Dems have been complaining for months & months about Dir. Comey. Now that he has been fired they PRETEND to be aggrieved. Phony hypocrites!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 10, 2017
UPDATE: A commenter has made a reasonable challenge in another thread:
the default position of folks on this site is that there is nothing problematic about any of this stuff. Can you imagine what the editorial (and commentator) voice of this site would be like if this was happening during a Democratic Administration?
Speaking only for myself, I’d like to accept that challenge and do a little thought-experiment. Suppose that:
- Hillary wins in November 2016. As today, both Democrats and Republicans are furious at Comey (for different reasons).
- Upon winning, Hillary is surrounded by allegations that China or Saudi Arabia colluded with her to “hack our democracy”.
- In real life, they probably have hacked our democracy. But, for this thought-experiment: Let’s say that the allegations are evidence-free innuendo, circulated by the VRWC to stir up Tea Party protests, raise funds and de-legitimize Hillary’s presidency.
- Comey occasionally feeds the innuendo, on top of the crap he did in 2016.
- But Comey does not target Hillary with a criminal investigation. He only does a counter-intelligence investigation into China and Saudi Arabia.
- DNI Clapper clears Hillary of any actual collusion with China or Saudi Arabia. Republicans are forced to admit (in this thought-experiment) that they really have no evidence.
- Whereupon Hillary says “OK, we know Comey has damaged people’s trust in the FBI and this is the right moment to replace him.” She fires him.
Our leftie friends would praise her decisiveness. How would I feel? Honestly, I’d be suspicious of her replacement for Comey. I’d watch that with a lot of worry. A lot. Even so, I believe that I wouldn’t do what some of our leftie friends have done:
- Calling it a constitutional crisis, like she doesn’t have the authority to fire Comey. (She does.)
- Calling it a coup d’etat. (It isn’t.)
- Claiming that she has obstructed a criminal investigation. (None exists to be obstructed.)
“The man can tweet”
Unfortunately, that’s often the problem.
Yes, it is Rsg. He should stay off the damn tweeting! That’s so lame.
Hi ILoveCapitalism,
I like the thought experiment, but it doesn’t get at what is making folks riled up. Intelligence investigations can become criminal investigations depending on what is found, and I think that possibility has Republicans worried. Flynn asking for immunity from criminal prosecution is not a good sign; the Administration waiting 18 days to remove him from an incredibly sensitive security position once evidence had surfaced that he may have been compromised (even if only temporarily to check veracity of evidence) and that there may have been collusion with agents of a foreign powers is also not a good sign. The FBI can’t tell us a lot but they are interested in US citizens who were members of the Trump Campaign and their connections/conversations/relationships with Russians.
Could we add the following to your thought experiment:
“evidence that members of her Campaign may have broken laws and interacted often with Saudi Arabian and Chinese nationals with ties to their respective governments.”
“evidence that member(s) of her Campaign who then became members of the Administration in extremely sensitive security positions may have broken laws and interacted often with Saudi Arabian and Chinese nationals with ties to their respective governments.”
Do those additions change any of your thinking about your reaction to your thought experiment?
A Query: ” Let’s say that the allegations are evidence-free innuendo.” But isn’t that at the heart of the issues to be addressed? Is it in fact “evidence-free innuendo”? That is what we are trying to find out isn’t it?
Also, if you are feeling your oats(!), we can add: “After asking for more resources to dig deeper into the counter-intelligence investigation to get to the heart of the issues, Comey gets fired by President HC.”
Given your thought experiment, would you think that something was pretty fishy and worth investigating? Not at the level of a “coup d’etat” or constitutional crisis, I grant, but worth looking at? Or would you accept President HC’s assertion that everything is normal and there is nothing to see, especially when the Democratic majorities in both Houses refuse to examine the issues?
Cas has a point. While POTUS is free to fire administration officials, s/he needs to tread carefully when it comes to law enforcement – especially when there are active investigations.
I can remember when Bill Clinton fired all the US attorneys (which was his prerogative) but I seem to recall that there were active investigations into Clinton, Inc. at the time. Of course the GOP raised hell while the Dems assured us that there was nothing to see here. Politics.
The fact that there are investigations (plural) may be part of the problem: there’s a lot of noise whether or not there’s much smoke or a fire. Perhaps Congress should return its attention to trivia like likely wars, threats to infrastructure like EMP, the looming recession, their inability to pass an actual budget: the crap they’re supposed to be doing.
I hope DJT knows what he’s doing here and appoints someone noted for honesty (not that lefties will be satisfied).
#3, Cas’ point is irrelevant because there is no evidence & fishing expeditions that exist solely to bolster a false narrative of collusion with Russia – are without merit. Hoping something will be dredged up during a fishing expedition, if you’re at the upper levels of our government, is dishonorable & juvenile. In other words, pathetic.
To address Jeff’s post. It’s a worthy experiment & one that the President & even his Deputy Press Secy have put forth today. It all points to the uselessness of this Russia probe. Except that Russia didn’t hack the election, they [might] have meddled [it’s unclear & the FBI cannot know] by leaking emails that were exposed by Wikileaks. The reason why, as Cas puts it, people [some] are all riled up is that all this supersedes the Left’s false narratives on a Russia probe. They’ve got nothing else at this time to attack Trump with so of course they are going to attempt to spin things to pretend they’re upset, thereby setting the talking points for Lib civilians to ponder & vomit out in threads far & wide.
