Merged Trump Fires Comey....

logger said:
The leaks are felonies?
Click to expand...

How could it be a felony for Wittes to tell a reporter what his friend (Comey) told him over lunch? Nothing that Comey said was covered by confidentiality laws or security classifications.

What law do you think might be broken here or in the case of leaks regarding Comey's memos?
 
phiwum said:
Fair enough. I was hoping that we'd see one or more of the memos.
Click to expand...

I'm a little surprised that we haven't seen at least the leaked memo yet. It will be interesting to see what all is covered in his notes.
 
xjx388 said:
I'm a little surprised that we haven't seen at least the leaked memo yet. It will be interesting to see what all is covered in his notes.
Click to expand...

It's possible that the recipients of the memo think that providing it to the press is one step too far. I reckon Congress will see this and other relevant memos and we might get more details, even if we never see the verbatim text.
 
theprestige said:
And yet here you are.
Click to expand...

Yes, that was indeed part of Noah's point.

One wouldn't say, "Believe me, I'd rather not be doing X," if one is not doing X.

Believe me, I'd rather not be explaining such basic concepts of communication.
 
PhantomWolf said:
.....
As such Trump and any apparent Obstruction of Justice was not covered by this question, nor by the way Comey answered it. So yeah you're wrong.
Click to expand...

That's quite a bit of effort to explain a concept that very few people need explained only to find it wasted as the posts are predictably relocated.
 
Bob001 said:
Do you really not get it? The Director of the FBI is not supposed to be on anybody's "team," and there are established procedures by which a President may inquire about an FBI investigation in those limited circumstances when it might be appropriate. Attempting to influence -- let alone shut down -- a federal investigation is way more than a "whole lotta nuthin."
Click to expand...

Well, to be honest, they should be on the American people's team.
 
BobTheCoward said:
I disagree.
Click to expand...

Then you're misguided and misinformed. In the US, we never take oaths to any individual, team or side, but the nation as a whole and it's guiding principles.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

In addition members of the judiciary take the following oath.

I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as (office) under the Constitution and laws of the United States. [So help me God.

Asking otherwise is un-American.
 
acbytesla said:
Then you're misguided and misinformed. In the US, we never take oaths to any individual, team or side, but the nation as a whole and it's guiding principles.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

In addition members of the judiciary take the following oath.

I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as (office) under the Constitution and laws of the United States. [So help me God.

Asking otherwise is un-American.
Click to expand...

Oaths are not magic. They have no power to limit the actions of the sweater, or hold institutions from diverging from the oath. An institution can operate one way and still administer an oath that is completely incongruent with it.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Oaths are not magic. They have no power to limit the actions of the sweater, or hold institutions from diverging from the oath. An institution can operate one way and still administer an oath that is completely incongruent with it.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of people who do take an oath serious. Hitler had military officers take an oath of loyalty to him personally, and reportedly, many had a moral problem breaking that oath. So, there you have a very good reason against oaths to a person, rather than to the institutions of state, and that makes Trumps request to Comey of personal loyalty the more odious.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Oaths are not magic. They have no power to limit the actions of the sweater, or hold institutions from diverging from the oath. An institution can operate one way and still administer an oath that is completely incongruent with it.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. But that's not the point. Our loyalty is not to individuals or the team but to the nation and it's principles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom