President Trump Fires James Comey

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: marg6043
Oh my god what in the heck is going on with the democrats, these people are completely on some kind of Hallucinogen or they ran out of Xanax, They got to be kidding, some guy or Democratic strategist, call Mustaffa, came out on the news saying that Trump have no right to fired Comey, that he didn't have the right to fired Yates, because all those people were investigating Trump, now Yates? really, Yates? since when Yates was appointed to investigate Trump.

This just something you will read in a bad comedy show.

Trump is the president, but democrats think that Trump have not rights as the president, because they say so.

How dare Trump fired the frogs that Obama the toad appointed under his administration.

Darn democrats are losing their minds, can somebody give this people some anti depressants.

This is the misinformation and crap they are feeding people that believe on them and then no wonder we come here on ATS and can not even get a nice debate on this issues, because people actually believe what these democratic agents on agendas are saying.

Un freaking believable.

I had not clue Yates was investigating Trump too.

Yeah I just saw that too, it was pathetic. They really have come unhinged. They don't realize they're driving reasonable people away from their party and Independents can't stand it.

I do not believe you would recognize "reasonable people" if your life depended on it.

A reasonable person doesn't doubt the Deputy AG and his appointed spokesperson being in agreement and instead puts his faith in an anonymous source because it agrees with his biased partisan false narrative. Try again little buddy.

I know the current narrative coming from the Left is that Trump fired Comey to derail the FBI investigation into any potential collusion between his campaign and "the Russians".

Even though pretty much everyone who would know says there's no evidence of that, and even leftist icon Dianne Feinstein says that there is no investigation into President Trump himself, let's assume for a moment that there is at least something there.

In that case, why didn't Obama use that against Trump long before the November election?

Obama has a long history of spying on his political opponents going back to his Senate run in 2004 (Jack Ryan's leaked divorce settlement). Since then, he has used the IRS to spy on and harass conservative groups, spied on the heads of state of some of our closest allies, wiretapped AMERICAN reporters from the AP to Fox's James Rosen (and his family), and very likely spied on Team Trump during the campaign.

If there were something there, why didn't Obama use it to help Bill Clinton's wife? He had to know that a "President" Trump would literally erase his entire legacy -- which he is well on his way to doing. He had to know that if Trump won, the odds of continued investigations in the Clinton's and even the Obama Regime itself would be likely.

Again, was this another massive Obama screw-up or was there in fact simply nothing there?

The same thing is true in regard to Trump's tax returns. If there were anything there, it strains credulity that Obama would not have arranged to have those negative items leak out.

a reply to: queenofswords

He's done worse to his political enemies.

a reply to: face23785

I surely do hope you're right. ...and you probably are.

Appointees these days, and days past, seem to be picked more for the ideological purity of their politics rather than any competence at their supposed jobs...

...and all sides are as guilty of this as the other. We are, as they say, reaping what we've allowed them to sow.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Thank you.

Partially due to reasons personal, partially because of the whole run up to and aftermath of the elections being puke-inducing, I've been on a hiatus for the past few months only barely glancing in the direction of events and happenings.

Comey's firing certainly registered and so I've been skimming the relevant threads.

I tell you what, seeing the same puke-inducing partisanship makes me want to stay away, however certain people are still making sense and I see a few new faces as well making the same sense so it's tolerable for the moment.

I wouldn't characterize the stonetear mess as painful so much as a blatant and extremely in-your-face flouting of the rule of law.

In the world in which you and I live, any of us would be hammered with every statute that could be even remotely applied and we'd recieve the legal equivalent of an unlubed proctological session.

From that one openeing, each and every other person granted immunity (by Obama's DOJ) could have been placed im the same crosshairs and the whole house of cards brought down.

Comey the weasel rather, stuttered his way through that grilling and was shown to have been the fall guy for the whole Clinton (and associated) Crime Family in keeping the witch from recieving the bucket of water.

Watching the dems wriggle and writhe like the maggots they are is grossly fascinating and one just can't look away even though the sight is repugnant.

The same circular arguments are still taking place and the silliness continues.

a reply to: face23785


That is the problem Im having with misinformation, is been spread by the media and those that subscribe to sensationalism because is spread like wild fire and some are just breathing that fire.

Sometimes I just shake my head and wait to see the end result.

Is like they are throwing crap to the ceiling and see what sticks.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: face23785

I can not believe this what they feeding their followers, they are actually telling people that Trump as the president doesn't have rights like Obama did or any other president before him.

This is worst than brainwashing, this is creating the ride mode for those that are gullible or that do not understand Americans politics to get up and start rioting.

What is this people thinking, I mean of what ever have become of the democrat leadership.

This beyond losing an election, this an agenda and an ugly one.

They just mistakenly believe it is getling them somewhere, probably because surrounded by their echo chamber it seems like most people agree with them and what they're doing. The lunatic fringes of the left are taking over that party and driving mainstream people out of it. I know many lifelong Democrats who find it absolutely disgusting.

a reply to: Indigo5

What's "reasonable" by your definition?

originally posted by: SBMcG
I know the current narrative coming from the Left is that Trump fired Comey to derail the FBI investigation into any potential collusion between his campaign and "the Russians".

Even though pretty much everyone who would know says there's no evidence of that, and even leftist icon Dianne Feinstein says that there is no investigation into President Trump himself, let's assume for a moment that there is at least something there.

In that case, why didn't Obama use that against Trump long before the November election?

Obama has a long history of spying on his political opponents going back to his Senate run in 2004 (Jack Ryan's leaked divorce settlement). Since then, he has used the IRS to spy on and harass conservative groups, spied on the heads of state of some of our closest allies, wiretapped AMERICAN reporters from the AP to Fox's James Rosen (and his family), and very likely spied on Team Trump during the campaign.

If there were something there, why didn't Obama use it to help Bill Clinton's wife? He had to know that a "President" Trump would literally erase his entire legacy -- which he is well on his way to doing. He had to know that if Trump won, the odds of continued investigations in the Clinton's and even the Obama Regime itself would be likely.

Again, was this another massive Obama screw-up or was there in fact simply nothing there?

The same thing is true in regard to Trump's tax returns. If there were anything there, it strains credulity that Obama would not have arranged to have those negative items leak out.

Whoa whoa, easy on the logic there buddy. The narrative isn't based on logic.

a reply to: marg6043

No, this isn't an agenda... it's the results of a failed agenda. The nanny state has become so entrenched in certain areas that people cannot understand concepts we find simple. Things like 'fair election,' 'will of the people,' or 'personal responsibility' are beyond them.

So when they don't get their way, they react like the spoiled children they have become: throwing fits, lashing out violently, or trying to debate outside reality. It's all they know.

I pity them, really.

TheRedneck

a reply to: queenofswords

But that is what is been reported by those that the media are selectively interviewing and people believe it.

The media is becoming the new number one public enemy in this nation and some have no clue how dangerous they are becoming.

a reply to: TheRedneck

It is pitiful but when that irrationality starts to spread and affect others it becomes dangerous.

a reply to: Xcathdra

But in this case Loretta Lynch has recused herself from the investigation because of the meeting with Bill Clinton on the tarmac in Atlanta. Remember? I could be wrong but I thought she had passed that responsibility on to Comey.

a reply to: SBMcG

The only thing that makes sense to me is no one in DC thought for one second he could beat the Annoited One.

Surprise!

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

But in this case Loretta Lynch has recused herself from the investigation because of the meeting with Bill Clinton on the tarmac in Atlanta. Remember? I could be wrong but I thought she had passed that responsibility on to Comey.

Loretta Lynch did not recuse herself.

It would sure help if you could get something right once in a while. I might actually go back to reading your posts more.

a reply to: SBMcG

Ha, logic is not applicable when it comes pointing out the corruption under the last administration.

Only sensationalism and liberal media opinions, misinformation and lies need to apply.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

But in this case Loretta Lynch has recused herself from the investigation because of the meeting with Bill Clinton on the tarmac in Atlanta. Remember? I could be wrong but I thought she had passed that responsibility on to Comey.

She actually didn't recuse herself. She said she would go with Comey's recommendation but that's not the same thing. And it's completely improper to leave the decision of whether to prosecute or not up to the FBI Director. The proper thing to do would've been to recuse herself, let the FBI turn over their findings to the Deputy AG and the Deputy AG make the call on whether to prosecute. Not that the result would've been different, but if they cared about proper procedure and rule of law that's what they would've done.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: SBMcG

The only thing that makes sense to me is no one in DC thought for one second he could beat the Annoited One.

Surprise!

TheRedneck

Actually, I think that's it more than anything else.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: SBMcG
I know the current narrative coming from the Left is that Trump fired Comey to derail the FBI investigation into any potential collusion between his campaign and "the Russians".

Even though pretty much everyone who would know says there's no evidence of that, and even leftist icon Dianne Feinstein says that there is no investigation into President Trump himself, let's assume for a moment that there is at least something there.

In that case, why didn't Obama use that against Trump long before the November election?

Obama has a long history of spying on his political opponents going back to his Senate run in 2004 (Jack Ryan's leaked divorce settlement). Since then, he has used the IRS to spy on and harass conservative groups, spied on the heads of state of some of our closest allies, wiretapped AMERICAN reporters from the AP to Fox's James Rosen (and his family), and very likely spied on Team Trump during the campaign.

If there were something there, why didn't Obama use it to help Bill Clinton's wife? He had to know that a "President" Trump would literally erase his entire legacy -- which he is well on his way to doing. He had to know that if Trump won, the odds of continued investigations in the Clinton's and even the Obama Regime itself would be likely.

Again, was this another massive Obama screw-up or was there in fact simply nothing there?

The same thing is true in regard to Trump's tax returns. If there were anything there, it strains credulity that Obama would not have arranged to have those negative items leak out.

Whoa whoa, easy on the logic there buddy. The narrative isn't based on logic.

Sorry. I won't let it happen again

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: marg6043
Oh my god what in the heck is going on with the democrats, these people are completely on some kind of Hallucinogen or they ran out of Xanax, They got to be kidding, some guy or Democratic strategist, call Mustaffa, came out on the news saying that Trump have no right to fired Comey, that he didn't have the right to fired Yates, because all those people were investigating Trump, now Yates? really, Yates? since when Yates was appointed to investigate Trump.

This just something you will read in a bad comedy show.

Trump is the president, but democrats think that Trump have not rights as the president, because they say so.

How dare Trump fired the frogs that Obama the toad appointed under his administration.

Darn democrats are losing their minds, can somebody give this people some anti depressants.

This is the misinformation and crap they are feeding people that believe on them and then no wonder we come here on ATS and can not even get a nice debate on this issues, because people actually believe what these democratic agents on agendas are saying.

Un freaking believable.

I had not clue Yates was investigating Trump too.

Yeah I just saw that too, it was pathetic. They really have come unhinged. They don't realize they're driving reasonable people away from their party and Independents can't stand it.

I do not believe you would recognize "reasonable people" if your life depended on it.

A reasonable person doesn't doubt the Deputy AG and his appointed spokesperson being in agreement and instead puts his faith in an anonymous source because it agrees with his biased partisan false narrative. Try again little buddy.

The cloistered bubble around here is stunning.

This isn't a left/right thing...this is the most inept, dishonest Administration the country has ever seen.

No doubt you think this is the best President on earth etc..

And I have no reason to burst anyone's bubble...

It is very, very wild to watch though..

It's not difficult to discern truth and lies amongst the spin.