Director Comey FIRED!!!

[2A_Tom]

So now we Know that Comey is a P***y.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...th-found-way-alicia-shepard-column/102667250/

New York Times Contributor: Comey's Testimony Like a Sexual Harassment Victim's

 

[Kutnupe14]

Classy

 

[Route 45]

No, leaking implies an illegal action... at least IMO, and considering what this administration has called "leaks" thus far. This is more of an instance of whistleblowing, where the information is able to be released to the public without legal consequences.

Did Comey Commit a Federal Crime When He Leaked Notes of Trump Meeting to the Media? Legal Expert Says Yes

 

[jamil]

I've always thought that stuff was kind of privileged. I don't think very highly of executive privilege. But if we're gonna have it, it should be applied evenly. We can't just say it doesn't apply only when we think the executive is extra poopy. And, for no more than we got out of all those hours of testimony, I don't think it's worth all the coverage.

 

[Fargo]

Did Comey Commit a Federal Crime When He Leaked Notes of Trump Meeting to the Media? Legal Expert Says Yes

Mmmmm, you're talking about a copy of an unclassified record so I think it is a bit of a stretch to say that that statute would apply. That said, for an executive branch the law enforcement officer to leak privileged internal documents to the media with the stated intent of influencing an open investigation is in my opinion both a violation of his duties, his oath of office, and not a constitutionally protected act.

What really kills me about this is that Comey's attempts to influence the investigation probably constitute obstruction of justice moreso than the Preident's directives to his employee. I don't think either is legally sufficient, but I do find it pretty ironic.

 

[T.Lex]

Mmmmm, you're talking about a copy of an unclassified record so I think it is a bit of a stretch to say that that statute would apply. That said, for an executive branch the law enforcement officer to leak privileged internal documents to the media with the stated intent of influencing an open investigation is in my opinion both a violation of his duties, his oath of office, and not a constitutionally protected act.

What really kills me about this is that Comey's attempts to influence the investigation probably constitute obstruction of justice moreso than the Preident's directives to his employee. I don't think either is legally sufficient, but I do find it pretty ironic.

That's a good point.

Petards point both ways.

Wait.

Not really.

Well, some of them do.

Never mind.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

That sounds a bit petarded.

[SUB]*sound of sirens in the distance, approaching*[/SUB]

oh no it's the ingo language police

[sub]*siren grows louder*[/sub]

/exits thread

 

[T.Lex]

That sounds a bit petarded.

[SUB]*sound of sirens in the distance, approaching*[/SUB]

oh no it's the ingo language police

[SUB]*siren grows louder*[/SUB]

/exits thread

I would tell you to retard your speed instead of slow your roll, but it just sounds ostentatious.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I would tell you to retard your speed instead of slow your roll, but it just sounds ostentatious.

Won't that make him go faster? Remember Spaceballs? The ship passed ridiculous speed on the way to ludicrous speed, so it seems that the more retarded it becomes, the faster it goes.

 

[indiucky]

I would tell you to retard your speed instead of slow your roll, but it just sounds ostentatious.

Do Whuuuutttt????

 

[indiucky]

Won't that make him go faster? Remember Spaceballs? The ship passed ridiculous speed on the way to ludicrous speed, so it seems that the more retarded it becomes, the faster it goes.

So what are you Colonel Sanders...Chicken????

 

[IndyDave1776]

So what are you Colonel Sanders...Chicken????

 

[T.Lex]

Won't that make him go faster? Remember Spaceballs? The ship passed ridiculous speed on the way to ludicrous speed, so it seems that the more retarded it becomes, the faster it goes.

Bwahaha forgot about that element of one of the masterpieces of American cinema.

 

[miguel]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

TASS: Russian Politics & Diplomacy - Putin ready to provide political asylum to former FBI director

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

p.s. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

 

[Kutnupe14]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

TASS: Russian Politics & Diplomacy - Putin ready to provide political asylum to former FBI director

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

p.s. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

You do know, that this probably is the last thing the Trump team needs, right? Putin trolling Comey, and thus (by default) attempting to help Trump? Yeah, this won't quiet any of the accusations the president is currently trying to fend off.

 

[rob63]

You do know, that this probably is the last thing the Trump team needs, right? Putin trolling Comey, and thus (by default) attempting to help Trump? Yeah, this won't quiet any of the accusations the president is currently trying to fend off.

Ummm... there isn't anything that will quiet any of the accusations. Truth or fiction is irrelevant to the crowd floating them.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Ummm... there isn't anything that will quiet any of the accusations. Truth or fiction is irrelevant to the crowd floating them.

Equally true for the other side of the coin.

 

[rob63]

Equally true for the other side of the coin.

I don't disagree, but it is also irrelevant to whether what Putin does makes any difference to the accusations about Trump.

I thought you were the one always preaching that it isn't ok just because the other side does it, did I have that wrong?

Interesting article, from someone that is hardly a Trump fan:
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/06/14/navarrette-trump-prosecutors-are-going-off-the-rails/

 

[Route 45]

I thought you were the one always preaching that it isn't ok just because the other side does it, did I have that wrong?

Fake news.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I don't disagree, but it is also irrelevant to whether what Putin does makes any difference to the accusations about Trump.

I thought you were the one always preaching that it isn't ok just because the other side does it, did I have that wrong?

Interesting article, from someone that is hardly a Trump fan:
Navarrette: Trump prosecutors have gone off the rails

Yeah, you got it wrong. You made an unsubstantiated claim based in opinion; whereas the instances I cite are based on very specific, factual issues. In such cases where opinion is interjected, and a generalization implied. I am free to insert a competing statement to weaken that opinion.