President Trump Fires FBI Director James Comey

On comey, I knew it was a matter of time he got fired. I just didn't know when.

the last straw must've been over Huma's email thing, where Comey says hundreds and was contradicted by his FBI staff that it was only 2 emails, the remainder being a back up email chain. -- this sounds like he was setup by his staff.

The whole Trump Russian thing is BS and the left knows it. Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

Of course they do, but Liberals like to hold onto their delusions like schizophrenics, lol.


Jim

Yep. The Turd Reich's Bullshit machine will be working OT for the next couple of weeks.

Twitler meats (not a typo) with the Russian Foreign Minister tomorrow.

Meanwhile, the forces of darkness continue to work on getting Twitlercare thru the Senate.

This is all such a YUGE DISASTER!

Of course they do, but Liberals like to hold onto their delusions like schizophrenics, lol.


Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

That's pretty ironic.

That's pretty ironic. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Not really, Liberalism is a mental disorder, by the way you have a pretty advanced case of it.


Jim

Not really, Liberalism is a mental disorder, by the way you have a pretty advanced case of it.


Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Which is the primary reason he doesn't realize it, particularly when he's nesting in the middle of TrumpDeRangementsVille!

Patients in the "Funny Farm" believe those outside are abnormal.

Trump, DRAINING THE SWAMP! https://spectator.org/former-u-s-att...s-a-dirty-cop/

October 13, 2016, 3:07 pm

The FBI in open revolt against a deceitful director.

James Comey presides over an FBI in revolt over his leadership, a former U.S. attorney tells The American Spectator, and pursues “paranoid, delusional, and vindictive” measures to prevent negative information leaking out to the public.

“I know that inside the FBI there is a revolt,” Joseph diGenova tells The American Spectator. “There is a revolt against the director. The people inside the bureau believe the director is a dirty cop. They believe that he threw the [Hillary Clinton email] case. They do not know what he was promised in return. But the people inside the bureau who were involved in the case and who knew about the case are talking to former FBI people expressing their disgust at the conduct of the director.”

The loss of faith in the bureau chief stems in part from a dishonest rendering of the decision not to indict Mrs. Clinton as unanimous rather than unilateral and in part from the bureau’s decision to destroy evidence in the case and grant blanket immunity to Clinton underlings for no possible prosecutorial purpose.

“There is a consensus among the employees that the director has lost all credibility and that he cannot lead the bureau,” diGenova explains. “They are comparing him to L. Patrick Gray, the disgraced former FBI director who threw Watergate papers into the Potomac River. The resistance to the director has made the agency incapable of action. It has been described to me as a depression within the agency unlike anything that anyone has ever seen within the bureau. The director’s public explanation for the unorthodox investigation are viewed by people in the bureau as sophomoric and embarrassing.”

Comey maintained in July that he came to the decision to recommend not indicting Clinton for the inclusion of classified material in 110 emails stored on a private server based on an “entirely apolitical and professional” investigation despite conceding that others in a similar spot would face “consequences” and that “evidence of potential violations” existed. He insisted then, “No outside influence of any kind was brought to bear.”

But agents trained to sniff out malfeasance smell something rotten here.

“When the director said that it was a unanimous decision not to recommend prosecution, that was a lie,” diGenova points out. “In fact, the people involved in the case were outraged at his decision, which he made by himself. When people realized that he was lying publicly about their role and when they knew he had approved of the destruction of laptops that were subject to congressional subpoena, that flipped the switch.”

Critics of the FBI and the broader handling of the case by the Justice Department remain skeptical over investigators’ ostensible belief in Clinton’s claim that she “lost” 13 Blackberry devices and did not understand that documents marked “C” meant confidential. Decisions to grant Clinton aide Cheryl Mills attorney-client privilege in a case involving her, to destroy her laptop and with it any evidence desired by Congress, and to limit the investigation’s search to documents from before January 31, 2015 to obstruct any possible obstruction of justice case against Mills also similarly baffled. Direct evidence of Clinton hiding public business on a private server (and thereby making it easier for enemy governments to see what the American government could not) and “bleaching” her hard drive after the story became public presented the FBI clear evidence of wrongdoing. But authorities sought to protect rather than prosecute the malefactors.

“The director’s public explanation for the unorthodox investigation are viewed by people in the bureau as sophomoric and embarrassing,” diGenova notes. “The people in the bureau anticipate that there will be subpoenas for their testimony. Comey in a telephone conference with special agents in charge around the country, within the last few days, warned that if they received a phone inquiry about the investigation, or any inquiry about the investigation, they were ordered to report the call and the caller to the director’s office.”

DiGenova describes such control tactics as something out of J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI. Yet, it’s Hoover’s successor, L. Patrick Gray, who offers the clearest parallel to Comey. As diGenova puts it, “There is a Deep Throat.”

Agents involved in the case now fear congressional subpoenas thanks to Comey’s head-scratching handling of the case. DiGenova met this week with figures requesting attorneys for FBI officials. The former independent counsel and U.S. attorney affirms his willingness to serve in that capacity and to represent potential whistleblowers.

“These people are trained to be loyal, honest, and forthright,” diGenova points out. “What [Comey] did was force them to corrupt their oath of office. They have had enough.”

Not really, Liberalism is a mental disorder, by the way you have a pretty advanced case of it.


Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Two Thumbs Up, Jim.

We all (on both sides of the aisle) know that Comey was on borrowed time. Did anyone really believe he'd make it thru the summer? Why are the libturds shocked / indignant over his release?

That's neither here nor there. the point is Gowdy knows and respects the the law and is not likely to be sell out like Comey.

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

On comey, I knew it was a matter of time he got fired. I just didn't know when.

the last straw must've been over Huma's email thing, where Comey says hundreds and was contradicted by his FBI staff that it was only 2 emails, the remainder being a back up email chain. -- this sounds like he was setup by his staff. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Team Trump is under investigation and team Trump fires the guy leading investigation

Things that make you go hmmmm.


.

Team Trump is under investigation and team Trump fires the guy leading investigation

Things that make you go hmmmm.


. Originally Posted by WTF

Not really, WTF.

Word has it you'll be appointed as the newest head of the FBI. I'm almost certain you'll do as well if not better than Comey in leading this marathon of an investigation. Seriously...could you be any less competent than he is/was to lead the rudderless ship that is the F B I ?

The Parrot has opined again!

eming[/COLOR]]ism is a mental disorder, by the way you have a pretty advanced case of it.


Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin;Not really, L[COLOR="Red"

What's "fake news"? You? Originally Posted by LexusLover

You, now that you poked your unwanted opinion into it.

You, now that you poked your unwanted opinion into it. Originally Posted by bamscram

Are you referring to my opinion of your inability to write English?