President Trump Fires James Comey

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: face23785
a reply to: Xcathdra

So you don't think the President works for the American people and his authority questioned?

Well, forgive me. I thought it was our job as responsible citizens to hold our leader's feet to the fire. Perhaps I should learn to lay down and become a sheep.

Requires less thought. Sounds amusing.

Way to only see what you want while making false claims about other people..

Typical but not surprising.

What false claims have I made?

Please, enlighten me.

Your post here - www.abovetopsecret.com... - false claims and all.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: face23785

If you think Clinton shouldn't have faced charges, you are either outside your realm of knowledge or have more left political leanings than you realize.

Actually, I was almost spot-on with my assessment of the Clinton email issue. I will not be baited by such an ignorant ad hom.

I don't care what others here claim. I know what I did in the service, I know you cannot legally do what she did with classified info, and I don't need to have that shoveled to me by my favorite news source, I know it for a fact.

Yet another logical fallacy. I don't care what you did in the service. You could be lying for all I know.

You can twist all you want, but nothing you say will change that.

No need to twist. My assessment is corroborated by the fact she is not in jail, or in the courts.

You wanna talk about logical fallacies, thinking because someone wasn't charged means they're innocent is a bigtime logical fallacy and simply not based in reality. You sound like the brainless Clinton worshippers Mr. No Traditional Political Leanings

Another personal attack.

Let's stick to the topic and not let your emotions cloud your ability to effectively debate. I have no desire or time to trade punches with the immature.

You need to look up the definition of logical fallacy. And if you took that as a personal attack you're too thin skinned for this place. You were absolutely nowhere close to accurate on what you said about Clinton. See above. You don't know what you're talking about, you're another uninformed Clinton worshipper.

Sure. If you look at my history, you would see that I am not and was not a Clinton supporter. I came to my conclusions based on past legal precedence.

If you'd like to continue this discussion, I'd be glad to but find an actual point to discuss. Not going to waste my time with ad homs and logical fallacies.

There is no past legal precedence of someone doing what she did. You came to your conclusions because you're politically biased. You can throw all the terms around you want, the only way you can be informed on the subject and think she didn't need to be charged is if you're biased. An Army Private with a Secret clearance knows better than to do what she did, and she had 30 years experience in and around government, some as a Senator so she was well aware of what she was allowed to do with classified. That alone proves intent. It's simply not possible she couldn't know. She was trained and retrained and retrained what you can and can't do with classified and what is instantly classified at generation. So yeah run and hide because I accused you of being a Clinton supporter, that's fine.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Partisans never hold their leaders' feet to the fire. It was so painful to behold under Obama, he was so protected from criticism...I know I grew apathetic.

We are all partisan in some form or another. What we are not "all" is honest.

I don't feel the left's outrage on this because they weren't outraged about a number of things Obama did that outraged me.

That's doesn't make much sense. Why should we care about what others are outraged about? What do you think? What concerns you?

They fostered so much apathy, I don't know why anyone is surprised by it. I don't even really like Trump, but I am sure not going to get outraged by him firing Comey.

I'm not outraged either. I just want to know if it was for a damned good reason. So far, that does not appear to be the case. The best reason I have seen so far is "because he can".

originally posted by: introvert


Think about that. Both sides wanted him gone. Maybe he was doing something right and all of you, both Left and Right, couldn't handle what you were being served.

With my limited knowledge of the facts, this surely rings the most true to me

nice post

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: face23785
a reply to: Xcathdra

So you don't think the President works for the American people and his authority questioned?

Well, forgive me. I thought it was our job as responsible citizens to hold our leader's feet to the fire. Perhaps I should learn to lay down and become a sheep.

Requires less thought. Sounds amusing.

Way to only see what you want while making false claims about other people..

Typical but not surprising.

What false claims have I made?

Please, enlighten me.

Your post here - www.abovetopsecret.com... - false claims and all.

I didn't even see that post from him because I was eating and missed a page or two. lol and then he whines about my personal attacks. So he's a hypocrite too.

originally posted by: face23785

Yeah you're completely wrong on all of this. She did not follow the law as it is written, that's the whole problem.

