Comey Fired!

[ProdigalHorn]

Everything in the Rosenstein memo is months old and was known by the Administration and the public for a long time.

Think of it this way. You're Trump. You've got bigger and more important things to do than just about everything on your desk. That's why you hire other people: to handle things. So the Comey thing has been out there and you're thinking "this guy is a disaster, but I've got more important things to deal with." So you bring in people to try and "drain the swamp" around the justice department, which he said he would do, and one of them sends an assessment that reminds you that while Comey is in place, the FBI is always going to be a train wreck. Then on top of that, you get Comey's embarrassing performance under oath this past week. Clearly, he's not getting any better at this job. So Trump says "fine, we'll take care of it."

The admin puts it out there that the memo from the deputy AG was the reason. The reportedly apolitical Rosenstein - who basically just outlined the reasons for why Comey should be fired - doesn't want to be seen as the guy who made the decision, because he isn't the guy who made the decision. He provided a recommendation, and likely wants no visible part in that process. So he's understandably not happy that now he's being blamed. That's like me being told by my boss to give an assessment of our company website, I tell him "it sucks and we need to do something with it." So the next day he calls the web team and tells them to scrap the site - with no warning and no input from them - and says "Paul recommended we do this, so we're doing it." No... don't put that on me, I just gave a recommendation. It's your decision. Own it. (I get it's not a perfect analogy but you get the idea.) I don't know if that's what happened, but it's the simplest explanation, it's completely plausible, and being told by people that it's "drinking the kool-aid" for thinking that's probably what happened is getting old.

If the investigation into the Russian influence issue is called to a halt after this, I'm more than happy to get on board with the theory that Trump was trying to end it. (Which doesn't mean there's truth to it, but could also indicate that he's tired of the nonsense and wants someone in place who will drop it and move on. Neither is acceptable, obviously.)

BTW Deez, my cynicism has reached a point where when I see "unnamed source" and "Washington Post" I immediately doubt that it happened. Particularly when it's an attempt to make the Trump administration look bad. It's interesting to me that people are arguing that it's out of character for him to send a memo blasting Comey, but they don't have a problem that it would seem out of character for him to participate in a partisan hit job in order to tank an ongoing investigation, either.

Frankly I'm at the point of outrage overload. Maybe this is where the Dems were eight years ago around now. Everything's a crisis. Everything (except when it involves Hillary) is worse than Watergate. Everything is an impeachable offense. Suddenly travel expense matters. All of a sudden Goldman-Sachs appointments are problematic - how many did Obama have again? People who couldn't have cared less about any of this stuff eight years ago are all of a sudden really concerned about our relationship with Russia. Trump clearing the deck of the previous administration's appointees was a "bloodbath" even though every administration does it. (Except the stupid ones like GW Bush who really believed he could reach across the aisle and work with beltway Dems.) People on this board who were all about "What difference does it make" a few years ago, are now all of a sudden demanding clarity and resolution and for all the facts to be known. They've shown themselves for what they are.

If the Dems really want my attention, they can start talking about what's going on with giving Trump's son-in-law such influence in policy-making. They're not going to do that because Kushner's a New York liberal and they likely see him as at least a chance to influence things. Spend more time talking about actual demonstrable conflicts of interest which would have bipartisan support. I'm sure Ivanka's a smart woman, and it's clear she's one of the only people Trump really trusts, but I didn't elect her or Jarred to public office. As much as I was annoyed by Michele Obama inserting herself into the public health arena with no expertise, no credibility, and no standing to draft public policy on what kids should be eating for lunch, at LEAST she wasn't sitting in on policy meetings with heads of state.

Dems can't help but swing for the fence. They want something big like Trump's campaign being in collaboration with the evil empire (which most of them loved or at least tolerated up until this election.) They don't see that the one thing that Americans do not like across both parties is entitlement: the idea that Trump is elected president and believes that rules about influence and protocol don't apply to him. He decides whether something's a conflict of interest, and we should simply accept that it's not and move on if he says it.

 

[OUBubba]

Think of it this way. You're Trump. You've got bigger and more important things to do than just about everything on your desk. That's why you hire other people: to handle things. So the Comey thing has been out there and you're thinking "this guy is a disaster, but I've got more important things to deal with." So you bring in people to try and "drain the swamp" around the justice department, which he said he would do, and one of them sends an assessment that reminds you that while Comey is in place, the FBI is always going to be a train wreck. Then on top of that, you get Comey's embarrassing performance under oath this past week. Clearly, he's not getting any better at this job. So Trump says "fine, we'll take care of it."

