This should have happened a long time ago. And Democrats are going to go ballistic.
What do you think?
Trump creating more fake news.
Trump creating more fake news.
Stupid and uniformed Europeans, consuming "fake news" and thinking it'll sustain them! :) You're anemic -in terms of political news,
ersi.
Comey had a clear obligation to refrain from mentioning the Clinton email investigation in public; perhaps he could have informed Congress in closed session… Intelligence committees sometimes need to know such things. But he went to Congress, repeatedly, in open session.
That violates the procedure of the FBI every which way from Sunday!
If there was an investigation, that should have remained confidential. Was it leaked to the press? That doesn't matter; the FBI is an agency of the U.S. government — not a PR firm or an arm of a political party.
Obama's DoJ knew all this, and didn't fire Comey.
What can't be denied is that Director Comey has no way to keep the reputation of the FBI un-sullied…
BTW: Obama administration officials are going to be "looked at" — and perhaps "unmasked" in NSA intercepts! :(
Myself, I'd like to see the Obama administration's silly expansion of access to NSA's "raw" data rescinded. Surely, Democrats will support this: Their "enemies" -the Republicans- have too much power and access now… :)
You're anemic -in terms of political news, ersi.
Whenever Trump does anything, there is nothing political in it in the relevant sense. It's just Trump clowning around like he's always done.
Whenever Trump does anything, there is nothing political in it in the relevant sense. It's just Trump clowning around like he's always done.
And silly Europeans reacting… We have enough local "democrats" willing to do this: Denigrate Trump, and whatever his administration does!
Do you think Director Comey has recently reasonably performed the duties of his office?
And silly Europeans reacting...
Who started the thread? Who asked for opinions?
You are the only one reacting here. Without me, you would have nothing to react to. Trump by himself is not worth it.
There's nothing news-worthy in that Trump fired Comey. Whatever the purported reason, the real reason is dis/like, because that's the bottom line with Trump.
It's news-worthy if Trump replaces Comey with someone who is not yet another one of his croney friends. We all know how that will go.
Who gets fired ???
Comedy? :no:
I'm not reacting, either.
In Oakdale's mind Europeans, Asians and South Americans are totally reacting to things like the succession of Scalia or Comey or whoever (because Congress Democrats do and therefore Europeans and South Americans do also - they are all a bunch of Commies so they all do the same Commie thing).
In reality, not even Canadians would care if Trump annihilated the entire FBI because he can't imagine a purpose for it and doesn't believe that its employees do any work.
It's sad to be fired.
Good luck to Mr. Comey.
(I suppose I'm starting to react somehow... :right:)
Flies changes the shit remains the same...
So
ersi and his ilk post to say that they have no interest (and no understanding) of the topic)…But they still dislike President Trump.
It's news-worthy if Trump replaces Comey with someone who is not yet another one of his croney friends. We all know how that will go.
If the U.S. Senate has been compromised, we'll see.…
This -for the Democrats- is still about "the Russian 'interference' in
our democratic process… Which is to say, Hillary lost! As the kids say nowadays: Oh noes! :)
Comey had -for the likes of me- a checkered past: He appointed a fellow -also well respected- named Fitzgerald as a Special Prosecutor, to discover who "outed" Valerie Plame as an under-cover CIA agent…
She wasn't "under-cover" and Fitz knew before he began his year-long investigation who leaked her name and status. But he never named or charged the culprit: He was —it seems to me— tasked with finding someone in GW Bush's administration to charge…
I'm still angry with GW for his not pardoning "Scooter" Libby. who did nothing wrong, let alone illegal.
Comey never apologized, either.
BTW: If you have no interest in the topic and no understanding of its history, why comment as if you do? Some people outside the U.S. will assume you know what you're talking about; they'd be wrong. It only makes you seem silly…to us here; well, the Democrats (and AntiFa Communists! :) ) will agree with whatever you have to say against the Trump administration and America in general. Ask questions, if you'd need to know more. Or be like
ersi and assume you know everything already.
