Trump finally fires James Comey

[ClimateSanity]

The simple explanation for firing Trump when he did

https://www.google.com/amp/www.brei...017/05/09/james-comey-simple-explanation/amp/

But why fire Comey now? The answer is simple. The day before, President Barack Obama’s former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper*repeated, under oath, what he*told*NBC News’ Chuck Todd on*Meet the Press*on March 5 — that he had seen no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. That gave the Trump administration the breathing room to*dismiss*Comey — which it simply did not have before.

It is true that Trump did not have an attorney general and assistant attorney general in place until relatively late, but he could have acted before then — though having their recommendation*certainly adds weight to his*decision.

Put simply, if Trump had fired Comey while there were still serious questions*about Russia, then it would have been more plausible to accuse him of trying to interfere in the investigation or cover up whatever happened. It is now clear that nothing, in fact, happened. Monday’s hearing with Clapper and former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates was meant*to reveal*a “smoking gun,” and produced nothing but*viral*videos of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX).

 

[rexlunae]

The simple explanation for firing Trump when he did

https://www.google.com/amp/www.brei...017/05/09/james-comey-simple-explanation/amp/

But why fire Comey now? The answer is simple. The day before, President Barack Obama’s former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper*repeated, under oath, what he*told*NBC News’ Chuck Todd on*Meet the Press*on March 5 — that he had seen no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. That gave the Trump administration the breathing room to*dismiss*Comey — which it simply did not have before.

Sorry, that doesn't even come close to cutting it, for several reasons. Consider this exchange:

Chuck Todd (ph) then asked, I understand that, but does it exist? You say no, not to my knowledge. Is that still accurate? CLAPPER: It is. GRAHAM: Ms. Yates, do you have any evidence — are you aware of any evidence that would suggest that in the 2016 campaign anybody in the Trump campaign colluded — colluded with the Russian government intelligence services in improper fashion? YATES: And Senator, my answer to that question would require me to reveal classified information. And so, I — I can't answer that.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...per-testify-on-russian-election-interference/

So, James Clapper, director of national intelligence until January 20th had not seen any such evidence. Sally Yates....declined to answer. She was both in a very different position, that of acting attorney general (i.e. James Comey's boss), and potentially had different sources of information. Her information was enough, at the very least, to implicate Michael Flynn of several crimes, getting herself fired, but ultimately setting up the unravelling of General Flynn. It's unlikely that Clapper ever saw any of that information, as he had retired a whole ten days earlier and didn't work in thee Justice Department.

Beyond that, just the fact that one intelligence official can't support an investigation based on the information they have doesn't invalidate an investigation being conducted by another department. The FBI has a broader purview. And Clapper didn't even suggest that an investigation wasn't warranted.

And finally, it is inappropriate and possibly illegal to shut down a lawful investigation against yourself, no matter how justified you think it is. The FBI has convened a grand jury to look into the allegations. There is an actual process that should be respected.

It is true that Trump did not have an attorney general and assistant attorney general in place until relatively late, but he could have acted before then — though having their recommendation*certainly adds weight to his*decision.

I would bet that he asked for those recommendations to justify his rage-fueled reaction to watching cable news.

Put simply, if Trump had fired Comey while there were still serious questions*about Russia, then it would have been more plausible to accuse him of trying to interfere in the investigation or cover up whatever happened. It is now clear that nothing, in fact, happened. Monday’s hearing with Clapper and former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates was meant*to reveal*a “smoking gun,” and produced nothing but*viral*videos of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX).

There is a serious investigation ongoing. Clapper likely wasn't involved in it, and therefore hasn't seen as much of what's in it as Yates. It's true that no smoking gun was revealed, but the fact that both of the witnesses kept declining to answer in an open setting suggests that a great deal of what is happening is not yet public, either because it is part of an ongoing investigation, which is the point, or it is the product of surveillance and thus classified.

 

[patrick jane]

Collusion is a big fat nothing burger

 

[ClimateSanity]

Sorry, that doesn't even come close to cutting it, for several reasons. Consider this exchange:

Chuck Todd (ph) then asked, I understand that, but does it exist? You say no, not to my knowledge. Is that still accurate? CLAPPER: It is. GRAHAM: Ms. Yates, do you have any evidence — are you aware of any evidence that would suggest that in the 2016 campaign anybody in the Trump campaign colluded — colluded with the Russian government intelligence services in improper fashion? YATES: And Senator, my answer to that question would require me to reveal classified information. And so, I — I can't answer that.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...per-testify-on-russian-election-interference/

So, James Clapper, director of national intelligence until January 20th had not seen any such evidence. Sally Yates....declined to answer. She was both in a very different position, that of acting attorney general (i.e. James Comey's boss), and potentially had different sources of information. Her information was enough, at the very least, to implicate Michael Flynn of several crimes, getting herself fired, but ultimately setting up the unravelling of General Flynn. It's unlikely that Clapper ever saw any of that information, as he had retired a whole ten days earlier and didn't work in thee Justice Department.

