POLITICS President Trump: 100+ Mornings After (Term 1 Complete)

Which is why it gets tuned out beyond the Dems.

And it only helps Trump.

 

You think Trump fired him to "quiet the detractors"? The timing is only curious insofar as it should have been done on Jan. 20th.

They have any PoliSci south of Somerville?

 

J-grab her-F-by the hooch-K? The original Trim Reaper?

Fire JEd?

You jest.

 

No they really don't.

But I do believe he was fired because he wouldn't publicly back Trump on Trump's claims and that because he couldn't be controlled, he was actually giving fuel to the detractors. Thus his removal would quiet that effect.

 

I think this both fair and accurate.

 

I'd argue that as the FBI Director, if you're making each side mad occasionally, you're probably doing your job correctly and fairly.

 

I don't disagree.

 

Please don't tell me you're saying that's exclusive to one particular party.

 

Speaking of Comey backing Trump, it's being reported tonight that during the Trump/Comey dinner, what Trump said happened is being disputed by Comey sources. They are saying Trump asked for the dinner & asked Comey to pledge loyalty to Trump.

Even though he was well within his power to can Comey, I'm not sure it's going to work out as well as he might think. It sure isn't going to have the desired effect stated by both Sarah Huckabee at the press briefing as well as Trump himself in his interview with Lester Holt of making the investigation go away.

There's nobody that will do anything about anything Trump does, but give many statemrnts today by both his surrogates h Trump himself, he's flirting with some serious issues.

Here's a link to the FAKE NEWS story about the dinner I mentioned earlier:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investi...r-fbi-officials-dispute-trump-account-n758221

 

Both his deputy press secretary & Trump himself said so. But, I'm sure he's just outsmarting everyone else on this issue as well.

 

When Trump said Comey asked for the dinner, that was an immediate red flag that went up for me. Trump habitually makes this crap up (he claimed John Oliver wanted him on his show and asked tons of times, but Oliver is like "uh....no we haven't").

 

Trump said he was showboating. And we know that's Trumps market, and Trump hates competition.

So he had to go.

 

No, not at all.

The Dems have always been more advanced in it, and since Trump's election, seem not only intent on perfecting it, but to its calamitous end.

 

I think that Trump fired him for a multitude of reasons, including his refusal to investigate the alleged spying and the unmasking / leaking of names by the Obama admin, his repeated decision to make prosecutorial decisions as the head of a purely investigative body, his refusal to prosecute Clinton, Abedin, et al, and his errant testimony to Congress just two weeks ago (regarding classified info on Wiener's laptop) and which the FBI itself (you know, the agency he was leading) had to later correct was undoubtedly the straw that broke the camel's back.

I'll stand by my original comment and say that I am not sure how Comey lasted beyond Jan. 20th, and why Trump erred in allowing him to remain beyond that.

Comey believed - even by that same NYT article you previously cited - that he was untouchable. And why would he believe that? Because Comey bet that Trump would be unable or unwilling to endure the very gnashing of teeth and seething faux-rage that his doing so would compel from the left (and which - surprise! - is exactly what we're seeing, now).

Comey lost that bet, and just as any FBI Director who loses the confidence of fairness, and with any POTUS, will - and should - similarly lose.

Comey's letter tells you all you need to know - the President can fire the FBI Director at any time, for any reason or no reason at all. If you want to believe Comey is telling the truth, then believe him there.

And if you think that Trump may genuinely and personally believe there is any credence to the "Russian-collusion" silliness, then firing Comey is about the last thing a guilty person might do, fearing the appearance of guilt. But the innocent don't fear the appearance of guilt....particularly when they are certain of their innocence. That Trump fired Comey is ominous to the Russian-collusion narrative, whether everyone can see (admit?) that now, or not.

 

The POTUS inviting the FBI Director for dinner "threw up a red flag?

You've lost the plot.

 

Some truth in this.

 

Now threatening Comey on Twitter.

 

Some?

 

What? Him doing this doesn't suggest innocence. Nixon did the same thing and he was guilty as hell. I'm not saying that Trump is guilty, for sure, of anything, but, thinking that this demonstrates how there's nothing to this doesn't jibe with how trump operates. He was reckless during the campaign, repeatedly, to no effect. This is a guy who said he "could shoot someone in the middle of the street and not lose any votes". He's never been a person who fears consequences all that much for anything he does. I'm not sure where you got the idea he doesn't cater to his narcissism and do whatever he wants. in fact, that's how narcissists often operate.

 

What is the threat?