Trump Fires FBI Director Comey

[Chain Chungus]

What links? When has Trump been named in the investigation? Comey has said multiple times he's not under investigation at this time. No evidence has come forth to link Trump to any Russian operatives. At best they may investigate Flynn, but that's all there is right now and they may not even bother with Flynn.

Comey was fired for being incompetent and at the recommendation of the AG. An FBI director has been fired before. Bill Clinton did it in 1993 when he fired Sessions for misusing FBI funds and other ethical issues. Comey has behaved quite unorthodox for an FBI director and Democrats have wanted him gone since he publicly talked about investigating Clinton.

So yes, it's nothing. A whole lot of fucking nothing, but it will make some fun fodder for talk shows and such for a week or so.

A whole lot of nothing that hasn't ebbed one bit, but on the contrary has grown exponentially. Are you a paid protester or something?

[Flutterguy]

You think an investigation into the Trump campaign does not involve investigating Trump?

They're investigating specific individuals within the campaign and so far haven't found anything regarding those people. They've gone out of their way to say Trump is not a focus. The most noise that's been made has been over Flynn, but there's not much substance behind it. We're not even approaching Oliver North levels here and people are trying to compare this to Watergate which is a joke.

- - - Updated - - -

A whole lot of nothing that hasn't ebbed one bit, but on the contrary has grown exponentially. Are you a paid protester or something?

Yes. I work for the Russians. I got Putin on speed dial. He usually asks me to order him pizzas.

[Wyrt]

They're investigating specific individuals within the campaign and so far haven't found anything regarding those people. They've gone out of their way to say Trump is not a focus. The most noise that's been made has been over Flynn, but there's not much substance behind it. We're not even approaching Oliver North levels here and people are trying to compare this to Watergate which is a joke.

Right, right, Grand Juries and subpoenas happen over nothing.

[Chain Chungus]

Yes. I work for the Russians. I got Putin on speed dial. He usually asks me to order him pizzas.

I love how you think this is all one big joke. Only someone who actually wants America to fall would talk like this. Of course, there is nothing to think any of what you say is honest. You could be some 400 pound guy sitting on a couch, in Macedonia.

[Wyrt]

The Trumpkins are going wild on McCain's twitter post it's pretty hilarious.

Also, they seem to be under the impression that the FBI director is the one that prosecutes people and that Hillary will get locked up by the new director.

[rogueMatthias]

So, let me get this right...

"Comey is awful and needs to be fired, it was his fault we have Trump; he cost Clinton the election."

*Trump fires Comey*

"Woah I can't believe he did that, Comey was great! Clearly a Russian cover up."

[Flutterguy]

Right, right, Grand Juries and subpoenas happen over nothing.

Trump hasn't been subpoenaed and there has been no grand jury. There haven't even been real accusations or charges. They've been looking into it for over six months and haven't found anything. Whatever they found about Flynn wasn't bad enough for Obama to revoke his security clearance over it.

[ati87]

Considering how high his support numbers are, i doubt long term political consequences is an actual thing in the US. I mean when you take a look at approval ratings, trump is about where obama was most of the time, slightly lower but heck, obama had a bunch of months of 40% approval.

Na, his overall approval is pathetic compared to previous presidents.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...roval-ratings/

He would probably win the election again if it was against Clinton but that's a different topic and not related to his approval

[Flutterguy]

I love how you think this is all one big joke. Only someone who actually wants America to fall would talk like this. Of course, there is nothing to think any of what you say is honest. You could be some 400 pound guy sitting on a couch, in Macedonia.

I could be. I could also be a 100lb transsexual from Thailand.

[Chain Chungus]

So, let me get this right...

"Comey is awful and needs to be fired, it was his fault we have Trump; he cost Clinton the election."

*Trump fires Comey*

"Woah I can't believe he did that, Comey was great! Clearly a Russian cover up."

This is bigger than party now, jackass.

[Wyrt]

Trump hasn't been subpoenaed and there has been no grand jury. There haven't even been real accusations or charges. They've been looking into it for over six months and haven't found anything. Whatever they found about Flynn wasn't bad enough for Obama to revoke his security clearance over it.

There has been a grand jury. Comey just testified at it the day before he was fired.

So, let me get this right...

"Comey is awful and needs to be fired, it was his fault we have Trump; he cost Clinton the election."

*Trump fires Comey*

"Woah I can't believe he did that, Comey was great! Clearly a Russian cover up."

You're missing the entire context of it. But whatever works for your narrow world view I guess.