Beyond that, just the fact that one intelligence official can't support an investigation based on the information they have doesn't invalidate an investigation being conducted by another department. The FBI has a broader purview. And Clapper didn't even suggest that an investigation wasn't warranted.

And finally, it is inappropriate and possibly illegal to shut down a lawful investigation against yourself, no matter how justified you think it is. The FBI has convened a grand jury to look into the allegations. There is an actual process that should be respected.



I would bet that he asked for those recommendations to justify his rage-fueled reaction to watching cable news.



There is a serious investigation ongoing. Clapper likely wasn't involved in it, and therefore hasn't seen as much of what's in it as Yates. It's true that no smoking gun was revealed, but the fact that both of the witnesses kept declining to answer in an open setting suggests that a great deal of what is happening is not yet public, either because it is part of an ongoing investigation, which is the point, or it is the product of surveillance and thus classified.

I have no idea what you are blabbering on about in your lengthy response to your first quote of me.

 

[ClimateSanity]

You are seriously insane dude.

 

[Rusha]

Collusion is a big fat nothing burger

IF that were true, he wouldn't keep firing those who heading the investigations. He wants to control all of the judges, prosecutors, etc.... like all wanna-be dictators. What he did is eerily similar to how Richard Nixon responded when his corruption being investigated.

 

[jeffblue101]

it's going to get much harder for the Democrats to maintain their conspiracy theory once they find out that the new interm FBI director is a well connected Democrat whose wife ran for a state senate seat as a democrat.
http://heavy.com/news/2017/05/andre...paign-hillary-clinton-donation-children-kids/

 

[jeffblue101]

IF that were true, he wouldn't keep firing those who heading the investigations. He wants to control all of the judges, prosecutors, etc.... like all wanna-be dictators. What he did is eerily similar to how Richard Nixon responded when his corruption being investigated.

he only fired Comey after 6 months at such a pace it would take him at least 20 years to gain complete control:rotfl:

 

[Nick M]

Irrelevant quote

That does not stop US law, which was used and enforced by President Obama, and many before him.

1227(a)(4)(B) of this title (relating to terrorist activity), unless, in the case only of an alien described in subclause (IV) of section 1182(a)(3)(B)(i) of this title, the Attorney General determines, in the Attorney General’s discretion, that there are not reasonable grounds for regarding the alien as a danger to the security of the United States; or

 

[Rusha]

he only fired Comey after 6 months

When he realized he could not control him. EOS. And the era of the Trump Corruption continues. For now.

 

[annabenedetti]

When he realized he could not control him. EOS.

From the NYT:

Comey Fired Because He Could Bring Down a President


From The Cipher Brief:

General Michael Hayden, Former Director, CIA and NSA:

I’m very surprised and stunned as anyone. And I was puzzled by the public explanation of the firing. The explanation was what he did last summer with regard to the Hillary Clinton email investigation. If that was really the cause, the time to release him would have been in January during the transition. So I’m puzzled why we’re doing this now. The thought I had is that Comey is his own man – his critics would say to a fault – and maybe there was some fear—like he did last summer, acting independent of the Attorney General—there was fear from the Administration that he might do the same thing with regard to the Russia investigation.

I mean I’m purely speculating here. I’m trying to avoid the conclusion that we’ve become Nicaragua.

TCB: How is this likely to be perceived in the world?

MH: I have already gotten an email from a foreign friend, asking me what’s going on: “It does seem like your institutions are melting down.” That’s a lone email, but he’s a very astute observer.
​

 

[Nick M]

The main factor was the fact that "Huma Abedin forwarded hundreds or thousands of emails to her husband Anthony Weiner, some of them classified, was wrong". And Comey did not suggest indictment. Or for the private email server.

 

[annabenedetti]

He didn't have a problem with that for six full months. He's feeling the heat from the FBI, and he used the closest vaguely defensible tool to get rid of the problem. There's something called a "pretext".

Comey has bungled so many aspects of his job, I honestly think he's lost a lot of credibility. But actually the letter Sessions sent to Trump (I would bet within the last few hours) mis-characterized the actions related to Clinton's emails. Sessions claimed that Comey had usurped the roll of Department of Justice prosecutors. However, Loretta Lynch had decided to defer to Comey's decisions, in part because she was perceived to have a conflict of interest. Sessions seems to reopen that decision, but it was a decision undertaken by the previous AJ, and he has no business going back and trying to somehow cancel it retroactively. He certainly can disagree with it, but he can't just change what was ordered at the time.

This all leads back to the Trump campaign/Russia connection, so what happened to Sessions recusing himself?

 

[annabenedetti]

The main factor was the fact that "Huma Abedin forwarded hundreds or thousands of emails to her husband Anthony Weiner, some of them classified, was wrong". And Comey did not suggest indictment. Or for the private email server.

If that was true, then Trump would have let him go in the transition - not now, not when Trump's afraid of where the Russia inquiry is headed.

 

[Rusha]

Jeff Sessions was supposed to be recused from all matters related to Hillary Clinton's email investigation. His involvement here has to be investigated.

On the more positive note, when all is said and done, Sessions will forever be linked to Trump (the most corrupt president in history). The new "anti-health, let's give the rich a tax break instead ofhealth-care plan* was bad enough.

 

[northwye]

Comey was the head of the FBI in January of 2016 when Robert LaVoy Finicum was shot and killed by the FBI Hostage Rescue Team and the Oregon State Police.

http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/06/oregon_standoff_case_defense_l.html

"Defense lawyers in the Oregon standoff case want a federal judge to compel the government to turn over records from its investigation into the apparent firing of gunshots by a FBI Hostage Rescue Team member at Robert "LaVoy'' Finicum and alleged tampering with shell casings after the Jan. 26 encounter."

"They also need the investigative reports to establish the "bias and animosity'' of the elite FBI Hostage Rescue Team officers "directly involved in the shooting and subsequent cover-up,"

The killing of Finicum was called a "Shoot-Out" by many in the Mainstream Media, but the FBI released a video taken from a helicopter over the scene of the FBI and Oregon State Police shooting. In addition, the FBI released a video taken with a cell phone inside Finicum's truck by Shawna Cox who was a passenger in the truck. Her video, especially the sound track, shows that the agents fired into Finicum's vehicle for several minutes after he was killed just outside the vehicle in the snow. The Cox video shows no attempt by the people left inside the vehicle to shoot back at the officers and agents.

 

[ok doser]

Hillary spent 1.1 Billion Dollars on her campaign.

and still lost! :darwinsm:

:mock:hillary donors

But so far, Trump is the best President ever !!!

way better than hillary would've been! :thumb:

 

[rexlunae]

This all leads back to the Trump campaign/Russia connection, so what happened to Sessions recusing himself?

I'd bet that whatever conspiracy has occurred, Sessions is probably on the inside of it. He seems to break the rules at just the right moment. The IG should look into his involvement.

Speaking of which, there was apparently an open IG investigation on Comey's behavior. If this was really about that, why not wait for the IG's report?

 

[rexlunae]

I have no idea what you are blabbering on about in your lengthy response to your first quote of me.

Well, I can't help you much there. You need to understand what I said in order to understand what's going on. But the bottom line is this:

If the article from Breitbart is right about Trump's motivation, and it seems likely that they are given that they're almost a mouthpiece for Trump, then it's a problem for Trump. If he fired Comey in an attempt to shut down the FBI's lawful investigation, then it's probably obstruction of justice. Even if the investigation had no merit and was unreasonable, that doesn't mean you can interfere with it. But the fact that at least one of the investigations has just yielded its first subpoenas the very same day suggests that there is merit to it.

So, to recap, if the obvious is true, and Trump fired Comey to try to stop their investigation into his Russia connections, that is probably a fresh, new crime, committed yesterday by Trump, regardless of the merits of the FBI investigation.

 

[jeffblue101]

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2017...iring-trump-did-what-they-wanted-obama-to-do/

Said Hoekstra on Trump firing Comey, Democrats “are now in a very awkward position. They have a President that they don’t like who did exactly what they wish their president, President Obama, had done months ago and that is fire James Comey. And now it’s kind of like, well, what are we supposed to do now? How are we supposed to react to this?”

Hoekstra continued to mock the Democrats, adding, “We don’t like anything that Donald Trump does. That’s our standard operating procedure and he’s now done exactly what we’ve been asking for for months. So, we have to now come up with a rationale why we don’t like this decision and why all of a sudden James Comey is our hero.”

Hoekstra also said he felt Comey had become a distraction for the FBI and a liability to its reputation and the firing was appropriate. He also said Obama would have fired Comey before Hillary Clinton took office had she won in November, allowing her to pick her own director.