Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 17:00:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on May 9, 2017 18:00:04 GMT -5
Isn't it great that de facto despots can fire people in charge of investigating them?
How convenient.
No, no. We're not in a semi-dictatorship. Not at all. Move along. Nothing to see here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 19:13:39 GMT -5
Yeah, on the one hand, I think Comey's choices during the election re: Hillary's emails were questionable at best. Were Comey not leading an investigation into Trump and his team, I might not be losing too much sleep.
But since Comey is leading such an investigation... and because we've just heard Yates et al. give some evidence that doesn't make Trump look so great...
Trump's firing Comey is, at best, very bad (wait for it) Opty-cs. (Sorry, Opty -- ever since you said you hated that word, I never see it without thinking of you!) And yes, it feels very dictator-ship-y. So help me, if he puts Ivanka in charge of the FBI...
Seriously, we need an independent investigator, stat. If Trump and his team did nothing wrong, at this point they should welcome the opportunity to clear the clouds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 19:32:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by poetinahat on May 9, 2017 20:04:54 GMT -5
Yeah, I can't muster any sympathy for Comey. But I can't decide whether the timing of this move is mostly tone-deaf, brazen, or desperate. "Brazen" is leading in the polls so far.
I wish I could say it smacked of desperation or hubris. But I have this sick feeling that, as with everything before, this is all going to amount to nothing, because the ruling party is more than happy to be complicit in this horrific chapter in our nation's history.
At least Nixon managed, what, five or six years before he brought down the investigators on himself. Trump wasn't even in office before he was settling lawsuits. I agree with you, Cass - if the Russia deal is all fake news, then the Administration should be eager to get an independent investigation and clear the air once and for all. But that won't happen.
Sorry to say that my money is on Trump seeing out at least four years.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on May 9, 2017 22:30:58 GMT -5
Trump fired Comey. We can fire Trump.
Make it so.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 10, 2017 6:22:21 GMT -5
Yeah, I can't muster any sympathy for Comey. But I can't decide whether the timing of this move is mostly tone-deaf, brazen, or desperate. "Brazen" is leading in the polls so far. I agree. Comey has proven himself to be unfit for the seat he is in, I think. But timing matters. Trump knows that. This is another "neener-neener, watcha gonna do about it?" moment from him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 9:08:29 GMT -5
I agree it's a neener-neener moment -- or possibly just inept -- For whatever it is worth -- I spoke last night with a good friend of mine who's been with the U.S. Attorneys office for years and had a lot of contact with Comey and his colleagues. She ridicules Trump's claim that Comey has lost the faith of the FBI, Justice Dept., etc. To the contrary, she thinks he's generally regarded as an excellent boss who tries not to let partisan crap get in the way of what he think needs to be done -- hence what he's done with both Hillary and Trump. She lauds that he'll do unpopular stuff if he thinks it needs doing. She defends his motivations both with regard to the Hillary email investigation and the Trump investigation. That gave me some real pause in my own assessment of Comey, since I respect her opinion tremendously and she's worked with him (whereas I've formed my opinion based on news articles). Also, she's really not very partisan -- she shrugs at stuff that sends me foaming at the mouth -- and one of the least likely people I know to see things purely through partisan goggles. So, like I said, for what it's worth. But whether Comey is fabulous or unfit, the timing could not be worse -- like, really? He fired Comey for being mean to Hillary months ago, when at the time and ever since he's been cheering the investigation into Hillary's emails? And it's just coincidence that Comey is leading an investigation against him? And the method is grotesque. There's just no way Comey should have found out about this from a TV screen. This called for a face-to-face, even assuming it should have been done at all. And that weird-ass line in Trump's firing letter: Yeah. That's really weird. Is it a veiled threat? (e.g.,"you gave me inside info on this investigation, and if you kick up a fuss, I'll do worse than fire you") is it bluster? ("three times! that's the most any president ever was told he wasn't investigated! I win!")
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 10, 2017 9:10:08 GMT -5
Here's a piece with a bunch of takes from legal experts on the Comey firing, on whether or not it is some sort of "constitutional crisis": www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/09/comey-trump-firing-is-this-a-constitutional-crisis-215118Some interesting stuff, and worth considering. Me, I don't think this is any sort of constitutional crisis, unless Trump replaces Comey with Ivanka or the like. But as much as I think Trump's firing of Comey is punitive and petty, I still think Comey deserves to get fired. Look at this: www.propublica.org/article/comeys-testimony-on-huma-abedin-forwarding-emails-was-inaccurateComey is (or was) the director of the FBI. He was testifying before Congress. And he was talking about people who are--right now--private citizens. He has to get the facts right. It's inexcusable that he didn't, imo. Really, I think it's too bad Obama didn't can him last year, when it was clear he wasn't up to snuff. Of course, the Right would have freaked and claimed Obama was firing Comey to protect Clinton (which I guess would have let her blame someone else--Obama--for her loss), so I can understand why he wouldn't have done it. Still, Comey is not the person for this job, he's not the person to lead a investigation of Trump or of any other high-profile figure, imo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 9:29:01 GMT -5
Heh. was just talking this over via email with another friend. His comment: "we're living Idiocracy" and this clip (which I must say hits way too close to home for me) --
Give Trump an automatic weapon, and I'd say that's pretty much him. And that's definitely our House of Representin'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 9:50:33 GMT -5
Doesn't it seem like this would be a good time for Putin to keep his freaking mouth shut? Apparently no. Well, see, that should in fact be the kind of given that we don't need Russia to assure us about. As a matter of fact, their opining has exactly the opposite effect -- it will make people wonder all the more whether it DOES have something to do with Russia. It's like if Rob banned Angie for her detonating the Current Events forum (again), and I, out of nowhere, said "Hey, Angie's banning had nothing to do with my intense loathing of her. Trust me, it's all Rob's decision. I didn't have anything to do with it. Nothing. I was just sitting her, minding my own business." See, Russia isn't -- or shouldn't be -- in any position to know Trump's motivations for firing Comey, and unless directly asked, there is no reason whatsoever for them to issue a statement on it. Far better to shut uo than pull the focus further toward Russia -- unless indeed that is the intent.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on May 10, 2017 10:01:33 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 10:18:22 GMT -5
I'm afraid it smells that way to me, too.
Though I've long been convinced Russia tried to meddle in our election, I've been less convinced that Trump himself was involved. The way this is going down pushes me a lot further in that direction. Innocent until proven guilty, but...yeah, this reeks more and more. Seriously, if it were me and I were innocent, I'd want a neutral investigation to clear the air. At this point, nothing else will.
I'd advise Trump to at least choose Comey's successor with extreme care for someone with a reputation for unquestioned integrity.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on May 10, 2017 10:40:47 GMT -5
Is it a Constitutional crisis? Who gives a shit? What it is is a fucking travesty. Of course, President Pussygrabber broke off Jim Comey. "Hey man, thanks for serving up the 2016 election on a silver platter. I prefer gold, but between you and Vlad, I couldn't have done it without ya. Now you're fired, ya worthless meatball. Scram!" Anybody who thinks the Republicans will be embarrassed or shamed into doing anything about the Tuesday Night Massacre, I got five words for you: fuhgeddaboudit! You can't embarrass or shame a Republican. They have had those nerves surgically removed and replaced with balls the size of an elephant. Hence the symbol of the Republican Party. WE GOT ELEPHANT BALLS. WE GOT PRESIDENT YUGE HANDS AND TINY PEE-PEE AND HE CAN FIRE ANYONE HE WANTS ANYTIME HE WANTS FOR ANY REASON HE WANTS BECAUSE WE GOT ELEPHANT BALLS!!!!
Did James Comey deserve to be fired? Mebbe so and mebbe no, but Trump was the last guy with a good reason to do so. Oh, well there was the fact Comey was leading the FBI's investigation into the ties between the Trump campaign and the Russians, but that's got nothing to do with anything. Annnnnnnnd if you believe that, you probably think those are raindrops falling on your head, right?
|
|
|
Post by maxinquaye on May 10, 2017 10:48:16 GMT -5
This is what authoritarians do.
They will go to great lengths to grasp the legitimacy that law gives - with show trials, great public inquiries, masses of trials to 'expose things to the people'. Look back to Stalin's show trials, or Erdogans. If they think they can get legitimacy from the institutions, they will grasp at the chance to gain that legitimacy.
At the same time they have utter contempt for the law and process - and will run a wrench through the fine machinery of the law and process at every opportunity. They will acusse judges of being partisan and activist. They will point fingers at courts, and claim them to be 'enemies of the people'. They will ignore constitutions, or simply unilaterally repeal the bits of the constitution they don't like.
The most depressing thing is that a large portion of an electorate will think that's a perfectly fine way to operate. They'll rage of someone threatens, say, their supposed constitutional rights. Look at gun control. They'll be angry as hell if anyone stands in the way of removing things like Habeas Corpus or Equality clauses if those protect people that they don't like. Or your first amendment, if it means that'll shut up dissent against their leaders.
Firing Comey is, like, a classical move for authoritarians. People might not like Comey, and think he's terrible for one reason or another. But there is a process for removing him, and that process would ensure that conflicts of interest didn't get in the way. But, as you're seeing, that large portion of people who are fine with authoritarianism is now engaged in rubbishing everything about that process and that check-list, beginning with Mitch McConnel.
|
|