Trump Fires Comey

[Odin]

Looks like Trump has done his own Saturday Night Massacre. This really is a shitty Nixon rerun...

[pbrower2a]

Three years earlier for an analogous event. This administration is unraveling quickly.

In countries with a weaker heritage of Constitutional government, one might expect a military coup.

[gabrielle]

CNN exclusive: Grand jury subpoenas issued in FBI's Russia investigation

[pbrower2a]

Even the method of firing is erratic in the extreme: it was broadcast on television.

[Galen]

I thought you guys were upset with Comey for costing Hillary the election.  Eric the Obtuse certainly blames him for that so it seems that Trump gave you what you want.  I think Scott Adams is [url="http://blog.dilbert.com/post/160515646406/the-comey-firing]right[/url] about what is going on here.  Truth is, it really doesn't matter what Trump does you are going to angry about it.

[beechnut79]

(05-10-2017, 02:16 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Even the method of firing is erratic in the extreme: it was broadcast on television.

Is this the first public firing since Arthur Godfrey's firing of Julius LaRosa?

[Bob Butler 54]

(05-09-2017, 06:33 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 06:09 PM)Odin Wrote: Looks like Trump has done his own Saturday Night Massacre. This really is a shitty Nixon rerun...

Score another flub for the Gang Who Couldn't Shoot Straight.

What a complete, freaking, sad, joke. The worst President in US history ... and he happens to be in our time!!!! Well, we cannot say we are not living in interesting times.

I thought Bush 43's grab on the worst president title would last a lot longer.

Trump trends narcissist while Nixon was paranoid.  It seems to me that paranoia could be kept secret, hidden from the public, much longer.  I have a similar feeling between the two presidents of an administration shooting itself in the foot.  I'm not sure what it is, but I got much more intense and emotional about Nixon.  Maybe I was younger.  Maybe the times were still emotionally charged with the remnants of the awakening mood.

I remember at the peak of Watergate, when the Big Three TV networks were ever so dominant, watching Walter Cronkite spend 25 of this 30 allotted minutes on Watergate without having problems filling the time slot.  Next up?  A Watergate special, of course.

From my perspective, while Trump's fiasco certainly out splashes Bush 43, Nixon was a far more intense ride.  Give Trump more time, I suppose.

[pbrower2a]

(05-10-2017, 03:47 PM)beechnut79 Wrote:

(05-10-2017, 02:16 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Even the method of firing is erratic in the extreme: it was broadcast on television.

Is this the first public firing since Arthur Godfrey's firing of Julius LaRosa?

Similarly tactless, and it gutted the nice-guy image of Arthur Godfrey.

Another crass example: pizza magnate Tom Monahan hired retired U of M football coach Bo Schembechler* as President of his Detroit Tigers baseball team, and fired the legendary football coach by fax.


*That tells you how spell-check works: someone out of sight who was once fantastically famous can fade away.

[Bronsin]

(05-10-2017, 02:17 PM)Galen Wrote: I thought you guys were upset with Comey for costing Hillary the election.  Eric the Obtuse certainly blames him for that so it seems that Trump gave you what you want.  I think Scott Adams is [url="http://blog.dilbert.com/post/160515646406/the-comey-firing]right[/url] about what is going on here.  Truth is, it really doesn't matter what Trump does you are going to angry about it.

They won't like being reminded of that you know. Laffin'

[Odin]

(05-09-2017, 06:33 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(05-09-2017, 06:09 PM)Odin Wrote: Looks like Trump has done his own Saturday Night Massacre. This really is a shitty Nixon rerun...

Score another flub for the Gang Who Couldn't Shoot Straight.

What a complete, freaking, sad, joke. The worst President in US history ... and he happens to be in our time!!!! Well, we cannot say we are not living in interesting times.

As Red Don would say, "SAD!"

[Odin]

(05-10-2017, 02:17 PM)Galen Wrote: I thought you guys were upset with Comey for costing Hillary the election.  Eric the Obtuse certainly blames him for that so it seems that Trump gave you what you want.  I think Scott Adams is [url="http://blog.dilbert.com/post/160515646406/the-comey-firing]right[/url] about what is going on here.  Truth is, it really doesn't matter what Trump does you are going to angry about it.

I see you've been thoroughly programmed with right-wing talking points. You sound exactly like all the idiots calling in to the local radio news show hosted by Sen. Heitkamp's brother yesterday morning screaming "HILLARY'S EMAILS".

Two wrongs don't make a right, and lets make this clear, despite what the administration says this has nothing to do with Comey's BS regarding Clinton. This has everything to do with them being scared with Comey getting to close to discovering something very, very bad regarding Trump and Russia.

[Odin]

(05-10-2017, 06:44 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(05-10-2017, 02:17 PM)Galen Wrote: I thought you guys were upset with Comey for costing Hillary the election.  Eric the Obtuse certainly blames him for that so it seems that Trump gave you what you want.  I think Scott Adams is [url="http://blog.dilbert.com/post/160515646406/the-comey-firing]right[/url] about what is going on here.  Truth is, it really doesn't matter what Trump does you are going to angry about it.

There are patriotic Republicans among those questioning the timing of the firing.

Galen is a complete hack who probably thinks those Republicans are just "Neocon globalists".

[Odin]

(05-11-2017, 05:51 AM)Bronsin Wrote:

(05-10-2017, 02:17 PM)Galen Wrote: I thought you guys were upset with Comey for costing Hillary the election.  Eric the Obtuse certainly blames him for that so it seems that Trump gave you what you want.  I think Scott Adams is [url="http://blog.dilbert.com/post/160515646406/the-comey-firing]right[/url] about what is going on here.  Truth is, it really doesn't matter what Trump does you are going to angry about it.

They won't like being reminded of that you know. Laffin'

Nah, we're just not dumb cult members, unlike you.

[pbrower2a]

(05-10-2017, 02:17 PM)Galen Wrote: I thought you guys were upset with Comey for costing Hillary the election.  Eric the Obtuse certainly blames him for that so it seems that Trump gave you what you want.  I think Scott Adams is [url="http://blog.dilbert.com/post/160515646406/the-comey-firing]right[/url] about what is going on here.  Truth is, it really doesn't matter what Trump does you are going to angry about it.

We are disgusted with President Trump trying to squelch an investigation of possible and pervasive wrongdoing. Maybe former FBI Director Comey has come to recognize what a Frankenstein monster he helped release upon the public.

Do you want to know who really handed President Trump the election? Gullible voters -- the sorts of people who fell for the demagoguery of a con-artist. I have seen little that President Trump has done from the start of his campaign to now that I like.

A hint: by 2020 we Americans will want a President with the decency, integrity, caution, rationality, erudition, and respect for protocol of Barack Obama -- even if that implies a conservative Republican. Of course that does rule out Donald Trump.

Had Donald Trump won the Democratic nomination and run on boilerplate liberalism but with the same dishonesty and demagoguery I would have voted for the Republican nominee.

[Eric the Green]

Comey had just asked Justice for more funds to investigate Russian interference and possible Trump collusion. Then Justice comes up with this reason to fire him, months and months after the fact. The explanation they gave is that Comey did not follow Justice Dept. procedure by publically giving his views on the investigation and Hillary's behavior, even though he didn't file charges against her. So it seemed that Trump and his Justice Dept. was being fair by firing Comey for what he did to Hillary, both in July and in Oct. That gave them cover to fire him because "he had lost the confidence of the people" on both sides of the political divide. But Trump's statement in his termination letter thanking Comey for not saying Trump was involved in the collusion, shows what was on his mind. So does the timing, right after Comey's request for more funds, and right after and before his latest testimonies to Congress.

Firing Comey sends a chill into the FBI about investigating the boss. No matter whom Trump appoints to replace Comey, that chill may still be there. If Trump bends to the winds and appoints a new director with integrity, and this person is granted the funds and the permission Comey had asked for, Trump could escape this episode; although he could end up being charged with violating the law due to his collusion with Russia. If he appoints another sycophantic stooge or aligator to his swamp, then he may escape a possible FBI indictment, but the calls for a special prosecutor and even for impeachment may get louder. His decision will tell us which alternative he is more afraid of, perhaps.

[David Horn]

(05-11-2017, 05:51 AM)Bronsin Wrote:

(05-10-2017, 02:17 PM)Galen Wrote: I thought you guys were upset with Comey for costing Hillary the election.  Eric the Obtuse certainly blames him for that so it seems that Trump gave you what you want.  I think Scott Adams is right about what is going on here.  Truth is, it really doesn't matter what Trump does you are going to angry about it.

They won't like being reminded of that you know. Laffin'

The fact that Comey was, and probably still is, a putz doesn't justify canning him on TV, nor does it argue well for firing the guy who's investigating The Fire Meister™.  Trump will not win this one, but he may run down the clock for a while.  

PS: Fixed your broken link

[David Horn]

(05-11-2017, 02:10 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: I have to wonder -  at what point people who really care about the US, and who have the power to orchestrate it, would do a coup?

That's probably unnecessary.  Eventually, self-preservation will drive the Republicans to take action, just like Watergate.  They weren't enthused that time either.

[pbrower2a]

(05-11-2017, 02:10 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: I have to wonder -  at what point people who really care about the US, and who have the power to orchestrate it, would do a coup?

1. Pervasive fraudulence of the election. It's not one part of the election. A Senator or Representative can be unseated if vote fraud, even if the elected official is not culpable, can be shown to have occurred that would have undeniably altered the election. That is a high standard even in an individual instance, and it is unlikely to change the electoral balance.

Fraudulence would include illegal interference by a criminal enterprise, foreign power or a foreign corporation, especially if one offers quid pro quo. Such would require a bare win in which funding from suspect sources creates the impression of such support deciding the election. Or there is some blatant fraud such as tampering with voting equipment. It would have to be large enough to decide a majority in one or the other House of Congress  or the Presidency and be unambiguous in cause. It must fit the level of proof suitable for a criminal conviction, and affected offices must simply endorse the fraud, denying recourse.

That is a very tough standard. A President or Congress made by (and I am using any Japanese players only as illustrations while suggesting that no imaginable Japanese entity is involved this time) -- the Yakuza (crime syndicate), the Japanese government, or Toyota Corporation.

2. Blatant violations of Constitutional practice. The President dissolves Congress (not a right in this system), suspends habeas corpus without a valid rationale, orders political opponents arrested or killed, or violates Congressional immunity. In essence, the President has destroyed democracy. Or Congress acts to expel the opposition Party without recognized cause or passes legislation outlawing the other Party. In essence, Congress has destroyed democracy. Or either the President or Congress has established a secret police or empowered an existing police to do summary justice.

3. Overt criminality. Among those are war crimes, crimes against peace, or crimes against humanity.

4. Obstruction of justice -- a blatant violation of the principle of rule of law. Nixon went down for that.

We have no provision for any revolution or military coup in the Constitution. But don't be stupid. There was Salvador Allende in Chile. Yes, Allende was a socialist -- but at some point I can imagine some general telling the President that it would be wise to vacate the Presidency.

[Bob Butler 54]

(05-11-2017, 08:17 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: We have no provision for any revolution or military coup in the Constitution. But don't be stupid. There was Salvador Allende in Chile. Yes, Allende was a socialist -- but at some point I can imagine some general telling the President that it would be wise to vacate the Presidency.

Well, some would say we do have provisions for a revolution...  Start with the 2nd Amendment. Actually, with the standing army needing re authorization every two years and the states having authority to appoint officers to the militia, one could say the founding fathers gave the matter significant thought. As the militia has not been trained in a century plus, replaced by the National Guard which is legally a federal standing army, the constitutional priming for revolution is no where near what it once was.

But ask a NRA flavored extreme partisan if there is a provision for revolution and they'll likely give you all the details. They are much more aware of these things than most blue leaning folk. Alas, many such NRA leaning people were the ones who elected Trump.

I don't find it hard to imagine a general telling Trump to step down.  I find it harder to imagine Trump listening.

[pbrower2a]

(05-11-2017, 10:56 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(05-11-2017, 08:17 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: We have no provision for any revolution or military coup in the Constitution. But don't be stupid. There was Salvador Allende in Chile. Yes, Allende was a socialist -- but at some point I can imagine some general telling the President that it would be wise to vacate the Presidency.

Well, some would say we do have provisions for a revolution...  Start with the 2nd Amendment.  Actually, with the standing army needing re authorization every two years and the states having authority to appoint officers to the militia, one could say the founding fathers gave the matter significant thought.  As the militia has not been trained in a century plus, replaced by the National Guard which is legally a federal standing army, the constitutional priming for revolution is no where near what it once was.

We haven't relied upon state-based militias to a great degree since the Civil War. We have state national guards who activate largely for local emergencies (like national disasters) and are effectively reserves for the regular armed services. 

Quote:But ask a NRA flavored extreme partisan if there is a provision for revolution and they'll likely give you all the details.  They are much more aware of these things than most blue leaning folk.  Alas, many such NRA leaning people were the ones who elected Trump.

Of course the NRA is very right-wing, and it can more easily see an uprising against  a 'Commie' like Obama than against a read-blooded American like Donald Trump.

Quote:I don't find it hard to imagine a general telling Trump to step down.  I find it harder to imagine Trump listening.

In most coups it is the tanks, troop carriers, and missile-carrying trucks arrayed against the residence of the Prime Minister or President that do the convincing. Or it is a gun pointed at the vital organs of the nominal leader (which explains King Michael of Romania abdicating).

Reputedly, Washington DC streets are unusually flimsy so that heavy military equipment can't use them. Streets of Greater Miami? Not so flimsy.