Merged Trump Fires Comey....

[ChristianProgressive]

You are confused. The President's orders are executed through the chain of command, but nobody has the authority to countermand or veto him. Your "two-man rule" applies in missile silos and submarines, not the White House. The President can literally end the world on a whim.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...les-nukes-button-launch-foreign-policy-213955


http://www.businessinsider.com/president-nuke-option-requires-no-permission-2017-4

Formally, you are correct, but there are several steps in that process where the president can be checked. First, authentication requires the confirmation of a cabinet member, with the Sec Def at the top of the list. He cannot be compelled to confirm the order, nor can any member of the cabinet. In addition, the Joint Chiefs (who are bound by the laws of war under the Geneva Convention) have to agree to transmit the order to the missile controllers and they cannot be compelled to do so.

There is an excellent discussion of this topic on Quora

https://www.quora.com/If-the-US-Pre...s-a-first-strike-attack-could-anyone-stop-him

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I consider the Rosenstein memo to be sincere because it lays out the case for Comey's errors in a correct (as far as I can tell) and detailed manner. The only thing that doesn't make sense is the date.

[Tin foil hat warning!]

Did he write that memo contemporaneously but someone changed the date to May of this year then forward it to Sessions as the cover Trump needed for the firing? Makes as much sense as other aspects of this mess.

News rumors I scanned this morning say the letter did not recommend firing and that's why Sessions had to contribute his input.

Not going to bother sourcing this until it becomes more than the latest rumor.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Ah, so you weren't asking a question, you were very sleazily trying to make a (very silly) point. JAQing off, as it were.

Yep. I'll sit this one out.

What are you talking about? I explicitly said whatever my opinion on the issue is, I have an independent interest in wanting to accurately describe other people's viewpoints. That is why I'm asking for other people's viewpoints.

I mean really, if I didn't understand how people view right and wrong, wouldn't asking why people review a specific event as wrong be a good place to start?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Nope. Look up "2-man" rule. No president has the sole authority to order a strike and see that it is carried out. And even if he has a second cabinet member to back him, it still has to go through the joint chiefs down to the lesser commanders. The president (even with cabinet approval) cannot give a direct order to forces.

It only applies to levels below the president. The assumption is that it is, but all those precautions are about it being a valid order from the president there is no legal block to the president launching any preemptive nuclear strikes he so chooses. The secretary of defense can try to talk him out of it, but at the end of the day they will follow the perfectly legal orders.

See

http://www.radiolab.org/story/nukes/

 

[BobTheCoward]

News rumors I scanned this morning say the letter did not recommend firing and that's why Sessions had to contribute his input.

Not going to bother sourcing this until it becomes more than the latest rumor.

The letter reads like it recommends firing. Is the rumor that his letter was doctored?

 

[varwoche]

ABC News is reporting that Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein was close to resigning over having the decision to fire Comey pinned on him by the White House talking heads.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/deputy-ag...t-over-wh-112329706--abc-news-topstories.html

Greetings fellow skimmer.

 

[ChristianProgressive]

Breaking: Acting Directo McCabe in Congressional testimony going on right now:

"We consider it [Trump investigation] to be a highly significant investigation."

and, (when asked whether it's true FBI rank-and-file had lost confidence in Comey)

"No sir, that is not accurate."

 

[TraneWreck]

What are you talking about? I explicitly said whatever my opinion on the issue is, I have an independent interest in wanting to accurately describe other people's viewpoints. That is why I'm asking for other people's viewpoints.

You do have access to google, yes? How about you channel this "sincere" desire to learn into some actual effort on your part instead of pretending to ask questions while advancing your typical goofy position?

 

[ChristianProgressive]

It only applies to levels below the president. The assumption is that it is, but all those precautions are about it being a valid order from the president there is no legal block to the president launching any preemptive nuclear strikes he so chooses. The secretary of defense can try to talk him out of it, but at the end of the day they will follow the perfectly legal orders.

See

http://www.radiolab.org/story/nukes/

As I said above, while there is no legal reason why he cannot order it, the order must be confirmed at several points in the chain and that is not automatic.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You're right, they're not but then again Trump still has 80%+ approval ratings among GOP supporters. Is there reason to suppose that older white GOP supporters may not turn out in 2018 ?

