Larry Gude
Strung Out
Never mind that. What they are saying is that Vlad swayed US voters away from Hillary be revealing the truth about the DNC and her.
Why the Comey decision makes no sense
- Thread starter tommyjo
- Start date
Never mind that. What they are saying is that Vlad swayed US voters away from Hillary be revealing the truth about the DNC and her.
This_person
Well-Known Member
1. Why NOT fire Comey now? The person put in place by Obama in MD and Trump in 2017, the man who just took the office of oversight over Mr. Comey two weeks ago, sent a letter to Mr. Trump saying, "duuuuuuude, fire this guy or you'll never be able to fix the FBI." If Trump did fire him previously, it would look like it was over Russia. Instead, now it looks to most thinking people (that would take out most liberals and many libertarians) like it is about Comey.
2. What difference would location make?
3. What difference would a resignation (instead of firing) have made?
This_person
Well-Known Member
That's a strong argument the Democrats have: "The right cheated by telling people what we were doing!!!"
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
As opposed to days after Comey asked Rosenstein for more resources to look into the Russian allegations in the election?
Most thinking people see the above. They also see Sessions' and Trump's praise of Comey's actions a year ago. They also see those same actions as the basis for the firing as recommended by the same guy Comey asked resources from.
Last edited:
Mere coincidence.
This_person
Well-Known Member
Rosenstein was only there for days, so it only could have been days after.
No, this is about Comey, not Trump. In Trump's letter, he explains that he is doing it despite being told three times he was not being investigated. Comey has said there's nothing there with Russia. Clapper, Yates, Feinstein, even Maxine Waters has said there's nothing to connect Trump and Russia. EVEN IF THERE WAS, there's nothing connecting Russia to the outcome of the election.
This is about Comey. Sorry.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
Why did Trump even mention it?
"Hey, I know you asked for more resources to look into the Russian thing, but trust me, that's NOT why you're being fired."
When did the party of questioning government become so naive?
Huh. I read it through three times and still can't find that sentence.
Invisible ink.
This_person
Well-Known Member
My best guess is that Pres Trump didn't know more resources were being requested. However, he does know that Comey's direct supervisor wrote the President saying that Comey can't stay if the FBI is to be fixed.
Why did he say it? Trump said he was appreciative to Comey for informing Trump that Trump was not under investigation because that tells people he's firing Comey EVEN THOUGH there's no investigation into him - as in, "you're doing me a solid by letting me know you're not looking into me, but, dude, you still have to go."
How do you know he wasn't? Being "asked to resign" isn't a real request - it's a face-saving measure offered up, which can either be accepted or refused, but either way you will no longer be holding that position.
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if Comey was given the opportunity to resign and refused so that the Dems could have their outraged #### storm.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Either you have a prescription for medical marijuana or just a brain fart. There is NO universe, anywhere, where Donald Trump passes up the chance to say "You're fired" in this circumstance.
Why would Trump want to keep an FBI director who is blatantly digging dirt to try and undermine him? Comey's "investigation" is based on rumor and nothing more - there is no evidence that Trump colluded with Putin to swing the election his way. There never has been any evidence. All they have is Democrats making accusations and having a fit as if they were true. Normally an investigation comes about when there's some sort of evidence; Comey didn't feel compelled to worry about that part, just went on a frantic digging expedition.
Yes, that would be the highest law enforcement official in the country trying desperately to frame someone without evidence. I'd think you, of all people, would be outraged by that.
Like the good little Lefty you are, you completely made that up and have no idea what happened. You act like you have some inside scoop on what Trump is thinking every single second, even when he spews without filter on a regular basis, so it's not like there's any ambiguity. But you, little Lefty, insist that no matter what Trump says, YOU know what he *really* said and did and thinks. And it's ALWAYS the worst possible thing, because of course he is the WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD.
You have become what you used to loathe. Fun times.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
You make this too easy.
You mean me and everyone else knows what's on his mind AND when he's sitting on the can, anyone who has a clue about the Twit-er-er in chief?
Wow, you even know when he's taking a crap?
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Well, you have a point. Maybe he just sits there and thinks deep thoughts and THEN tweets after he's done wiping his ass?
*note to self; never ask to borrow potus cell phone...
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
You know, I've brought this up before, but I think it bears repeating --
The very worst thing they're claiming the Russians did was try to influence voters on the way they voted. There wasn't any machine tampering, no cyber-altering the vote count, no bribery of election officials to change the ballots or in any way change the outcome of the election, no thuggery in trying to keep away Hillary voters. They didn't buy TV or radio ads and they didn't pour money into anyone's campaign war chest. What they are accused of - and without any proof at all after all these months - is trying to change voter's minds.
Which is what CAMPAIGNS do.
So Hillary's complaint is - these damned Russians changed voter's minds about me. Because after spending hundreds of millions of dollars, they were better at it than I was.
How paranoid do you have to be to believe that?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I already think it is weird enough that the Oct 28th letter is blamed for anything - millions of American voters couldn't even name the VP on the ticket they were voting on - and they knew the content of Comey's letter and changed their minds?
The very worst thing they're claiming the Russians did was try to influence voters on the way they voted. There wasn't any machine tampering, no cyber-altering the vote count, no bribery of election officials to change the ballots or in any way change the outcome of the election, no thuggery in trying to keep away Hillary voters. They didn't buy TV or radio ads and they didn't pour money into anyone's campaign war chest. What they are accused of - and without any proof at all after all these months - is trying to change voter's minds.
Which is what CAMPAIGNS do.
So Hillary's complaint is - these damned Russians changed voter's minds about me. Because after spending hundreds of millions of dollars, they were better at it than I was.
How paranoid do you have to be to believe that?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I already think it is weird enough that the Oct 28th letter is blamed for anything - millions of American voters couldn't even name the VP on the ticket they were voting on - and they knew the content of Comey's letter and changed their minds?
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
I hate to repeat this again , but the Democrats are alleging that Russia did what George Soros actually did.
Soros gave millions to the Democrats. He even formed organizations with the express purpose of interfering with the elections.
Why aren't the Democrats worried about an ex-Nazi interfering in American elections?
For those who cannot figure it out, let me say the reason is that he was supplying them with the money and the clout.
P.S. I might add that he hasn't stopped yet.
Right now he is supplying money to anti-Trump demonstrators.
Stirring sedition. Why aren't the Democrats investigating this?
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
Wow. EVERY SINGLE ONE of those I've heard in the mouths of leftie pundits over the last 72 hours. Reaffirms my thought you can't think for yourself.
1. Doesn't matter but honestly? He should have been fired on Inauguration Day, especially for that stunt he pulled last July.
2. So what? He fired Sally Yates as well. Was that face to face? Nope - she found out by a letter.
3. He may have. So what? Most people I know who were fired don't get this luxury.
I realize you had more after this - but frankly, all the above is crap. Why bother with your paranoid conspiracies?