President Trump Fires James Comey

Even if trump has nothing to hide he sure can screw things up with his impulsive behavior. Making things look bad...

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: JinMI

Sure you doubt it. It contradicts lyin trumps version of events.

What about his claim of the FBI being in turmoil? That the rank and file had lost confidence in Comey?

McCabe put that puppy to bed pretty quick .

What happened to the original story told by Huckabee, Pence and Spicer, where Comey was fired because Rosenstein wrote a letter?

See Holt interview... trump contradicted them all.

McCabe, lol. So the person now in charge of the FBI - the boss - says his team are all happy and that is 'putting that puppy to bed'? Laughable.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Sure you doubt it. It contradicts lyin trumps version of events.

I doubt it because it is third party information. I didn't know you were able to read minds!

What about his claim of the FBI being in turmoil? That the rank and file had lost confidence in Comey? McCabe put that puppy to bed pretty quick .

Your saying THIS Andrew McCabe? I believe he will say and do anything to distance himself from whats going on in that article.

What happened to the original story told by Huckabee, Pence and Spicer, where Comey was fired because Rosenstein wrote a letter?

I don't recall that happening. Have a source?

a reply to: UKTruth

I never watch CNN.
My quote was from the interview. It was trumps own words so if CNN had it too, well I'm sure all the major networks will be covering that today. That's what he said. So basically you noticed I quoted him correctly.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

I never watch CNN.
My quote was from the interview. It was trumps own words so if CNN had it too, well I'm sure all the major networks will be covering that today. That's what he said. So basically you noticed I quoted him correctly.

You did quote him correctly, but failed to completely quote him, missing out context and thus spreading a false narrative. I had given you credit for just getting misled by CNN, but if you didn't even read it there then it's worse for you. You actually operate the same way as CNN. Good to know.

It Was A Dark And Stormy Night

So now we have a New York Times article which claims to speak on behalf of unnamed "associates" of Former-Director Comey, and which, like so much of the other tripe proffered on that partisan rag these days, reads like a cheap novel.

Tabloid trash from a trash tabloid.

Is it true? I don't know, but I tire of anonymous grade-school whispering campaigns like this one and the gossip columns that perpetuate them.

Nonetheless, let's consider the possibilities anyway...

Case 1: It's True

We have the President of the United States asking the FBI Director to "pledge his loyalty to him", and he refused. Sounds pretty sinister, doesn't it?

Was Trump asking Comey to forgo his duty to be impartial in favor of personal loyalty? Maybe do some favors? Make some "problems" disappear? Maybe not tell anyone outside the Family what he's thinking?

It sure reads that way. And it certainly sounds enough like Trump.

But even if it's 100% true, there's no evidence of wrongdoing. The President is not wrong to expect loyalty from government officials, and such loyalty does not necessarily mean or even imply expectations of malfeasance or criminal conspiracy.

At face value and the most charitable assumptions, it's all innuendo. It's click-bait worthy of pulp fiction, and such are the Times we live in.

Case 2: It's False

According to the article, the White House says this account is not correct, and the question of loyalty never came up. Of course, the White House isn't much (if any) more reliable a source than the Times, but it at least has a name and speaks on the record, unlike anonymous "associates".

So is the account false? Hard to say, but given its central reliance on innuendo and lack of meaningful substance, the distinction seems academic, at best.

All Cases: Some Things Are Clear

True or false, the story is bull#. It's pap. It's prolefeed.

Comey needed to be fired, and this NYT ventriloquism ploy is proof enough of that. These are precisely the sorts of political machinations an FBI Director -- or former Director -- should never indulge in, whether directly or through surrogates, yet here we are.

Mr. Comey described details of his refusal to pledge his loyalty to Mr. Trump to several people close to him on the condition that they not discuss it publicly while he was F.B.I. director. But now that Mr. Comey has been fired, they felt free to discuss it on the condition of anonymity.

Yeah, right. "Sing away, my minions!" Utterly disgusting.

Throughout all this, and despite some very troubling public displays, I have tended to give Director Comey the benefit of the doubt. It's now clear he never deserved it, and I'll stand corrected.

Trump did indeed fire a "showboat" and a "grandstander", and not soon enough. Good riddance. The swamp still festers, but at least one snake has had its fangs pulled.

I hope Comey will be replaced by someone more suited to the job, but as the saying goes, hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

I won't hold my breath.

Well at least cheeto is funny to watch

originally posted by: Majic
It Was A Dark And Stormy Night

So now we have a New York Times article which claims to speak on behalf of unnamed "associates" of Former-Director Comey, and which, like so much of the other tripe proffered on that partisan rag these days, reads like a cheap novel.

Tabloid trash from a trash tabloid.

Is it true? I don't know, but I tire of anonymous grade-school whispering campaigns like this one and the gossip columns that perpetuate them.

Nonetheless, let's consider the possibilities anyway...

Case 1: It's True

We have the President of the United States asking the FBI Director to "pledge his loyalty to him", and he refused. Sounds pretty sinister, doesn't it?

Was Trump asking Comey to forgo his duty to be impartial in favor of personal loyalty? Maybe do some favors? Make some "problems" disappear? Maybe not tell anyone outside the Family what he's thinking?

It sure reads that way. And it certainly sounds enough like Trump.

But even if it's 100% true, there's no evidence of wrongdoing. The President is not wrong to expect loyalty from government officials, and such loyalty does not necessarily mean or even imply expectations of malfeasance or criminal conspiracy.

At face value and the most charitable assumptions, it's all innuendo. It's click-bait worthy of pulp fiction, and such are the Times we live in.

Case 2: It's False

According to the article, the White House says this account is not correct, and the question of loyalty never came up. Of course, the White House isn't much (if any) more reliable a source than the Times, but it at least has a name and speaks on the record, unlike anonymous "associates".

So is the account false? Hard to say, but given its central reliance on innuendo and lack of meaningful substance, the distinction seems academic, at best.

All Cases: Some Things Are Clear

True or false, the story is bull#. It's pap. It's prolefeed.

Comey needed to be fired, and this NYT ventriloquism ploy is proof enough of that. These are precisely the sorts of political machinations an FBI Director -- or former Director -- should never indulge in, whether directly or through surrogates, yet here we are.

Mr. Comey described details of his refusal to pledge his loyalty to Mr. Trump to several people close to him on the condition that they not discuss it publicly while he was F.B.I. director. But now that Mr. Comey has been fired, they felt free to discuss it on the condition of anonymity.

Yeah, right. "Sing away, my minions!" Utterly disgusting.

Throughout all this, and despite some very troubling public displays, I have tended to give Director Comey the benefit of the doubt. It's now clear he never deserved it, and I'll stand corrected.

Trump did indeed fire a "showboat" and a "grandstander", and not soon enough. Good riddance. The swamp still festers, but at least one snake has had its fangs pulled.

I hope Comey will be replaced by someone more suited to the job, but as the saying goes, hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

I won't hold my breath.

I'd give you more than one star if I could. In addition, even if the story is true, it comes as no surprise that Trump would be demanding loyalty in a climate of deep state leaks all through the govt. I rather suspect that behind the scenes, the leakers and those actively working against the President were and are being sought out.

Asking such a direct question and looking into the whites of the eyes of the person you are asking is a good way of getting a feel for where the loyalties lie.

Trump tweets. "Comey better hope there are no "tapes" of our conversation before he leaks"

Is is saying he taped their conversation or is this a bully moment he's threatening Comey with?

What an odd thing to tweet.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Odd tweets are Trump's speciality.

originally posted by: Majic
a reply to: Sillyolme

Odd tweets are Trump's speciality.

He keeps rollin with the trollin...
And they keep taking the bait.
Suckers.

a reply to: UKTruth

Yes dear perhaps you didn't grasp the situation.
While Trump and company are saying the FBI rank and file had lost confidence in Comey. ( there was actually a montage of Sarah Huckabee saying that exact phrase in several different venues recently)
And then McCabe saying Comey had the respect of his team kind of proves trump lied about this too.
Aren't we at the point yet where if someone says something contradictory to what the president says that we automatically believe the other person? I know I am.

But really Sarah said she'd heard it from innumerable FBI agents. Then in the same conversation says she doesn't know many FBI agents. Certainly the tens of thousands of people in the department didn't weigh in on the question with her or with trump.
It's more of his inflammatory sullying language like he uses for anyone he considers an enemy. Comey is an enemy as of Tuesday.
He's not even your president I really don't get tyour blind dedication to this loser.

a reply to: JinMI

No one is disputing it are they?
Trumps tweet about Comey better hope there are no tapes before he leaks... kind of bizzare no?

a reply to: JinMI

And umm no I don't read minds.
But I do read...
I don't sit here in the dark making things up you know.

originally posted by: JinMI

I don't recall that happening. Have a source?

Were you under a rock? Pence said it on Capitol Hill, Sanders said it in the press briefing, and Spicer said it out in the bushes the other night. The video evidence is everywhere.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Trump tweets. "Comey better hope there are no "tapes" of our conversation before he leaks"

Is is saying he taped their conversation or is this a bully moment he's threatening Comey with?

What an odd thing to tweet.

He probably knows the conversations didn't quite go exactly as he claimed and tapes would prove it.

But surreptiously taping the president would seem like a crazy thing to do.

a reply to: UKTruth

Oh please school me. What part did I leave out?
Why don't you get the part I left off . I wouldn't want to misrepresent.

My quote is complete in its concept. I would have to transcript the entire interview to not be out of context.
He said that was why he fired him.
It's not veiled or innuendo. Those are his exact words.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Oh please school me. What part did I leave out?
Why don't you get the part I left off . I wouldn't want to misrepresent.

My quote is complete in its concept. I would have to transcript the entire interview to not be out of context.
He said that was why he fired him.
It's not veiled or innuendo. Those are his exact words.

I already did.
It's quite clear what he was talking about.
Good try though.

originally posted by: Majic
a reply to: Sillyolme

Odd tweets are Trump's speciality.

"odd" wouldn't be my adjective..

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

Yes dear perhaps you didn't grasp the situation.
While Trump and company are saying the FBI rank and file had lost confidence in Comey. ( there was actually a montage of Sarah Huckabee saying that exact phrase in several different venues recently)
And then McCabe saying Comey had the respect of his team kind of proves trump lied about this too.
Aren't we at the point yet where if someone says something contradictory to what the president says that we automatically believe the other person? I know I am.

But really Sarah said she'd heard it from innumerable FBI agents. Then in the same conversation says she doesn't know many FBI agents. Certainly the tens of thousands of people in the department didn't weigh in on the question with her or with trump.
It's more of his inflammatory sullying language like he uses for anyone he considers an enemy. Comey is an enemy as of Tuesday.
He's not even your president I really don't get tyour blind dedication to this loser.

When you realise I have no blind dedication, then you may begin to understand you have lost your way and are prepared to jump willingly into a pit of propaganda.