Thankfully, he doesn't even participate in Estonia's politics…
BTW: If you have no interest in the topic and no understanding of its history, why comment as if you do?
I comment to correct this rather fundamental misunderstanding of yours. Different from what you assume, when Trump acts, the action has no connection whatsoever to any history, meaning, purpose, principle, topic, or such. Trump is a tweeting monkey. Your posting shows that you are taking seriously some statistical probability of a Shakespearean chef d'oeuvre from him. #sad
His vernacular represents its source if the subject matter isn't telling enough.
Tho, side note: I have found it interesting how rightwing propaganda blogs have adapted words you, not three years ago, would have only found in conspiracy theory blogs.
I almost miss the days he got caught up in the 'clever' use of a thesaurus for some B novel he was reading at the time.
Trump is a tweeting monkey.
Tweeting gorilla. His dream is to have a beautiful lady at one hand while standing up at the top of his towers.
Tweeting Godzilla.
Who cares about an FBI director. Who cares about his boss.
Well the FBI were playing nonsense over that load of silly guff about interference in what passes for elections in the ex-colonies.
Un-packing your prejudices is too tedious, RJ… :) (It would help if you could write a grammatical sentence. But I know better than to expect that! :) )
To you posters here who might as well be Tweeters: Your "deep" understanding is appreciated, by my country's Democratic Party die-hards. They know that only the rejection of our constitutional republic and our traditional rule of law will allow them to prevail.
It's odd -to me- that you'd prefer our failure… You have better examples to learn from? :)
Let me explain this as if to children: FBI Director Comey laid out an explicit case for indicting Hillary Clinton for violations of the Espionage Act… After he explained at length why she was guilty (by the letter and spirit of the law…) he then said no prosecutor would pursue such an indictment.
I see no other reason for this than his understanding of the reach and vindictiveness of the Clinton "machine" which would give even him qualms.
Do you wonder why I am in favor of "draining the swamp"?
Prejudice? Yanks are brought up with it so i accept you are an expert.
Prejudice? Yanks are brought up with it […]
We learned it from our British "masters"… :) Who "brought them up to it"? :)
Easy excuse but may i remind you dear ex-colonist that the people who led your daft breakaway were the monied class hence the state of the place today?
This idiot Trump is more dangerous than Nixon.
Maybe one day a proper full democracy might come in over there but won't be quick.
This idiot Trump is more dangerous than Nixon.
Well, since Nixon's dead… :) (Why was Nixon dangerous again?)
@
RJ: A "proper democracy" is
what again? Oh, yes, I remember: Whatever silliness or inanity
RJ thinks he grew up with! (In his "defence," he was at least twice rejected by his neighbors for political office… That does show some sensibility! :) )
My political corner dear Trumpite, oops, OakdaleFTL so I have little to bother me. We have a far wider political system than you lot of corporate controlled nationalists misusing the word patriot. When your idea of a parliament is wider like ours then boast boy. :yes:
Here's some food for thought.........here is a scenario that is completely legal, & may just come to fruition within the near future.....
If President Trump nominates a candidate that the dems & the rinos see as too partisan, according to the accepted rumors, they will reject him or her.
So, what happens....back to the drawing board, the President will have to nominate another.....so let's say he nominates a candidate even more partisan than the first.....the dems & rinos reject again.....
This can go on for months upon months.....
It might actually be the 'calculated' original plan, that the President may actually want to appoint an extremely biased, & highly partisan FBI Director.....the appointee he really wanted from day one........but an appointee he knew for certain the Senate would never confirm.......a "Temporary or Acting" FBI Director can stay in the Director position, as such, indefinitely, without Senate approval, because the Senate only gets the opportunity to be involved when, & if, the President makes a nomination of a permanent replacement of the FBI Director.....but not temporary replacement(s) (acting directors).
