|
Post by Vince524 on May 10, 2017 11:36:36 GMT -5
It's all a mess.
People on the left seemed wary of Comey, then praised him, then hated him, and now they question his being fired.
People on the right praised him and called him a straight shooter, then condemned him, then loved him again for a few days, then hated him again, now defend his firing.
I used to feel like Comey got a raw deal no matter what, but more and more I feel like he also mishandled everything as well.
Of course, none of this means Trump was wrong or right to fire him.
None of it means that even if he had cause, he didn't do it to try and cover his own ass.
The time stinks, but so does a lot about it.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 10, 2017 11:54:36 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 12:02:51 GMT -5
For me, my "wtf was he doing with Clinton -- was he trying to interfere with the election" reaction was somewhat tempered by his pursuing the Trump investigation. That led me to think that whether he was right or wrong with regard to either, that at least he wasn't motivated primarily by partisan considerations. (My friend's take on Comey has furthered that opinion, fwiw, but I was moving there anyway).
That doesn't mean Comey didn't screw some shit up. That doesn't mean he's handled it all as well as he might have. That doesn't mean that maybe replacing him at some point, and in a proper manner, might not be the right move.
But I'm with Max, et al., that this was an authoritarian move, the timing reeks to high heaven, and the way in which it was carried out is just ridiculous.
Trump might have done this without riling up the likes of me if he'd done it properly, immediately proposed someone of unimpeachable credentials and integrity as a replacement (someone moderate who didn't have Trump ties), and proposed an independent investigation, expressing assurance that he and his administration would be cleared and if anyone was found to have colluded, appropriate consequences would follow.
But, yeah, he didn't do anything like that. And he meets the very next day with Russian officials. It fucking reeks of authoritarianism and "neener neener I'm the president."
At the very, very least, it is atrocious Opty-cs. (Sorry, Opty. You really never should have mentioned you hated that word.)
ETA:
And all the "oh, you people on the left hated Comey so what are you complaining about"? Besides the fact that Comey pursing the investigation into Trump's Russia ties to some extent quelled some questions about Comey having partisan motives (it's somewhat easier to get over a bad move you don't agree with if you don't think the intent was to sway the election), there's also the fact that damn, it's hard to believe that Trump fired Comey over the Hillary email thing.
Come on. Trump spent the entire election screaming "lock her up!" He cheered that investigation. He encouraged Russia to hack and leak more of her emails. Even since the election, he can't let it go. And now, really, we're supposed to believe that he's firing Comey over the email stuff, and oh, it doesn't have anything to do with Comey pursuing an investigation into the Russia stuff?
Yeah, no. If Trump wants me to believe that, he can do what I suggested above: appoint a moderate replacement of unimpeachable integrity and a neutral person to investigate the Russia thing. Frankly, in light of "lock her up!" and all the other circumstances, that's the ONLY way I'll believe it. FWIW, I now am pretty convinced that Trump and/or someone pretty high up in his administration has something serious to hide. I was not convinced of that before.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on May 10, 2017 12:23:21 GMT -5
Seems like there's much more to the timing to this than originally thought. Apparently, Comey requested a "significant increase" in money and staff to ramp up the investigation into the Trump/Russia ties. The comparisons to Watergate are sounding more and more accurate as this fiasco goes on. www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/05/james-comey-mike-flynn-subpoenas
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 10, 2017 12:38:57 GMT -5
Well, it would be great if there was an independent prosecutor for the Flynn/Russia stuff. Odds on that? Maybe in 2020...
But I'm still struck by just how awful Comey is at his job. With all due respect to Cass' friend, Comey has basically stepped in every political cowpie that has appeared in his path. And his position is ultimately a political one; everyone knows that.