Those on the Right comment, attack & defend from a perspective of fact, stability & various degrees of conservative thought. A much different perspective than the social experiments, which change every decade, of the Left. There is no comparison.
It depends. It could be that Flynn doesn’t want to walk into a witch hunt. Or that he is asking to be treated like Hillary’s crew would be treated (Comey handed lots of them immunity for little good reason).
We’d have to get specific about what laws. And what evidence. Remember, it’s normal for foreign agents to cultivate relationships with key U.S. citizens across the political spectrum. If the Russian ambassador wasn’t trying to talk to Flynn (and to Flynn’s Hillary counterpart, etc.) then he wasn’t doing his job.
And there is evidence of Hillary campaign officials (one or both of the Podestas, I forget exactly) doing business with Russians and taking large amounts of money and failing to register/report things properly. Not to mention the Clinton Foundation’s corrupt pay-for-play dealings with foreigners. As double standards are a classic sign of a witch hunt, we should be sure to avoid them.
I expect that just made you go “Huh?” – Clinton Foundation corruption is one of those things that conservatives tend to know and find astounding and appalling, while non-conservatives tend to have never believed it or heard of it.
And trying…and trying…and trying. When does it end? Believe me, if Trump & co did something seriously wrong, I’ll acknowledge it. (I was never a Trump supporter.) But so little has been found, after so long, that I will be surprised as well.
I’m not the first to point out that Congress has its own probes into these matters, which will continue along with the FBI probe. If something is wrong, let’s find it. But let’s not make stuff up. Let’s not witch hunt. At some point – a point which I think is coming pretty soon, if it hasn’t arrived already – the best thing for America will be for everyone to say “OK, there really is nothing here” – and end it.
Indeed. Which makes it a double standard when Republican presidents are criticized for doing the same.
Agree. To put it more precisely, I hope he appoints someone who is actually honest – and tough enough to handle all the people who are going to call him dishonest anyway.
When I read Rosenstein’s memo, what sold me was the range (bipartisan) of senior Justice Dept types who were willing to slam Comey’s actions. It made me go “Whoa. I hadn’t realized how far out of line Comey was. But now I can see it. DOJ people have standards of professionalism and Comey is rightly vilified, in that culture.”
Regardless of what *other* reasons may have played into Trump’s decision (or not), the Rosenstein memo offers *sufficient* reasons for firing Comey. In other words, other reasons (if any) almost don’t matter. It’s like, when you fire the abusive alcoholic schoolteacher, who cares if you also once had a fight with him over your Rolling Stones memorabilia?
To be precise: They’ve got plenty else to attack Trump with, except it’s policy stuff, which is icky because then you have to be reasonable and persuasive and grownup. They would rather dramatize and emote. They still fantasize about reliving Watergate and scoring a super knockout blow that reverses the 2016 election.
I agree with what Cas and RSG wrote.
The left has its share of deranged reactions, but the ongoing ineptitude and endless gaffes of this administration are pretty unfortunate and embarrassing.
I still would have preferred Crooked Hillary over this guy. She surely would be covering up and messing up too if her past record is any indication (we can only speak in hypotheticals), but I heavily doubt to this degree. And, if I’m being honest, I probably wouldn’t be as embarrassed/frustrated with her. But, I wouldn’t be defending her missteps either, or downright ignoring them.
Three more years of Trump? No thanks. Not if he doesn’t turn a corner. And based on his personality, idiotic comments, etc, I highly doubt that is going to happen.
Bill C fired his FBI director the day before Vince Foster was killed
Oh, I saw that on Hot Air too. Yeah, the death that two Congressional investigations (one led by a Republican), the police, DOJ, FBI, the coroner, and Ken Starr concluded was a suicide. Sure. And 9/11 was an inside job.
Go take your meds.
Hi ILoveCapitalism,
I apologize for not writing back sooner, but I just wanted a couple of days to see what else would emerge about Comey. I understand your desire to see the investigation over, I really do, but in order for that to happen, there would have to be a full airing of what has been going on. How likely is that when the Republicans control Congress and have no interest in looking at anything. The main reason that there is any energy behind this activity to discover connections is because of the strange behavior of the President who contradicts the story that his Press team puts out after having arranged cover for his actions with R’s memo. That got blown to bits didn’t it, and the guy who did it was the President. And his subsequent behavior publicly tweeting about the possibility of “taping” Comey and releasing it if Comey says different from the President is bizarre.
The GOOD news is that we can get a clearer picture of what is going on now that Comey is a private citizen, and can be a tad more free about what he can comment on. And he has said he will be happy to tell us ALL publicly, what has been going on (National Security concerns respected, of course!). That should help bring your desire for closure closer to reality. Republicans could demonstrate the bankruptcy of Comey’s position and can put the whole controversy to rest by showing the investigation to be nothing but hot air, given your assumption that it lacks a proper foundation. Republican senators should call his bluff, and summon him to testify publicly and then everyone will be able to see how silly he was to ask for more resources…