There is no law forcing the President to make a nomination that the Senate will confirm.........only that the President can make a nomination(s), & present that nomination to the Senate for it's consideration ("advice and consent").
The law does say that the President can make temporary, acting, interim appointments to the position of FBI Director.....it doesn't stipulate how many or how few.........1, or 2, or maybe even 5..........& the Senate doesn't get to say anything about any of those appointments because they aren't presented as permanent appointments.
That's a fact......it's sort of a loophole in the process, & one President Trump could have a field day with!!
Chew on that one for a while............
My political corner
Yup! Them what knows you best!
(Interesting idea,
Smiley. But I suspect Trump actually wants a competent FBI director… But keep in mind: Most people nowadays get their info from their "telly". Tonight's episode of
Quantico posited a convention of the states, ostensibly to merge the FBI and the CIA — because that would require a Constitutional Amendment! Apparently, no one working in the "creative" side of television needs know anything about anything… :) Both the FBI and the CIA were created by Congress; nothing to do with the Constitutional remit, other than the powers of Congress. Hey! That kinda sounds like the Democrats howling about "separation of powers" and "unconstitutional firings"… People who've never read let alone understood that document, the Constitution, have nothing better than TV to explain what's going on in our country: Sitcom U.S.A.! :) )
Living as you do in a part democracy and juvenile nationalism that requires 16 securty agencies is a damn farce. Should be spending more internally on the millions who are suffering.
The law does say that the President can make temporary, acting, interim appointments to the position of FBI Director.....it doesn't stipulate how many or how few.........1, or 2, or maybe even 5..........& the Senate doesn't get to say anything about any of those appointments because they aren't presented as permanent appointments.
That's a fact......it's sort of a loophole in the process, & one President Trump could have a field day with!!
Chew on that one for a while............
Smileyfaze it's playing at the children garten.
At any democrat European regimen such idiotic, child brainish expedient, would be punished with impeachment and probably jail.
Grammar aside.
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWI7WbC6qrc[/video]
Unfortunately the whole thing is due to the system. He is not a regular politician and that has to be borne in mind.
American law can do nothing against the president that decides to behave like a total scumbag. Even before Trump became the president, everybody knew he was a total scumbag (plus consistently acting like it).
Chew on that one for a while. Four years at least.
Living as you do in a part democracy and juvenile nationalism that requires 16 securty agencies is a damn farce.
Your folk number such things differently, knowing how deficient your schools are… But you have the same number or more. GCHQ is akin to our omnibus DHS, and was long before 9/11.
But your ignorance is legend!
American law can do nothing against the president that decides to behave like a total scumbag.
What -exactly- has he done that so aggravates you?
Bel and
ensbb3: You have your own problems… I doubt any psychiatrist could "cure" you: You've caught Trump Derangement Syndrome! Are not your own politicians worth talking about? :)
Hm.
Are not your own politicians worth talking about?
Trump is one of my politicians. :right: [Triggered much?]
Well he hasn't done anything to me Oakdale and he was elected via the system so that is that. On a wider issue I would say that not being a routine politician will mean in practical terms a different way of doing things. What is questionable is the way the opposition an bias media acts which is something else. Although I have no admiration for your rather corporate political control over there he was put in and people should get on with it and all the childish nonsense being stirred up by those are by those that hoped their candidate would win. It has reached the childish level . Now the Trump haters are going on about the FBI boss being heaved over the stuff about Russia. You would think that too many Yanks are brained into Russia as an automatic moan or stir up if things do not go a way wanted.
I don't believe Russia had anything to damn well do with the recent Presidential election and it is all made up as part of the old tradition of moaning about the bear. Now the same stirring up people are coming out with baloney that Trump imparted something to the Russian Foreign Minister in the White House. Well Trump was right to rubbish that mindset. In fact President Putin has said if the US wants a copy of the recorded meeting they are free to have it. Finally, I would say it is one thing having a different political stance on a President but the present stuff is so damn head-shaking and daft. The biggest issue is the media and some politicians who were on the losing side.
Fair enough Oakdale?!
American law can do nothing against the president that decides to behave like a total scumbag.
What -exactly- has he done that so aggravates you?
Currently the relevant question is: What exactly did Comey do to aggravate Trump so that he ended up fired?
The documentation of Mr. Trump’s request [to Comey to shut down the investigation concerning Flynn's ties to Russia] is the clearest evidence that the president has tried to directly influence the Justice Department and F.B.I. investigation into links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia.
And what exactly does Trump find so cute about Putin so as to be overgenerous with apparently classified information to him? Putin enjoys embarrassing the clown further http://6abc.com/news/putin-jokes-he-would-release-record-of-trumps-russian-meeting-to-congress/2003397/
What exactly did Comey do to aggravate Trump so that he ended up fired?
As Scott Adams said:
My opinion of Comey’s handling of the Clinton email issue remains the same. I believe he sacrificed his career and reputation to avoid taking from the American voters their option of having the leader of their choice. If Comey had pushed for Clinton’s indictment, the country would have ended up with a President Trump without a “fair” election. That was the worst-case scenario for the country and the world. Comey prevented that disaster while still making it clear to the American public that Clinton was not guilt-free with her email server. He let the voters decide how much weight to assign all of that. In my opinion, Comey handled the Clinton email situation like a patriot. The media is spinning the situation as “making it all about himself.” That’s true in the same sense that a Medal of Honor winner who jumped on a grenade to save his buddies is “making it all about himself.” I don’t disagree with the characterization that Comey was trying to be the “hero” because that’s how it looks to me too.
(source) (http://blog.dilbert.com/post/160515646406/the-comey-firing))
Comey did technically usurp -with the help of President Obama and Atty General Loretta Lynch- the AG's role…
to be overgenerous with apparently classified information
ersi, why post a link to a story you haven't read? :) (Or is it merely a case of having a deficient sense of humor?)
Comey did technically usurp -with the help of President Obama and Atty General Loretta Lynch- the AG's role...
And Trump sees this the same way? Hardly. Trump has no clue of anything called a technicality and in this case you are simply imagining it up a la Breitbart.
ersi, why post a link to a story you haven't read? :) (Or is it merely a case of having a deficient sense of humor?)
Of course I have read it. You evidently have no idea why it's funny.
First, stories appear accusing Trump of being an intelligence leak (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/05/report-israel-gave-trump-the-intel-he-shared-with-russia.html). This fits the overall picture of Trump's unstable character.
Then Putin rushes in Trump's defence. This is funny because, when you think it through, he really doesn't. He knows he is making the scandal worse and this is exactly why he is doing it.
Speaking of those Clinton emails:
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/4e/ea/24/4eea24bb6d725f79c984d94d379de692.jpg)
Because "rigging" the DNC procedures to "select" Clinton was not a crime… The "election" you refer to was the party's selection of a candidate — something not under the control of the government. The DNC is a private organization, and they refused the FBI access to their servers. A better question is what were they hiding from the Democrat voters and the public in general? :)
Certainly, many consider it unfair. But there it is; and it remains the responsibility of the party to handle.
The source of the leaked emails is pertinent to a crime within the remit of the FBI, hence the investigation continues.
(https://image.ibb.co/ddRHNa/russia_cover_final.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
Another load of nonsense that picture. OakdaleFTL does have a passing point in that the president has not done anything illegal but the election losers cannot accept the result. Oh, and still bananas about Russia.
Another load of nonsense that picture.
In case you didn't know, that's a Russian minaret. :)
CNN mistakenly spots ‘Russian minarets’ on new Time cover (PHOTO) (https://edition.eannews.org/cnn-mistakenly-spots-russian-minarets-on-new-time-cover-photo/)
(https://i2.wp.com/edition.eannews.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/591dc773c4618891618b464e-2.jpg?w=620&ssl=1)
Those at CNN must be real geniuses. :lol:
In case you didn't know, that's a Russian minaret. :)
Your fav news source covers it best https://www.rt.com/viral/388848-cnn-time-russian-minarets/
Are we now to accept any Photo-Shopped pic as "news"? :) Have we all become Democrat Party members?
If anyone is still interested: The commission of an "independent" counselor egregiously muddies the waters…
The original investigation was of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election. By making such a criminal investigation, the Justice Dept. has rejected an intelligence investigation. (Lots of special safeguards apply in criminal investigations that are moot in a counter-intelligence investigation…) But maybe a "counselor" is not a prosecutor? :) Of course, the average Democrat won't know that!
Mueller is an honorable man; a competent man. (And a Democrat.)
The Dems seem to be backing off of almost everything. Why?
Because they -having burned the candle at both ends- now realize that the flame, at long last, has reached the center: There's nothing left to burn.
Onward to 2020! :)
If anyone is still interested: The commission of an "independent" counselor egregiously muddies the waters…
The original investigation was of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election. By making such a criminal investigation, the Justice Dept. has rejected an intelligence investigation. (Lots of special safeguards apply in criminal investigations that are moot in a counter-intelligence investigation…) But maybe a "counselor" is not a prosecutor? :) Of course, the average Democrat won't know that!
The basic error with this as grounds for firing Comey is that it vaguely resembles juridico-political reasoning. Trump doesn't do that sort of thing.
For example, as you well know from Trump's interviews with O'Reilly, when asked how he would respond to military threats from Putin, his answer was, "I would call him and I would say, "Don’t do it. Just stop it. Don’t do it.""
Do you have any examples of him thinking any deeper than this? Or are you like him in that when asked about factual data, you can reply, "Many people have come out and said I'm right," and when pressed further, "Forget all that. We're gonna do it."?
The basic error with this as grounds for firing Comey is that it vaguely resembles juridico-political reasoning. Trump doesn't do that sort of thing.
What you meant to say is that
you don't understand how our system of government works…You seem to think it's all about the personality of who's in power.
I grant you, we're getting closer to the European model… But we're not there yet!
Haven't you folks grown up enough to reject Freudian psychologizing yet? :)
The basic error with this as grounds for firing Comey is that it vaguely resembles juridico-political reasoning. Trump doesn't do that sort of thing.
What you meant to say is that you don't understand how our system of government works…You seem to think it's all about the personality of who's in power.
Not at all. I'm only saying that with Trump in power, that's what it observably is. It wasn't like this before, but with no chance to remove him, he may make this a permanent feature of your political culture.
This point is perhaps too specific and nuanced for you so that it never gets through to your skål.
Are we now to accept any Photo-Shopped pic as "news"? :)
Simpleminded people do.
Are we now to accept any Photo-Shopped pic as "news"? :) Have we all become Democrat Party members?
You mean cover illustrations are Liberal Mainstream Media Lies whereas Trump's twittering is "without the filter of the fake news"? Way to go!
Mueller is an honorable man; a competent man. (And a Democrat.)
He's a Republican actually.
Thanks for the correction. Yes, he's a Republican…
Alan M. Dershowitz has an interesting article: Who Will Stand up for Civil Liberties? (https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10386/who-will-stand-up-for-civil-liberties)
I know, I know krake what is in the picture! It is to me symbolic of the almost fanatical nonsense that Russia was involved in the Presidential election. It is the same about the fable on the meeting president trump had with the Russian foreign minister. Too many over the pond have been so stuck in the old cold War tradition and that attitude is in filtering in Europe too. I have to be franks and say that someone like Donald trump would not get very far in my corner's politics as it is wider than the corporate stuff over there. Many Americans have got bananas about the result of an election as the winner is not a routine politician but everyone could vote and someone has to win and someone lose. However it has got to the almost childish of some in the country. People in the States cannot wax on about democracy and elections then go into kindergarten more because of who won! I am content to live in a wider political place but I think that although I was never taken with Trump or Clinton that was the system and the person in the White house has to get on with things. Going on about Russia deciding the election is so damn daft and the way people are going bonkers.
Those rabbiting on about impeachment are enough to make a head shake and there is no illegality to go on about that. Unfortunately those who were disappointed at the election result are not doing themselves or the country any good by the stretching out of things with little or no positive reason except emotional stuff.
Liberal Mainstream Media Lies
Trump 'said firing Comey eased pressure over Russia' (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/19/donald-trump-called-james-comey-nut-job-said-firing-eased-great/)
Some may say it was a pity sacking but that would have to be balanced by the emotional media and political negativity. America has such a long history of involving behind the scenes in controlling other countries so their is a lack of principle regarding this nonsense over Russia.
For the first time I can remember, I actually, & awkwardly, agree with RJ on many of his points.
Now, RJ, don't get all excited....
NO, we are not going to start taking warm showers together!!!
And RJ it's called a soap rope....why do you ask?? (https://www.smileyfaze.tk/slides/chuckle002.gif)
Here's a little Political Satire, & some facts, to get the juices flowing:[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYcpeFO_jpo[/VIDEO]
Well Smileyfaze and dear man. I will use bright orange soap to get you out of the picture! And not to surprise you too much have an yellow flag (Imperial Russia coat of arms) to mark the assassination of a pleasant family along with their nice girls and the 13 year old boy expected to live due his medical complaint. My Confederate flag will be used In those days to mark the Fort Sumter attack.
DnD has plenty of candidates to CIA director but not me.
I support rjhowie for CIA director. Or that other guy that doesn't speak English and posts a lot of bullshit, can't remember his name.
Animosity is your only it seems, lately•… Are you close to death and think that the last rites will absolve you? :)
That's too bad.
—————————————————————
* I'm trying to write English the way you understand it, Bel!
Hope you were not looking in the mirror Belfrager when you typed that?? :whistle:
When I speak about a Philipine or something like that, an American and a Scotish-British ansewers..
Perfect. No difference indeed.
Well dear thankless man really niggly as you depended on us when the Napoleonic French nuts were sorting you out. And the poverty of Portuguese education is well shown putting us who created democracy are shoved in the same corner as the yanks. Heavens maybe you miss the decades of Porto fascist times so got confused! ??? :o
Thinking back to the starting of this thread reminds me of something that has never been answered here. Why does the US of A need so many security agencies/ It beats the Third Reich and the old Commie times of the USSR. Farcical and expensive. The political nutters in America go on like children about Russia interfering in their election, uh? no proof that the Russian government did anything of the sort. Also laughable the damn nonsense of US politicians inside the country and the UN, etc going on about Russia when you consider their own country's arrogance. Supporting dictators, causing wars, manipulating in the politics of places everywhere they can. Farce and hypocrisy can crawl into the picture.
It will never be answered here.
Next.
No it won't. Nor in the world as long as it gives into the imperialism that country likes to attack others on nor until the people there in the USA have a proper revolution. Over a dozen security organisations costing enormous bills and spending half the world's military bill while millions are bad off within it's boundary?? :faint:
Well Smileyfaze and dear man. I will use bright orange soap to get you out of the picture! And not to surprise you too much have an yellow flag (Imperial Russia coat of arms) to mark the assassination of a pleasant family along with their nice girls and the 13 year old boy expected to live due his medical complaint. My Confederate flag will be used In those days to mark the Fort Sumter attack.
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZ35SOU9HTM[/video]
A damn Nationalist waffling a song, eh?! They are taking hold of the Scots flag as if it is theirs damn nebs. But every time I go out on a parade with my Loyal Order at the front we carry both the great Union Flag and the Scots Saltire. Oh and at the UK general Election took a third of the MP seats of the SNP Brigadoons lot as well as lots of City Council seats across Scotland.
Loyal and true that is me and like Martin Luther stand by his comment...."here I stand I can do no other." :knight: ;)