DC Tom Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 Every new admin should immediately fire/release all intelligence directors and all working for the Attorney General for the previous admin, even without cause or concern, just get it over with. Same as cabinet cleaning, keeping some around if they are vital and useful. Wouldn't make a difference. They do that with district attorneys, and Trump got raked over the coals for that, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 Wouldn't make a difference. They do that with district attorneys, and Trump got raked over the coals for that, too. Anyone remotely okay with Trump couldn't possibly care less what the media reports. Not a tinker's dam is given. So if we can have one wish granted would it be film footage of: 1) The reaction of Hil and Bill when they were told Comey had re-opened the investigation; or 2) Her reaction when it finally sank in that Trump had won the election. That there was indeed a highway to 270 electoral votes, kiddo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 And Comey managed, via either incompetence or malfeasance, to step on his dick and misrepresent the information to Congress. I'd probably find all of this hand-wringing hilarious, if I could understand one damn thing the left was thinking right now. They say Comey threw the election in Trump's favor by making public statements on the Clinton email investigation and supposedly stonewalls the investigation in to Trump's ties to Russia - who, like Comey, hacked the election for Trump's benefit. But now, in mere seconds, they change their mind and decide he must have been making too much progress against their bete noire on the investigation they accused him of stonewalling to the benefit of their bete noire, and completely ignore the !@#$ed-up testimony he just gave to Congress that was unreasonably favorable to Trump? Bunch of reactionary crybabies. The left is panicked because they suspect Trump's coming for the CF now. That's a big domino that will ensnare lots of establishment folks on both sides of the aisle and in all sorts of positions of power in the media. I'm not sure he is going to come hard after the CF now, the pick for new head will be telling. If it's Gowdy or Chaffetz (or even Christie), Hilldawg might want to think about finding a non extradition country to retire to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 Yes the Republican senators calling this firing into question should take their partisan blinders off. Good point. And what new revelations about the emails? Are we seriously still talking about that? This is one of the more ironic posts I've seen here in a while, and I'm not talking about the Alanis Morissette kind of irony, either. You want Republican senators -- who are challenging a Republican president's decision -- to take off their partisan blinders? Really? Explain how they're being partisan, please. And to top it off, you are quick to jump into this discussion to criticize the right, and you're not even aware of Comey admitting how Huma forwarded Hillary's classified emails to her pedohphile husband? Why are you in this discussion if you so clearly have no idea what you're talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 This is one of the more ironic posts I've seen here in a while, and I'm not talking about the Alanis Morissette kind of irony, either. You want Republican senators -- who are challenging a Republican president's decision -- to take off their partisan blinders? Really? Explain how they're being partisan, please. And to top it off, you are quick to jump into this discussion to criticize the right, and you're not even aware of Comey admitting how Huma forwarded Hillary's classified emails to her pedohphile husband? Why are you in this discussion if you so clearly have no idea what you're talking about? "But they weren't classified at the time, and weren't marked classified!" As though it's okay to forward government emails to family at all. Again: I can't tell you the world of **** I would be in if I forwarded any work-related emails to my wife. But Clinton...hell, she can forward with impunity meeting minutes from her meetings with DoD to her daughter...I guess because Chelsea's an admiral or something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 And Comey managed, via either incompetence or malfeasance, to step on his dick and misrepresent the information to Congress. I'd probably find all of this hand-wringing hilarious, if I could understand one damn thing the left was thinking right now. They say Comey threw the election in Trump's favor by making public statements on the Clinton email investigation and supposedly stonewalls the investigation in to Trump's ties to Russia - who, like Comey, hacked the election for Trump's benefit. But now, in mere seconds, they change their mind and decide he must have been making too much progress against their bete noire on the investigation they accused him of stonewalling to the benefit of their bete noire, and completely ignore the !@#$ed-up testimony he just gave to Congress that was unreasonably favorable to Trump? Bunch of reactionary crybabies. you're on it today. Washington is a gigantic crock pot of hypocrisy and back-scratching, and it's never been more obvious than since President Trump took over. Those lefty and lefty-moderate leaning folks who point to REPUBLICANS who are aghast at this most recent event are pretty hung up on titles. Its fairly obvious that President Trump views many in r leadership as part of the problem, and it's painfully obvious that they see him as a threat to a) the country or b) to their base of power. I think the question ultimately boils down to whether or not the president had the power to do what he did. Obv, since President Clinton (the Clinton who was actually president, not the other Clinton who ran a couple of horrible campaigns to try and get elected) fired the FBI director back when he was in monica, oops, office. I thought the letter from the AAG laid out the case from removal pretty clearly. Then again, maybe he's in on it too. I have found the yates/Flynn/Trump discussion fascinating. yates brings information to the attention of the white house, and 17 days later, Flynn is out. Obama's secretary of state played fast and loose with national security for 4 years and her time in the woodshed boils down to "she's really sorry, let's make her prez...". Unreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 The left is panicked because they suspect Trump's coming for the CF now. That's a big domino that will ensnare lots of establishment folks on both sides of the aisle and in all sorts of positions of power in the media. I'm not sure he is going to come hard after the CF now, the pick for new head will be telling. If it's Gowdy or Chaffetz (or even Christie), Hilldawg might want to think about finding a non extradition country to retire to. If the Clintons worked under the same rules of government records management that I do, all of the Clinton Foundation's media should now be subject to confiscation at Congressional request. Given the way that Hillary co-mingled Foundation and government business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 If the Clintons worked under the same rules of government records management that I do, all of the Clinton Foundation's media should now be subject to confiscation at Congressional request. Given the way that Hillary co-mingled Foundation and government business. Pretty much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 This is one of the more ironic posts I've seen here in a while, and I'm not talking about the Alanis Morissette kind of irony, either. You want Republican senators -- who are challenging a Republican president's decision -- to take off their partisan blinders? Really? Explain how they're being partisan, please. And to top it off, you are quick to jump into this discussion to criticize the right, and you're not even aware of Comey admitting how Huma forwarded Hillary's classified emails to her pedohphile husband? Why are you in this discussion if you so clearly have no idea what you're talking about? YOU don't know what you're talking about. I was being sarcastic about Jeff Flake. You're telling me to "remove my partisan blunders," meanwhile several Republicans have already expressed concern about the timing. That should tell you it isn't merely "partisan blinders." And do you mean this report? http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-abedin-didn-t-send-as-many-emails-as-1494345658-htmlstory.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/09/report-comeys-testimony-on-amount-clinton-emails-on-laptop-was-misleading.html Uh huh, what exactly does this reveal? Nothing. Just another wild goose chase for certain media types to follow. I'm sure you see this as bigger news than the FBI director being fired by the man he's investigating for foreign collusion, but to moderate America the real news to pay attention to is pretty obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 If the Clintons worked under the same rules of government records management that I do, all of the Clinton Foundation's media should now be subject to confiscation at Congressional request. Given the way that Hillary co-mingled Foundation and government business. It's calculated to be sleazy enough to draw attention but not criminal enough to indict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 YOU don't know what you're talking about. I was being sarcastic about Jeff Flake. You're telling me to "remove my partisan blunders," meanwhile several Republicans have already expressed concern about the timing. That should tell you it isn't merely "partisan blinders." And do you mean this report? http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-abedin-didn-t-send-as-many-emails-as-1494345658-htmlstory.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/09/report-comeys-testimony-on-amount-clinton-emails-on-laptop-was-misleading.html Uh huh, what exactly does this reveal? Nothing. Just another wild goose chase for certain media types to follow. I'm sure you see this as bigger news than the FBI director being fired by the man he's investigating for foreign collusion, but to moderate America the real news to pay attention to is pretty obvious. You're focused on entirely the wrong elements of those stories. They're blinding you with smoke and emotional trigger words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 BACKFIRE alert! Audience reaction to Comey firing NOT what Stephen Colbert wanted. COLBERT: Trump fired Comey NY AUDIENCE: YEAAAAAAAAAAAH COLBERT: No guys, this is bad. Here's some awful jokes to explain why. AUDIENCE: Boo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 10, 2017 Author Share Posted May 10, 2017 You're focused on entirely the wrong elements of those stories. They're blinding you with smoke and emotional trigger words. No, he's right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 RAND PAUL: Comey firing ‘couldn’t happen soon enough.’ “He had the confidence of almost no one.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 And Comey managed, via either incompetence or malfeasance, to step on his dick and misrepresent the information to Congress. I'd probably find all of this hand-wringing hilarious, if I could understand one damn thing the left was thinking right now. They say Comey threw the election in Trump's favor by making public statements on the Clinton email investigation and supposedly stonewalls the investigation in to Trump's ties to Russia - who, like Comey, hacked the election for Trump's benefit. But now, in mere seconds, they change their mind and decide he must have been making too much progress against their bete noire on the investigation they accused him of stonewalling to the benefit of their bete noire, and completely ignore the !@#$ed-up testimony he just gave to Congress that was unreasonably favorable to Trump? Bunch of reactionary crybabies. I was willing to give Comey the benefit of the doubt RE: the election: as head of the FBI you could argue he had a responsibility to inform Congress and the general public about purported malfeasance on the part of the DNC. The timing made the optics, but if his intentions were in accordance with his job description it was less a dereliction of duty than a simple case of damned if you do and vice versa. Similarly the recommendation, which Trump publicly agreed with IIRC. His (Comey's) being a prosecutorial background...while it may not have been within his purview to make such a claim, it's not difficult to view his actions as expedient albeit sloppy. Neither of which, IMO, really warranted his firing which is what makes the timing of this move seem odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 That seems to be the one thing Trump's consistent on: you can be stupid, but don't lie and make him look like a fool. Yeah, because that's his job. He doesn't need any help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 10, 2017 Author Share Posted May 10, 2017 Drip..drip...drip.. WASHINGTON — Days before he was fired, James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, asked the Justice Department for a significant increase in money and personnel for the bureau’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the presidential election, according to three officials with knowledge of his request. Mr. Comey asked for the resources during a meeting last week with Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general who wrote the Justice Department’s memo that was used to justify the firing of the F.B.I. director this week. Mr. Comey then briefed members of Congress on the meeting in recent days. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/us/politics/comey-russia-investigation-fbi.html?smid=tw-share&_r=3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 You're focused on entirely the wrong elements of those stories. They're blinding you with smoke and emotional trigger words. What am I supposed to gain from a cryptic statement like this? Talk to me like a normal person if you have a point to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 The best part of Podesta's feed these days are the comments. He should probably avoid using words like trigger words like massacre, no matter how much he enjoys them. I think he used 'massacre' in reference to Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 I think he used 'massacre' in reference to Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre. that was bad news for Nixon, just added to the bonfire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts