Breaking....Trump's AG he tried to scapgoat threatened to resign

Wait, I thought it was on the advice Jeff Sessions too? That's what Trump's resignation letter states.

www.pbs.org...

Is Sessions also getting thrown under the bus, too? Is Trump going to start throwing everyone under the bus now that he's tied his own noose?

Talk about passing the buck.

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Willtell

I hate it when my boss makes me work too.

Sucks!

An FBI head is supposed to be INDEPENDENT of politics...

Which would be precisely why he got fired....so voila...you have now nullified your own thread...

What was that button Hillary handed the Russians again...oh yeah...

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: rickymouse

All we have is what's in these news outlets. None of us are flies on walls.


One believes what they find credible to their own logic.

Correct, we don't know the truth. Which makes your assertions troubling, to say the least.

a reply to: Willtell

Comey himself said it was pefectly Legal to fire him. your assumption of lawbreaking is crap.

So if Trump fired Comey because he was frustrated with his actions in investigating the Russian affair this is a crime!


Trump has no jurisdiction in managing FBI investigations or influencing them in any way!


If he does he is committing a crime!

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: rickymouse




One believes what they find credible to their own logic.

To quote someone much smarter, at least in certain areas, than most anyone here:



I believe the quote should switch "imagination" and "logic" in this case though....plenty of imagination is being used...i know that.

a reply to: yuppa

Legal IF his original reason he gave is legitimate, something that subsequent events proves otherwise.


Trump's intent is the key. He said he fired him for the actions he took over the Hillary affair. It turns out that IS A LIE.


Trump used that excuse to fire Comey. His actual intent and reason for firing him was to compromise his actions in the Russian investigation.

a reply to: Willtell

jesus age mary...

what investigation?

you mean all the dropkicks throwing accusations around? those same drop kicks when asked to show evidence all claim there is none.. but that doesnt stop them

people like you believe it, because you want to believe it.

There was no collusion, Russia did not decide this election. Clinton was a lying piece of crap and people were sick of here nonsense.

Pull your head out of the sand for christ sakes, Comey and Lynch conspired to get Clinton off - thats a sackable offence.

Either prove there was russian colusion, prove Trump is a Russian stooge of STFU and allow this government to get on with the job.
Until you provide proof of your absurd claims, go away and shuttup!

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: Willtell
What Trump did turns out to be a gross violation of the law. He’s trying or he is influencing the direction of criminal investigations which is a crime therefore an impeachable offense

Can you quote said law(s)?
How is firing a director influencing the direction of current investigations?
Does the FBI stop and wait until a new director is seated?

The law is clear. Not even a president can interfere with an FBI criminal investigation particularly when it involves the president, which this case does.


Richard Nixon got impeached for this. Its called OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE...Its a crime

The crime of obstruction of justice, in United States jurisdictions, refers to the crime of obstructing prosecutors or other (usually government) officials. Common law jurisdictions other than the United States tend to use the wider offense of perverting the course of justice.t

en.wikipedia.org...

Considering the American people elected Trump, and he is the BOSS of the person doing the investigation, I see no applicability of these statutes.

With Nixon, there was evidence and a break in. Here we have "anonymous sources" and heresay as to not only his involvement but also the allegations entirely.

The entirety of the evidence, aside from speculation, amounts to a soup sandwich. In fact, firing Comey only gives more speculative creedence to the Democrats, where there would have been none otherwise. However, the one thing that is severely lacking here is EVIDENCE.

Sure, I'll listen to an anonymous source that has EVIDENCE. Otherwise, it's heresay and a disgrace to this country to entertain these fools.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: yuppa

Legal IF his original reason he gave is legitimate, something that subsequent events proves otherwise.


Trump's intent is the key. He said he fired him for the actions he took over the Hillary affair. It turns out that IS A LIE.


Trump used that excuse to fire Comey. His actual intent and reason for firing him was to compromise his actions in the Russian investigation.

Well we all know "intent" was basically invented in the Hillary case, so don't expect it to be any big winner in an already failed case with all agencies reporting ZERO collusion with Russia...

Does logic say to not believe those intelligence agencies when they state it under oath, because they have a few times now.

Comey's sudden firing fueled by Trump's fury over the FBI director's refusal to clear him in Russia probe: report

SOURCE

President Trump’s abrupt decision to fire FBI Director James Comey was reportedly fueled by the commander-in-chief’s anger and frustration at his refusal to clear him in his agency’s Russia probe.
Trump was furious over the FBI’s growing investigation and began turning on Comey in March, when the lawman testified to the Senate Intelligence Committee that his agency was in fact probing the Trump campaign, Politico reported.

The President’s anger only grew when Comey refused to support Trump's baseless claims that former President Barack Obama had ordered illegal wiretaps of Trump Tower — and often led to the President literally “screaming” at the television, the report said.

Comey was back before the Senate — and back in Trump’s cross hairs — last week, when he testified that the probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election was continuing.

Trump concocted a excuse to fire Comey

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: yuppa

Legal IF his original reason he gave is legitimate, something that subsequent events proves otherwise.


Trump's intent is the key. He said he fired him for the actions he took over the Hillary affair. It turns out that IS A LIE.


Trump used that excuse to fire Comey. His actual intent and reason for firing him was to compromise his actions in the Russian investigation.

Funny the letter didnt say that. the reason he was fired was last week he"mis spoke" AKA lied in more blunt speech to congress. As to Intent Unless you are him you cannot actually prove intent. Its a opinion and not a fact.

a reply to: carewemust

Fake news, that fishy smell used to get
Thrown into the HOAX bin.

🦄🦄🦄

a reply to: Willtell

Here, have a peek and find out which one applies.
18 U.S. Code Chapter 73 - OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

While your at you'll also need proof that Trump is in fact under any investigation.
Also, keep in mind that the POTUS has full authority to fire a sitting FBI director and lastly "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" is very relevant. Court of public opinion does not matter.

originally posted by: Willtell
So if Trump fired Comey because he was frustrated with his actions in investigating the Russian affair this is a crime!


Trump has no jurisdiction in managing FBI investigations or influencing them in any way!


If he does he is committing a crime!

If...then... = speculation, noy facts.

Trump is not managing any investigation, he is managing personnel, which is his JOB.

originally posted by: Willtell

Comey's sudden firing fueled by Trump's fury over the FBI director's refusal to clear him in Russia probe: report

SOURCE

President Trump’s abrupt decision to fire FBI Director James Comey was reportedly fueled by the commander-in-chief’s anger and frustration at his refusal to clear him in his agency’s Russia probe.
Trump was furious over the FBI’s growing investigation and began turning on Comey in March, when the lawman testified to the Senate Intelligence Committee that his agency was in fact probing the Trump campaign, Politico reported.

The President’s anger only grew when Comey refused to support Trump's baseless claims that former President Barack Obama had ordered illegal wiretaps of Trump Tower — and often led to the President literally “screaming” at the television, the report said.

Comey was back before the Senate — and back in Trump’s cross hairs — last week, when he testified that the probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election was continuing.

Trump concocted a excuse to fire Comey

LOL...wait...are you seriously just quoting another news agency that used your original source as their source?

LOL!

a reply to: wakeupstupid

You're totally wrong. Nixon was busted for obstruction of justice, not the burglary.

The tape where he tried to get Richard Helms, the then CIA director to intervene in the FBI investigation to stop it by saying the burglary had something to do with the bay of Pigs


read you history

So all news stories that don't support Trump's lies are okay with the posters here.

You have every right to be fooled, and deceived be my quest.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: wakeupstupid

You're totally wrong. Nixon was busted for obstruction of justice, not the burglary.

The tape where he tried to get Richard Helms, the then CIA director to intervene in the FBI investigation to stop it by saying the burglary had something to do with the bay of Pigs


read you history

No you're wrong, I didn't say Nixon committed the crime of burglary. There was EVIDENCE, that he CONSPIRED to cover up the crime.

Where is this evidence on Trump? That's my question. All there is currently? Speculation.

Non-Actionable Intelligence for the unintelligent masses to foam over.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: wakeupstupid

You're totally wrong. Nixon was busted for obstruction of justice, not the burglary.

The tape where he tried to get Richard Helms, the then CIA director to intervene in the FBI investigation to stop it by saying the burglary had something to do with the bay of Pigs


read you history

Trump hasnt stopped the investigation so how is it obstruction? Comey had a person under him and most likely will step in until a new head is appointed.