[Independent voter]

Left wingers had better not get their hopes up. Comey cost Hillary the election in all likelihood, three days before the vote he reopens a closed investigation into her email thing and publicly announces it, how's is that going to look to people on the fence? The election was so close that I think Comey's actions put Trump in office.

Comey deserved to be fired just for that, he broke protocol. He wasn't supposed to make decisions of that magnitude on his own, it wasn't up to him to pick the president he was supposed to ask his superiors, one of whom is the attorney general I think.

Trump's pick for the new director of the FBI will have to approved by congress.

[Unhinged]

What links? When has Trump been named in the investigation? Comey has said multiple times he's not under investigation at this time. No evidence has come forth to link Trump to any Russian operatives. At best they may investigate Flynn, but that's all there is right now and they may not even bother with Flynn.

Comey was fired for being incompetent and at the recommendation of the AG. An FBI director has been fired before. Bill Clinton did it in 1993 when he fired Sessions for misusing FBI funds and other ethical issues. Comey has behaved quite unorthodox for an FBI director and Democrats have wanted him gone since he publicly talked about investigating Clinton.

So yes, it's nothing. A whole lot of fucking nothing, but it will make some fun fodder for talk shows and such for a week or so.

While the sacking is indeed nothing, the replacement is where the issue could have huge problems.

[Deleted]

What's the fuzz about?
It's well within his power to do so.

[paralleluniverse]

Reading the Rosenstein memo is pure catharsis. It TOTALLY EVISCERATES Comey for his partisan hackery, for violating DoJ protocol in his derogatory Clinton email press conference, and his letter to Congress, which rigged the election for Trump. It vindicates all the Democrats' criticisms of Comey. It obliterates the defense of Comey's press conference and letter offered by Trump, Sessions, Comey, the GOP, and The Deplorables.

May 9, 2017

MEMORANDUM FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

FROM: ROD J. ROSENSTEIN

DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL

SUBJECT: RESTORING PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN THE FBI

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has long been regarded as our nation's premier federal investigative agency. Over the past year, however, the FBI's reputation and credibility have suffered substantial damage, and it has affected the entire Department of Justice. That is deeply troubling to many Department employees and veterans, legislators and citizens.

The current FBI Director is an articulate and persuasive speaker about leadership and the immutable principles of the Department of Justice. He deserves our appreciation for his public service. As you and I have discussed, however, I cannot defend the Director's handling of the conclusion of the investigation of Secretary Clinton's emails, and I do not understand his refusal to accept the nearly universal judgment that he was mistaken. Almost everyone agrees that the Director made serious mistakes; it is one of the few issues that unites people of diverse perspectives.

The Director was wrong to usurp the Attorney General's authority on July 5, 2016, and announce his conclusion that the case should be closed without prosecution. It is not the function of the Director to make such an announcement. At most, the Director should have said the FBI had completed its investigation and presented its findings to federal prosecutors. The Director now defends his decision by asserting that he believed Attorney General Loretta Lynch had a conflict. But the FBI Director is never empowered to supplant federal prosecutors and assume command of the Justice Department. There is a well-established process for other officials to step in when a conflict requires the recusal of the Attorney General. On July 5, however, the Director announced his own conclusions about the nation's most sensitive criminal investigation, without the authorization of duly appointed Justice Department leaders.

Compounding the error, the Director ignored another longstanding principle: we do not hold press conferences to release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation. Derogatory information sometimes is disclosed in the course of criminal investigations and prosecutions, but we never release it gratuitously. The Director laid out his version of the facts for the news media as if it were a closing argument, but without a trial. It is a textbook example of what federal prosecutors and agents are taught not to do.

In response to skeptical questions at a congressional hearing, the Director defended his remarks by saying that his "goal was to say what is true. What did we do, what did we find, what do we think about it." But the goal of a federal criminal investigation is not to announce our thoughts at a press conference. The goal is to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to justify a federal criminal prosecution, then allow a federal prosecutor who exercises authority delegated by the Attorney General to make a prosecutorial decision, and then if prosecution is warranted — let the judge and jury determine the facts. We sometimes release information about closed investigations in appropriate ways, but the FBI does not do it sua sponte.

Concerning his letter to the Congress on October 28, 2016, the Director cast his decision as a choice between whether he would "speak" about the decision to investigate the newly-discovered email messages or "conceal" it. "Conceal" is a loaded term that misstates the issue. When federal agents and prosecutors quietly open a criminal investigation, we are not concealing anything; we are simply following the longstanding policy that we refrain from publicizing non-public information. In that context, silence is not concealment.

