BREAKING: Trump Fires Comey

[136or142]

Trump was overheard discussing potential replacements:

"How about John McClane or Rambo?  Wait, I know: Paul Kersey.  An outsider like me would be good."

[136or142]

Hillary Clinton or Tim Kaine would have fired Comey as well, especially after what he did on Oct. 28 and Nov. 6. So I don't see what the big deal is. Clinton-Kaine would have chosen a left wing lawyer just like how Trump would pick a right wing lawyer. It is what it is.

Except neither Hillary Clinton nor Tim Kaine would have been under investigation by the F.B.I.  Duhhhhhhhhh

[136or142]

Hillary Clinton or Tim Kaine would have fired Comey as well, especially after what he did on Oct. 28 and Nov. 6. So I don't see what the big deal is. Clinton-Kaine would have chosen a left wing lawyer just like how Trump would pick a right wing lawyer. It is what it is.

Except neither Hillary Clinton nor Tim Kaine would have been under investigation by the F.B.I.  Duhhhhhhhhh

Neither is Trump.

Yes he is
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/its-official-the-fbi-is-investigating-trumps-links-to-russia/520134/

[136or142]

Hillary Clinton or Tim Kaine would have fired Comey as well, especially after what he did on Oct. 28 and Nov. 6. So I don't see what the big deal is. Clinton-Kaine would have chosen a left wing lawyer just like how Trump would pick a right wing lawyer. It is what it is.

Except neither Hillary Clinton nor Tim Kaine would have been under investigation by the F.B.I.  Duhhhhhhhhh

Neither is Trump.

Yes he is
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/its-official-the-fbi-is-investigating-trumps-links-to-russia/520134/

No he isn't. An article from March? From the frickin ATLANTIC?

HAHHAHAHAHHAH!

With text that doesn't match the headline?

You really are desperate.

You expect the FBI to complete an investigation in one month?

[136or142]

Hillary Clinton or Tim Kaine would have fired Comey as well, especially after what he did on Oct. 28 and Nov. 6. So I don't see what the big deal is. Clinton-Kaine would have chosen a left wing lawyer just like how Trump would pick a right wing lawyer. It is what it is.

Except neither Hillary Clinton nor Tim Kaine would have been under investigation by the F.B.I.  Duhhhhhhhhh

Neither is Trump.

Yes he is
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/its-official-the-fbi-is-investigating-trumps-links-to-russia/520134/

No he isn't. An article from March? From the frickin ATLANTIC?

HAHHAHAHAHHAH!

With text that doesn't match the headline?

You really are desperate.

You expect the FBI to complete an investigation in one month?

Once again... read slowly. You are posting an old article, from THE ATLANTIC, with a headline that doesn't match the text of the article.

I'm sure that you don't actually understand the distinction. I'll give you a cookie if you can figure out where you stepped off the tracks of reality.

Except it's not a cookie, it's horse sh**t, you just can't tell the difference.

[136or142]

FOX reporting diane feinstein was instrumental in the decision to fire him.

Yeah you're deflecting. You're just trolling at this point and trying to go for “The Democrats are onboard this.“

I have said THREE times in this thread that the russia stuff needs to be investigated and that there were shady people working in the campaign. I will say nothing more until evidence is presented.

Do you morons think investigators are carried out by directors?

Of course not, but a new director can stop an investigation, you moron.

[136or142]

So.....all the bitching in earlier months that comey needs to be fired is out the window because the guy you hate ended up doing it?

Pure hypocrisy.

So hey, do you believe anything about Trump and Russia? Or are you cool with everything in that department?

I'm guessing you actually don't mind that the investigation might be hurt because you don't want the truth eh?

Despite all the witch hunt hysteria that's been going on for months now over this Trump/Russia conspiracy theory one has been able to produce actual evidence that withstands scrutiny to back up the claims that Trump campaign was linked to Russian hacking of the election or that the Russians even hacked the election in the first place.

Nice bait and switch.  The investigation has nothing to do with any alleged Russian hacking.  That was what the recounts were about and no hacking was found, so obviously neither Trump nor his campaign are being investigated for that.

[136or142]

So.....all the bitching in earlier months that comey needs to be fired is out the window because the guy you hate ended up doing it?

Pure hypocrisy.

So hey, do you believe anything about Trump and Russia? Or are you cool with everything in that department?

I'm guessing you actually don't mind that the investigation might be hurt because you don't want the truth eh?

