Trump fires FBI Director James Comey.

[townsend]

You are saying two different things. Read closely. You said Trump said "THE INVESTIGATION BEING THE REASON FOR HIM BEING FIRED WAS A HOAX". But, now you are trying to twist it and reach to say that he said the investigation itself is a hoax.

Oh no. You misunderstood. Here's what he said

Recounting his decision to dismiss Comey, Trump told NBC News, “In fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, ‘You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story, it’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.’”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-says-fbi-director-comey-told-him-three-times-he-wasnt-under-investigation-once-in-a-phone-call-initiated-by-the-president/2017/05/11/2b384c9a-3669-11e7-b4ee-434b6d506b37_story.html?utm_term=.010adaa8dbf9

 

[L.T. Fan]

So if Trump fires the next one because the Russia investigation is still a "hoax", is that okay? How much of a leap is it to say that firing a person because you don't like an investigation means that you want a guy who also doesn't like that investigation?

I just wonder why you feel the need to defend this Asshole. Because if it were Hillary, I bet you'd be on my side right now.

I dont know what Trump's intentions were, no one does. But the optics make it pretty apparent, and the white house conflicting its own reasoning 5 times points to them not wanting to admit the real reason.

So when they even bring up the Russia investigation it should be seen as a big deal, because if it played a roll, at all, in the decision to fire Comey, it's obstruction of justice.

Trump didn't fire him because the investigation was a hoax. He fired him for cause which was stated that he could no longer be an effective Director of the FBI. Your claims are just fantasy from your brain.. The hoax thing was an afterthought.

 

[townsend]

Trump didn't fire him because the investigation was a hoax. He fired him for cause which was stated that he could no longer be an effective Director of the FBI. Your claims are just fantasy from your brain..

The white house has stated 5 different reasons, including the one I quoted above. Only you would see a kid with his hand in the cookie jar and expect people to entertain his rambling, nonsensical, conflicting explanations.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I know what they said but by rule you have to terminate for cause. The cause was he could no longer be an effective Director. Anything else is just someone adding narrative.

 

[Simpleton]

The white house has stated 5 different reasons, including the one I quoted above. Only you would see a kid with his hand in the cookie jar and expect people to entertain his rambling, nonsensical, conflicting explanations.

I wonder if these very same people making any excuse imaginable under the sun would be bending over backwards in the same manner if you simply replaced Trump with Clinton and she had taken the exact same actions.

Of course I'm kidding, I don't wonder because I know exactly what their responses would be.

 

[Cotton]

The white house has stated 5 different reasons, including the one I quoted above. Only you would see a kid with his hand in the cookie jar and expect people to entertain his rambling, nonsensical, conflicting explanations.

So, he had 5 different reasons to fire him? Sounds like a Bradie Bottle lock.

 

[townsend]

I wonder if these very same people making any excuse imaginable under the sun would be bending over backwards in the same manner if you simply replaced Trump with Clinton and she had taken the exact same actions.

Of course I'm kidding, I don't wonder because I know exactly what their responses would be.

I just don't get the devotion. When Comey closed the Hillary investigation in the summer, most liberals agreed she at least kind of got away with something. Very few people thought she was completely innocent. Likewise, when Bill Clinton got impeached, no one believed his BS reasoning for why he didn't perjur himself.

This is like if people had said "No Bill didn't lie, you just don't understand what the word "is" means."

 

[2233boys]

I just don't get the devotion. When Comey closed the Hillary investigation in the summer, most liberals agreed she at least kind of got away with something. Very few people thought she was completely innocent. Likewise, when Bill Clinton got impeached, no one believed his BS reasoning for why he didn't perjur himself.

This is like if people had said "No Bill didn't lie, you just don't understand what the word "is" means."

I see it as two factions or dynamics playing out now.

We have the cultist who Trump accurately said would defend him if he killed someone. Trumpism is their cult and Trump theur Jim Jones.

For many others they are thoughtful people who believed the snake oil salesman or couldnt vote for Clinton. They are in defense mode now because they realized they were conned but aren't ready to admit it.

I'll let you figure out what dynamics we have at play here.

 

[townsend]

If dems flip the house and 2018 and give Trump the same treatment Hillary got after Benghazi, I think it's over. Not because they'll definitively get to the bottom of it, but because I don't think Trump can make it through a deposition. Every interview and press conference he's done has been rambling nonsense. I'm not in the legal profession, so maybe people from that background would know better, but it seems like a frequently confused, compulsive liar like Trump would get ruined if he had speak under oath, to a hostile congress.

 

[Cotton]

I see it as two factions or dynamics playing out now.

We have the cultist who Trump accurately said would defend him if he killed someone. Trumpism is their cult and Trump theur Jim Jones.

For many others they are thoughtful people who believed the snake oil salesman or couldnt vote for Clinton. They are in defense mode now because they realized they were conned but aren't ready to admit it.

I'll let you figure out what dynamics we have at play here.

DON'T YOU PIGEONHOLE ME!

 

[Angrymesscan]

I know what they said but by rule you have to terminate for cause. The cause was he could no longer be an effective Director. Anything else is just someone adding narrative.

This seems rather subjective.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I see it as two factions or dynamics playing out now.

We have the cultist who Trump accurately said would defend him if he killed someone. Trumpism is their cult and Trump theur Jim Jones.

For many others they are thoughtful people who believed the snake oil salesman or couldnt vote for Clinton. They are in defense mode now because they realized they were conned but aren't ready to admit it.

I'll let you figure out what dynamics we have at play here.

 

[L.T. Fan]

This seems rather subjective.

It is subjective to the extent that an established criteria is used as the guideline for being successful at a position. I don't know what Trumps guidelines were/are but at that level of government the appointees are at the pleasure of the President and what ever he assesses is correct is the standard that is used.

At career level employees, the USOPM guidelines determine how employees are reviewed and assessed. Personnel reviews are done once a year on all career employees by their supervisors at every level.

The Presidential appointees are subject only to the Presidents assessment at his/her discretion. There is no fairness issues involved.

 

[L.T. Fan]

So, he had 5 different reasons to fire him? Sounds like a Bradie Bottle lock.

Actually the President doesn't even have to have a reason to deal with appointees. It's purely discretionary.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I wonder if these very same people making any excuse imaginable under the sun would be bending over backwards in the same manner if you simply replaced Trump with Clinton and she had taken the exact same actions.

Of course I'm kidding, I don't wonder because I know exactly what their responses would be.

You'd see everyone flop. Republicans would be screaming bloody murder and people like Townsend would be defending it. We all already saw this happen basically. All the Democrats were screaming for Comey's head when Trump got elected and now they are crying the opposite. Just like the Republican's that supported Comey back then are now claiming how incompetent he was now.

 

[Angrymesscan]

You'd see everyone flop. Republicans would be screaming bloody murder and people like Townsend would be defending it. We all already saw this happen basically. All the Democrats were screaming for Comey's head when Trump got elected and now they are crying the opposite. Just like the Republican's that supported Comey back then are now claiming how incompetent he was now.

I'd consider this a sign he was doing a decent job, kinda like when both teams complain about the ref...

 

[L.T. Fan]

I'd consider this a sign he was doing a decent job, kinda like when both teams complain about the ref...

Yeah that's pretty good.

 

[Simpleton]

You'd see everyone flop. Republicans would be screaming bloody murder and people like Townsend would be defending it. We all already saw this happen basically. All the Democrats were screaming for Comey's head when Trump got elected and now they are crying the opposite. Just like the Republican's that supported Comey back then are now claiming how incompetent he was now.

Are you really not able to differentiate Democrats wanting him fired months ago for unnecessarily affecting the election but now being upset because of the possibility that the President is setting a precedent based on his own personal desire to affect an investigation?

 

[Simpleton]

So do you guys think it's normal for a President to basically threaten a former FBI director with "tapes" of their conversations?

Or do we just want to pretend like this is all business as usual?

 

[L.T. Fan]

Are you really not able to differentiate Democrats wanting him fired months ago for unnecessarily affecting the election but now being upset because of the possibility that the President is setting a precedent based on his own personal desire to affect an investigation?

Yeah. One alleges an election was rigged and the other alleges an investigation was rigged.

My personal opinion is the neither happened and both are politically motivated.