My perspective on these issues is shared by former Attorneys General and Deputy Attorneys General from different eras and both political parties. Judge Laurence Silberman, who served as Deputy Attorney General under President Ford, wrote that "it is not the bureau's responsibility to opine on whether a matter should be prosecuted." Silberman believes that the Director's "performance was so inappropriate for an FBI director that [he] doubt[s] the bureau will ever completely recover." Jamie Gorelick, Deputy Attorney General under President Clinton, joined with Larry Thompson, Deputy Attorney General under President George W. Bush, to opine that the Director had "chosen personally to restrike the balance between transparency and fairness, departing from the department's traditions." They concluded that the Director violated his obligation to "preserve, protect and defend" the traditions of the Department and the FBI.

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who served under President George W. Bush, observed that the Director "stepped way outside his job in disclosing the recommendation in that fashion" because the FBI director "doesn't make that decision." Alberto Gonzales, who also served as Attorney General under President George W. Bush, called the decision "an error in judgment." Eric Holder, who served as Deputy Attorney General under President Clinton and Attorney General under President Obama, said that the Director's decision "was incorrect. It violated long-standing Justice Department policies and traditions. And it ran counter to guidance that I put in place four years ago laying out the proper way to conduct investigations during an election season." Holder concluded that the Director "broke with these fundamental principles" and "negatively affected public trust in both the Justice Department and the FBI."

Former Deputy Attorneys General Gorelick and Thompson described the unusual events as "real-time, raw-take transparency taken to its illogical limit, a kind of reality TV of federal criminal investigation," that is "antithetical to the interests of justice."

Donald Ayer, who served as Deputy Attorney General under President George H.W. Bush, along with other former Justice Department officials, was "astonished and perplexed" by the decision to "break[] with longstanding practices followed by officials of both parties during past elections." Ayer's letter noted, "Perhaps most troubling ... is the precedent set by this departure from the Department's widely-respected, non-partisan traditions."

We should reject the departure and return to the traditions.

Although the President has the power to remove an FBI director, the decision should not be taken lightly. I agree with the nearly unanimous opinions of former Department officials. The way the Director handled the conclusion of the email investigation was wrong. As a result, 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. Having refused to admit his errors, the Director cannot be expected to implement the necessary corrective actions.

And to compound his seething animosity for Clinton, he even committed perjury last week by lying under oath about the Clinton emails.

If Hillary Clinton had fired Comey, she would have drafted this memo.

But this is not why Comey was fired, He was fired because Trump wanted to cover-up Trump-Russia. In Trump's letter, he desperately flags his innocence over Trump-Russia totally unprompted. This despite Comey's firing, on its face, having nothing to do with that, but rather based on the AG's and the DAG's recommendation above. It is a blatant and completely obvious phony pretense for the firing. The Trump campaign is under FBI investigation. Trump's FBI pick will be worse. This is a cover-up.

[Mayhem]

Na, his overall approval is pathetic compared to previous presidents.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...roval-ratings/

He would probably win the election again if it was against Clinton but that's a different topic and not related to his approval

Yeah, comparing the first 110 days, true, but i doubt it will dip any lower, considering his achievements, and looking at every other president, they started off with large support and ended at about 40%...

[Kryos]

Impeach this wannabe dictator already!

[Chain Chungus]

Honestly the issue is not with firing Comey. The issue is with the stupidity of this leaked letter about his dismissal. Why ever mention the issue of Russia? Trump again works against himself; he could have fired Comey for interfering with the elections and vindicated Hillary making it hard for the Democrats to defend him. Or he could have said nothing and let the Attorney General's recommendation letter speak for him.

I honestly do not understand what is being played here. It is easy to just say that Trump is a narcissistic manchild who destroys his own arguments just because he cannot handle basic propriety. But if it's not that, then what is it? The media would have alleged it was about Russia regardless of what was written in those letters but it would have been much easier to handle. Yet by adding that paragraph the entire process is muddled and that is most certainly not to his benefit at least as far as I can perceive.

I don't get what is happening.

Take a look at Turkey and behold your answer.

[Ddoc23]

What do you think the effect on the stock market will be on this? Any idea?

[jdbond592]

One wonder just how little it takes to "restore" America if someone as despicable and downright criminal as Trump can do it?
This guy is the great savior, the chosen one. One with all the answers. One who tells it like it is.