Jump to content

Trump calls Comey 'showboat,' acting FBI chief contradicts president


webfact

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Skywalker69 said:

Trump has been watching too much of the Godfather and Good Fellows. These officials (as Trump also did) swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution and the American People, NOT to some wannabe mafioso boss. Trump has spent way to long with his criminal buddies in New York.

 

You want to know why Trump has not been impeached yet - it is simple - because there is so much crap in the melting pot that people don't know where to start first. The law enforcement agencies are like kids in a sweet shop full of their favourite sweets, "er this one, no this one, but.....no this one". The forthcoming events are going to be awesome, website owners will make a fortune as the best click bait in history is still yet to come.

Edited by Andaman Al
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The people who were on Trumps transition team and in his administration should be very worried. This guy is all about 'me me me'! He does not give a crap about anybody else. Watch the video below of the interview with NBC. When the interviewer corrects Trump and says that statements have been clearly made that there is an investigation into the Trump Campaigns connections with Russia, Trump says "i am not talking about the campaign, I am talking about me". Only a couple of minutes or skip to the last 20 seconds. Trump will happily throw any of the people that worked for him under the bus, he just did it with Comey. Nobody is safe, apart from his 3 little piggies and Kushner.

 

 

Edited by Andaman Al
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

Trump has been watching too much of the Godfather and Good Fellows. These officials (as Trump also did) swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution and the American People, NOT to some wannabe mafioso boss. Trump has spent way to long with his criminal buddies in New York.

 

You want to know why Trump has not been impeached yet - it is simple - because there is so much crap in the melting pot that people don't know where to start first. The law enforcement agencies are like kids in a sweet shop full of their favourite sweets, "er this one, no this one, but.....no this one". The forthcoming events are going to be awesome, website owners will make a fortune as the best click bait in history is still yet to come.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

If/when they go for Trump they need to have a water tight case against him because he will squirm and wriggle and try to blame everyone else around him.

True, but what about 'just unstable' or 'unreliable' - in short 'unfit' to say the least ...

 

First he said he acted on an advice from his minister of justice, 2 days later it was Comey's handling of Clinton's email-story and now he's calling the bloke names (which would fit himself better anyway) and states he didn't trust him for a long time already. Borderline schizo - if not acute?

 

Well, let's see what we'll get to hear tomorrow! Any bets ... ? :coffee1: 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main reason, as far as I can tell, is that he apparently continues to have a substantial proportion of Republicans in Congress willing to, at least, support him, some while holding their noses -- probably mainly because they believe he's their chance to enact their right-wing legislative agenda after years of stalemate with President Obama.

 

The fact that so many Republican politicians can continue to stand behind Trump -- despite all the screw-ups and clear lapses he's made in such a short time, not to mention potentially selling out U.S. interests for personal reasons to adversaries like Russia -- speaks volumes as to the characters of those politicians.

 

The prior round of this kind of sad story back in Nixon's era, by the way, was called the "Saturday Night Massacre," with no less than the infamous Robert Bork as the president's hatchet man in that sad episode in U.S. political history.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Massacre
 

Quote

 

But the House Judiciary Committee did not approve its first article of impeachment until July 27th the following year – more than nine months after the Saturday Night Massacre – when it charged Nixon with obstruction of justice. Two more articles of impeachment quickly followed.

Nixon resigned less than two weeks later, on Aug. 8, 1974.

 

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump warned Friday morning the former boss of the FBI James Comey not to make revelations to the press. " James Comey better hope that there are no "tapes" of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!"

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/05/what-the-actual-fck-is-this-internet-aghast-after-trump-publicly-threatens-his-former-fbi-director/

"Comey was upset that his investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails may have swayed an election. He should be upset. The FBI is supposed to be apolitical. But all Trump could see was a man deprecating Trump’s victory. "
 
Edited by Opl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The main reason, as far as I can tell, is that he apparently continues to have a substantial proportion of Republicans in Congress willing to, at least, support him, some while holding their noses -- probably mainly because they believe he's their chance to enact their right-wing legislative agenda after years of stalemate with President Obama.

 

The fact that so many Republican politicians can continue to stand behind Trump -- despite all the screw-ups and clear lapses he's made in such a short time, not to mention potentially selling out U.S. interests for personal reasons to adversaries like Russia -- speaks volumes as to the characters of those politicians.

 

The prior round of this kind of sad story back in Nixon's era, by the way, was called the "Saturday Night Massacre," with no less than the infamous Robert Bork as the president's hatchet man in that sad episode in U.S. political history.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Massacre
 

 

Power and party over country.

Shame on them.

Hope they will pay for their VILLAINY someday.

But no guarantees. 

 

Quote

What will pull the GOP away from Trump? Nothing, it seems. At a time in which the president himself tests the strength of our democracy, we know what the Republican Party stands for: party over country, power over everything.

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/05/comey_s_gone_and_the_gop_doesn_t_care_is_there_anything_trump_could_do_to.html

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Opl said:

Trump warned Friday morning the former boss of the FBI James Comey not to make revelations to the press. " James Comey better hope that there are no "tapes" of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!"

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/05/what-the-actual-fck-is-this-internet-aghast-after-trump-publicly-threatens-his-former-fbi-director/

"Comey was upset that his investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails may have swayed an election. He should be upset. The FBI is supposed to be apolitical. But all Trump could see was a man deprecating Trump’s victory. "
 

Where are the resident lawyers. Are Trump's threats , in particular using an illegal method  (as far as I know) a crime. Is this illegal unauthorised surveillance? He may have done this in his business deals, but I think he has just chewed on a stinking great log dumped by Beelzebub. Trump will go down, not if but WHEN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

Where are the resident lawyers. Are Trump's threats , in particular using an illegal method  (as far as I know) a crime. Is this illegal unauthorised surveillance? He may have done this in his business deals, but I think he has just chewed on a stinking great log dumped by Beelzebub. Trump will go down, not if but WHEN.

Apparently not a crime - if the meeting took place in the WH or elsewhere in DC:

 

Who must give permission to record a telephone or in-person conversation?

Federal law permits recording telephone calls and in-person conversations with the consent of at least one of the parties. See 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d). This is called a "one-party consent" law. Under a one-party consent law, you can record a phone call or conversation so long as you are a party to the conversation. Furthermore, if you are not a party to the conversation, a "one-party consent" law will allow you to record the conversation or phone call so long as your source consents and has full knowledge that the communication will be recorded.

 

The District of Columbia's wiretapping law is a "one-party consent" law. DC makes it a crime to record a phone call or conversation unless one party to the conversation consents. See D.C. Code § 23-542. Thus, if you operate in DC, you may record a conversation or phone call if you are a party to the conversation or you get permission from one party to the conversation in advance. That said, if you intend to record conversations involving people located in more than one state, you should play it safe and get the consent of all parties.

 

Possibly a different result if it happened at Mar-a-Largo:

 

Florida's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. Florida makes it a crime to intercept or record a "wire, oral, or electronic communication" in Florida, unless all parties to the communication consent. See Fla. Stat. ch. 934.03. Florida law makes an exception for in-person communications when the parties do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the conversation, such as when they are engaged in conversation in a public place where they might reasonably be overheard. If you are operating in Florida, you may record these kinds of in-person conversations without breaking the law. However, you should always get the consent of all parties before recording any telephone conversation and any in-person that common sense tells you is private.

 

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations

Link to comment
Share on other sites

trump being trump.

 

donaldtrumpbaby.jpg.67e3d280d4697daaab76257d74504a4c.jpg

 

Sad.

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/11/opinions/no-one-can-save-trump-from-himself-borger/index.html

 

Quote

 

No one can save Trump from himself

Oh, and as he told NBC, Comey was a "showboat" and a "grandstander." It was a telling insult; in Trump's galaxy, there can be no star brighter than Trump.
One requirement of the presidency is to believe that your job is about something greater than yourself -- your country.
But first you have to believe there is something greater than yourself.

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

Where are the resident lawyers. Are Trump's threats , in particular using an illegal method  (as far as I know) a crime. Is this illegal unauthorised surveillance? He may have done this in his business deals, but I think he has just chewed on a stinking great log dumped by Beelzebub. Trump will go down, not if but WHEN.

