President Trump Fires James Comey

a reply to: alphabetaone

If I could butt in.

It matters when the AG goes on record as stating before his announcement that she would go with whatever he (Comey) suggests.

Planes and ex-presidents were also in the news around that time......

originally posted by: introvert

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.

There is a difference between being found guilty and pleading guilty in terms of reporting.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: alphabetaone

If I could butt in.

It matters when the AG goes on record as stating before his announcement that she would go with whatever he (Comey) suggests.

Planes and ex-presidents were also in the news around that time......

the issue he is missing though is the AG never recused herself. She is responsible for the decision and not Comey. Comey held a press conference announcing no charges without speaking to the Ag and telling her what he was going to say.

a reply to: introvert

Not applicable to the current discussion.

You stated h er private server was not illegal, and I showed how even smaller situations were highly illegal. How u s that not applicable?

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?

If they contained classified or sensitive emails, they should have been prosecuted.

I am no fan of Dubya.

TheRedneck

a reply to: MotherMayEye

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

And wondering about Obama's BC is just peachy?

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 are you going down this road? I don't give a damn about Obama's BC. Have it it. Prove them wrong if you can.

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'd just like to know. I'm not making a big deal out of it, unless you consider questioning his actions to be unreasonable.

I actually proved my case.

You have proven something, but it was not that Obama was not born in the US.

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?

Actually I don't agree with this.

It is pretty clear now that Trump was watching Comey's testimony in front of congress, did not like what he heard and decided to fire him. He was already not happy with him, but that testimony was the last straw. It was probably the nauseated comment that did it, as we all know Trump does not respond well to being attacked.

He then asked the attorney general and deputy to type up letters supporting the firing. Now, it doesn't look good that the white house was at first trying to claim it was due mainly to the deputy AG's letter, and not Trump himself. This was probably done to try and tamp down the russia investigation speculation BS, but it backfired when the truth came out. Trump obviously realized he would get blow back for it - and the proof is his own tweet where he said Comey told him 3 times he was not being investigated. This has now been verified by Fienstein that he is not being investigated.

So anyway, the whole thing seems pretty clear to me at this point. Again as McCabe has stated today, this will have no effect on the investigation, and Trump A. Knowing he did not collude was not worried about the investigation, and B. That he was not under investigation was not motivated by that at all.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Because at the time policies regarding private emails were not in effect. The ones Clinton violated were put in place by Obama.

Also the bush deal never dealt with a private sever located in someones basement.

Finally-

22 Million E-Mails Missing From Bush White House Found

originally posted by: Xcathdra
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.

Jesus.

Such a charge requires certain actions to be taken which in and of itself prove intent to commit a crime.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

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.

Like I said, have at it. Scrutinize Obama's BC all you like.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: alphabetaone

If I could butt in.

It matters when the AG goes on record as stating before his announcement that she would go with whatever he (Comey) suggests.

Planes and ex-presidents were also in the news around that time......

the issue he is missing though is the AG never recused herself. She is responsible for the decision and not Comey. Comey held a press conference announcing no charges without speaking to the Ag and telling her what he was going to say.

Right.

The argument could be had that she recused herself enough to let Comey dictate where the case would go thus washing her hands of the whole mess. However....this...is...ATS!!!

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Xcathdra
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.

Jesus.

Such a charge requires certain actions to be taken which in and of itself prove intent to commit a crime.

and you are wrong...

involuntary manslaughter does not require intent, just gross negligence / carelessness actions that result in someone elses severe physical injury or death.

It means you killed someone by your actions yet had absolutely no intent on doing so.

Like 793 F - being grossly negligent resulting in the mishandling of classified info.

Your smart and this is not difficult to grasp.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert

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.

There is a difference between being found guilty and pleading guilty in terms of reporting.

Did I say anything about the reporting?

Patraeus pled guilty because he knew he was guilty...with intent.

a reply to: TheRedneck

You stated h er private server was not illegal, and I showed how even smaller situations were highly illegal. How u s that not applicable?

Because it was not illegal.

If they contained classified or sensitive emails, they should have been prosecuted.

Wasn't even followed-up on. Wasn't illegal, apparently.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: introvert

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.

There is a difference between being found guilty and pleading guilty in terms of reporting.

Did I say anything about the reporting?

Patraeus pled guilty because he knew he was guilty...with intent.

No you didnt because you dont understand what I am talking about.

He plead guilty because he was offered a deal on a misdemeanor charge. The origional charge was felony and he said he would fight it.

a reply to: Xcathdra

That does make sense.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: MotherMayEye

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

And wondering about Obama's BC is just peachy?

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 are you going down this road? I don't give a damn about Obama's BC. Have it it. Prove them wrong if you can.

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'd just like to know. I'm not making a big deal out of it, unless you consider questioning his actions to be unreasonable.

I actually proved my case.

You have proven something, but it was not that Obama was not born in the US.

I didn't set out to prove Obama was born outside the U.S. and have never made that claim. I proved the short form birth certificate was fraudulent via the only method the public has to make government transparent. I didn't wonder, I answered my questions through the Uniform information Practices Act.

And I already DID prove it: Link

The fact that no major media would report on it doesn't mean I didn't prove it.

a reply to: Xcathdra

That's right, it's not hard to grasp and I've already refuted the ridiculous comparisons.

originally posted by: introvert
Because it was not illegal.

Yes it is.

originally posted by: introvert
Wasn't even followed-up on. Wasn't illegal, apparently.

Because they were protecting Clinton.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

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.

Like I said, have at it. Scrutinize Obama's BC all you like.

Already did, done, and proven that Obama (with the help of Factcheck) committed fraud: Link

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Xcathdra

That's right, it's not hard to grasp and I've already refuted the ridiculous comparisons.

All you have done is demonstrate your lack of knowledge and understanding in this area by repeating failed talking points over and over.

I do this for a living and know what im talking about.

Whats your background.