President Trump Fires James Comey

a reply to: Majic

I forgot to add, When J. Edgar Hoover became the FBI director, he change the FBI with his hidden agenda and that was to keep taps on all the snakes politicians in Washington, but sadly dirty money has gotten his way within that agency and favors has been allowed to be bought and sold.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Majic
Contemptible filth, one and all.

So you are of the position that unnamed sources have no place in a free press?

Can you imagine circumstances whereby they provide vital information important to the public that would otherwise not be known?

No, I am not, nor do I expect the press to reveal unnamed sources. And hey, if a government official calls and drops a bombshell, that in itself is news.

I don't blame the press for reporting news. That's their job. Indeed, their work is vital to a free society, and to the extent they pursue their craft with honesty and integrity, I salute them.

What I do oppose is conspiring with the government to deceive the public, and that's what's been going on. Collusion, propagandizing and rumor-mongering have no place in ethical journalism.

And they know it.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: face23785

Oh please prove that's a lie.
What is that your go to defense?

You said you will give me $1000. Prove it's a lie.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Sillyolme
James Comey speaks out.
Says he didn't tell president he was not under investigation.

And he said trump demanded he pledge loyalty to him.
Comey refused. He said he could promise to always be honest with him but he could not pledge fealty to him.

nymag.com...


And the original story in the times

www.nytimes.com... egion®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Can you point out where Comey says anything? Your articles only show unnamed sources.

Deepthroat was an unnamed source that led to Nixon's impeachment and resignation.
He was later revealed to be the Dep. Director of the FBI.

We have Trump's statements and we have unnamed sources..

Trump has also alluded to recordings of conversations in bizarre threatening tweets aimed at the Former Director of the FBI.

It is not the first time someone has said that the Trump WH is recording conversations unbeknownst to visitors. A confrontation with a reporter and Trump advisor Omarosa resulted in shared, albeit edited, recordings with other journalists. In DC I believe the law requires only one party consent to a recording.

It would be prudent for the Senate Intelligence Committee to first ask and then issue a subpoena for all potential WH recordings regarding discussions Trump might have had with the Director of the FBI and DOJ that involved the Russia investigation.

That too would not be unprecedented.

It could clear up a lot of unknowns and validate Trump's claims..

Look at the nonsense that was being pushed here all day yesterday. An anonymous source told some gullible Trump hating "journalist" that the Deputy AG threatened to resign over the Comey firing and they didn't bother checking with the DOJ, or asking the Deputy AG himself, they just ran with it.

The conservative WSJ and the Hill continue to report a version of this now.

That Rosenstein asked McCabe to clear up the facts about his letter being the impetus for the firing and said something to the effect that he did not "intend to work in an environment where the facts were not accurately reported"

Whether that constitutes a threat to resign or not..who knows..

Either way Rosenstein will testify to congress next week and perhaps we will get clarity then.

Of course all of this would be much easier if any sane person was able to trust what the WH says..but left, right, in the middle...everyone understands that lying and breathing are done with the same ease by this administration.

a reply to: Indigo5

“If the election had been on October 27, I would be your president,” Clinton told moderator Christiane Amanpour, the CNN anchor, at a Women for Women International event in New York.

yes interesting times indeed

Has anyone thought to ask what if Comey wanted to quit but couldn't?

Perhaps someone wiser than me already did earlier, I didn't read every page.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: face23785

Oh please prove that's a lie.
What is that your go to defense?

Then quote it from the article.

www.wsj.com...

It's in the freakin sub headline. Read it...

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Sillyolme
James Comey speaks out.
Says he didn't tell president he was not under investigation.

And he said trump demanded he pledge loyalty to him.
Comey refused. He said he could promise to always be honest with him but he could not pledge fealty to him.

nymag.com...


And the original story in the times

www.nytimes.com... egion®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Can you point out where Comey says anything? Your articles only show unnamed sources.

Deepthroat was an unnamed source that led to Nixon's impeachment and resignation.
He was later revealed to be the Dep. Director of the FBI.

We have Trump's statements and we have unnamed sources..

Trump has also alluded to recordings of conversations in bizarre threatening tweets aimed at the Former Director of the FBI.

It is not the first time someone has said that the Trump WH is recording conversations unbeknownst to visitors. A confrontation with a reporter and Trump advisor Omarosa resulted in shared, albeit edited, recordings with other journalists. In DC I believe the law requires only one party consent to a recording.

It would be prudent for the Senate Intelligence Committee to first ask and then issue a subpoena for all potential WH recordings regarding discussions Trump might have had with the Director of the FBI and DOJ that involved the Russia investigation.

That too would not be unprecedented.

It could clear up a lot of unknowns and validate Trump's claims..

Look at the nonsense that was being pushed here all day yesterday. An anonymous source told some gullible Trump hating "journalist" that the Deputy AG threatened to resign over the Comey firing and they didn't bother checking with the DOJ, or asking the Deputy AG himself, they just ran with it.

The conservative WSJ and the Hill continue to report a version of this now.

That Rosenstein asked McCabe to clear up the facts about his letter being the impetus for the firing and said something to the effect that he did not "intend to work in an environment where the facts were not accurately reported"

Whether that constitutes a threat to resign or not..who knows..

Either way Rosenstein will testify to congress next week and perhaps we will get clarity then.

Of course all of this would be much easier if any sane person was able to trust what the WH says..but left, right, in the middle...everyone understands that lying and breathing are done with the same ease by this administration.

Look on the last page. I already addressed that. The WSJ article says an anonymous source said Rosenstein said that. It then says when asked for comment the DOJ spokesperson, who was actually NAMED, denied it.

originally posted by: Majic

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Majic
Contemptible filth, one and all.

So you are of the position that unnamed sources have no place in a free press?

Can you imagine circumstances whereby they provide vital information important to the public that would otherwise not be known?

What I do oppose is conspiring with the government to deceive the public, and that's what's been going on. Collusion, propagandizing and rumor-mongering have no place in ethical journalism.

And they know it.

Fair enough. Not to be too pointed, but do you trust your reason supersedes political leanings and worldview sufficiently where you apply that standard in a non-partisan way?

What you wrote above would seem a fair description of the current administration as well?

Lastly...a note to ponder about "Deep throat" ...The unnamed source that exposed Nixon's criminal activity..

He did not leak to the press out of some higher calling or interest in public oversight etc.

He was the Dep. Director of the FBI and was upset at Nixon's choice for his boss, who he considered a Nixon sycophant.

It opens the question...Does the motivation for leaking need to be pure in order for a greater public good to occur?

originally posted by: face23785

It then says when asked for comment the DOJ spokesperson, who was actually NAMED, denied it.

I remain baffled why you continue to cite Trump Administration spokespeople as if they are the final arbiter of truth when the past 100 days have repeatedly shown them to be (intentionally or unintentionally) the least factual/accurate/honest spokespeople in history..."Alternative facts" and all..

The past 48 hours alone plainly demonstrated the President himself in interviews debunking Sean Spicer, Sarah Huckabee, and VP Pence's accounting and rationale for Comey's firing.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: face23785

It then says when asked for comment the DOJ spokesperson, who was actually NAMED, denied it.

I remain baffled why you continue to cite Trump Administration spokespeople as if they are the final arbiter of truth when the past 100 days have repeatedly shown them to be (intentionally or unintentionally) the least factual/accurate/honest spokespeople in history..."Alternative facts" and all..

The past 48 hours alone plainly demonstrated the President himself in interviews debunking Sean Spicer, Sarah Huckabee, and VP Pence's accounting and rationale for Comey's firing.

The Deputy AG is greatly respected by both sides. He was recently confirmed 94-6 in the Senate, meaning nearly every Democrat voted for him. If you're going to question his integrity, you should have something more concrete than one anonymous source who has since been refuted by the DOJ spokesperson and by Rosenstein himself. You were wrong. You thought this poorly sourced rumor was true, and you were wrong, and you're not adult enough to admit it so you're twisting yourself into a pretzel trying to justify it and keep making yourself look more and more like a fool. You were wrong and the more you insist this happened the bigger partisan liar you appear to be. There's thousands of people in the Trump administration. Pretending every one of them is untrustworthy is dishonest and just proves how low you are. You're as bad as silly. I encourage you to seek professional help. It's unhealthy to be this dedicated to a proven false story.

originally posted by: Indigo5
Fair enough. Not to be too pointed, but do you trust your reason supersedes political leanings and worldview sufficiently where you apply that standard in a non-partisan way?

Everyone, including me, is biased. These are my biases on this subject.

Partisanship is slavery. I'm not immune to it, but I do avoid it as best I can. There will never be a place for me in the political cartels known as the Democrats or Republicans. Both are hopelessly corrupt.

Likewise, commercial media is, by nature, hopelessly corrupt, and I am not naive enough to think it will ever be otherwise. I nonetheless reserve the right to call it what it is, regardless of how impotent my protestations may be.

There are no saints, only sinners.

Anyone speaking anonymously in Washington is doing so in pursuit of an agenda. The motives may be honorable, but the means is not. It is impossible to play Machiavelli without dancing with the devil.

So it was with Deep Throat, and so it will always be. Good can come of it, but so can evil, and usually more of the latter than the former.

Every anonymous source perpetuates the opioid-like dependence of the press and the public on gossip, and in the absence of accountability, corruption reigns supreme.

That may be all we've got, but we don't have to like it.

a reply to: Majic

What I do oppose is conspiring with the government to deceive the public, and that's what's been going on. Collusion, propagandizing and rumor-mongering have no place in ethical journalism.

There are alot of angry people concerned with this.
Yet the media wonders why their "polls" are not accurate or believed.

originally posted by: Majic Collusion, propagandizing and rumor-mongering have no place in ethical journalism.

And they know it.

Agreed, wholeheartedly.

Nor, in the White House....and they DON'T, but should know it.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: UKTruth

What that sounds like is that he is taunting Comey, we all know the nature of Trump, I felt very confident on my assumption of Comey as the unmasker, after Clapper came out of the hearing telling that he knew who the unmasker was and that he may knew who leaked information.

Then Comey got fired.

Makes more sense now... The NYT article had come out and he'd obviously read it. It is mocking the 'leak'.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Majic Collusion, propagandizing and rumor-mongering have no place in ethical journalism.

And they know it.

Agreed, wholeheartedly.

Nor, in the White House....and they DON'T, but should know it.

Collusion, propagandizing and rumor-mongering have been a staple in the political diet for thousands of years. That won't change. It does not give the media a free pass to disgrace their profession on a daily basis.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Majic Collusion, propagandizing and rumor-mongering have no place in ethical journalism.

And they know it.

Agreed, wholeheartedly.

Nor, in the White House....and they DON'T, but should know it.

Collusion, propagandizing and rumor-mongering have been a staple in the political diet for thousands of years. That won't change. It does not give the media a free pass to disgrace their profession on a daily basis.

There was just some Dem talking head on Fox repeating the lie that the FBI asked for more funding for the Russia investigation just before Comey fired him. Shows how damaging the inaccurate reporting and lack of basic research by the media can be. 3 days later, even after the acting-Director testified to Congress that wasn't true, you still have liberal talking heads pushing a false narrative on live TV. Luckily the Fox host corrected her.

The FBI requested more funds, but it was not for the Russia investigation. The acting-Director testified they have all the funds and resources they need for the Russia investigation.