tequila4kapp;842838640 said:

---

The truth is we don't know.

Trump's inclusion of the "you exonerated my 3 times" language is highly suspicious. But it could just as easily be another instance of Trump's hyper sensitivity / defensiveness as it could be a clue the investigation uncovered criminal activity by others.

The other thing to consider is the recent Congressional approval for the DoJ's #2 (?) person. I think that's the person Comey directly reports to. That person wrote the detailed letter explaining Comey's termination. The filling of that position could easily be at play here too.

---

That's really it. Sessions firing him would have been much worse without a number 2 in place. Comey should/would have been fired in January if they had someone

GB54;842838636 said:

---

We're definitely in topsy turvy world- Trump fires Comey because he mishandled the email investigation ( which helped elect him) and now the Dems, who wanted him out for same, want him back. I'm enjoying this.

---

But did they really want Comey fired so that Trump could appoint his successor (for the next 10 years)? And Obama couldn't fire him...before the election, it would've looked political and after it would mean that Trump would pick the next FBI director.

okaydo;842838637 said:

---

Per the NY Times, Comey was addressing employees in Westwood at FBI's LA HQs when the TV screens started flashing that he had been fired. He thought it was a prank.

---

I am not a fan of Comey. But this is bush league, if it happened. Nobody deserves to be treated that way.

okaydo;842838644 said:

---

But did they really want Comey fired so that Trump could appoint his successor (for the next 10 years)? And Obama couldn't fire him...before the election, it would've looked political and after it would mean that Trump would pick the next FBI director.

---

Well, it's not supposed to be a political appointment, but yes- he definitely contributed to their candidate's defeat. Trump played it all wrong, though; he should have fired him early as a bi-partisan gesture

GB54;842838641 said:

---

He needs a bow tie and crew cut , plus Cox was competent

---

Interestingly, one of Cox's relatives Senator Sherman Day was one of the original trustees of The University of California.

NYCGOBEARS;842838648 said:

---

Interestingly, one of Cox's relatives Senator Sherman Day was one of the original trustees of The University of California.

---

That is interesting, I always had him fixed as the tweedy New Englander wearing suede shoes

GATC;842838590 said:

---

Some buzz that it could be Trey Gowdy. He's "impartial".

---

My money is on Scott Baio

BearChemist;842838638 said:

---

You are naive if you really think the reason of Comey firing is about HRC's email investigation.

---

Yes and no. Comey usurped his authority. It is not his decision as to whether there is enough evidence for prosecution, it is the AG's office. Plus it is not his role to hold a press conference and publicly chastise someone who is not being prosecuted. He deserved to go, but I'm not naive enough to think that is the only reason.

tequila4kapp;842838645 said:

---

I am not a fan of Comey. But this is bush league, if it happened. Nobody deserves to be treated that way.

---

Can't belive this President would fire someone on TV.

Sorry for going a bit off-topic, but I just saw this hilarious political ad:

[video=youtube;5Cj5i8AEIu8][/video]

GB54;842838636 said:

---

We're definitely in topsy turvy world- Trump fires Comey because he mishandled the email investigation ( which helped elect him) and now the Dems, who wanted him out for same, want him back. I'm enjoying this.

---

Me too. Comey had to go and going in this manner has cast Trump in the worst possible light.

As an aside, Comey was going to testify in front of the Senate on Thursday. I suppose he still can.

GB54;842838649 said:

---

That is interesting, I always had him fixed as the tweedy New Englander wearing suede shoes

---

He was, as was Day. They come from a long and storied political family originating in New England but ultimately exerting influence from coast to coast.

NYCGOBEARS - No. What Comey did was way off the reservation. Even in California, when an investigative agency thinks their case should be filed they don't file the case. The DA's office does that and if they refuse to file and prosecute they usually don't explain in detail the facts of the case. I have worked in two different DAs offices for more than 30 years - no Chief of Police, no cop, no Sheriff or his deputy ever thought he had the authority to prosecute a case. The prosecutor, not the investigator, makes that decision. If the DA himself is recused, that doesn't mean that no one in his office can't decide to file a case. A Judge may order that if he is asked to do so. Even if the whole DA's office is recused, the Attorney General's Office or a neighboring DA's Office can take over the case. So Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton and decided to recuse herself. That doesn't mean that her immediate assistant can't make that decision. But Comey jumped in and took over. He was wrong to do so.
Now we found out that Comey's explanation on Clinton's emails was factually wrong on very important details.
Comey lost the confidence of the newly appointed Chief Deputy US AG (who was just confirmed by the US Senate 94-6) and the AG so the President fired Comey.
The Dems who blasted Comey just months ago are saying this is a repeat of Nixon's firing of Cox. Schumer should change his name to Schmuck. Schumer has proven to be an absurd hypocrite.
Was this badly handled (Comey was notified by TV that he was fired)? Absolutely - typical of the Trump administration. But that doesn't mean this firing was wrong or unjustified.

BerlinerBaer;842838658 said:

---

Me too. Comey had to go and going in this manner has cast Trump in the worst possible light.

As an aside, Comey was going to testify in front of the Senate on Thursday. I suppose he still can.

---

Comey is testifying to Congress tomorrow in a closed door session. Trump is meeting Russia's foreign minister in the Oval Office, also tomorrow. Reporting out that an FBI Grand Jury recently delivered subpoenas to associates of Russiasn agent, Michael Flynn.

NYCGOBEARS;842838639 said:

---

Is Comey gonna be the new Archibald Cox?

---

Cox was the special prosecutor.

joe yaks;842838665 said:

---

Cox was the special prosecutor.

---

I know. He was fired and it was the beginning of the end for Nixon.

okaydo - hilarious but I would bet it is very effective in Georgia

tequila4kapp;842838626 said:

---

I was about 8 so a little before my time but I'm a History major so I am aware.


I was in favor of a special prosecutor when Lynch met with Clinton on the tarmac and Comey - still reporting up to Lynch - was put in the awkward position of making the prosecutorial decision instead of acting as law enforcement only. I felt more strongly about it after the very strange "extremely reckless" isn't "negligent" decision.

A special prosecutor is probably the only way out of this now.

Bigger picture, I firmly believe the current state is a direct result of the unprecedented politicization of the DoJ under Obama. Maybe using a Special Prosecutor here and final resolution of the whole enchilada - Clinton emails, Russia, etc. - whatever that may be, can get us to an overall better place with a DoJ that goes back to its traditional role.

---

Leaving aside how much the DoJ has been "politicized," I am glad to see a consensus is now forming about the need for an independent investigation. Good.

CAL6371;842838663 said:

---

NYCGOBEARS - No. What Comey did was way off the reservation. Even in California, when an investigative agency thinks their case should be filed they don't file the case. The DA's office does that and if they refuse to file and prosecute they usually don't explain in detail the facts of the case. I have worked in two different DAs offices for more than 30 years - no Chief of Police, no cop, no Sheriff or his deputy ever thought he had the authority to prosecute a case. The prosecutor, not the investigator, makes that decision. If the DA himself is recused, that doesn't mean that no one in his office can't decide to file a case. A Judge may order that if he is asked to do so. Even if the whole DA's office is recused, the Attorney General's Office or a neighboring DA's Office can take over the case. So Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton and decided to recuse herself. That doesn't mean that her immediate assistant can't make that decision. But Comey jumped in and took over. He was wrong to do so.
Now we found out that Comey's explanation on Clinton's emails was factually wrong on very important details.
Comey lost the confidence of the newly appointed Chief Deputy US AG (who was just confirmed by the US Senate 94-6) and the AG so the President fired Comey.
The Dems who blasted Comey just months ago are saying this is a repeat of Nixon's firing of Cox. Schumer should change his name to Schmuck. Schumer has proven to be an absurd hypocrite.
Was this badly handled (Comey was notified by TV that he was fired)? Absolutely - typical of the Trump administration. But that doesn't mean this firing was wrong or unjustified.

---

1. Do you support an independent investigation or not?

2. Can you point me to your post criticizing Comey conduct for mistreating Hillary before he was fired?

CAL6371;842838670 said:

---

okaydo - hilarious but I would bet it is very effective in Georgia

---

Wow -- Hillary was 1 point below Trump. Seems that area is becoming more liberal.

1. It is still NO
2. I had no post on that matter because I wasn't sure exactly how the Federal system was different than the California system. I was never a federal prosecutor (I turned the job down). Watching former Federal prosecutors on the news showed me that the rules are similar - the investigating agency doesn't decide who to charge - the prosecutor does. One exception - in the Cal system if a DA's Office is recused - then you can bring in the Cal Attorney General's Office to make the decision whether or not to prosecute. There is no such existing office in the Federal System which can perform that duty outside of appointing a special prosecutor.

It's not a constitutional crisis. During the Trump administration it's just a Tuesday.

NYCGOBEARS;842838615 said:

---

When you're already rich, what more is there to obtain? Power. That's Trump's motivation. Those around him just see the ultimate networking and enrichment opportunity.

---

Like Montgomery Burns once said, Trump would give up all his money for just a little bit more.

MSaviolives;842838574 said:

---

We should have a BI pool on how long Trump remains in office

---

7 1/2 years. OH, MI, PA and WI.

Cal88;842838703 said:

---

7 1/2 years. OH, MI, PA and WI.

---

2012 Obama in Ohio: 50.67%
2016 Trump in Ohio: 51.69%

2012 Obama in Michigan: 54.21%
2016 Trump in Michigan: 47.50%

2012 Obama in Wisconsin: 52.83%
2016 Trump in Michigan: 47.22%

2012 Obama in Pennsylvania: 51.97%
2016 Trump in Pennsylvania: 48.18%

2012 Obama in Florida: 50.01%
2016 Trump in Florida: 49.02%


1. All it takes for the non-Trump voters is to back 1 single candidate.

2. 93% of Trump voters approve of him after 3 months. That might sound like a lot. But those 7% could make a huge difference.

3. Most presidents are boring ("No Drama Obama"). The citizens basically ignore them -- yes, even Bill Clinton (pre-Lewinsky).

But Trump likes to create constant drama, whether it's via Twitter or press conferences. He likes making news and being at the center of attention, and it becomes even more heightened in this internet/social media age. He likes to frequently shoehorn himself into everybody's lives, while, for most Americans, the president usually disappears.

We are in the 24th month of Trump being the No. 1 news story.

By the time of the next election, we'll be in the 66th month.

After 66 months of Constant Donald Drama, will the country -- who already disfavors Trump -- want another 50 months?

okaydo;842838707 said:

---

2012 Obama in Ohio: 50.67%
2016 Trump in Ohio: 51.69%

2012 Obama in Michigan: 54.21%
2016 Trump in Michigan: 47.50%

2012 Obama in Wisconsin: 52.83%
2016 Trump in Michigan: 47.22%

2012 Obama in Pennsylvania: 51.97%
2016 Trump in Pennsylvania: 48.18%

2012 Obama in Florida: 50.01%
2016 Trump in Florida: 49.02%


1. All it takes for the non-Trump voters is to back 1 single candidate.

2. 93% of Trump voters approve of him after 3 months. That might sound like a lot. But those 7% could make a huge difference.

3. Most presidents are boring ("No Drama Obama"). The citizens basically ignore them -- yes, even Bill Clinton (pre-Lewinsky).

But Trump likes to create constant drama, whether it's via Twitter or press conferences. He likes making news and being at the center of attention, and it becomes even more heightened in this internet/social media age. He likes to frequently shoehorn himself into everybody's lives, while, for most Americans, the president usually disappears.

We are in the 24th month of Trump being the No. 1 news story.

By the time of the next election, we'll be in the 66th month.

After 66 months of Constant Donald Drama, will the country -- who already disfavors Trump -- want another 50 months?

---

It really depends on if the democrats change imho. If they follow the same book to try to elect another Hillary..they will lose again. So far after watching how the DNC elected their new chairman I'm not convinced they got the message. I've considered myself democrat for a long time, but I've moved to independent now, I was really soured by the last election and the leadership of both parties. My main focus has always been jobs, safety net(healthcare comes under this), unions. Everyone looks at different stuff but a candidate that addresses those issues is ok with me.

MinotStateBeav;842838710 said:

---

It really depends on if the democrats change imho. If they follow the same book to try to elect another Hillary..they will lose again. So far after watching how the DNC elected their new chairman I'm not convinced they got the message. I've considered myself democrat for a long time, but I've moved to independent now, I was really soured by the last election and the leadership of both parties. My main focus has always been jobs, safety net(healthcare comes under this), unions. Everyone looks at different stuff but a candidate that addresses those issues is ok with me.

---

I'll just point out that Hillary got more votes than either Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump.

This thread has shown me the denizens of this site are even more out of touch with reality than I thought. Lines are being drawn that history will long judge. Which side are you on?

Americans love reality shows. This is the ultimate one.

And here is the Russian Foreign Minister standing with our Secretary of State and mocking the firing of our FBI Director who was investigating Russian assets within our government. There were Patriots and Tories. There were Unionists and Confederates. Same situation today.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/lavrov-jokes-about-comey-firing

News flash. The cold war ended decades ago. Russia meddles in elections but did not HACK our election. They merely spewed propaganda based on facts, which hurt war hawk hillary and gave us idiot trump. We have been DIRECTLY affecting elections around the world for more than a century, executing democratically elected leaders to further our business interests. We have no leg to stand on when it comes to complaining about russia. Enough.

"The cold war ended decades ago."

:rollinglaugh:

Trump's a master of the three ring circus- pass a crappy health care bill, arm Kurds in Syria and fire Comey. Which one will the media and Dems lather over- the wrong one, for sure.

okaydo;842838707 said:

---

2012 Obama in Ohio: 50.67%
2016 Trump in Ohio: 51.69%

2012 Obama in Michigan: 54.21%
2016 Trump in Michigan: 47.50%

2012 Obama in Wisconsin: 52.83%
2016 Trump in Michigan: 47.22%

2012 Obama in Pennsylvania: 51.97%
2016 Trump in Pennsylvania: 48.18%

2012 Obama in Florida: 50.01%
2016 Trump in Florida: 49.02%


1. All it takes for the non-Trump voters is to back 1 single candidate.

2. 93% of Trump voters approve of him after 3 months. That might sound like a lot. But those 7% could make a huge difference.

3. Most presidents are boring ("No Drama Obama"). The citizens basically ignore them -- yes, even Bill Clinton (pre-Lewinsky).

But Trump likes to create constant drama, whether it's via Twitter or press conferences. He likes making news and being at the center of attention, and it becomes even more heightened in this internet/social media age. He likes to frequently shoehorn himself into everybody's lives, while, for most Americans, the president usually disappears.

We are in the 24th month of Trump being the No. 1 news story.

By the time of the next election, we'll be in the 66th month.

After 66 months of Constant Donald Drama, will the country -- who already disfavors Trump -- want another 50 months?

---

Totally agree with your point #2. If Trump were to lose 7% of his voters that would make a big change in the next election provided that the Dems did not lose any of theirs.

People forget that 25% of the electorate continued to support Nixon even after he was impeached. That shows that a president's hard core voters will not abandon him whatever he does.

bearsandgiants;842838719 said:

---

News flash. The cold war ended decades ago. Russia meddles in elections but did not HACK our election. They merely spewed propaganda based on facts, which hurt war hawk hillary and gave us idiot trump. We have been DIRECTLY affecting elections around the world for more than a century, executing democratically elected leaders to further our business interests. We have no leg to stand on when it comes to complaining about russia. Enough.

---

I'm not sure it's fair to even call it propaganda. The materials released by WikiLeaks were accurate source materials. The TRUTH about the DNC, HRC and others was revealed. It was meddling because it was mostly a one sided release of info.

bearsandgiants;842838719 said:

---

News flash. The cold war ended decades ago. Russia meddles in elections but did not HACK our election. They merely spewed propaganda based on facts, which hurt war hawk hillary and gave us idiot trump. We have been DIRECTLY affecting elections around the world for more than a century, executing democratically elected leaders to further our business interests. We have no leg to stand on when it comes to complaining about russia. Enough.

---

+1 Well stated.

And now working on a new cold war.

My day after reaction...

I'm less convinced / concerned this is a cover up. The investigation continues by the FBI without Comey. The interim FBI director is far from Trump/Republican friendly, he being the guy who's wife took 700k for her Dem campaign. I think this is likely another instance of Trump being a businessman who's inclined to fire people for poor performance and who simply is not sophisticated in the ways of Washington to appreciate (or care) how things look.