Which is all very unfortunate, I think, if Trump is actually covering something up. Because Comey's ineptness make it easy to spin the firing for the benefit of Trump's supporters. Indeed, as the Colbert bit indicates, supposedly informed people on the left needed to be instructed on how to receive the firing.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on May 10, 2017 12:40:50 GMT -5
Comey needed to be fired. Or asked to resign. But he needed to go. He overstepped his bounds, broke with protocol, and is not trusted by both Democrats and Republicans. He got himself into this. Rosenstein's letter details this well. www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39866767The firing could have been done better. I have no argument with that. Here again is Trump behaving in a way that is clumsy and less than presidential. But as far as cover-up, Comey was obviously not the only person involved in the Russia investigation. And too many people in this country are very concerned to get to the bottom of this. I don't see how this Russia stuff will go away simply because Trump fired Comey.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 10, 2017 12:44:55 GMT -5
Well, a new director can end the investigation with a word.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 12:46:49 GMT -5
If Trump had made noise about replacing Comey before the Russia investigation gained steam, I would be shrugging, to tell you the truth, unless the proposed replacement was bad news. Trump is entitled to replace Comey, though he should do so in a proper manner.
as far as informed people on the left goes -- I don't think we can count on it that everyone in the Colbert audience is well-informed. The left and the right both have knee-jerk partisans who live and die by biased sound-bites. Which, of course, is why we're doooooomed.
A lot of the audience no doubt instantly thought "yeah! the guy who zinged Hillary!" and reacted before thinking any further.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on May 10, 2017 12:47:07 GMT -5
I don't know the ins and outs of how these things work, but the opposition knows, and there is no way they will let this rest if there is truly wrongdoing to be uncovered.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 10, 2017 12:54:29 GMT -5
as far as informed people on the left goes -- I don't think we can count on it that everyone in the Colbert audience is well-informed. The left and the right both have knee-jerk partisans who live and die by biased sound-bites. Which, of course, is why we're doooooomed. My point was that that they no doubt consider themselves well-informed, kinda like Rush Limbaugh's audience members consider themselves well-informed. There are a lot more sheep out there than most are willing to admit...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 13:05:05 GMT -5
...and by the way, I didn't mean to imply that my friend's opinion was gospel, or that you all should adopt an opinion based on my reciting of an opinion of someone none of you know.
I'm just saying, her take on Comey gave me pause, because I very much respect her, because she is not at all prone to partisan hysteria on either side of the fence, and because she has closer and broader knowledge than I do. She may not be right, I may not even end by agreeing with her on Comey, but I could not dismiss her take out of hand.
Right now, I'm waiting and seeing what happens. Trump could make me feel better about this -- though right now I'm doubting he will. For what it's worth, my friend is also holding her breath. Really, I think Trump could quell a lot of this particular furor if he chose to do so. (Not the extreme partisans, of course, but nothing will affect them.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 13:05:45 GMT -5
as far as informed people on the left goes -- I don't think we can count on it that everyone in the Colbert audience is well-informed. The left and the right both have knee-jerk partisans who live and die by biased sound-bites. Which, of course, is why we're doooooomed. My point was that that they no doubt consider themselves well-informed, kinda like Rush Limbaugh's audience members consider themselves well-informed. There are a lot more sheep out there than most are willing to admit... Yeah, I can't disagree.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2017 15:04:25 GMT -5
Republican Senator Richard Burr, Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence: ETA: A number of other prominent Republicans have come out with similar statements, including John McCain. But Burr's position makes me give his words special weight. Just saying -- the reaction to this isn't just liberal partisan squawking. And it is the kind of thing that (for me, anyway), sits worse the more I think about it. ETA: Me being frivolous for a moment -- why do so many of these senators have fun, easily-parodied names? Boozeman, Burr, Corker, Flake... Anyway. Never mind. Whatever their names may be, I share their sentiment, and I applaud them for voicing their concern instead of simply brushing it under the rug of party unity.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 10, 2017 15:43:49 GMT -5
I'm not surprised that Flake isn't on board with the firing. He's the the actual maverick McCain pretends to be.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 10, 2017 15:51:31 GMT -5
|
|