- Joined
- Apr 25, 2016
- Messages
- 512
- Reaction score
- 115
- Age
- 31
- Country
-
As of now, the Senate has rejected the bill, although they're going to make the necessary adjustments that would make it appealing to the members.
Now the question is: who's gonna be the director? Will Trump try to get one of his family in that position, or will he try to put his stooge there? Imagine the shit he could do and get away with, and the dirt he can get on others. Assuming the new director would play ball with him, who'd also be pretty powerful.Trump just fired James Comey.
One thing's for sure: he's going to replace Comey with someone who would sabotage or withdraw from the investigation. This would become problematic for the Trump Administration, because they're going to show the public that they're hiding something horrific.Now the question is: who's gonna be the director? Will Trump try to get one of his family in that position, or will he try to put his stooge there? Imagine the shit he could do and get away with, and the dirt he can get on others. Assuming the new director would play ball with him, who'd also be pretty powerful.
I would question there being any room left for this being machiavellian at all lol. An interesting point I just read is that the process to get rid of someone like comey would under normal circumstances start with trump asking comey to resign. Now, if trump did that the implication here would do what comey is wont to do and told trump to eat an orange dick. And trump would have responded to that by firing him as suddenly as he apparently did. Now, add in the bit with comey investigating trump's administration and its connections to russia and you have something that looks downright awful. Now, of course this doesn't prove the administration has done anything wrong in that regard but all of the questions on the issue are completely valid. There was plenty of time to fire comey and do so in a manner which showed competence, seriousness and common sense. But trump behaved like the exemplary moron he is and fired the guy after he had told the world the FBI was indeed investigating trump. So yeah, this looks very much like incompetence. Perhaps grotesque incompetence. Or worst, perhaps it actually is what it looks like...This is an unforced political error. Well two really, but they're linked. Comey should have been asked to resign immediately after Trump was inaugurated, but he didn't do that. And now 6 days after another round of Comey's microphone show in front of Congress, where he was very clearly anti-Russia, he's fired.
It just makes no sense politically. And now Trump and his camp will use Democrat's indignation over this as ammunition against them (since a large portion of them were very clearly anti-Comey in the past). Well, maybe then it makes perfect sense... The firing of Comey doesn't end the investigations that are still ongoing at the FBI. He merely gave the administration an opening to fire him (as well as the Inspector General's investigation of the FBI itself). So then why keep him in the first place? This is either Machiavellian or pure incompetence. And the fact that that is so unclear is the exact reason why this administration is garbage.
How problematic, though? To those not on his side, all it'll do is make us more convinced about the negatives of Trump and his administration. To those on his side, it'll just seem like they're trying to sling even more mud on Trump and make him look bad. Seriously, Trump has played this game so beautifully, and it wouldn't have worked with democrats because their voters aren't dumb.One thing's for sure: he's going to replace Comey with someone who would sabotage or withdraw from the investigation. This would become problematic for the Trump Administration, because they're going to show the public that they're hiding something horrific.
Yes, but the FBI was doing this previous to the election, Comey just wasn't talking about it publicly like he was with Hillary's emails. We're in agreement here that Comey shouldn't have remained head of the FBI, and keeping him and then doing this does look like more gross incompetence.Now, add in the bit with comey investigating trump's administration and its connections to russia and you have something that looks downright awful.
Well, but the firing did happen after comey actually confirmed the investigation was a thing. It's not the same as before where there was basically just speculation on that or only the flynn thing...Yes, but the FBI was doing this previous to the election, Comey just wasn't talking about it publicly like he was with Hillary's emails. We're in agreement here that Comey shouldn't have remained head of the FBI, and keeping him and then doing this does look like more gross incompetence.
But just take one look at Trump's Twitter tonight and you'll see him calling out Schumer for his criticism of the move. I'll be the last person to give Trump credit for being so devious, but it does look bizarre.
It would become problematic for them because it would only give the American People more impression that they're hiding something. Covering their foot-tracks hasn't worked with Nixon, and it sure as shit won't work for a Moron.How problematic, though? To those not on his side, all it'll do is make us more convinced about the negatives of Trump and his administration. To those on his side, it'll just seem like they're trying to sling even more mud on Trump and make him look bad. Seriously, Trump has played this game so beautifully, and it wouldn't have worked with democrats because their voters aren't dumb.
But my point is Comey didn't show impartiality at all, given that both candidates were under investigation and only chose to speak publicly about Trump's after he was elected. This is why Democrats were very displeased with him. I remember yourself being puzzled why he was doing what he was doing just prior to the general election regarding reopening Clinton's investigation. And meanwhile, Trump and members of his campaign had been under investigation the whole time as well. It isn't like the FBI suddenly decided to get involved after Flynn was given the boot. Maybe I'm wrong there, but that's the impression I got.Well, but the firing did happen after comey actually confirmed the investigation was a thing. It's not the same as before where there was basically just speculation on that or only the flynn thing...
My point is not about comey being impartial or not in this case (even a few posts ago I mention his actions only make sense to me up to the point where he said the FBI would not recommend indicting hillary). My point is about trump's timing. Sure, he and his team were under investigation the whole time but we only learned that from a fact recently when comey confirmed it to congress. Before that it was mostly speculation that trump and his people were being investigated. So it makes a difference whether trump fired him before or after comey himself confirmed this. Had it been before he could have used whatever excused he wanted... But if he fires him at any point after the investigation was made public then it is reasonable to think trump fired him because of the investigation reveal.But my point is Comey didn't show impartiality at all, given that both candidates were under investigation and only chose to speak publicly about Trump's after he was elected. This is why Democrats were very displeased with him. I remember yourself being puzzled why he was doing what he was doing just prior to the general election regarding reopening Clinton's investigation. And meanwhile, Trump and members of his campaign had been under investigation the whole time as well. It isn't like the FBI suddenly decided to get involved after Flynn was given the boot. Maybe I'm wrong there, but that's the impression I got.
I didn't say it wasn't unreasonable, I'm just saying it's not a given. We've just now been talking about this administration's incompetence. If the FBI has anything particularly damaging on Trump or people involved in his administration, Comey getting fired isn't going to prevent that from getting out. The Inspector General's office still has to complete it's investigation on the FBI's conduct and I wouldn't be surprised to see hearings called in the wake of Comey's firing as well. We've even seen leaks from a number of government agencies already as well.But if he fires him at any point after the investigation was made public then it is reasonable to think trump fired him because of the investigation reveal.
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
--- Double Post Merged, ---

Oh, I am not saying it is a given. Just that it looks bad. And of course firing comey will have absolutely no bearing on the results of the investigation whatever they may be getting out.I didn't say it wasn't unreasonable, I'm just saying it's not a given. We've just now been talking about this administration's incompetence. If the FBI has anything particularly damaging on Trump or people involved in his administration, Comey getting fired isn't going to prevent that from getting out. The Inspector General's office still has to complete it's investigation on the FBI's conduct and I wouldn't be surprised to see hearings called in the wake of Comey's firing as well. We've even seen leaks from a number of government agencies already as well.
To me, it's almost as likely that Trump is really this much of moron to think that the timing of this doesn't matter. Which again, brings up the question of why he let Comey keep his position in the first place. Was it simply because he figured he was on his side due to the Clinton investigation?
Well forget hearings being likely, it will happen. Members of congress are already calling for an independent commission on the Russian issue itself. Some are even calling for a special prosecutor which has nothing to do with the FBI in any case.--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
--- Double Post Merged, ---
I mean, Amash is in the fucking Freedom Caucus...![]()
How is it beating a dead horse? So I guess people in western democracies should just accept Russian interference in their elections as a commonplace thing? They want to destabilize NATO, they want to destabilize European governments they're not allied with. How is this issue not important?Now what's really hilarious is that the russian thing is still ongoing. Talk about beating a dead horse.
Not the Russian involvement, although I've yet to see any actual proof of those either at least that's somewhat believable.How is it beating a dead horse? So I guess people in western democracies should just accept Russian interference in their elections as a commonplace thing? They want to destabilize NATO, they want to destabilize European governments they're not allied with. How is this issue not important?