 
 

The possible illegality stems from the potential charge of "obstruction of justice", the same charge that snared both Nixon and Bill Clinton. His Tweet could easily be interpreted as threatening a potential witness. Also, the fact that in his interview with NBC's Lester Holt, Trump specifically mentioned the Russia investigation as part of his reasoning for firing Comey, another potential instance of obstruction.

 

Just my opinion, but Trump appears to be seriously rattled by the progress of the investigation and its refusal to go away. He is also massively frustrated by his inability to solve problems the way he did in business. It would appear there may well be some "there, there". As multiple people have said on countless occasions...if you've got nothing to hide, what are you afraid of?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump’s-own-words-add-fuel-to-questions-about-the-legality-of-firing-comey/ar-BBB4EcY

Edited by Traveler19491
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jingthing said:

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/11/opinions/no-one-can-save-trump-from-himself-borger/index.html
 

One requirement of the presidency is to believe that your job is about something greater than yourself -- your country.
But first you have to believe there is something greater than yourself.
 

 

Ha!!!!  Unfortunately, those criteria aren't part of the official ones required to be eligible to run for President -- though it certainly might be a good thing if they were.

 

If they were, then clearly, Trump never would have been able to be a candidate for President. At least in his view, no one is a greater grandstander or showboat that him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Traveler19491 said:

The possible illegality stems from the potential charge of "obstruction of justice", the same charge that snared both Nixon and Bill Clinton. His Tweet could easily be interpreted as threatening a potential witness. Also, the fact that in his interview with NBC's Lester Holt, Trump specifically mentioned the Russia investigation as part of his reasoning for firing Comey, another potential instance of obstruction.

 

Just my opinion, but Trump appears to be seriously rattled by the progress of the investigation and its refusal to go away. He is also massively frustrated by his inability to solve problems the way he did in business. It would appear there may well be some "there, there". As multiple people have said on countless occasions...if you've got nothing to hide, what are you afraid of?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump’s-own-words-add-fuel-to-questions-about-the-legality-of-firing-comey/ar-BBB4EcY

 

I think it's kind of like an analogy to WWII...

 

Originally, there was just one front against the Germans, and that was in Europe. Read that to be the Trump-Russia investigation/allegations. But now with the firing of Comey, it would appear the President himself has opened up an entirely new, second front in the investigations/allegations against him, and that's the obstruction of justice case relating to Comey's firing, an action that clearly could be perceived as trying to thwart the original investigation.

 

As best as I understand the law, Trump could conceivably end up getting off / avoiding criminal prosecution in connection with the Russia probe. Hypothetically, best case scenario for him, let's say some of his campaign staff and aides end up taking the fall. But even if that were the end result, he still could end up getting nailed for obstruction of justice in trying to thwart the original investigation -- even if the original one ultimately didn't lead to any conviction against him.

 

He might well have been better off to just keep his big mouth shut and try to have his staff and allies in Congress massage the process of the investigation and its outcome.  But now, instead of just facing the one original investigation, he could well end up fighting a war on two separate fronts. And of course, history tells us how that worked out for his kindred spirit Hitler...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎05‎/‎2017 at 9:22 AM, Traveler19491 said:

Trump has likely made a serious miscalculation in firing Comey. The FBI prides itself on being one of the most independent agencies in the U. S. government, and they are a very tight-knit group. Something like this is being seen from the inside as an attack on them. Trump has already cancelled a planned visit to FBI headquarters after being informed that he would not receive a warm welcome. As the linked article explains, they have a tremendous ability to make life hell for the President, especially someone like Trump whose past is a patchwork of highly questionable associations and business practices. Trump has known connections to Mafia personalities, may well have committed tax fraud, has ties to the Russian mob, has a long history of using fraudulent promises to cheat people out of their investments and/or contractual obligations, none of which, for some reason, have ever been seriously investigated. By firing Comey, Trump may well have given the FBI reason to start looking much more closely at him. It wouldn't surprise me if they have a rather thick dossier on him that contains some rather unflattering information. Given his complete inability to accept any news that doesn't massage his ego, leaks that shined a spotlight on derogatory information about him would drive him nuts. Watching this unfold should be hugely entertaining.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/why-the-fbi-might-wage-“war”-on-trump-—-and-how-they-would-actually-do-it/ar-BBB1Wgo

Thank you Traveler19491  for sharing this link, quote:

" Trump has done a lot of things that might invite law enforcement scrutiny, but weirdly haven’t... The point, in short, is that Trump is vulnerable and the FBI is extremely powerful. Starting a fight with the bureau is inadvisable for every president, and especially so for a president with a history of legal problems. But by firing Comey, he’s invited war.”

Edited by Opl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whining and complaining about Trump is indeed good group therapy and support for those who need it, in other words those who are still upset Trump won.

 

The president has every right to fire the FBI director for whatever reason he wants.  Even Comey agrees with this.  All the work Comey was doing will be done by his replacement. 

 

Trump keeps moving the country ahead, suckering the whiners with things like this. 

 

At least Hillary,, of all people got it.  At the end of one debate she said, "If Donald wins the presidency, that's the way the cookie crumbles."  In other words, no big deal.

 

In the past I have felt the whiners should just get over it, but now I see they need this therapy to help them. So, whine away while President Trump continues to work for the benefit of all Americans.

 

 

Edited by mesquite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mesquite said:

The whining and complaining about Trump is indeed good group therapy and support for those who need it, in other words those who are still upset Trump won.

 

The president has every right to fire the FBI director for whatever reason he wants.  Even Comey agrees with this.  All the work Comey was doing will be done by his replacement. 

 

Trump keeps moving the country ahead, suckering the whiners with things like this. 

 

At least Hillary,, of all people got it.  At the end of one debate she said, "If Donald wins the presidency, that's the way the cookie crumbles."  In other words, no big deal.

 

In the past I have felt the whiners should just get over it, but now I see they need this therapy to help them. So, whine away while President Trump continues to work for the benefit of all Americans.

 

 

So why did the President say in his letter he was firing Comey on the recommendation of Rosenstein and then deny that was the case when interviewed? Why did he lie?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, mesquite said:

The whining and complaining about Trump is indeed good group therapy and support for those who need it, in other words those who are still upset Trump won.

 

The president has every right to fire the FBI director for whatever reason he wants.  Even Comey agrees with this.  All the work Comey was doing will be done by his replacement. 

 

Trump keeps moving the country ahead, suckering the whiners with things like this. 

 

At least Hillary,, of all people got it.  At the end of one debate she said, "If Donald wins the presidency, that's the way the cookie crumbles."  In other words, no big deal.

 

In the past I have felt the whiners should just get over it, but now I see they need this therapy to help them. So, whine away while President Trump continues to work for the benefit of all Americans.

 

 

There was a very good essay written by Charles Sykes, a political conservative. He labels supporters of Trump as not conservative but as believers in anti anti-trumpism. Mesquite, like so many others of his kind has just posted a perfect example of this.  Here's a bit of Sykes' article consistent with fair use rules here. But the whole column should be read.

 

If Liberals Hate Him, Then Trump Must Be Doing Something Right

Here is how it works: Rather than defend President Trump’s specific actions, his conservative champions change the subject to (1) the biased “fake news” media, (2) over-the-top liberals, (3) hypocrites on the left, (4) anyone else victimizing Mr. Trump or his supporters and (5) whataboutism, as in “What about Obama?” “What about Clinton?”

But the real heart of anti-anti-Trumpism is the delight in the frustration and anger of his opponents. Mr. Trump’s base is unlikely to hold him either to promises or tangible achievements, because conservative politics is now less about ideas or accomplishments than it is about making the right enemies cry out in anguish.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/12/opinion/sunday/if-liberals-hate-him-then-trump-must-be-doing-something-right.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

There was a very good essay written by Charles Sykes, a political conservative. He labels supporters of Trump as not conservative but as believers in anti anti-trumpism. Mesquite, like so many others of his kind has just posted a perfect example of this.  Here's a bit of Sykes' article consistent with fair use rules here. But the whole column should be read.

 

If Liberals Hate Him, Then Trump Must Be Doing Something Right

Here is how it works: Rather than defend President Trump’s specific actions, his conservative champions change the subject to (1) the biased “fake news” media, (2) over-the-top liberals, (3) hypocrites on the left, (4) anyone else victimizing Mr. Trump or his supporters and (5) whataboutism, as in “What about Obama?” “What about Clinton?”

But the real heart of anti-anti-Trumpism is the delight in the frustration and anger of his opponents. Mr. Trump’s base is unlikely to hold him either to promises or tangible achievements, because conservative politics is now less about ideas or accomplishments than it is about making the right enemies cry out in anguish.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/12/opinion/sunday/if-liberals-hate-him-then-trump-must-be-doing-something-right.html

 

 

Excellent post, and very well stated. The text of the quote very succinctly states the whole problem with Trump's base.

 

15 hours ago, mesquite said:

The whining and complaining about Trump is indeed good group therapy and support for those who need it, in other words those who are still upset Trump won.

 

Keep in mind that the ONLY reason Trump won was due to the Electoral College. He failed rather bigly in the popular vote, to the extent that there are well in excess of three million Americans who disagree with you.

 

A big "thank you" to ilostmypassword for posting the link. A small quote that highlights the snare that lies ahead for all of the anti-anti-Trump types:

 

"As the right doubles down on anti-anti-Trumpism, it will find itself goaded into defending and rationalizing ever more outrageous conduct just as long as it annoys CNN and the left. In many ways anti-anti-Trumpism mirrors Donald Trump himself, because at its core there are no fixed values, no respect for constitutional government or ideas of personal character, only a free-floating nihilism cloaked in insult, mockery and bombast.

Needless to say, this is not a form of conservatism that Edmund Burke, or even Barry Goldwater, would have recognized."

 

The biggest problem with the anti-anti-Trump camp is the complete lack of original ideas or concrete solutions to the myriad problems facing America. Couple that with the fact that the timing of Trump's dismissal of Comey, someone whom he had not long ago been praising, reeks of "cover-up" and it won't take long for swing voters to tire of the circus. After all, people who go to the circus don't lay out their money just to listen to the ringmaster barking. They expect something of value for their money. Swing voters are the ones who decide elections, not Democrats or Republicans, and if the swing voters (along with those former Trump supporters who are beginning to realize that the guy they voted for isn't giving them what he promised) don't start seeing concrete results that make an actual difference in their day-to-day lives, it won't take long for them to start calling for his head...along with anyone in Congress who lines up with him. They just might start casting a serious eye to the 2018 mid-terms. And there are numerous vulnerable Republicans who are anxiously aware of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, mesquite said:

The president has every right to fire the FBI director for whatever reason he wants.  Even Comey agrees with this.  All the work Comey was doing will be done by his replacement. 

 

Trump keeps moving the country ahead, suckering the whiners with things like this. 

 

No one argues that the President has the authority to fire the Director of the FBI. That's clearly his prerogative. The problem arises in the reasons for his firing. The White House studiously laid out one reason, then Trump immediately turned around and gave a different reason, at the same time directly referencing the Russia investigation. Very stupid on his part, as that leaves him open to a charge of obstructing justice. Then he further complicates his situation by tweeting something that can very easily be interpreted as a  threat against Comey with his reference to "tapes". That can easily be interpreted as "intimidation", also considered obstructing justice. Face it, Trump is not a deep thinker. He is impulsive, and his inability to control his impulsive behavior has created ongoing and massive problems for his staff. And now it's entirely possible that his poor impulse control may have well handed his political enemies exactly what they've been waiting for. Remember, in Watergate, it wasn't the crime that brought down Nixon. It was the cover-up. The Articles of Impeachment drawn up against Nixon were based on "obstruction". And what's going now on has a definite aroma of deja vu.

 

And one last item:

16 hours ago, mesquite said:

 

Trump keeps moving the country ahead, suckering the whiners with things like this. 

 

Please enumerate three things that Trump has done that are "moving the country ahead". And by three things, I mean three things that have actually solved persistent problems affecting real people. Not the undoing of stuff that black guy did. All I've seen are court injunctions blocking unconstitutional Executive Orders, rollbacks of environmental protections that will make it easier for corporations to pollute our air and water, rollbacks of protections for individual investors, stocking the "swamp" with his favorite slimy denizens, a push to kick up to 24 million people off of their health insurance (which, according to Mitch McConnel, is DOA in the Senate), and a parade of broken promises to his base. But, hey...at least he's upsetting the Left! Hooray! Who needs a better standard of living, good healthcare, safe roads and bridges, a decent education, or any of those other "frills"? Jeez, you people are blind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.









×
×
  • Create New...