Despite all the witch hunt hysteria that's been going on for months now over this Trump/Russia conspiracy theory one has been able to produce actual evidence that withstands scrutiny to back up the claims that Trump campaign was linked to Russian hacking of the election or that the Russians even hacked the election in the first place.

Nice bait and switch.  The investigation has nothing to do with any alleged Russian hacking.  That was what the recounts were about and no hacking was found, so obviously neither Trump nor his campaign are being investigated for that.

It kinda does.  Not of the election but of Hillary, Dems, etc. It's about whether or not Trump's campaign colluded to do this or not.

1.Colluded to illegal hack the Hillary Clinton/DNC websites with wikileaks/Russia.  Not colluded to hack election websites.

Other allegations
1.Offers of bribery/pay offs with Putin/Russia in order to ease or eliminate the sanctions against Russia in exchange for campaign assistance, future business deals, monetary rewards or who knows what else.  That the special friendship between Putin and Trump may have ended post election does not alter any promises made prior to the election. It just shows that one psychopath shouldn't trust another psychopath.

2.Allegations of colluding with Russian backed fake news campaign against Hillary Clinton.

[136or142]

This will blow over with a whimper, just like all the other Trump controversies.

He appears to be immune to anything negative happening to him.

And here's a thought, while Trump has created a storm in this direction, and people think he's trying to cover up for the Russian thing (which is what he wants us to think), it's likely that Trump is pulling a "Trump" and is actually making sure people are stumbling all over this instead of looking where there is probably a REAL fire raging somewhere else.

Let's not be fooled. Somewhere else there's a real fire that Trump doesn't want us to see.


He seems to be a master at this.

I don't think either he or anybody in his Administration are intelligent enough to pull off something like that.  I agree most journalists are stupid enough to fall for red herrings, but to pull something off like that would mean Trump would have to be a master magician at misdirection.

[136or142]

...then you can't help but feel as if justice was done when he got fired.

On behalf of Democrats and independents everywhere: good luck with that.

It's not at all hard to believe both that a) Comey was a f&ck-up on many levels who handed Trump the presidency and b) Trump firing him today is a massive abuse of power related to Comey's investigation of Republican scandals.

Trump supporters are unable to hold two seemingly contradictory ideas in their head at the same time and realize both of them might be true.  This is a bit odd because Trump himself holds two genuinely  contradictory ideas in his head all the time and thinks both of them are true (sometimes both at the same time, sometimes one at a time.)

[136or142]

I thought this was funny:
https://twitter.com/SarahFoxes/status/862097068151779329

[136or142]

Trump has the unpopularity/malaise of Jimmy Carter and the paranoia/corruption/controversy of Nixon

Not sure about the malaise, the one thing Trump has going for him is that the economy is still decent (one quarter of not great results doesn't change that)  and that either a majority or plurality of Americans believe that Trump's economic policies will help grow the economy even further.

Most people are economically illiterate. 

[136or142]

The confirmation hearings for the new Director will be gripping, that's for sure.

More gripping or less gripping than Trump's p--sy grip?

[136or142]

Trump has the unpopularity/malaise of Jimmy Carter and the paranoia/corruption/controversy of Nixon

Not sure about the malaise, the one thing Trump has going for him is that the economy is still decent (one quarter of not great results doesn't change that)  and that either a majority or plurality of Americans believe that Trump's economic policies will help grow the economy even further.

Most people are economically illiterate.  

Carter actually had the highest annual percentage increase of jobs of any President since Johnson.

That's likely largely attributable to the late baby boomers joining the work force and the middle baby boomers belatedly joining the work force after the 1974-1975 recession . I'd have to check into it more though.  I know the economy performed better than most people believe throughout much of the 1970s with all the mention of 'stagflation' and the 'misery index' but the unemployment rate was still relatively high:
http://www.multpl.com/unemployment/table

So, that data point is likely nothing more than a statistical blip.

[136or142]

The Russia investigation won't end any time soon. We may have doubts and have our own opinions of course, but the media coverage is terrible. CNN has become unwatchable, today I saw Watergate and Nixon and that's the only narrative they present. Talk about presenting facts from both sides.

What if there is only one valid side?

[136or142]

If not mentioned already, Senator Mike Lee suggested Merrick Garland as new head of FBI.  

I think that could be a good idea.

However, the Deputy Head who is right now the acting head is career FBI and appears to be a capable person.  

If President Trump isn't trying to derail the FBI investigation into the Trump's campaign or administration alleged collusion with Russia/Putin, he should nominate one of these two right now. (After a genuine vetting anyway.)

No Rudy Giuliani (who has been implicated himself), no Chris Christie and no other Republican partisan or Trump water carrier who has lied in regards to Trump and Russia "there's nothing to see here."

[136or142]

If not mentioned already, Senator Mike Lee suggested Merrick Garland as new head of FBI.  

I think that could be a good idea.

However, the Deputy Head who is right now the acting head is career FBI and appears to be a capable person.  

If President Trump isn't trying to derail the FBI investigation into the Trump's campaign or administration alleged collusion with Russia/Putin, he should nominate one of these two right now. (After a genuine vetting anyway.)

No Rudy Giuliani (who has been implicated himself), no Chris Christie and no other Republican partisan or Trump water carrier who has lied in regards to Trump and Russia "there's nothing to see here."

This would be a terrible idea.

It would allow Trump to pick a replacement for the DC circuit court.

Ah, sorry.  I didn't know Garland was still a Judge.

OK, so the Deputy Head (and acting head) seems to be a good choice.  He is career FBI, seems to have the respect of FBI officers and presumably has been continually 'vetted.'

[136or142]

The Democrats would not impeach Trump and it would be suicidal to talk about it. Even talking about it would result in a civil war in the party that causes a number of us to switch to the GOP.

That would make you, and, well...

probably just you switching to the Republican Party over this.

[136or142]

Canadian columnist Andrew Coyne's insights (Coyne is a libertarian leaning semi contrarian with a masters degree in economics)

"But if Trump’s every move suggests he has something to hide, that does not mean firing Comey will have no impact on the investigation. Trump need not install a more compliant director to further slow its progress. He can, as David Frum has suggested, simply leave the office vacant for months on end, as he has hundreds of others. Neither should Comey’s firing be seen in isolation: this is the third senior legal officer Trump has dismissed, after acting attorney general Sally Yates and New York federal prosecutor Preet Bharara. All three were responsible for various aspects of the Trump-Russia investigation."

"Those fine minds who think the really essential point to make at this moment is that it is “perfectly legal” for Trump to fire the FBI director, or that the Democrats didn’t care much for Comey either, might wish to consider how they became so blind to context. Whatever Trump’s powers, whatever Comey’s mistakes, for the president to fire the FBI director in the very middle of an investigation into his administration — an investigation that, whatever his protestations, is very likely to touch upon the president himself — is self-evidently unacceptable."

"The official explanation for the firing — that the president had suddenly become displeased with Comey’s handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails he had earlier publicly praised — is transparently, clownishly false. There has been ample reporting from inside the White House that the decision to fire Comey had been in the works for days, if not weeks; that it was motivated by the president’s irritation at the FBI’s continuing investigation into various Trump associates’ alleged collusion with the Russian government to throw the presidential election to Trump."

"The question is whether this prospect can safely be endured. And the answer, it is now clear, is no. If sense prevailed, the wheels would already be in motion to remove him from office. Alas, political calculations on both sides of the aisle may conspire to leave him there: the Republicans, in dread of the turmoil his removal would unleash among their base; the Democrats, because he may help deliver them the Congress, as early as 2018.

They should think again. The risk is too great, not just to the republic, but to the world"

[136or142]

"The question is whether this prospect can safely be endured. And the answer, it is now clear, is no. If sense prevailed, the wheels would already be in motion to remove him from office. Alas, political calculations on both sides of the aisle may conspire to leave him there: the Republicans, in dread of the turmoil his removal would unleash among their base; the Democrats, because he may help deliver them the Congress, as early as 2018.

Usually I've thought that if Trump were impeached, it would wreck the GOP for the next few years due to the backlash among their base, but thinking about it more, if the evidence of wrongdoing is weak upon removal, it could help neutralize some of the backlash Democrats would hope to harness for themselves.

If the evidence is substantial enough that a large majority of the public is convinced Trump deserves impeachment, then removing him from office would be the best option with nothing but benefits for Democrats, politically-speaking.

I think it would depend on how soon and how quickly the impeachment (and conviction) was done.  If Mike Pence had at least a year to be President before the midterms in November, I think he and the Congressional Republicans would have ample time to put Trump behind them and put the Republican coalition back together.

Obviously some of the 'only Trump' Republicans would give up on electoral politics again, but I think clearly the gains for the Republicans would enormously outweigh the losses.