Trump fires Comey

[ordnance11]

Why does it feel like 1972?
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[robkelk]

Remember how Prof. Allan Lichtman predicted Trump would be elected President?

Remember the rest of what he predicted?

That's why it feels like 1972.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[khagler]

Actually the last time a President fired an FBI Director was in 1993, not 1972. That was Clinton firing a Reagan appointee.

[khagler]

Apparently, he was indeed fired over the Clinton email probe. Trump is apparently still following the advice of Democratic cheerleaders.

[Black Aeronaut]

At the time, it was no big surprise that Clinton fired Sessions.  This from the article you linked, khagler:

This wasn’t a matter of mere partisanship.  William Sessions was an awful FBI Director.  According to the New York Times’ account of the matter, the Director loved the trappings and pomp of his high office, but took little interest in the actual job of running the FBI, leaving the critically important agency leaderless and adrift just as the mission was shifting, from counterintelligence against the newly fallen USSR, to defending against the specter of domestic and international terrorism.  The FBI was devolving into warring internal factions.  

Undercurrents of unrest surfaced last year when several complaints led to an internal inquiry by the Office of Professional Responsibility, an internal watchdog unit of the Justice Department. 
The report found that Mr. Sessions had taken numerous free trips aboard F.B.I. aircraft to visits friends and relatives, often taking along his wife, Alice. The report, which was endorsed officially by Attorney General William P. Barr on his last day in office, detailed a litany of abuses. It is a lacerating portrayal of the Director as an official who was in charge of enforcing the law but who seemed blase about perceptions of his own conduct.

Having been, thus, excoriated by the outgoing Republican Administration of George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton’s incoming Democratic Administration surprised no one in its ardor to see the last of Mr. Sessions.  But the stubborn Republican FBI Director refused to go voluntarily, finally provoking Bill Clinton to telephone Mr. Sessions on July 20, 1993.  The President called twice.  The first call was to tell the Director he was fired.  The second was to tell the Director it was effective immediately.

So yeah.  Clinton had legitimate reasons for it.  Making it sound like Trump is doing it just because Clinton did it and so it's okay....  yeah.

[ordnance11]

Black Aeronaut wrote:

---

At the time, it was no big surprise that Clinton fired Sessions.  This from the article you linked, khagler:

This wasn’t a matter of mere partisanship.  William Sessions was an awful FBI Director.  According to the New York Times’ account of the matter, the Director loved the trappings and pomp of his high office, but took little interest in the actual job of running the FBI, leaving the critically important agency leaderless and adrift just as the mission was shifting, from counterintelligence against the newly fallen USSR, to defending against the specter of domestic and international terrorism.  The FBI was devolving into warring internal factions.  

Undercurrents of unrest surfaced last year when several complaints led to an internal inquiry by the Office of Professional Responsibility, an internal watchdog unit of the Justice Department. 
The report found that Mr. Sessions had taken numerous free trips aboard F.B.I. aircraft to visits friends and relatives, often taking along his wife, Alice. The report, which was endorsed officially by Attorney General William P. Barr on his last day in office, detailed a litany of abuses. It is a lacerating portrayal of the Director as an official who was in charge of enforcing the law but who seemed blase about perceptions of his own conduct.

Having been, thus, excoriated by the outgoing Republican Administration of George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton’s incoming Democratic Administration surprised no one in its ardor to see the last of Mr. Sessions.  But the stubborn Republican FBI Director refused to go voluntarily, finally provoking Bill Clinton to telephone Mr. Sessions on July 20, 1993.  The President called twice.  The first call was to tell the Director he was fired.  The second was to tell the Director it was effective immediately.

So yeah.  Clinton had legitimate reasons for it.  Making it sound like Trump is doing it just because Clinton did it and so it's okay....  yeah.

Since I blocked out Khagler, so I had no idea what he replied, but him stating that since Clinton fired Sessions, it's okay for Trump to fire Comey. Well, I'll be blunt. It's dumb. Firing the head of the FBI conducting an investigation into collusion between Russia and members of the administration is bad optics to say the least. Following on the heels of Sally Yates testimony. The most damming things about the testimony are:
1. It took 18 days to remove Flynn from his post from the time Ms. Yates warned the White House counsel about Flynn's possibility of being blackmailed by the Russians. I suspect that was done only when the story broke in the Post.2. The White House counsel response to being told about Flynn was this: What does it matter that Flynn lied?  So are you then telling me that it's not just Flynn who is coordinating with Russia prior to the inauguration and perhaps prior to the election? And also can Flynn be prosecuted for crimes? So if anyone else in the White House is doing what Flynn did, can they also be prosecuted was my takeaway of the response.
So far this administration has been engaged in denial, misdirection and deflection about the whole thing.  Yates testimony threw this administration under the bus. Firing Comey has echoes of Watergate. If Trump thinks this is bad, wait until the midterms elections because this will be a referendum on Trump. Prominent GOP congressmen like Chaffetz of Utah and Labrador of Iowa had decided not to run for their seats again. I wonder why. If the Democrats win control of the House again, do you really think they won't launch a full throated investigation that will make Benghazi look like a picnic?
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[Labster]

Watergate, watergate everywhere and not a drop to drink. 
I think one of the key details of this story is how Comey found out he was fired.  He was in the middle of a speech at the FBI office in L.A., when he saw the news that he was fired on a TV screen in the room.  He had a good laugh about it, because it was such a great prank.
So an action alert to all of you in the U.S.: Call your three Congresscritters tomorrow, and demand that they create an independent commission to investigate Trump, and if possible have an independent council appointed in the DOJ.  This is a priority one!
-- ∇×V

[khagler]

Black Aeronaut wrote:

---

At the time, it was no big surprise that Clinton fired Sessions.  This from the article you linked, khagler:

This wasn’t a matter of mere partisanship.  William Sessions was an awful FBI Director.  According to the New York Times’ account of the matter, the Director loved the trappings and pomp of his high office, but took little interest in the actual job of running the FBI, leaving the critically important agency leaderless and adrift just as the mission was shifting, from counterintelligence against the newly fallen USSR, to defending against the specter of domestic and international terrorism.  The FBI was devolving into warring internal factions.  

Undercurrents of unrest surfaced last year when several complaints led to an internal inquiry by the Office of Professional Responsibility, an internal watchdog unit of the Justice Department. 
The report found that Mr. Sessions had taken numerous free trips aboard F.B.I. aircraft to visits friends and relatives, often taking along his wife, Alice. The report, which was endorsed officially by Attorney General William P. Barr on his last day in office, detailed a litany of abuses. It is a lacerating portrayal of the Director as an official who was in charge of enforcing the law but who seemed blase about perceptions of his own conduct.

Having been, thus, excoriated by the outgoing Republican Administration of George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton’s incoming Democratic Administration surprised no one in its ardor to see the last of Mr. Sessions.  But the stubborn Republican FBI Director refused to go voluntarily, finally provoking Bill Clinton to telephone Mr. Sessions on July 20, 1993.  The President called twice.  The first call was to tell the Director he was fired.  The second was to tell the Director it was effective immediately.

So yeah.  Clinton had legitimate reasons for it.  Making it sound like Trump is doing it just because Clinton did it and so it's okay....  yeah.

It's impressive that you managed to read paste that much of the article while somehow not seeing the very next paragraph, or any of the comments agreeing with it:

I hope the second President Clinton makes three telephone calls, if FBI Director, Comey, forces the issue by refusing to resign, like Sessions before him:  Call #1.  You’re fired.  Call #2.  It’s effective immediately.  Call #3.  Your escort out of the building is on its way to your office.

 I guess partisan cheerleaders have moved past giving ridiculous excuses for reversing their positions after an election, and have now reached the point where they delude themselves into not even seeing their own hypocrisy.

[khagler]

Interestingly, this article claims that Trump was taken by surprise by the reaction:

But the fallout seemed to take the White House by surprise. Trump made a round of calls around 5 p.m., asking for support from senators. White House officials believed it would be a "win-win" because Republicans and Democrats alike have problems with the FBI director, one person briefed on their deliberations said.
Instead, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer told him he was making a big mistake — and Trump seemed "taken aback," according to a person familiar with the call.

Not realizing that the Democrats had all reversed their position on Comey immediately after the election is, if anything, even more delusional than the Democrats pretending their previous position never existed.

[ordnance11]

This event has all the makings of a rush job:

1. Sessions was supposed to recuse himself from the Russian investigation and he signed off on the firing of Comey.

2. None of the talking head were given talking points for 2-3 hours after the event. Even Spicer was out of the loop.

3. Does Trump even had a replacement in mind?

3. And last.. the Russian Foreign Minister was meeting Trump the next day. Tell me how good the optics look.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[nemonowan]

Funnily enough, days before getting fired Comey had requested more funding and manpower for his Russia-Trump investigation:
http://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/us/p ... .html?_r=0
Of course those two things cannot be related.

[ordnance11]

and McConnell has chosen party over country.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell