondering Beard]

Now that's trolling:

"“It sounds very strange when the head of the security services writes down a conversation with the commander-in-chief and then leaks it to the media through his friend ... How, in that case, does he differ from [Edward] Snowden?” the Russian president asked, referring to the NSA whistleblower who has been given political asylum in Russia.

“That means he is not the leader of the security services, but a human rights defender. And if he faces pressure, then we are happy to offer him political asylum, too,” said Putin."

Putin jokingly offers Comey asylum during annual phone-in session (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/15/vladimir-putin-russia-phone-in-session-james-comey-snowden-asylum)

[Bart Carter]

Interesting fact: If a special prosecutor has a relationship with a witness, the prosecutor must recuse himself. Comey and Mueller have an extensive relationship in so many ways Mueller could not possibly retain his position.

Of course if Mueller is the straight arrow that everyone says he is, that might not be best for Trump.