Yeah, no I'm not. we're talking about Jim Comey and not bringing charges AGAINST Hillary, not her (Hillary's) actions of inactions.

And millions of people hold security clearances. You think NONE of them are interested in the kind of discussions that happen here?

Interested? Sure. Willing to claim on a public forum that they hold/held such a clearance and thus have intimate knowledge of the workings on it? No.

Keep up the delusion champ, clearly it works for ya.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

No. It's about feeling apathetic.

Sorry, but I have wasted too much of my life feeling outraged when others should have, too, but they weren't. I don;t have the outrage to muster.

Plus, I am actually glad Comey is gone. I think he's a corrupt sleaze.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: face23785
a reply to: Xcathdra

So you don't think the President works for the American people and his authority questioned?

Well, forgive me. I thought it was our job as responsible citizens to hold our leader's feet to the fire. Perhaps I should learn to lay down and become a sheep.

Requires less thought. Sounds amusing.

Way to only see what you want while making false claims about other people..

Typical but not surprising.

What false claims have I made?

Please, enlighten me.

Your post here - www.abovetopsecret.com... - false claims and all.

Again, what have I said that was false?

Does the president not work for the American people?

Is it not our job to be diligent citizens and hold them accountable?

Are people not asking me to accept his actions simply because "he can"?

I think getting caught up in what other people believe is the fastest way into the woods.

The fastest way out is not worrying about it.

a reply to: introvert

If we get that vote, he is not a dictator.

True, so why all the 'dictator' talk? If he fails, he gets kicked out. If he's blocked from succeeding, the blockers get kicked out.

He was not elected on character or leadership skills to begin with, so I suppose it wouldn't matter the next go-around.

Actually, that is exactly why I voted for him. And so far, despite a few concerns, I'm happy with that decision.

If the goal is to make sure Trump does a good job for those who elected him, perhaps an understanding of why they elected him would be helpful. If the goal is to just gripe about Trump, then it's probably superfluous.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: introvert

I'm not outraged either. I just want to know if it was for a damned good reason. So far, that does not appear to be the case. The best reason I have seen so far is "because he can".

But he doesn't need a good reason or any reason.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: face23785

Yeah you're completely wrong on all of this. She did not follow the law as it is written, that's the whole problem.

Yeah, no I'm not. we're talking about Jim Comey and not bringing charges AGAINST Hillary, not her (Hillary's) actions of inactions.

And millions of people hold security clearances. You think NONE of them are interested in the kind of discussions that happen here?

Interested? Sure. Willing to claim on a public forum that they hold/held such a clearance and thus have intimate knowledge of the workings on it? No.

Keep up the delusion champ, clearly it works for ya.

You've been watching too many movies. Publicly acknowledging you have held a security clearance and know how they work and know what's illegal to do with classified material is not prohibited in any way. Get informed, then post. You're out of your element.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: face23785
a reply to: Xcathdra

So you don't think the President works for the American people and his authority questioned?

Well, forgive me. I thought it was our job as responsible citizens to hold our leader's feet to the fire. Perhaps I should learn to lay down and become a sheep.

Requires less thought. Sounds amusing.

Way to only see what you want while making false claims about other people..

Typical but not surprising.

What false claims have I made?

Please, enlighten me.

Your post here - www.abovetopsecret.com... - false claims and all.

Again, what have I said that was false?

Does the president not work for the American people?

Is it not our job to be diligent citizens and hold them accountable?

Are people not asking me to accept his actions simply because "he can"?

You insinuated I didn't think he worked for the American people, which is patently incorrect since I actually said in the post you're referencing that we could hold him accountable by not voting for him. You then insinuated I was a sheep, and proceeded to cry that I personally attacked you in one of my posts like a hypocrite.

Got it?

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

No. It's about feeling apathetic.

Sorry, but I have wasted too much of my life feeling outraged when others should have, too, but they weren't. I don;t have the outrage to muster.

Plus, I am actually glad Comey is gone. I think he's a corrupt sleaze.

I'm thinking along the same lines as far as Comey is concerned, although it took me a while to get there.

In what way do you think he is corrupt? Does it involve a connection to the Clintons? I ask for a reason, because I have some thoughts I haven't shared yet. Since I highly respect your wise perspectives on many things we've discussed on ATS, I am all ears!

originally posted by: face23785
You've been watching too many movies. Publicly acknowledging you have held a security clearance and know how they work and know what's illegal to do with classified material is not prohibited in any way. Get informed, then post. You're out of your element.

I didn't say it was prohibited. I said they simply wouldn't. You know nothing of my element, I think it would be prudent that you make no such claims.

a reply to: face23785

There is no past legal precedence of someone doing what she did.

True. What she did would not see the inside of a court unless intent could be proven. The legal precedence we do have proves that.

You came to your conclusions because you're politically biased. You can throw all the terms around you want, the only way you can be informed on the subject and think she didn't need to be charged is if you're biased.

You're talking out of your ass. I bet you could not even tell me, or anyone else, what political ideology I subscribe to.

An Army Private with a Secret clearance knows better than to do what she did, and she had 30 years experience in and around government, some as a Senator so she was well aware of what she was allowed to do with classified. That alone proves intent.

No it doesn't. Perhaps you do not understand intent and how is has to be proven.

So yeah run and hide because I accused you of being a Clinton supporter, that's fine.

What an odd thing to say. I'm right here responding accordingly. Perhaps you should try those tactics on someone dumb enough to be baited by them.

You can claim I am a Clinton supporter all you wish. Doesn't change the fact I am on record as not being a supporter and it doesn't change the fact that you claiming I am does not help your argument.

In other words, argue the points and stop making dumb accusations.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Trump so far has done more in 100 days in the white house that Obama did in 8 years and that is not counting how he screw the nation.

I am happy with Trump and thanks for him been the president I get to see the true nature of the Democratic party left over losers that are still holding that party hostage.

I am sure is plenty of voters like me that can see what the party has become.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: face23785
You've been watching too many movies. Publicly acknowledging you have held a security clearance and know how they work and know what's illegal to do with classified material is not prohibited in any way. Get informed, then post. You're out of your element.

I didn't say it was prohibited. I said they simply wouldn't. You know nothing of my element, I think it would be prudent that you make no such claims.

If you think we wouldn't, you're out of your element. What are you basing this claim on? There's confirmed people with past military and civil experience with security clearances on here. You simply do not know what you're talking about, no getting around it.

a reply to: TheRedneck

True, so why all the 'dictator' talk? If he fails, he gets kicked out. If he's blocked from succeeding, the blockers get kicked out.

I specifically said he was not a dictator. The approach others are taking would indicate otherwise.

Actually, that is exactly why I voted for him. And so far, despite a few concerns, I'm happy with that decision. If the goal is to make sure Trump does a good job for those who elected him, perhaps an understanding of why they elected him would be helpful. If the goal is to just gripe about Trump, then it's probably superfluous.

Why people voted for him are, at this point, somewhat irrelevant. What I want to know is why Comey was fired.

Simply griping about Trump for the sake of griping is not productive, but I would like to know why he did what he did.

I don't think that is unreasonable.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Oh, and PS:
What was obama sheltered from? Trump's claims that he was a Muslim not even born here? Or allegations that his wife was a transgender, or an ape?
Who protected him from that?

What freaking "criticism" do you harbor about him? His trying to help everyone? His reluctance to go to war? His health care efforts?

What?

Larry's Sinclair's false imprisonment should have caused extreme outrage, and Obama's fraudlent birth certificate and disdain for anyone who questioned that phony document. And, BTW, I concerned myself with that fake piece of junk back when i supported Hillary, in 2008, and NOT when Trump suddenly took up the issue in late 2010. IMO, Trump covered for Obama by demanding to see the long form as soon as the short form was proven to be fraudulent...by me.