• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Trump Fires Comey....

The Big Dog said:
"No there is no distinction because "Hillary's handling of the email scandal" directly substantively caused the public's reaction to the scandal."

tell me what part of that crystal clear, unmistakably definitive answer you are having trouble with.
Click to expand...
I hope you don't mind me jumping in here. Those words give me trouble. Can you say more?
 
SezMe said:
I hope you don't mind me jumping in here. Those words give me trouble. Can you say more?
Click to expand...

Sure, handling was part of a quote and in that usage includes things like her repeatedly changing her story, aka, lying about it.

which directly caused and substantively caused the public's reaction
 
The Big Dog said:
DOJ is claiming that Comey's claim that he asked for more money and resources for the Russian investigation is 100% false.

interesting....
Click to expand...
Lets see...

We've got multiple major media outlets all reporting that a request for more resources took place. We've also got officials associated with congress that say requests were made.

On the other hand, from what I can see the "spokesman" saying that no request was made seems to be Ian Prior, who has only been with the DOJ for a month or 2. (So he came to the office after Trump was elected, and has served as Session's mouthpiece in the past.)

Given the amount (and quality) of evidence as presented on both sides, I think that it much more likely that Comey asked for the resources, and that Prior is just trying to cover up.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/was...-more-resources-for-1494434774-htmlstory.html

https://ballotpedia.org/Ian_Prior
 
The Big Dog said:
Can I borrow your rather patronizing style? I understand your OPINION is that there was no "actual content of the scandal - was there any wrondoing in her handling of emails."

Your opinion is of course objectively wrong, of course.
Click to expand...

In your opinion, of course...

BobTheCoward said:
Hacked voter databases: that isn't election wrongdoing. They could be hacked for reasons other than the election (identity theft). Hacking the databases with intent to alter the election is election wrongdoing.
Click to expand...

25 of them with at least 4 known to be penetrated? And there certainly hasn't been any investigation that we know of to establish their non-effect on the election. At a bare minimum they are grounds to call it's legitimacy into question.

Unsecured voting machines: Every unlocked doors is not evidence that a robbery took place.
Click to expand...

We've known since the early-mid 2000s that EVMs are vulnerable to hacking/rigging and that has been PROVEN by an independent investigation conducted in part by Senator Zel Miller.

http://www.hackingdemocracy.com/

Also I'll refer you to the special election in GA's 6th District recently. Voter identification machines were stolen from several polling places in Fulton County, and a memory card that "didn't scan correctly" on the first pass went missing for some time. When found and re-scanned, Jon Ossoff's margin of victory in a VERY heavily Democratic area dropped below the 50% needed to outright win, forcing a runoff.

http://www.ajc.com/news/local-govt-...unty-election-results/ehE7L8HRHXaJwMbmNYCMwL/

http://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/249413136-story

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/18/new-details-emerge-in-theft-ga-voting-machines.html

I was following the FB coverage of Ossoff that night, and the official reports don't really begin to cover the irregularities that commenters were reporting. Fulton Co has apparently a long history of "dodgy" election issues.
 
Segnosaur said:
Lets see...

We've got multiple major media outlets all reporting that a request for more resources took place. We've also got officials associated with congress that say requests were made.

On the other hand, from what I can see the "spokesman" saying that no request was made seems to be Ian Prior, who has only been with the DOJ for a month or 2. (So he came to the office after Trump was elected, and has served as Session's mouthpiece in the past.)

Given the amount (and quality) of evidence as presented on both sides, I think that it much more likely that Comey asked for the resources, and that Prior is just trying to cover up.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/was...-more-resources-for-1494434774-htmlstory.html

https://ballotpedia.org/Ian_Prior
Click to expand...

I assume you misunderstood. They are reporting that Comey said he asked for more money and resources.

The DOJ is not disputing that he said it, they are saying he did not ask for it.
 
The Big Dog said:
I assume you misunderstood. They are reporting that Comey said he asked for more money and resources.

The DOJ is not disputing that he said it, they are saying he did not ask for it.
Click to expand...

wnfyyiakckla7hs0ptqb.jpg
 
sts60 said:
Well, I'm sure there was a U.S. flag there as well, just not in that particular shot. But the sequence perfectly captured the contempt for Western democracy held by Putin's merry mob, and endorsed by Tillerson and Trump and the rest of their corrupt, kleptocratic gang.

You may share their viewpoint, or you may just be too concerned with jabbing at them libruls to notice. I don't really care; your posturing and concern trolling don't interest me. What does is the subversion of America's democracy and institutions by a hostile foreign power, and the active and passive enabling of it by a host of corrupt participants and useful idiots.
Click to expand...
Who would have ever guessed that conservative Republicans who included members of the John Birch Society and cut their political teeth fighting the "Red Menace" would later be happy - if not eager - to get in bed with them? It's a stunning turn of events.
 
SezMe said:
Who would have ever guessed that conservative Republicans who included members of the John Birch Society and cut their political teeth fighting the "Red Menace" would later be happy - if not eager - to get in bed with them? It's a stunning turn of events.
Click to expand...

They hate Democrats even more, it seems.
 
The Big Dog said:
Sure, handling was part of a quote and in that usage includes things like her repeatedly changing her story, aka, lying about it.

which directly caused and substantively caused the public's reaction
Click to expand...

As you might expect, I disagree. Whether Clinton changed her story or not, the reason she had to keep talking about it was the incessant drip-drip-drip of email leaks from Wikileaks (read: Russians). The whole thing would have been a non-issue had that not taken place. Of course, Comey did yeoman service in assisting that dripping.
 
C_Felix said:
snip
Click to expand...

The New York times is reporting that Comey told the Congress that he asked for more money and resources.

The DOJ is not denying that he told Congress that. they are denying that Comey asked Rosenstein for more money or more resources for the Russia investigation

pretty simple.
 
The Big Dog said:
I assume you misunderstood. They are reporting that Comey said he asked for more money and resources.
Click to expand...
Uhh, no.

From: http://www.latimes.com/politics/was...-more-resources-for-1494434774-htmlstory.html
Comey met last week with Rod Rosenstein, the new deputy attorney general, and asked for both money and personnel to pursue the Russia probe, according to two officials
...

One Democratic congressional aide said the request was for a “significant increase in resources.”


Notice there? Its not Comey saying "I asked for more resources". There are Multiple people (who are not Comey) who have said they were privy to Comey asking for more resources.


In other words, the evidence points it it happening as described. Comey asks for more resources, then Trump fires him.



The DOJ is not disputing that he said it, they are saying he did not ask for it.
Click to expand...
Which means that the DOJ spokesman who is disputing what was said is likely a lying sack of crap.
 
SezMe said:
As you might expect, I disagree. Whether Clinton changed her story or not, the reason she had to keep talking about it was the incessant drip-drip-drip of email leaks from Wikileaks (read: Russians). The whole thing would have been a non-issue had that not taken place. Of course, Comey did yeoman service in assisting that dripping.
Click to expand...

wikileaks was releasing Podesta's emails, not Clintons.
 
uke2se said:
It's not justified in the context in which it happened. Trump applauded Comey's actions. Also, that was almost a year ago. Firing Comey now is almost certainly not about his handling of the Clinton affair. Therefore, this does more than make Trump look bad. It makes it look like the safeguards of democracy in the US are under attack, and Congress is doing nothing about it.
Click to expand...
Oh, I agree this wasn't about Clinton. But I see the timing as a plus. The safeguards of democracy in the U.S. were already under attack before Comey was fired. IMO it's a good thing Trump's timing looks so bad.

Comey wasn't the only guy in the FBI investigating Russia ties. There are still career prosecutors who have an interest in pursuing Trump ties to Russia. Unfortunately, IMO, the Russia thing is a wild goose chase. Trump publicly called on Russia to interfere in the election process. It was on TV. What can investigators find that's worse?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom