Another theory regarding Comey dismissal

dogtowner

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 24, 2009
Messages
17,849
Location
Wandering around
Trump early on signaled his intent to abandon further investigations into Clinton's shenanigans irritating some.
Then the left launched a string of silly probes.
Comey was the guy who rewrote law to let HRC off the hook by inserting "intent" where the laws she violated did not.
Looks like now the administration is rethinking the largesse shown earlier and ditching Comey is a necessary part of that.
Could be a very costly mistake by the donkeys so many of which have legal problems which have gone unpersued from tax evasion to felonies.
Should be interesting to see hiw things unfold.
 
Werbung:
Trump early on signaled his intent to abandon further investigations into Clinton's shenanigans irritating some.
Then the left launched a string of silly probes.

What "silly probes" are you speaking of?

Comey was the guy who rewrote law to let HRC off the hook by inserting "intent" where the laws she violated did not.[/quote}

What law did he rewrite?

Looks like now the administration is rethinking the largesse shown earlier and ditching Comey is a necessary part of that.

You mean the "largesse" Trump praised Comey for?

Could be a very costly mistake by the donkeys so many of which have legal problems which have gone unpersued from tax evasion to felonies.
Should be interesting to see hiw things unfold.

Interesting since you give no examples, and ignore Trumps convictions for such.
 
Rule of law. Which no one is above.
Be it unpaid taxes or criminal actions and irrespective of who you used to be.


Another liar like Trump speaks of what he knows nothing about. YOU made this claim liar:

"Could be a very costly mistake by the donkeys so many of which have legal problems which have gone unpersued from tax evasion to felonies."

Who are you referring to aside from Trump?
 
Even the Trumpster can't keep his stories straight:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...y-narrative/?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.17d1d8ba5f23

"In one fell swoop in an NBC News interview, Trump totally contradicted his three top spokespeople and offered a polar-opposite version of events than they had provided, on nearly every important count.

After they had spent nearly two days emphasizing that this was a decision Trump arrived at after receiving a memo and recommendation from Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, Trump just blurted out that he was going to fire Comey all along. Basically, he admitted the memo was a ruse and a political ploy.

And he even seemed to suggest he may have fired Comey because of the Russia investigation -- which only makes his decision more controversial and runs counter to the suggestions of everyone who has spoken on his behalf in recent days.

Here’s what Trump told NBC News’s Lester Holt (emphasis mine):

HOLT: Did you ask for a recommendation?

TRUMP: What I did is, I was going to fire Comey. My decision. It was not . . .

HOLT: You had made the decision before they came in the room.

TRUMP: I was going to fire Comey. There’s no good time to do it, by the way.

HOLT: Because in your letter, you said, ‘I accepted their recommendation.’ So you had already made the decision.

TRUMP: Oh, I was going to fire regardless of recommendation.

But that's not what White House press secretary Sean Spicer said this week — not by a long shot."
 
Trump early on signaled his intent to abandon further investigations into Clinton's shenanigans irritating some.
Then the left launched a string of silly probes.
Comey was the guy who rewrote law to let HRC off the hook by inserting "intent" where the laws she violated did not.
Looks like now the administration is rethinking the largesse shown earlier and ditching Comey is a necessary part of that.
Could be a very costly mistake by the donkeys so many of which have legal problems which have gone unpersued from tax evasion to felonies.
Should be interesting to see hiw things unfold.


Comey, by the timing of his press release regarding Clinton's emails, helped to elect Trump, but when the pursuit of truth led to the possibility that the Russians had had a hand in our election, for some unknown reason Trump decided that Comey was a liability. The question was also raised as to Trump's people possibly colluding with the Russians, which is unproven at this point, but the firing of Comey is in and of itself evidence that there may have been collusion.
While there are some prominent Democrats who have some unresolved legal issues, the "donkeys" weren't a part of those decisions. The decision to fire Comey was Trump's and his alone.
 
Comey, by the timing of his press release regarding Clinton's emails, helped to elect Trump, but when the pursuit of truth led to the possibility that the Russians had had a hand in our election, for some unknown reason Trump decided that Comey was a liability. The question was also raised as to Trump's people possibly colluding with the Russians, which is unproven at this point, but the firing of Comey is in and of itself evidence that there may have been collusion.
While there are some prominent Democrats who have some unresolved legal issues, the "donkeys" weren't a part of those decisions. The decision to fire Comey was Trump's and his alone.
Even Reuters reports there is zero evidence. It's n anufacturwd drama.
 
Zero evidence of Russian interference in the election? Really?
The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far. But the disclosure could increase the pressure on Trump and his aides to provide the FBI and Congress with a full account of interactions with Russian officials and others with links to the Kremlin during and immediately after the 2016 election.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-contacts-idUSKCN18E106
 
The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far. But the disclosure could increase the pressure on Trump and his aides to provide the FBI and Congress with a full account of interactions with Russian officials and others with links to the Kremlin during and immediately after the 2016 election.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-contacts-idUSKCN18E106
There may have been no collusion, but possible Russian interference in an election certainly deserves to be investigated.

And, Trump camp officials lying about having had contact with Russian operatives does raise some questions: Why?

The firing of Comey raises some questions as well.

One would think that the president would be in favor of investigating any foreign interference in a US election, unless, of course, he was a part of that interference.
 
Werbung:
There may have been no collusion, but possible Russian interference in an election certainly deserves to be investigated.

And, Trump camp officials lying about having had contact with Russian operatives does raise some questions: Why?

The firing of Comey raises some questions as well.

One would think that the president would be in favor of investigating any foreign interference in a US election, unless, of course, he was a part of that interference.
There is zero proof of Russian activity surrounding the election. Or Peru, or east timor or anywhere else. There us proof Seth Rich was in contact with WikiLeaks and he had all the access necessary. If you want to investigate something how about why he turned up dead.
 
Back
Top