The admin puts it out there that the memo from the deputy AG was the reason. The reportedly apolitical Rosenstein - who basically just outlined the reasons for why Comey should be fired - doesn't want to be seen as the guy who made the decision, because he isn't the guy who made the decision. He provided a recommendation, and likely wants no visible part in that process. So he's understandably not happy that now he's being blamed. That's like me being told by my boss to give an assessment of our company website, I tell him "it sucks and we need to do something with it." So the next day he calls the web team and tells them to scrap the site - with no warning and no input from them - and says "Paul recommended we do this, so we're doing it." No... don't put that on me, I just gave a recommendation. It's your decision. Own it. (I get it's not a perfect analogy but you get the idea.) I don't know if that's what happened, but it's the simplest explanation, it's completely plausible, and being told by people that it's "drinking the kool-aid" for thinking that's probably what happened is getting old.

If the investigation into the Russian influence issue is called to a halt after this, I'm more than happy to get on board with the theory that Trump was trying to end it. (Which doesn't mean there's truth to it, but could also indicate that he's tired of the nonsense and wants someone in place who will drop it and move on. Neither is acceptable, obviously.)

BTW Deez, my cynicism has reached a point where when I see "unnamed source" and "Washington Post" I immediately doubt that it happened. Particularly when it's an attempt to make the Trump administration look bad. It's interesting to me that people are arguing that it's out of character for him to send a memo blasting Comey, but they don't have a problem that it would seem out of character for him to participate in a partisan hit job in order to tank an ongoing investigation, either.

Frankly I'm at the point of outrage overload. Maybe this is where the Dems were eight years ago around now. Everything's a crisis. Everything (except when it involves Hillary) is worse than Watergate. Everything is an impeachable offense. Suddenly travel expense matters. All of a sudden Goldman-Sachs appointments are problematic - how many did Obama have again? People who couldn't have cared less about any of this stuff eight years ago are all of a sudden really concerned about our relationship with Russia. Trump clearing the deck of the previous administration's appointees was a "bloodbath" even though every administration does it. (Except the stupid ones like GW Bush who really believed he could reach across the aisle and work with beltway Dems.) People on this board who were all about "What difference does it make" a few years ago, are now all of a sudden demanding clarity and resolution and for all the facts to be known. They've shown themselves for what they are.

If the Dems really want my attention, they can start talking about what's going on with giving Trump's son-in-law such influence in policy-making. They're not going to do that because Kushner's a New York liberal and they likely see him as at least a chance to influence things. Spend more time talking about actual demonstrable conflicts of interest which would have bipartisan support. I'm sure Ivanka's a smart woman, and it's clear she's one of the only people Trump really trusts, but I didn't elect her or Jarred to public office. As much as I was annoyed by Michele Obama inserting herself into the public health arena with no expertise, no credibility, and no standing to draft public policy on what kids should be eating for lunch, at LEAST she wasn't sitting in on policy meetings with heads of state.

Dems can't help but swing for the fence. They want something big like Trump's campaign being in collaboration with the evil empire (which most of them loved or at least tolerated up until this election.) They don't see that the one thing that Americans do not like across both parties is entitlement: the idea that Trump is elected president and believes that rules about influence and protocol don't apply to him. He decides whether something's a conflict of interest, and we should simply accept that it's not and move on if he says it.

Or, you get tired of Comey not playing the good soldier by backing up your batshit crazy tweets about the phone "tapping" or he won't look away from Russia. You get mad and direct your staff to reverse engineer the firing. It's like we are used to watching chess being played and they're playing checkers, the big ones at Cracker Barrel. Much like how the White House had to scramble to backup the crazy tapping tweets.

Comedy reminds me of some Oklahoma sports columnists. OU fans thing they're biased in favor of OSU. OSU fans think they're biased toward OU. Turns out they're actually objective sports reporters.

 

[iatrogenic]

Or, you get tired of Comey not playing the good soldier by backing up your batshit crazy tweets about the phone "tapping"

As usual, the libs want to ignore proven facts while supporting innuendo and inference. This is why libs are looked down upon, and why the political trend of electing Republicans has been so strong over the past few years.

 

[horninchicago]

A Sooner on a Longhorn board with an avatar of Barry Switzer, and said Sooner calls the president's tweets "batshit crazy". I wonder why I don't give much credence to that.

Edit: Have to give credit where it is due. @OUBubba, you liked this post where I basically was criticizing you.

 

[ProdigalHorn]

Thanks for the confirmation.

Or, you get tired of Comey not playing the good soldier by backing up your batshit crazy tweets about the phone "tapping" or he won't look away from Russia. You get mad and direct your staff to reverse engineer the firing.

Certainly possible and I pointed that out - although not in the partisan way you're positioning it. This is a great example of the hypocrisy. If Trump were a liberal, and he'd said "GW Bush wiretapped my office and spied on my campaign," and it turned out that while no, GW did not actually go down to the office, put on the little hardhat and shimmy up the phone pole to install an old-school Mission Impossible wiretap, the executive office did in fact, sanction surveillance of Trump campaign members, and the administration did, in fact, take that information and blast it all around the intelligence community, making sure everyone knew who was being surveiled and what was being discovered (and yes, leaking it to the media), you would have somehow managed to figure out what he meant by "wiretapped." But since he's not one of your guys, you're all about the semantics. Everything is Watergate except for things that might actually BE LIKE WATERGATE.

Turns out they're actually objective sports reporters.

So now Comey's a straight shooter who's getting a bum rap? Yeah ok. I'm sure you were at the front of the lines telling your buddies to back off calling for his head after Hillary lost, telling people, "Look this guy's playing it right down the middle." If you were, good for you, but you sure weren't posting it on THIS board as far as I can remember. (I'm happy to be corrected on that.)

Or are you referring to sports reporters who didn't do their job and run Barry Switzer out of town for being an adulterous, player-paying, thug-enabling scumbag whose program should have been an embarrassment? Sorry, was that a cheap shot?

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

OK, a couple of days in and I'm still not sure what to think about this, other than the notion of calling this administration an ethical dumpster fire when compared to others we have all recently suffered through is ludicrous, though it may yet turn out to be true.

What I do know is neither side gives two shits about Comey, and both are happy to attempt to use him as a bludgeon to hurt the other side.

I think I know that Trump is ham handed, though I see him using bombastic, over the top statements and actions to get people talking and distracted, while he then quietly goes and signs an executive order or makes a deal I like. Is that the art of the deal, or is Trump really just a bull in a china shop? Frankly, if he is just a bull in a china shop I am OK with that because a lot of self-important, petty little overlords in DC needed to get their china broken a long time ago.

 

[OUBubba]

Thanks for the confirmation.



Certainly possible and I pointed that out - although not in the partisan way you're positioning it. This is a great example of the hypocrisy. If Trump were a liberal, and he'd said "GW Bush wiretapped my office and spied on my campaign," and it turned out that while no, GW did not actually go down to the office, put on the little hardhat and shimmy up the phone pole to install an old-school Mission Impossible wiretap, the executive office did in fact, sanction surveillance of Trump campaign members, and the administration did, in fact, take that information and blast it all around the intelligence community, making sure everyone knew who was being surveiled and what was being discovered (and yes, leaking it to the media), you would have somehow managed to figure out what he meant by "wiretapped." But since he's not one of your guys, you're all about the semantics. Everything is Watergate except for things that might actually BE LIKE WATERGATE.



So now Comey's a straight shooter who's getting a bum rap? Yeah ok. I'm sure you were at the front of the lines telling your buddies to back off calling for his head after Hillary lost, telling people, "Look this guy's playing it right down the middle." If you were, good for you, but you sure weren't posting it on THIS board as far as I can remember. (I'm happy to be corrected on that.)

Or are you referring to sports reporters who didn't do their job and run Barry Switzer out of town for being an adulterous, player-paying, thug-enabling scumbag whose program should have been an embarrassment? Sorry, was that a cheap shot?

I've been neutral on comey. I wasn't posting here then. My take is that, while I don't know the details, my hunch is that bill Clinton actually hurt his wife by interfering. That led to comey having to be more transparent and out in front of things. I think it's kind of ironic that had bill not meddled we may not have had the wiener email announcement and then on announcement.

The letter should have just said "we are going a different direction" and not detail items that were not only 6-12 months old but also a hinge that you'd praised the guy over since 1/20. Also, Rothstein apparently threatened to resign for being blamed for this firing. Yeah, this dumpster fire poop show is gonna work out great! #maga

Not a cheap shot at all on the switzer thing. .

 

[Garmel]

And to me, this is what smells funny here. It's not that Comey got canned but when it happened. Everything in the Rosenstein memo is months old and was known by the Administration and the public for a long time. It was certainly known by Jeff Sessions who could have made the recommendation when he took office, and it was known by Trump who could have pulled the trigger himself.

Let's put it this way. Rosenstein doesn't think his memo caused the firing. Link.

According to an unnamed person. In other words, another anonymous source. Don't trust the mainstream media when they pull this stuff.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Frankly I'm at the point of outrage overload. Maybe this is where the Dems were eight years ago around now. Everything's a crisis. Everything (except when it involves Hillary) is worse than Watergate. Everything is an impeachable offense. Suddenly travel expense matters. All of a sudden Goldman-Sachs appointments are problematic - how many did Obama have again? People who couldn't have cared less about any of this stuff eight years ago are all of a sudden really concerned about our relationship with Russia. Trump clearing the deck of the previous administration's appointees was a "bloodbath" even though every administration does it. (Except the stupid ones like GW Bush who really believed he could reach across the aisle and work with beltway Dems.) People on this board who were all about "What difference does it make" a few years ago, are now all of a sudden demanding clarity and resolution and for all the facts to be known. They've shown themselves for what they are.

This is largely politics but I'd like to point out why liberals are focusing on this. On the flipside, those issues you mention are suddenly NOT a concern from Trump supporters where they were critical under the previous administration.

1. Conservative media (and their parrots) have spent 8 years focusing on the costs of the Obama family vacations and his golfing habits. How many FOIA requests do you think Judicial Watch submitted just to get the costs for Obama's travels? Should it now not matter that Trump will have spent 50% of what Obama spent in 150 days what Obama did in 8 years? Or that Trump is on pace to triple the number of rounds that Obama golfed during his tenure? Remember when Trump said he'd be too busy to golf during his campaign while chastizing Obama. Interesting fact: Obama didn't golf a single round during his first 100 days.

2. Goldman Sachs. Trump ran on a platform to drain the swamp and one of his primary criticisms of HRC was her ties to Wall Street. The hypocrisy (like #1) is pretty egregious and again MUCH more than any recent administration. He was "different", right?

Your right, most of the left didn't care much about this 8yrs ago. I say most because Bernie Sanders and the fringe (i.e. Occupy Wall St.) have long cared about #2. The mainstream left didn't care though.

On the travel costs angle, that's simply throwing the astronomical hypocrisy back into the face of the conservertives. Honestly, I cared only mildly about Obama as their volume of family vacations didn't seem out of line. Trumps consistent weekend getaways are out of hand and the fact they are occurring while preaching austerity in government budgets and cutting critical programs appear to undercut Trump's credibility. It becomes "do as I say not as I do" which is a piss poor practice of leadership.

 

[Seattle Husker]

And to me, this is what smells funny here. It's not that Comey got canned but when it happened. Everything in the Rosenstein memo is months old and was known by the Administration and the public for a long time. It was certainly known by Jeff Sessions who could have made the recommendation when he took office, and it was known by Trump who could have pulled the trigger himself.

Let's put it this way. Rosenstein doesn't think his memo caused the firing. Link.

If Rosenstein was asked to come up with the justification for Comey's firing, I could understand why he'd be upset that the initial narrative (which has evolved) was that Trump was simply accepting the recommendation from Sessions/Rosenstien.

Again, this timing doesn't make any sense.

 

[Garmel]

Let's see. I recommend the firing of Comey but if you make me the main reason for the firing I'm going to get mad and quit. What a load of ****.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Let's see. I recommend the firing of Comey but if you make me the main reason for the firing I'm going to get mad and quit. What a load of ****.

You've clearly never been in corporate america where it's quite common for a CEO/Leader to want to fire a subordinate and asks a surrogate (Legal and HR) to build the justification for a termination. Heck, for every person I've terminated I've had to have justification. When I've asked others for help with supporting evidence it doesn't mean THEY were the person making the decision.

 

[Brad Austin]

It was certainly known by Jeff Sessions who could have made the recommendation when he took office, and it was known by Trump who could have pulled the trigger himself.

This illustrates exactly why he chose the timing and waited for Rosenstein.

If Trump fired Comey on his own right after taking office he'd have been crucified mercilessly for single-handedly removing the guy who's supposedly hot on his trail. These were the days of full blown Russia hysteria and impeachment calls, and no intel officials had declared they have no evidence of collusion after months of investigating.

Sessions already recused himself from anything to do with the Russia investigation. The fallout after a recused, poster boy for Lib attacks like Sessions orchestrating the dismissal would've been monumental.

Rosenstein was the perfect guy to fall back on. As pointed out by DT himself, Libs are on record praising this guy's characters and he passed confirmation by 96-4 vote. If Trump took the full brunt on his own or relied on a Sessions recommendation the outrage would've been 100 times worse.

He picked the one guy they can't throw under the bus as a corrupt scumbag because they've displayed confidence in him both verbally and by vote.

DT wanted Comey gone and blowback was going to happen NO MATTER WHAT. Doesn't matter who recommended it or when it happened. This was a genius move to embrace the recommendation from a universally respected Rosenstein to minimize the blast.

 

[Seattle Husker]

This illustrates exactly why he chose the timing and waited for Rosenstein.

If Trump fired Comey on his own right after taking office he'd have been crucified mercilessly for single-handedly removing the guy who's supposedly hot on his trail. These were the days of full blown Russia hysteria and impeachment calls, and no intel officials had declared they still have no evidence of collusion after months of investigating.

Sessions already recused himself from anything to do with the Russia investigation. The fallout after a recused, poster boy for Lib attacks like Sessions orchestrating the dismissal would've been monumental.

Rosenstein was the perfect guy to fall back on. As pointed out by DT himself, Libs are on record praising this guy's characters and he passed confirmation by 96-4 vote. If Trump took the full brunt on his own or relied on a Sessions recommendation the outrage would've been 100 times worse.

He picked the one guy they can't throw under the bus as a corrupt scumbag because they've displayed confidence in him both verbally and by vote.

DT wanted Comey gone and Blowback was going to happen NO MATTER WHAT. Doesn't matter who recommended it or when it happened. This was a genius move to embrace the recommendation from a universally respected Rosenstein to minimize the blast.

There are some good points in her on the timing for political reasons. Of course, this line of reasoning means Rosenstien was the stooge simply delivering Trumps/Sessions message.

Its befuddling that they didn't wait until the IG report unless they think the IG report will be favorable to Comey.

 

[Garmel]

This illustrates exactly why he chose the timing and waited for Rosenstein.

If Trump fired Comey on his own right after taking office he'd have been crucified mercilessly for single-handedly removing the guy who's supposedly hot on his trail. These were the days of full blown Russia hysteria and impeachment calls, and no intel officials had declared they have no evidence of collusion after months of investigating.

Sessions already recused himself from anything to do with the Russia investigation. The fallout after a recused, poster boy for Lib attacks like Sessions orchestrating the dismissal would've been monumental.

Rosenstein was the perfect guy to fall back on. As pointed out by DT himself, Libs are on record praising this guy's characters and he passed confirmation by 96-4 vote. If Trump took the full brunt on his own or relied on a Sessions recommendation the outrage would've been 100 times worse.

He picked the one guy they can't throw under the bus as a corrupt scumbag because they've displayed confidence in him both verbally and by vote.

DT wanted Comey gone and Blowback was going to happen NO MATTER WHAT. Doesn't matter who recommended it or when it happened. This was a genius move to embrace the recommendation from a universally respected Rosenstein to minimize the blast.

Exactly. When would have been the right time to fire Comey? It would have been suspicious to the media no matter what time it happened.

 

[Crockett]

 

[Seattle Husker]

 

[horninchicago]

Shocker. I fully expected to him get up and say that it is about time that moron was fired.

 

[OUBubba]

I listened to a podcast interview of a recent former FBI staffer. He pointed out that Comey was well thought of in the agency and that, if the motive was to impede the Russian dressing, that the move would backfire as agents are tired of being bashed by Trump and will not take kindly to A) having their boss fired as he was and B) being told not to look into the Circle K, when it is obvious to all that strange things are afoot at the Cirkle K.

 

[I35]

I got to hand it to the libs. They are very good at making nothing into something very big with the help of the MSM. But when it's something big like Hillary's foundation accepting money that's funneled to her campaign from countries that support terrorism, it's downplayed as not a big deal and not covered by the MSM.

Think about this below what I found on FB. It has nothing to do with this topic but I'm going to throw this in as a bonus. It's actually pretty accurate.

"The Democratic Party is the worlds most successful hate group. It attracts poor people who hate the rich people, black people who hate white people, gay people who hate straight people, feminists who hate men, environmentalists who hate the internal combustion engine, and a lot of bratty college kids who hate their parents. However, the real secret of the party's success is that it attracts the support of journalists who hate Republicans, and who therefore work tirelessly to convince the rest of us that we should vote for Democrats.

WOW! What's not mentioned is the war on police from that side or Muslim Terrorist/Refugees. Then they have the nerve to talk about how Donald Trump and the Republican party as so divisive. Everything above started with Obama. Hopefully as America is made great again it will end with Obama. What a bad chapter in our American history the last 8 years will be.

 

[OUBubba]

I got to hand it to the libs. They are very good at making nothing into something very big with the help of the MSM. But when it's something big like Hillary's foundation accepting money that's funneled to her campaign from countries that support terrorism, it's downplayed as not a big deal and not covered by the MSM.

Think about this below what I found on FB. It has nothing to do with this topic but I'm going to throw this in as a bonus. It's actually pretty accurate.

"The Democratic Party is the worlds most successful hate group. It attracts poor people who hate the rich people, black people who hate white people, gay people who hate straight people, feminists who hate men, environmentalists who hate the internal combustion engine, and a lot of bratty college kids who hate their parents. However, the real secret of the party's success is that it attracts the support of journalists who hate Republicans, and who therefore work tirelessly to convince the rest of us that we should vote for Democrats.

WOW! What's not mentioned is the war on police from that side or Muslim Terrorist/Refugees. Then they have the nerve to talk about how Donald Trump and the Republican party as so divisive. Everything above started with Obama. Hopefully as America is made great again it will end with Obama. What a bad chapter in our American history the last 8 years will be.

At least you deleted off the FW:FW:FW....

 

[djimaplon]

We need to trust our institutions to work as they were designed. Investigations take time. In the end, I believe they will arriive at the truth. Whether or not there is any there there, Trump has only himself to blame for the chaos.

 

[I35]

At least you deleted off the FW:FW:FW....

At least this FW: FW: FW: is accurate vs the fake news.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I got to hand it to the libs. They are very good at making nothing into something very big with the help of the MSM. But when it's something big like Hillary's foundation accepting money that's funneled to her campaign from countries that support terrorism, it's downplayed as not a big deal and not covered by the MSM.

Think about this below what I found on FB. It has nothing to do with this topic but I'm going to throw this in as a bonus. It's actually pretty accurate.

"The Democratic Party is the worlds most successful hate group. It attracts poor people who hate the rich people, black people who hate white people, gay people who hate straight people, feminists who hate men, environmentalists who hate the internal combustion engine, and a lot of bratty college kids who hate their parents. However, the real secret of the party's success is that it attracts the support of journalists who hate Republicans, and who therefore work tirelessly to convince the rest of us that we should vote for Democrats.

WOW! What's not mentioned is the war on police from that side or Muslim Terrorist/Refugees. Then they have the nerve to talk about how Donald Trump and the Republican party as so divisive. Everything above started with Obama. Hopefully as America is made great again it will end with Obama. What a bad chapter in our American history the last 8 years will be.

I submit this as Exhibit #1 that "liberals" have a monopoly on fact-less emotion driven arguments. The only fact in this post might be that I35 has learned to copy/paste. Next we'll work on the quote function then on to linking.

Just some good natured ribbing I35 although I do with you'd jump out of the emotional arguments and bring more facts to the debates.

 

[I35]

SH, Not sure what isn't factual to you. Do you want me to go down the list of examples of the hate from the left? I didn't think I was breaking any new news. Everything I mentioned is well known. More of just bring it to your attention ........ again.

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Seattle Husker]

SH, Not sure what isn't factual to you. Do you want me to go down the list of examples of the hate from the left? I didn't think I was breaking any new news. Everything I mentioned is well known. More of just bring it to your attention ........ again.

You're a little "experienced" to need to go back to elementary school.

 

[Seattle Husker]

"I was going to fire Comey," Trump told NBC News' Lester Holt in an interview. "Regardless of the recommendation I was going to fire Comey."

LOL! Some people need to wait until Trump finally lands on an excuse before commenting because his first statement is ALWAYS a lie/spin. Clearly he doesn't pay enough attention to his own spin machine to ensure he remains aligned on the talking points.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Comey continued to display a lot of class in how he conducted himself as he exits the FBI. He stayed above the partisanship that infests D.C. There are many on Capitol Hill that could follow his lead, including the man whose residence is on Pennsylvania Ave.

 

[Phil Elliott]

If you wanna read something other than crying for James Comey, go here:

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2017/05/11/trump-cans-comey-like-a-boss-n2324865