Trump Fires FBI Director James Comey

[Calliecake]

Oh, ok. Darn. Just wishful hoping...

At this point do you think anything would wake them up? Look at all that has come out the past few days.... and they are still defending him.


CNN just reported that James Comey found out he was fired from watching television. WOW!

 

[E B]

How 'bout that.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/grand-jury-fbi-russia/index.html

 

[redwood66]

It is about time he was fired. Thought way too much of himself and I think he liked being in the limelight which is not the place for the FBI Director. Yes there needs to be a special prosecutor investigation in this whole Russia mess to find out what happened and to shut down all this partisan BS because it is getting outrageous. I am so sick of all of it. Time to cut it out of my life.

Edit - his firing was handled terribly. Not the way to do it with someone of his length of service.

Edit again - As far as the Saturday Night Massacre references that is just ridiculous. There was a ton of evidence in the investigation at the point Nixon fired Archibald Cox and accepted resig's of the AG and DAG. Besides do you really think if Comey is gone the investigation at the FBI suddenly stops? That is not how it works. If the head of a company is fired the company doesn't suddenly go under, if the head of an agency leaves the work does not suddenly stop. He was not going to work every day reviewing the case files. Maybe the agents will feel more comfortable to do their work now since he won't be there to put their work in the media.

And Hillary just said it was his fault she lost. Why are dems so upset?

 

[E B]

 

[redwood66]

How 'bout that.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/grand-jury-fbi-russia/index.html

Huh. And it will happen without Comey being there. Imagine that.

 

[katharath]

How 'bout that.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/grand-jury-fbi-russia/index.html

Oh I hope this is only the beginning!!

 

[katharath]

At this point do you think anything would wake them up? Look at all that has come out the past few days.... and they are still defending him.


CNN just reported that James Comey found out he was fired from watching television. WOW!

I saw that too - that is ridiculous, like everything associated with this administration.

 

[katharath]

Hmmm...

 

[t-c]

It is about time he was fired. Thought way too much of himself and I think he liked being in the limelight which is not the place for the FBI Director. Yes there needs to be a special prosecutor investigation in this whole Russia mess to find out what happened and to shut down all this partisan BS because it is getting outrageous. I am so sick of all of it. Time to cut it out of my life.

Edit - his firing was handled terribly. Not the way to do it with someone of his length of service.

Edit again - As far as the Saturday Night Massacre references that is just ridiculous. There was a ton of evidence in the investigation at the point Nixon fired Archibald Cox and accepted resig's of the AG and DAG. Besides do you really think if Comey is gone the investigation at the FBI suddenly stops? That is not how it works. If the head of a company is fired the company doesn't suddenly go under, if the head of an agency leaves the work does not suddenly stop. He was not going to work every day reviewing the case files. Maybe the agents will feel more comfortable to do their work now since he won't be there to put their work in the media.

And Hillary just said it was his fault she lost. Why are dems so upset?

Context matters. If Trump had issues with Comey's handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, he should have fired him earlier -- that would have garnered cheers from Democrats.

But now that there is an ongoing investigation into Trump's close associates, you better have immediate urgent justification to get rid of the guy who is heading that investigation -- Comey's actions back in July and October would not meet that. It should be noted that the FBI investigation is the only one that seems independent; the House and Senate investigations are incredibly partisan and under resourced.

And do you really think changing the head of the FBI would not affect the investigation? What about the power to shift resources, to change priorities, to decide on which leads to pursue by the new Director? Trump will now appoint the person who will head the investigation that may involve him! If you don't see the conflict in that, you're being willfully blind.

 

[redwood66]

Context matters. If Trump had issues with Comey's handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, he should have fired him earlier -- that would have garnered cheers from Democrats.

But now that there is an ongoing investigation into Trump's close associates, you better have immediate urgent justification to get rid of the guy who is heading that investigation -- Comey's actions back in July and October would not meet that. It should be noted that the FBI investigation is the only one that seems independent; the House and Senate investigations are incredibly partisan and under resourced.

And do you really think changing the head of the FBI would not affect the investigation? What about the power to shift resources, to change priorities, to decide on which leads to pursue by the new Director? Trump will now appoint the person who will head the investigation that may involve him! If you don't see the conflict in that, you're being willfully blind.

Special prosecutor fixes it all. Time for one and maybe the new DAG will do it. No not willfully blind. Just not following partisan talking points.

Edit - I don't have a hopeful vested interest in seeing the destruction of our current president like many here. Because really that hurts us all in the end. The country is already divided enough.

 

[VapidLapid]

Revolting.

 

[t-c]

Special prosecutor fixes it all. Time for one and maybe the new DAG will do it. No not willfully blind. Just not following partisan talking points.

Edit - I don't have a hopeful vested interest in seeing the destruction of our current president like many here. Because really that hurts us all in the end. The country is already divided enough.

I actually don't mind if Trump proves me wrong and becomes a good president (by my definition, of course ), but he's shown no sign of this so far and all his wounds are self-inflicted. This is another instance when he and his staff show their incompetence: if you're going to fire the FBI Director while he is investigating your campaign, you better have someone really good waiting to take on the job and you better announce it right away, not only to demonstrate to the American people that there's a method to the madness but to also stop the rampant speculation and limit fall-out. But did Trump and his staff do that?

 

[Arkteia]

Actually, it serves a certain purpose not to have anyone waiting to take on the job during the investigation, does it not? And the sudden haste with which Comey was fired is intriguing to say the least.

 

[AGBF]

One thing I learned from watching excessive television before going to bed last night is that Attorney General Sessions has recused himself from the investigations into both anything regarding Hillary Clinton and anything regarding the 2016 Elections and Russia. Given that, how could he be the one to advise President Trump to fire Director Comey? He was recused from the matters under discussion. (This is if you buy that Comey was fired for something he did re: Clinton.)

AGBF

 

[AGBF]

This is what "The New York Times: says are the legal options for more independent investigations into the possible collusion of the Trump campaign /White house with the hacking of the 2016 Election. They are not as numerous as they were in the past and, apparently, do not include the possibility of a special prosecutor.

Link...https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/09/...nstein-comey-special-counsel-russia.html?_r=0

 

[AGBF]

I'm glad I turned on "Morning Joe" when I did. Conservative old Joe Scarborough got annoyed by some specious argument that would allow Republican Senators to turn away from what he says is a Constitutional crisis. I laughed out loud when he immediately retorted, "Then they're too stupid to operate a blender. Their immediate family members should sequester them in a corner and wrap them in bubble wrap."

AGBF

 

[Tekate]

Why? it was his fault that HRC lost the election...

I don't think Trump cared about that as in: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/t...-to-happen-to-hillary-clinton/article/2621956

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-comey-letter-probably-cost-clinton-the-election/

 

[siamese3]

Thought this was interesting.


https://www.justsecurity.org/40771/strange-perhaps-telling-omission-rosenstein-memo


An Odd and (perhaps) Telling Omission in the Rosenstein Memo [UPDATED]
By Marty Lederman



Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 12:34 AM

With his letter to James Comey today, President Donald Trump attached the “letters” he received from Attorney General Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The President characterized those documents as “recommending [Comey’s] dismissal” as FBI Director. Here’s an odd little fact, however, about the Rosenstein “letter” (which is not in fact a letter–it’s a memorandum to the AG): The Deputy Attorney General carefully avoids actually recommending that the President remove Comey.

To be sure, Rosenstein is unequivocal in writing that:

— he thinks Comey’s many actions in the Clinton e-mail case were indefensible and deeply harmful to the Bureau and to DOJ (and he’s right about that, in every detail);

— he thinks Comey’s refusal to accept that almost-universal judgment about his conduct is inexplicable (right again);

— the Bureau’s reputation and credibility have suffered substantial damage (yes, again);

— the Department and Bureau should “reject” Comey’s “departure” from DOJ/FBI norms and “return to the[ir] traditions” (just so);

— the FBI “is unlikely to regain public and congressional trust until it has a Director who understands the gravity of the mistakes and pledges never to repeat them” (yup); and

— that Comey has demonstrated that he can’t be expected “to implement the necessary corrective actions” (undoubtedly true).

And then . . . the memorandum ends abruptly, without any recommendation about what the President ought to do. Indeed, the only mention of the question comes at the outset of the final paragraph, where Rosenstein writes only–and cryptically–that “[a]lthough the President has the power to remove an FBI Director, the decision should not be taken lightly.”

It would be foolhardy, of course, to read too much into this omission, even though it is very odd and conspicuous. Perhaps Rosenstein simply forgot to add the final, “action” sentence. Or perhaps he did not think it was his place–as opposed to Sessions’s–to be recommending a course of action for the President to take. Or perhaps Rosenstein, for some reason, actually offered the President advice on the removal question orally, rather than in his memorandum to the AG. (Or perhaps Rosenstein knew that President Trump had already made the decision to fire Comey, and thought it would have been disingenuous to make a “recommendation” about a decision that had already been made.)

Or perhaps, just perhaps . . . Rosenstein meant to convey the message that although the fallout from Comey’s egregious mistakes cannot possibly be remedied, and trust in the FBI cannot and will not be “restored,” until it is headed by some other Director–and perhaps even that it would have been ideal if Comey had been removed under some other circumstances (say, by President Obama in November if Hillary Clinton had won the election)–that does not mean that this President should remove Jim Comey now.

And if that is, in fact, the (unstated) final message of Rosenstein’s memorandum, well then, in that case everything about it would be 100% spot-on.

[UPDATE: Some readers have assumed my intent in this post was to absolve Rosenstein of his responsibility in this tawdry affair. I apologize if I’ve left that impression, which is decidedly not what I meant to convey. Rosenstein should have refused to be part of this transparent farce, and his reputation is deservedly taking a beating today for his apparent failure to see how he was being used–so much so that it’ll be very interesting to see whether and when he appoints a Special Counsel for the Russia investigation. My point, instead, was simply to suggest that even Ron Rosenstein did not necessarily think–and, contrary to what the President said, did not recommend–that Trump should fire Comey, even though Rosenstein obviously believes every strong (and correct) word that he wrote in his memorandum.]

 

[AnnaH]

Yes, yes-- fire the man! Anyone who replaces the proper "nauseated " with the improper "nauseous" deserves to lose his job!

 

[AGBF]

Yes, yes-- fire the man! Anyone who replaces the proper "nauseated " with the improper "nauseous" deserves to lose his job!

Finally a Pricescope member comes up with a good reason, at least one with which I could agree, to fire Comey in the middle of this investigation! Who taught you your grammar, Anna? Someone did a very good job!

Deb

 

[AnnaH]

Deb, one of my majors was English, but my respect for language probably came from reading the classics. (There was only one TV in my childhood home).
However, I'm not really snooty about it. Communication is more important than flawless grammar, imo. No doubt you agree.
I notice those slips that happen even with those who generally use proper grammar, but it doesn't make me crazy. Good thing, as hardly anyone uses "nauseated."

 

[t-c]

Days Before He Was Fired, Comey Asked for Money for Russia Investigation
By MATTHEW ROSENBERG and MATT APUZZO
MAY 10, 2017

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.

 

[AnnaH]

Even Clapper and Yates admitted that there's nothing tying the Trump campaign to Russian collusion, much less Trump himself. Until there's some proof, why worry about prosecution?
IMO, Democrats want an independent counsel because they know that will drag this out and affect the next election. It's the FBI's job to investigate. If there's something to find, why wouldn't they find it? Any objection to the second in command guy? Didn't his wife recently run for office as a Dem?

 

[Tekate]

Even Clapper and Yates admitted that there's nothing tying the Trump campaign to Russian collusion, much less Trump himself. Until there's some proof, why worry about prosecution?
IMO, Democrats want an independent counsel because they know that will drag this out and affect the next election. It's the FBI's job to investigate. If there's something to find, why wouldn't they find it? Any objection to the second in command guy? Didn't his wife recently run for office as a Dem?

I akin it to Benghazi or Clinton's emails.. forever... and ever... nothing there. I suppose it's how the parties act today.. I think it started with the infamous Whitewater, another nothing there.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I akin it to Benghazi or Clinton's emails.. forever... and ever... nothing there. I suppose it's how the parties act today.. I think it started with the infamous Whitewater, another nothing there.

He said she broke the law but no grand jury investigation..

 

[AnnaH]

I akin it to Benghazi or Clinton's emails.. forever... and ever... nothing there. I suppose it's how the parties act today.. I think it started with the infamous Whitewater, another nothing there.

Good point, Kate. Nothing much happens to the Washington elites.

 

[Matata]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kremlin-tweets-during-closed-door-oval-office-meeting-with-lavrov/

 

[t-c]

Even Clapper and Yates admitted that there's nothing tying the Trump campaign to Russian collusion, much less Trump himself. Until there's some proof, why worry about prosecution?
IMO, Democrats want an independent counsel because they know that will drag this out and affect the next election. It's the FBI's job to investigate. If there's something to find, why wouldn't they find it? Any objection to the second in command guy? Didn't his wife recently run for office as a Dem?

You (and several others) keep saying we know nothing now so why bother -- do you really think we know everything about Russian interference and their relationship with the Trump campaign?! The call is to have an independent investigation, led by a person or committee who are not beholden to the President or the Democrats or the Republicans. What part of that do you take issue with? Do you not want to know the extent of the Russian reach into our institutions?

Right now, the House and Senate investigations in the Russian interference are clearly partisan (Devin Nunes and the kind of questions posed to Sally Yates and James Clapper make that painfully obvious).

By the way, I'm flabbergasted that the Republicans' focus is on the leaking/unmasking versus the fact that a foreign power tampered with a fundamental US democratic (small d) process. The person that leaked about Michael Flynn is a national hero -- because you know damn well that if the Washington Post did not print what they did, Flynn would still be advising Trump now.

 

[t-c]

Good point, Kate. Nothing much happens to the Washington elites.

Yeah, to you the Clintons are guilty no matter the outcome of the investigation. But are don't even want an investigation when it comes to Trump.

 

[AnnaH]

tc, hang on there. Never said I don't want an investigation. I'm saying follow the process. If something is found, call a grand jury and etc.