President Trump Fires James Comey

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: introvert

Not illegal.

Oh, dear me, yes it is!

My last internship was working with NASA on research... mishandling sensitive, not even classified, data, including carrying it on personal devices, is highly illegal even if one does not hold a security clearance!

ALL my data was safely stored on an official PC and I refused to even bring my laptop in.

TheRedneck

It's like I said, he simply has no idea what he's talking about. Those of us with firsthand experience know he is wrong and know she should've been prosecuted. He's regurgitating debunked Dem talking points and he thinks he's informed and unbiased. It's sad.

a reply to: Majic

Dep AG is suppose to address the senate intel committee in a few days behind closed doors on comeys termination. If we hear nothing / nothing is leaked the nits on the up and up.. If something leaks the nwe know Dems are trying to spin partial info they know no one can confirm because its classified.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Intent is required and this has been covered many times over.

Yes, we shall see.

originally posted by: Majic
Meanwhile, I don't think any of us is any closer to the truth about Director Comey's termination than we were 92 pages ago. If anything, it seems farther away than ever.

Mission Accomplished?

Right?

It seems that there is almost intentional obfuscation in almost ALL things with respect to this White House...whether it be here, in MSM or what have you.

Staying on the original topic without meandering seems to be an effort.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: alphabetaone

and by law it was not his place to make that decision to not file charges.

gross negligence is the requirement and intent is not needed.

As FBI director it WAS his choice to make, just as much as it is a local PD's choice to make whether or not to file charges against someone for lesser crimes.

The decision to or not can be challenged, but it was absolutely his place to make that decision.

This is patently false. Read the letter the Deputy AG sent the President the other day suggesting Comey's firing. He specifically identified this instance as one where Comey overstepped his authority. You're uninformed.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: introvert

Ah, that's right. Trump should be subject to scrutiny, by all, but it's NBD that Obama was protected from scrutiny.

Gotcha. Please don't wonder why half the country doesn't give a rat's ass why Trump fired Comey. You have your answer.

Trump should be scrutinized by those that choose to do so. Just as Obama's BC should be scrutinized by those that choose to do so.

Forgive me if I find one reasonable, and the other to be rooted in conspiratorial nuttery.

a reply to: alphabetaone

No - As FBI director, or any law enforcement officer for that matter, can make a recommendation to the AG on charges, either for or against them.

The prosecuting attorney / AG is the ultimate final authority on whether charges, and which ones, are brought or dropped or changed.

There is nothing to challenge since law enforcement has absolutely no statutory authority when it comes to charging someone. Even traffic citations are subject to the PA approval / denial. The officer has nothing to do with that part and neither does an FBI agent or FBI director.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Xcathdra

Intent is required and this has been covered many times over.

Yes, we shall see.

Its not required...
Its not in the statute...
Gross negligence is...
It has been covered and yet you keep repeating the flase talking points.

Yes, we shall.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: alphabetaone

and by law it was not his place to make that decision to not file charges.

gross negligence is the requirement and intent is not needed.

As FBI director it WAS his choice to make, just as much as it is a local PD's choice to make whether or not to file charges against someone for lesser crimes.

The decision to or not can be challenged, but it was absolutely his place to make that decision.

This is patently false. Read the letter the Deputy AG sent the President the other day suggesting Comey's firing. He specifically identified this instance as one where Comey overstepped his authority. You're uninformed.

The memo is to the point.

There are valid reasons for firing him.

Would they not have asked for his resignation first?

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: alphabetaone

and by law it was not his place to make that decision to not file charges.

gross negligence is the requirement and intent is not needed.

As FBI director it WAS his choice to make, just as much as it is a local PD's choice to make whether or not to file charges against someone for lesser crimes.

The decision to or not can be challenged, but it was absolutely his place to make that decision.

This is patently false. Read the letter the Deputy AG sent the President the other day suggesting Comey's firing. He specifically identified this instance as one where Comey overstepped his authority. You're uninformed.

The memo is to the point.

There are valid reasons for firing him.

Would they not have asked for his resignation first?

That is sometimes done as a courtesy. It's up to the boss.

originally posted by: D8Tee
Would they not have asked for his resignation first?

They arent required to...

Generally when terminating someone without asking for resignation means a termination "for cause". Given that the executive branch does not require cause for terminations we fall back to they serve at the pleasure of the president.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Not applicable to the current discussion. Let me ask, why weren't the GOP and the Bush admin prosecuted when they ran a private server at the GOP and deleted 22 million emails?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Exactly. So why does his recommendation even matter to you? I was hoping you would bring this up so I wouldn't have to. You're making claim that Jim Comey's (according to you) completely irrelevant recommendation - your context - should even impact the ability for him to complete his 10 year term?


Which makes some of us correct....the Hillary email talking point is simply bogus.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Xcathdra

Intent is required and this has been covered many times over.

Yes, we shall see.

Its not required...
Its not in the statute...
Gross negligence is...
It has been covered and yet you keep repeating the flase talking points.

Yes, we shall.

Again, provide an example of someone being prosecuted without intent.

a reply to: introvert

I think needing the answer to why Trump fired Comey is conspiratorial nuttery. It's silly and completely unreasonable.

At least I took the time to file open records requests to prove Obama's bullsh*t short form bore a fraudulent seal. That's puts it miles ahead of your wondering, in terms of evidence.

Why do you care enough to even want an answer? If Trump didn't like Comey's haircut...he can fire him. He can fire him for no reason, at all, even. You are merely speculating there is perhaps an 'unjust' reason, I actually proved my case.

a reply to: alphabetaone

As FBI director it WAS his choice to make, just as much as it is a local PD's choice to make whether or not to file charges against someone for lesser crimes.

No.

A police department only decides if evidence should be forwarded to the District Attorney. They can make recommendations, but the DA files the charges. No court will hear a criminal case based on a police investigation without a practicing attorney, licensed in that location, first filing charges. It is illegal for them to do so.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: introvert

Petraus was never found guilty. He took a plea deal. Show me a list of people who accepted ple deals under 793F.

He pled guilty because he knew he screwed up and knowingly broke the law, by his own actions.

a reply to: alphabetaone

Because he lied when he said intent was required when in fact its not.

a reply to: introvert

I did.. you refuse to accept it.

Involuntary manslaughter under federal law does not require intent.
18 USC 793 F does not require intent.

originally posted by: introvert
Trump should be scrutinized by those that choose to do so.

Also, you wrote this:

"I thought it was our job as responsible citizens to hold our leader's feet to the fire."

Responsible citizens write open records requests to make government transparent. They don't just scoff and waive away issues because they *think* they are not really issues.