nothing to see here, really.
[no great loss, the guy was too wishy-washy to be heading up law enforcement]
Donald likes to say "you're fired" anyway. I'm sure there will be more.
US President Donald Trump today fired FBI director James Comey. Comey's agents were probing people associated with the TV celebrity's presidential campaign for any links or collusion with Russian officials – after it emerged the Kremlin had instructed hackers to swing the White House race in Trump's favor. Attorney General …
Trump supporter produces fake news (massive haul of sensitive emails is not massive haul) and Trump shows him the door.
Here's an old fashioned idea. Let's try to get a consensus on what the Congress should do.
1)There is evidence that serious efforts were made to influence the outcome of the last Presidential election by at least one foreign government.
2) This is wrong.
3)The Congress should investigate
a)What efforts were made b) Which powers were involved c) Wheather they were successful d) What should be done about it e) What should be done to stop it happening in future.
I think that's an agenda every member of Congress and the Senate could get behind.
So, assuming that the inference is correct, what did they do ? The hacked and leaked the actual contents of the DNC and it's chairman John Podesta. Nothing was made up, just released what the DNC and Podesta actually talked about.
Anything else ? No ? Seems pretty tame, and, well, that allowed the "common" people in the USA to see what the DNC and Podesta actually thought of them, and hey, maybe some even appreciated the disdain and double dealing. I'm very confident that had some government deliberately spied on Trump's campaign and then leaked data about that the entire MSM would have applauded the act as necessary because "Russians".
The Russian influence probe has been ongoing for months, and started as we know well back in 2016 with monitoring (and the subsequent unmasking) of GOP and Trump campaign figures by the NSA and other US security agencies. Nothing to implicate Trump has been uncovered as it surely would have been leaked by now if it had. Figures such as James Clapper (ex NSA head) have publicly stated that there's no evidence to link Trump to any putative Russian interference, and others have also said the same.
The whole "Russian Influence" meme is nothing more than a desperate (and surprisingly successful with the entire MSM following their DNC paymasters orders) attempt to defelct attention from the real scandal that needs a Grand Jury/Special Prosecutor - and that's to what extent was the Obama administration spying on the GOP and Trump campaigns. Unmasking US citizen's identity in such surveillance is distinctly illegal in most circumstances, and is at best highly unethical for the administration do use these agencies for domestic political advantage. And what do we have so far, the Flynn received a fee (reportedly around $45K) for a speech from a Russian entity with government links and didn't report it so was possibly open to blackmail. Not exactly a huge reveal is it ? Not compared to the $$$ the Clintons pulled out of Russian interests with similar links following the Uranium deal, that was $100M to the Clinton Foundation, now that looks, prima facie, compromising.
Amazing the way that American English has suddenly and spontaneously evolved slavic characteristics, isn't it?
Nothing was made up, just released what the DNC and Podesta actually talked about...
...and started as we know well back in 2016...
...it must be some sort of easter egg filter in El Reg's Perl codebase that kicks in whenever someone parrots the Kremlin line word for word:
The whole "Russian Influence" meme is nothing more than a desperate (and surprisingly successful with the entire MSM following their DNC paymasters orders) attempt to defelct attention from the real scandal that needs a Grand Jury/Special Prosecutor - and that's to what extent was the Obama administration spying on the GOP and Trump campaigns.
Well done,Anonushka, extra cabbage soup ration for you tonight!
Nah. So-called "reality" TV is heavily scripted and massively overproduced. This is just the painful reality of a bumbling fool playing at being PotUS. It just looks like a sitcom, from here anyway.
"Bikini Girls With Machine Guns" has been done already, as nicely parodied by Poison Ivy and Lux Interior, writing for The Cramps. It's probably online somewhere ... RIP, Lux.
Austin Powers did it first...
Only in the Apple meaning of "first". Bikini Girls With Machine Guns was a UK hit single in 1989, 8 years before Austin Powers. Now the album was re-released in 2001, with Bikini Girls With Machine Guns (live) as a bonus track, so an Apple attorney (or really, any patent lawyer) <u>could</u> argue that Austin Powers did it "first" (if you paid them enough).
To quote a fictional Secretary of Defense:
Errrrrrr... that's not... entirely.... true.
Note also that there was considerable speculation that the most likely source of the leak was lardarse himself.
Mildly surprised El Reg hasn't yet picked up on the aspect that saw the US press barred from (or rather, not invited into) the Oval Office for what they thought was the meeting with Russian FM, Sergei Lavrov. The WH staff only admitted one snapper, a Russian with a large kitbag of gear who they assumed was Lavrov's official snapper but surprise!!! turned out to be working for TASS, Well, I say "working for TASS" -- the pictures showed up there, anyway. So now we know what Trumpy looks like in the company of the hairy Ivans when he thinks no-one's watching...
Oh yeah, and Kislyak, the FSB station chief in Washington was also there. Though the WH absent-mindedly forgot to mention it in any official briefings or press releases... it was only the TASS pics that gave the game away.
It's a diabolically awful situation, but at the same time I can't help but feel some grudging respect for the apparently effortless way the Russians have run rings round the entire US electorate, establishment, and IC, and completely compromised the organs of government.
I thought there was a sort of unspoken agreement that senior political figures were not to be prosecuted for any crimes they might have committed.*
If Mr. Trump really wants to prosecute Mrs. Clinton for her email nonsense he might find the various New York Grand Juries into various RICO matters begin issuing findings fairly quickly.
It almost feels like a sort of slow motion coup-d'état.
*I don't mean that as any sort of dig at our American friends, we have a long tradition of failing to hold our own leaders to the same standards as the rest where I live.
Many of us are thoroughly sick of divide and conquer false-dichotomy identity politics.
It could be that neither of the (usually just two) alternative views presented are correct, or anything but a distraction from how we're really being mistreated - I could put a much finer point on that with proof, but this is supposed to be a tech site, right?
So, please, I've quit a few others who have lost their purpose to promote failed political causes in favor of some other failed political cause - both wrong - instead of doing their stated mission.
Don't add yourselves to the list, please.
Leave the Brexit/EU and Yank politics to the birdcage liner rags please - or become one of them.
While Comey was political through and through a large part of his political orientation directly impacted on technical matters.
1. Encryption backdooring
2. Searches of electronic equipment
3. Selective politically motivated interest in various hacking, etc cases.
All in all he signed his death warrant the day he intervened in the election. He wanted to be a Hoover, but he forgot the most important Hoover lesson - you do not do that in public. You do it quietly.
In any case, I suspect his replacement will be significantly worse. There is very little to celebrate here.
"On topic" seems to lack a clear definition.
For years the readers of this fine organ have had their pageviews hijacked to fund the activities of agenda-driven writers like Page, Orlowski, Worstall, etc.
If that was acceptable, and there's recently been a regime change/changes such that the agenda has also changed, where's the big problem?
Mr. Trump picked a rather suspicious moment: just when he was under fire for holding onto Flynn despite the latter's increasingly damning ties to Russian operatives, and for acting as an agent of a foreign government without registering as such. And just as the House Select Committee on Intelligence was finally taking public testimony from government officials on the links between Russian hacking, Trump's associates, and Russian spycraft.
Perfect time to fire the guy who is overseeing the investigation into the Trump - Russia connections.
It won't stop the investigation, of course, but it will cause some disarray in the FBI, thus slowing things for the moment.
John, I'm starting to wonder if your real name isn't Ivan. You sure seem to be writing from inside Putin's pocket here.
Palpy, in all seriousness, we all know that there's a big fat nothing behind this whole "Russian collusion" farce. There never was anything, and there never will be. You can either admit failure and move on or join the ranks of the perpetually aggrieved.
That would be a shame.
Actually, no John, we don't know that at all. I think the actual word you were looking for is "hope". Personally, I don't know. Can you honestly say that you do know? Can you post proof of this for all of us to see? Or are you merely hopeful?
Where there is smoke ...
No, John. You are the hopeful one. You made a statement of hope. I responded to that statement with an observation and a couple of questions. Answer the questions, John.
To finish my colophon:
... people often fiddle about with mirrors.
"Where there is smoke ..."
there could also be mirrors and it's all obfuscation. Or a smoke machine. There isn't always a fire.
Trump fired Comey, but read the BBC article about why: It wasn't Trump deciding to do so as much as agreeing to do so.
Read down the article - it suggests Comey made repeated mistakes, including not accepting he made mistakes. Maybe Trump took advantage of this to get rid of Comey, maybe not. We don't know but there are going to be those who say he did, and those who say he didn't and those who will sit on the fence (I've got the cushions and some popcorn ready) and watching to see what comes from this.
Personally I wish I'd brought the marshmellows instead.
Well, I've been to the lengths - extreme, I know - of reading all the correspondence I could find attached to this story. Including Trump's and Sessions' letters, and Rosenstein's much more interesting and detailed opinion (on which the other two both hinge). And then I checked out Comey's original statement from July 2016.
I advise you to look at that last now, today, because there's a good chance it'll disappear from the record pretty soon. Here it is, as of right now.
And if you take time to read it, you'll see it doesn't say what Rosenstein's character assassination piece imputes it as saying. Rosenstein's memo is like Blair's dodgy dossier - it's transparently a justification for something that his boss was determined to do anyway, rather than an honest account of the reasons for doing it.
"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past."
This is bogus - no intent is required. Comey knows it, and every lawyer knows it. If I could be bothered to go find it, the statute AFAIK explicitly states intent is not necessary for breach.
Trump fired Comey, but read the BBC article about why: It wasn't Trump deciding to do so as much as agreeing to do so.
And if YOU read it again, you'll notice that that's the White House's version of events. I'd advise against taking what they say on trust as being self-evidently 100% accurate and truthful.
Comey submitted a request for increased resources for the Russia investigation last week to the same Deputy AG who supposedly decided to write Sessions and Trump a letter advising them to fire him (Comey). And we now know about the Grand Jury subpoenas too. They're going to be opened one day, and when they are...
"Palpy, in all seriousness, we all know that there's a big fat nothing behind this whole "Russian collusion" farce."
You have to ask yourself why Trump fired the guy investigating him just as a grand jury has been convened and subpoenas are starting to land. Last person to do this: Richard Nixon. Another guy who absolutely did nothing wrong while in office.
-- this whole 'Russian collusion' farce."
Late reply, John, and if I were you I'd have moved on to another thread by now. But anyway.
The overwhelming consensus from Western political analysts seems to be that Russia, under Putin's direction, has weaponized hacking and internet disinformation with the purpose of disrupting, degrading, and eventually destroying Western democracy. While the American NSA, FBI, and CIA have been focused on their internal cyber-attack programs and gathering data for surveillance, the Russian GRU, FSB, and SVR are using far more offensive tactics.
The "destruction" they're aiming at is not probably not outright overthrow of democratic governments. What geo-political analysts see is a very determined effort to tilt elections toward outcomes that will destabilize Western trade and military alliances, divide and polarize citizens, and encourage the rise of an oligarchic and authoritarian leaders. Leaders like Putin himself.
That's the background for the interference in the recent US election. (And yes: all branches of US intelligence, NSA, CIA, FBI, DIA, et al, agree that this interference was real and substantial.)
So Trump's stated admiration for Putin is already troubling. His associates' ties to Russia are troubling -- Manafort, Page, and Stone. Erik Prince. Michael Flynn. Tillerson. Slater. Why did Trump's son tell the press that "we [the Trump Organization] see a lot of money flowing in from Russia"? Why did Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, meet secretly with Sergey Gorkov, president of the Russian Vnesheconombank, in December?
Suspicions of collusion with Putin's government can be resolved, but not by firings and cover-ups. Trump really needs to identify every instance of Russian contact among his campaign associates, his administration, and his family. He needs to release his financial records, including taxes. He needs to apologize for the impression of collusion his words and actions have created.
He needs to make it very, very clear that NO ONE among his circle are to EVER meet with foreign officials without a clear and officially sanctioned purpose.
I truly don't believe Trump is man enough to do any of that.
And, in fact, the reason he is not going that route may well be because there really is cooperation between some members of his administration and at least some Russian agents.
But thanks for the opportunity to keep my typing skillz fresh.
"John, I'm starting to wonder if your real name isn't Ivan. You sure seem to be writing from inside Putin's pocket here."
Well, technically ...
Again speaking technically, Russian kept the distinction between the sacred and profane versions of many christian names. For example, while "Иван" (Ivan) is indeed derived from "Иоанн" (Ioann), in contemporary Russian these are two distinct names. English has mostly abandoned the distinction in the form of the name, leaving it to be inferred from the context it is used in.
Therefore, if your view of our Big John is mostly profane, then he is indeed an Ivan. If on the other hand you see him as saintly, then the appropriate equivalent is Ioann.
The timing is easily explained. The head of the FBI formally reports to the deputy AG, and that person (because of Democrat grandstanding in the Senate) was only approved 2 weeks ago (by 96-4 BTW, so near unanimous by both parties). One of his first tasks was to review the position of his subordinate, Comey. Position and actions reviewed in just two weeks seems pretty reasonable, and his recommendation was that Comey should go for his role in bring the FBI into disrepute.
We will have to wait to see who is nominated (requires Senate approval), but Comey was actively disliked on both sides and had a something like 15% approval rating compared to the FBI's overall rating of 80%. The justification seems sound and all the bloviating about it is merely partisan bullshit.
Comey's announcement, now explained by him as incorrect, was a big factor in Clinton losing the election, in my eyes and in the opinion of many others. I thought Comey was being a loyal Republican and doing his bit to help. I thought that would mean he'd be secure in office. But unfortunately no, either because he now refuses to continue to go after Clinton or because he refuses not to continue to go after the Russian hacking issue.
I think he was politically-involved when he should not have been, but I think the president should at least have respected him as a human being and a senior person in government and have fired him when he could get the news in private.
On behalf of sane Americans I preemptively apologize for what is going to happen on this comment page. These twits are not sane, are not the majority, and though they purport to be mostly aren't even American.
Let me express some human concern for Kellyann Conway. Clearly she isn't well. Best wishes.
Previously I apologized on behalf of sane Americans and promised we'd get the situation back under control in about four years. At the moment it seems possible to move that timeline up a bit. Will update occasionally.
Trump wants to be a strong man as he is such a wimp when actually confronted. He is aping the actions of authoritarian regimes but he is a coward at his core and will collapse when confronted by strength, especially by strong women. Women are his weakness and they will be his downfall. He is only a carrot in the guise of a man. So sad!
You asked me that a couple weeks ago ...See:
If I could upload a sample, I would. Must get started harassing ElReg about implementing BTP in the next upgrade (Booze Transfer Protocol).
I'd apologize for the image, but if I gotta suffer, everybody suffers.
Apologies to those non-Brits ( non-Scots even ) who won't have a clue who I'm talking about but.... Gary Tank Commander with a Dougie Donnely wig would be the perfect candidate. He just needs to ramp up the fake tan. Paris, cos she will be playing all the female parts :-)
Tricky Dicky's behavior requested getting his aides to organize burglaries of political opponents. That's never going to be acceptable.
We'll see how the D's behavior shapes up the next 1350 days.
Along with the hands on the Doomsday Clock of course.
If indeed Comey was fired to derail the Russia/election probe, is there a possibility that the investigation may actually intensify as a result? Reactance triggered, etc.?
If it happens then there may still be hope for the US of A - just as a side effect.
This whole article is unbelievable, complete with links to "100% true" allegations by the NYT, and fantasms from the desk of Anne Applebaum and Louise Mensch stated as "fact".
Fully expecting El Reg to write about how Lizard People are actually running the world next.
You mean the Koch brothers are really Lizard people? Who'd a thought it?
On the R.H side of the pond, the name Koch does not mean much but apparently they are the new Rockafellas of the 21st Century. Fingers in all sorts of pies making sure that they control policy in not only the US Government but according to some US Commentators, they are T. May's puppet masters.
Appoint independent special prosecutors to probe both Trump's Russian connections and Hillary's email. Both sides will get something they want, and Trump won't get away trying to kill the investigation (that he's already tried several times to have killed or dodge with false claims that it is a "hoax")
Not unreasonable, but add a third - did the administration try to influence the investigations in any way (including when were senior administration officials aware of any misleading statements that may have been made to congress), or does it just look like that from the outside?
Given that in politics (Android autocorrect just suggested poltergeists?) the cover up is often more significant than what they wish to cover, it's a separate question ...
I think Hillary's emails are a done deal.
The Repubs spent an awful lot of time "investigating" them, and were unable to come up with anything that would stick. And they were motivated to find *something*...anything. So, an independent prosecutor for that rathole would be a waste of money. And I say that as a Hillary supporter.
Now, the "Russian Connection" is a lot more interesting. First of all, I think it happened. How much coordination there was between Trump's people and the Russians is debatable, but Trump and his team were played very well by the Kremlin. As was the American electorate. Now, there's a certain justice about the whole thing, considering the CIA's long history of meddling in third world elections, so I'm not too outraged about it (to me it just proves we need to double down on educational spending in some of the Red(!) states), but the report would make interesting reading.
The issue with Hillary's email isn't that there's more to uncover, but whether she should have been charged for mishandling classified material. Republicans were unhappy she wasn't and believed at the time that the fix was in since Comey was an Obama appointee (though he was a republican) The way Comey derailed her momentum with his "October surprise" when he could have at least waited the weekend to get preliminary feedback from the agents proved the fix wasn't in, he's just incompetent.
We couldn't trust someone who works for Trump to make a fair assessment whether to charge her given he and his people were cheering on "lock her up" chants during rallies, so if that's going to be looked at again it would have to be an independent prosecutor with republicans conceding in advance that if he decides against charges that will be the end of the matter.
Republicans would need to think hard about going this route though, if there is ANY truth to the rumors that use of personal emails is rampant in the Trump White House to avoid leaving paper trails. That's not only a potential violation of mishandling classified material, but violating records laws. If Hillary is charged, it will set a clear precedent that democrats would no doubt be eager to follow when they regain power (which may be as soon as January 2019, thanks to Trumpcare being far less popular than Obamacare)
"You do have to wonder if Comey will now be much more likely to spill the beans the next time he's up in front of the committee."
A good question for any committee member cross-examining him: "Mr Comey, would it materially change your views on security of communications to learn that the President ordered your phone to be backdoored and that you were fired because of what was overheard?"
Although it's a speculative question and he'd reckon the premise was almost certainly untrue he couldn't be sure it wasn't so it would immediately get him thinking back recent conversations to see what might be held against him. It would soften up his defences against the next question which would be the real one.
And I'd like to see what being out of office has done to his thoughts about communication security.
To quote..."veddy interestink". * I find this move fascinating. Someone suggested popcorn and that may be a good idea. Not sure where it will go if anywhere but it is an interesting turn of events given all the re-election wrestling matches, both pre- and post-, by both parties.
Will Congress get to the bottom of all the allegations? Maybe, maybe not. The bigger question is will they follow the Warren Commission and lock up all findings in the National Archive after doing their usual political song and dance?
*Artie Johnson on Laugh-In circa 1967 or so.
Anyone remember Whoops Apocalypse (TV series, not movie)? ( don't remember it clearly, for some reason, but I do remember "Wear your mushroom with pride".
Or even Luck and Flaw's "The President's Brain is Missing"
Happy days, in comparison.
Wolfetone, surely it's not unimaginable someone could be against foreign meddling in elections and want to see proper independent investigation, without also being a supporter of one side or the other?
Do you perhaps prefer the view "each man must choose between joining our side or the other side."?
"Wolfetone, surely it's not unimaginable someone could be against foreign meddling in elections and want to see proper independent investigation, without also being a supporter of one side or the other?
Do you perhaps prefer the view "each man must choose between joining our side or the other side."?"
Blessed as I am to be European, and not American, I can afford to have an unbiased view of a situation.
The rhetoric of Trump being a Russian candidate is a rhetoric started by the Democrats, added to by some Republicans. There has never, at any point, been any real evidence of Russian involvement in an American election.
Comey's involvement in the election came after the "Russian hack" of Podesta's emails, which - aparently - originated from "Russian backed hackers". When, in all actual fact, John Podesta's personal Gmail account was phished. Seeing that phising email, it was forwarded to Podesta's IT guy and he was asked whether it was genuine or not. As a typo he replied "It's legitimate". He meant to reply "It's illegitimate". But he didn't. Podesta gets the reply, changes his password, bish bash bosh, your mothers uncle was a bloke called Robert - Podesta's private emails are now accessible to the 3rd party.
Meanwhile, we had the saga regarding Clinton's emails. Held on a private server. In both cases, these email accounts/servers were outside of the jurisdiction of the DNC. So very much private email accounts yet both used primarily to discuss DNC/election issues. Yet more shouting about "Russian backed hackers" accessing these emails.
The problem in the latter case was that the FBI asked to get to the server. This request was denied to them, and instead a 3rd party contractor investigated whether Clinton's email server was hacked. They reported back that indeed it was hacked, by the Russians. However, even to this day, the FBI have never had first hand access to that server to verify these claims. Any claims from there on in have relied on the 3rd party's findings. Right now, while I write this, I can't find the name of the 3rd party company - hopefully someone can help with that while I work - but the owner of this 3rd party has very important ties to anti-Russian agencies and organisations. But what is important in this aspect is the following: never at any point were the FBI given 1st hand access to the server, instead their investigation was based off of the findings of that 3rd party.
The question, therefore, should not be "surely it's not unimaginable someone could be against foreign meddling in elections and want to see proper independent investigation". It should be "Why is the possibility of foreign meddling allowed to be reported as fact when there is little to no evidence of such an event occuring".
Ultimately, Trump was elected President because he had a platform of anti-establishment. The US public rejected Clinton because they didn't trust her. More of the same old same old. That's fact, and the history books will (hopefully) reflect that properly.
The independent non-partizan ones will anyway.
"says the trump puppet."
I'm a "Trump puppet" because I did my own research in to the subject instead of jumping on the anti-Russian bandwagon that's been going for the last year or two?
If that makes me different from you or others who want to follow someone elses agenda, then I'm glad of it.
I don't even like the guy, but I hate being fed lies more.
"When said by anyone else it's imbecilic."
What else do you suggest then?
Sit there, watch the BBC/CNN et al, listen to what they say and accept it as gospel?
Sit there, watch them etc, Google what they're saying and read more than one view point from different people, and come to my own conclusion based on the facts available?
See the second one is what I did, but apparently that's imbecilic.
It's been clear for a couple of weeks that prosecutions were in the offing. Grand juries were being convened, subpoenas in progress.
That's the only reason Comey was sacked and everyone knows it. Sacking him on a flimsy pretext is just going ensure that the number of leaks in the intelligence services multiplies, massive pressure will be placed on congress to appoint a special prosecutor, existing charges won't be dropped, other RICO suits will press on regardless.
If Trump thought his problems were bad before, they've probably become far worse today and far more public.
Sometimes like EVERY GREAT corporation, a country must CHOOSE between HIONESTY and GREATNESS. It takes balls to choose GREATNESS because HONESTY is a path chosen by THOSE WHO don't know enough to know WHEN it's THE RIGHT TIME TO LIE. I fully support TRUMP in what he does HE'S MAKING AMERICA great AGAIN again and at least he's showng some metal, firing that LEFT wing HATER OF AMEICAN values COMEY who's probably in the pocket of VLADAMOR PUTIN anyway. Now our PRESIDENT has shown what happens to THOSE who are DISLOYAL to the GREAT UNITED STATESOF AMWEICA let's hope that the LEFT WINGER SCOURGE can work with our great administration to MAKE AMERICA again GRATE again instead of sabotaging everything that our president and his sweet lady MADONNA, elected with A MAJORITY is trying to do. THIS IS LIKE OBAMA LETTING MEN USE WOMENS TOILETS AND SPENDING MONEY ON HEALTHCARE FOR TERRORISTS.
No one having made a considerable mistake this week (excluding all those that the Donald chose to ignore) the board looked back over previous achievement (way Back) and decided that James' record was not good enough and decided he was next for the chop.
In other news James' investigation, into the allegations that a forgien Network colluded with the Donald to put him in the CEO seat, seemed to be gaining mommentum, However, it appears some of the lesser candidates are taking this up in his abscence....
Sounds Like another position is opening up for Jared (allowing the donald even more time with Ivanka, behind closed doors....)
People have been commenting that Comey has been political. There's a reason for that.
US agencies operate under a system of patronage not seen or allowed in Europe for a very long time (Think: the Medici) - The _Director_ position is usually a political appointment.
As a result, the apolitical position and the one who has most of the power is the _deputy_ director.
Which is why in the USA there's no stigma in being deputy-director of XYZ for decades.
Trump has effectively stopped the investigation from proceeding, at least briefly. What better time to destroy any evidence that was in danger of being exposed thus far into the questioning and direction the investigation was taking. Perhaps, by the time there is a new Director there will be little left to investigate.
Getting fired by the TV whilst addressing your staff is a truly shitty way to find out,
Comey did put forward that there was nothing to prosecute in the Clinton email issue. In a legal context, this is incorrect. The FBI is charged with investigation and apprehension, not prosecution itself. That the AG at the time could have been in a political or personal conflict is irrelevant in legal terms as they could be recused and allow others to take the lead.
That Trump chooses to fire Comey at this moment instead of on January 22nd (which in all honesty I personally expected) is what makes this seem highly nixonian. (I'm liking that term).
I have *no love* whatsoever for trump or clinton. But I do have to believe that the american people would like to see their political system work the way it was intended to, as at least a semi-self-balancing engine. This particular action is highly questionable in the current context.
Popcorn and beers at high noon.
Dear Reg Team,
Please keep your politics out of a site that is meant to be about IT. If you are going to get all butt-hurt over it realize that people have been calling for Comey's firing for a LOOOOOOONG time.
here is a tweet with many of the clips edited together:
This is Schumer talking about how scared he is and "Muh Russians" etc:
This is MSNBC upset about it 10 days before the election:
Bernie Says he should step down:
Democrats lash out at Comey from Fox News:
Harry Reid saying Comey should be investigated:
James Carville saying Comey worked for the republicans:
Tim Kaine compares Comey to Hoover taping MLK:
FOX, Dems change tune on Comey:
occupy democrats "news" :
OBAMA talking shit:
KIETH OBERMAN TWEET:
At least the author is so biased that he can't even be bothered to check any facts. The Reg really needs an opinion page to keep this kind of trash off of the news.
Author likely has a career ahead of him at CNN though or other news outlets that don't require any facts or verification.
Journalism-dead. Replaced by leftists with an agenda and no commitment to journalistic integrity.
Comey should have been shown the door after bungling the investigation into Clinton's email/private server. It wasn't rocket science, but him and all the other G-men strung that out and shook it until nothing came out. The right flew into an absolute tizzy that there was more smoke than fire (but, but, Benghazi!!!), and the left got sick of the whole thing and just wanted this fuckery in the rear window. Neither got their way, and why Obama didn't can him after it was all over is beyond me, because he clearly needed to go. So what we have is someone who is incompetent and blatantly taking money directly from the taxpayers. The other side of that would have been someone that had at least been the SECSSTATE and a US Senator who was used to sitting at the grown-ups table but for the email and other bullshit. I can overlook that, people with that paygrade get up to some shady shit, and I accept that. I draw the line at outright profiteering off the people he supposedly works for.
"The investigation is still going on. The agents handling the investigation were not fired. Nothing to see here but fake outrage."
Trump is trying to signal to EVERYONE that they can be seriously affected if they find the wrong things about him. There is lots to see here. Just your average dictator. I bet he looks with envy on how Erdogan has set up his little dictatorship. (As does May, the Strong and Stable leader.)
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019