I'm not sure you realize that this country has a substantial population who call themselves independent. While they may not be as independent as they believe because they tend to vote with one party or the other consistently, they are not included in those GOP polls you speak of.

What you are seeing is 80% of 30%, not 80% of 50%.

 

[BobTheCoward]

You do have access to google, yes? How about you channel this "sincere" desire to learn into some actual effort on your part instead of pretending to ask questions while advancing your typical goofy position?

I'm not advancing my position. When you asked something about advancing my position, I said I wasn't going to give my position as it doesn't matter to hearing other people's positions.

And I am googling and reading other stuff. But I post here cause I actually like you people. So to the extent you are willing to engage and provide links, I actually like that interaction.

 

[acbytesla]

So is there a good piece on why this is wrong? I'm having trouble understanding a reason. I don't mean disagree with it. I definitely think this was a bad decision and it is an example of the garbage why I hate the guy. But there seems to be attacks that this is a fundamental violation of the office.

Presidents are elected to exercise the power of the executive branch. Trump did so. What is the problem?

ETA: Yes, I know this is a weird question. I want to be able to pass the ideological turing test and I know I can't on this issue.

There is a difference between exercising power to protect the nation's interests and wielding it for yourself. This is why there is a system of checks and balances. We elect a president not a king. The position is not intended to be all powerful. There are limitations.

I would hope that anyone that is incompetent would be let go as that truly serves the nation. But that doesn't look like what was done here. It appears as if Comey was let go because he refused to be partial to the President.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Given that they just gave a blogger a 3-1/2-year prison sentence (suspended) for using a smartphone in a church, you can remove that question mark.

Link please, this makes little sense.

 

[TraneWreck]

I'm not advancing my position. When you asked something about advancing my position, I said I wasn't going to give my position as it doesn't matter to hearing other people's positions.

And I am googling and reading other stuff. But I post here cause I actually like you people. So to the extent you are willing to engage and provide links, I actually like that interaction.

The disingenuous nature of this statement is manifest in the 20 preceding pages of people explaining why they find the firing troubling.

 

[newyorkguy]

John Yang on the PBS Newshour quoted a White House staffer as saying when the Comey firing was suddenly announced, and the stunned reactions starting rolling in, the White House was thrown into chaos. Yang said they told him, "It was chaos, even by our standards."

But I must say, living in New York and having had a front row seat to the various adventures of Donald Trump over the past thirty-five years, this all seems very familiar.

 

[Belz...]

Ah, so you weren't asking a question, you were very sleazily trying to make a (very silly) point. JAQing off, as it were.

Yep. I'll sit this one out.

Gosh, would someone please look up that term? "Just asking questions" was a rhetorical device to present plausible deniability for one's accusatory questions e.g. "Did president Bush order the murder of 3000 Americans on 9/11? We don't know. We're just asking questions!" when we know it wasn't a question at all.

Asking a question for the question's sake, although annoying, isn't JAQing off at all.

 

[ponderingturtle]

As I said above, while there is no legal reason why he cannot order it, the order must be confirmed at several points in the chain and that is not automatic.

All by people who do not have the authority to countermand it. They would have to illegally violate their oaths of service and lie to do so. And in the nuclear command system they are all screened very very thoroughly so that they will not do that.

There is a proposed law giving the need for someone else to support the use of nuclear weapons in a preemptive strike but as it stands you are basing your position on "these people would go against everything they are screened and trained to do, to violate the law, to stop the president from exorcising his legal authority".

 

[superfreddy]

Link please, this makes little sense.

Here it is. A Pokemon player, not a blogger

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...onvicted-playing-pokemon-go-church/101541958/

ETA: I guess he is considered a blogger.

 

[BobTheCoward]

There is a difference between exercising power to protect the nation's interests and wielding it for yourself. This is why there is a system of checks and balances. We elect a president not a king. The position is not intended to be all powerful. There are limitations.

I would hope that anyone that is incompetent would be let go as that truly serves the nation. But that doesn't look like what was done here. It appears as if Comey was let go because he refused to be partial to the President.

Inside that power and inside those limitations is firing the FBI director without cause. I understand being angry that it is exercising that power for personal gain, but how does that extend to the sense that this is violating limitations?

 

[Babbylonian]

Link please, this makes little sense.

Okay, but it still won't make any sense...

http://gizmodo.com/russian-blogger-sentenced-to-3-5-years-in-prison-for-pl-1795116915