It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

President Trump Fires James Comey

page: 36
144
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:17 PM
link   
More flip-flopping than a Lions Club Pancake Breakfast.




Schumer Says He Lost Confidence in FBI’s Comey Over E-Mail Probe
by Steven T. Dennis
November 2, 2016, 4:13 PM CDT

“I do not have confidence in him any longer,” said the New York Democrat, who has criticized as “appalling” Comey’s decision to send a letter to lawmakers 11 days before the election disclosing the bureau’s new review of e-mails potentially pertinent to the investigation of Clinton’s private server.

www.bloomberg.com...


edit on 9-5-2017 by Deny Arrogance because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
Here's an unfortunate truth: NOTHING in this thread matters AT ALL. It's a complete waste of time. Y'all are just venting and NONE of it will gave any real-world consequence. It's all gonna just disappear!


What's the point of having ATS at all, then? Couldn't your post apply to every single thread on here?



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: neomaximus10

That is very interesting,

from your source.


In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence.

Read more at: www.nationalreview.com...

This what happened when the crocks get to write laws



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
New CNN analysis...

Any Republican not agreeing to a special prosecutor has to be under suspicion of colluding with Russia...Ho hum...


Leave it to the left to revive McCarthysm...



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

There was 3 to 4 hundred percent more unmasking in 2016, during a political season, than ever before. That indicates something...

circa.com...
edit on 5/9/2017 by kosmicjack because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnonyMason
a reply to: Xcathdra


originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: AnonyMason

Sure but the left has taken the "resistance" bs to a level of emo epic proportions though.. There is a difference between legitimate concern and what they are currently doing.


Almost on the same level as angry white right wingers during the beginning of the Obama era.



Almost... The right was not nearly as bad as what we are seeing now... The left has revived mccarthysim.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Lot's of pages, so if this was answered already forgive me...

Now that Comey is fired are there any restraints to prevent him from talking about all that he wants to? It seems this could be a play by Trump to actually free up Comey to spill the beans that he couldn't do while on the job.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: neomaximus10
a reply to: marg6043

I heard something on the radio today saying that they changed the law that hillary broke and added the intent thing so that she could get away from being charged. Let me see if i can find it.
Here it is, it says the fbi rewrote the law inserting an intent element.

www.google.com...

Does anyone know if this is true?



Not true.

Comey changed it by adding "intent" in his presser and the left ran with it.

It's not official at all.




posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: burntheships



No, LE enforces the law. He declined to do that, using the weak excuse "no reasonable prosecutor" load of BS.


Of course you think that. You don't understand precedence and how those laws are enforced. He and others explained it quite well.

By the way, why hasn't anyone stepped-up to prosecute her? Hmmm...



When he did that, while calling her careless and negligent, He sealed his fate. She would have ruined him in an ugly way had she won. Anyone who denies this is just plain lying.


So you would admit that this was a political firing by Trump? Anyone who denies this is just plain lying.

It appears he did the same thing Clinton would have done..if she had won, of course.



Remind me again how long you worked for the Clinton campaign... I remember you talking about it sometime back.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   
People at the WH are there late tonight. They had no idea this was going to cause such a #Storm. So they say.
Spicer cornered in the dark outside in some bushes, trying to answer questions. lol.

Dems might block any appointment to the FBI Head, until the Republicans agree to a special prosecutor.

I think it's an excellent idea. Sounds like it's gaining support among Republicans too. This is the time to put country before party. We have to know what happened, we owe it to ourselves, and to both parties.

*Stands up and salutes the flag.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: neomaximus10
a reply to: marg6043

I heard something on the radio today saying that they changed the law that hillary broke and added the intent thing so that she could get away from being charged. Let me see if i can find it.
Here it is, it says the fbi rewrote the law inserting an intent element.

www.google.com...

Does anyone know if this is true?


First I heard of this.
Devastating, if true.


Only Congress can modify a law. What the FBI did was added "intent" on their own and they did this to prevent clinton from being charged. The standard is "gross negligence".

Intent is not needed. Just as if someone gets drunk, drives a car and hits and kills a person. They had "no intent" to kill the person but through their "gross negligence" a person died so they can be charged with manslaughter.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert
No I won't agree, read the letters from the AG's,
Comey did not follow protocol, while citing precedence.

He had this coming for a while.

Maybe now the FBI will give Weiner what he has coming too.
A jail cell for his peadophilia and sex crimes with a minor.

Comey was protecting him too,









edit on 9-5-2017 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: DonInHtown

Let's see, Comey just got fired in a humiliating way by Prez Trump and the GOP, and he's going to let Hillary have it?



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: TheRedneck

There was 3 to 4 hundred percent more unmasking in 2016, during a political season, than ever before. That indicates something...


That is most likely the reason the ranking Democrat on the Senate intel committee told Susan Rice NOT to testify.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: angeldoll

They only need 51 votes to end debate and force a vote to confirm.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: TheRedneck

There was 3 to 4 hundred percent more unmasking in 2016, during a political season, than ever before. That indicates something...

circa.com...


Right.. It's a NO-BRAINER. Walks and quacks just like an Obama Rice duck.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Calm down people.....geeze louise


There are dozens and dozens of FBI agents working on various investigations, on Flynn, russian meddling, etc.

Those same exact agents will still be working on 5/10/2017 whatever they were working on on 5/09/2017.

People who are trying to say this will kill any investigation the FBI had on Trump/Flynn/Manacort etc are just plain ignorant.

The only thing that changes is who leads the FBI. It will be very telling in who Trump chooses.
edit on R302017-05-09T21:30:38-05:00k305Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: TheRedneck

There was 3 to 4 hundred percent more unmasking in 2016, during a political season, than ever before. That indicates something...

circa.com...




We should let that sink in. This is not a coincidence.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:30 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Thank you for proving my point. You honestly think if they had something they wouldn't have plastered it all over the news by now? That there wouldn't have been a leak? God knows they can leak classified info any other time they want. You think that Obama wouldn't have fed info to Hillary? No. Of course not /sarc. You guys just keep yammering about the same sh**, day in, day out.
edit on 9-5-2017 by DAVID64 because: spelling



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: queenofswords

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: TheRedneck

There was 3 to 4 hundred percent more unmasking in 2016, during a political season, than ever before. That indicates something...

circa.com...




We should let that sink in. This is not a coincidence.

The Executive Order written by Obama allowing the widespread sharing of that info was not just coincidental either.
edit on b000000312017-05-09T21:31:19-05:0009America/ChicagoTue, 09 May 2017 21:31:19 -0500900000017 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
144
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join