So he doesn't serve at Trumps pleasure? Sally Yates was the Acting AG and she got shitcanned. If Trump wants Rosenstein or Sessions to ask to terminate his job, he can. This is the point I'm getting at. The president has always had this ability, only Nixon and now Trump have used executive power to this level. Clinton fired the FBI director after an ethics investigation showed he was skimming money from the FBI so that isn't really comparable here. I still maintain that although Comey definitely deserved to be fired he should've been untouchable until the investigation was either over or an independent investigator had been assigned to it.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Trump Fires James Comey
- Thread starter whyamihere
- Start date
- Status
Aaronology
Member
That 1) Trump has the authority to do this and 2) Comey has erred in the past do not at all exclude this from also being "some executive power grab." The timing and context of this firing is absolutely suspect and concluding there is no underhanded motive(s) at play seems rather premature and even a little silly given we're talking about Donald Trump and his adminstration. They have done little of note that has not been underhanded.
"But he has the power to do this" seems like an incredibly flimsy position to take, to boot, given how many other actions this could apply to in the last 100+ days.
There was also no precedent for Comey's behavior during the election, or his continued fucking up when speaking publicly about that behavior. We've been living through many unprecedented things over the last 2 years concerning our politics and our leaders.
Also, to be fair to Jeff Sessions, he recused himself from any DoJ investigations into the actions of Russia during the 2016 election. That does not mean he can no longer have an opinion on who's heading the FBI. Rosenstein also recommended his termination.
And yet there was no internal ethics investigations into Comey's actions. You know, the precedent set for firing an FBI Director.
Doctoglethorpe
Member
"I'm sorry, bigotry is a preexisting condition."
SJurgenson
Banned
You're right. Firing the #1 guy in charge of said investigation is definitely not interfering in that investigation.
SuperEpicMan
Banned
Fixed that for you.
BoogieWoogie
Banned
McConnell still slimeball. News at 11.
tedrotheredro
Member
Since Comey announced an investigation into Trump? Hell no.
No?
Surely the timing is suspect, but until any potential investigation were completed it would always be suspect.
You're mistaking my position however, what you quoted just says "this isn't an executive power grab" which is clearly true considering he already has the power to do this. He is not overreaching. This wasn't an independant special investigator that he fired.
This is all regardless of his actual motivations and the repercussions of the firing, which I discussed in that same post but you declined to take into account when responding.
RPGCrazied
Member
5 months ago. He waited until the investigations got really hot and do this to stop it.
@benji and Marrec
of course the president has the ability to hire and fire the FBI directory. That is not at issue here. Its the optics of it. It doesnt look good, at all, when the person investigating someone else is fired by that someone else. If you can't see how that isn't exactly a good look, I dont know what to tell you. Also, they can say it was because of the way he handled Hillary's email probe, but last year Trump was praising Comey's investigation.
Its also never happened before, without an investigation.
of course the president has the ability to hire and fire the FBI directory. That is not at issue here. Its the optics of it. It doesnt look good, at all, when the person investigating someone else is fired by that someone else. If you can't see how that isn't exactly a good look, I dont know what to tell you. Also, they can say it was because of the way he handled Hillary's email probe, but last year Trump was praising Comey's investigation.
Its also never happened before, without an investigation.
benjipwns
Banned
Maybe because I don't expect the President, let alone one who is Donald fucking Trump, to do what's good for the country. Considering they have an extensive history of doing the exact opposite.
oh no, not the precious optics
This too.
Back when he messed up during the election? Yes.
Now while he's heading an investigation on Trump's campaign and ties to Russia? No.
lol I love Jake Tapper
I've never said it's a good look, I'm just arguing that we shouldn't lose our minds over this. People going crazy thinking that Trump is circumventing all checks and balances now and that he'll be dictator for life.
It's embarrassing frankly.
Tangentially:
I mean, anything he does that's beyond previous presidential precedent sends people on here into a tizzy so I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but what do people expect by now? That suddenly he's going to do things the way they've always been done?
MiketheBSG
Member
Why is it so hard for Republicans to understand the outrage is over the TIMING of the firing. There is no dispute the Dems wanted Comey fired, it's the timing that is the problem. It's like someone at the GOP gave their members this talking point, and regardless of this explanation, that's what they stick with.
BravesCountry
Banned
During the election? Probably. Things changed when it came to light there was an investigation into Trump and all the ethics implications that came with it.
Theslammer
Member
Notice how Obama never fired him during the initial negotiation and when he sent that letter to Congress in late October. He did it because he didn't want to interfere in an investigation.
This is the third person investigating Trump who he has fired.
January 20th maybe.
Can't give a straight face and say that Trump had Democrats concerns at heart when he made this move May 9th though.
Yeah, that damn CCN.
Reflects our education system as wanted by Republicans.
They're being deliberately obtuse.
This old far right meme always made more sense the other way, but I'd dunno that I would ever invoke it.
digitalrelic
Banned
I just think it's been made clear that our checks and balances don't mean shit when the President can legally fire the person that is investigating him for illegal activity. It doesn't matter if Trump's actions are within our countries legal boundaries. It's corrupt as all hell and people fearing that he's going to attempt to take that next step towards a dictatorship aren't talking crazy talk. It's within the realm of possibility.
Vyse The Legend
Member
They understand it, fully and completely. They are just gaslighting.
If Comey were sitting on some concrete evidence that would really screw Trump, surely firing him and pissing him off would be a bad thing to do right? None of this really makes sense.
No matter what the situation, this president is an idiot. There is no twelve dimensional chess. He's a dipshit through and through. There's no world where this is a smart and well thought through plan by a mastermind.
No matter what the situation, this president is an idiot. There is no twelve dimensional chess. He's a dipshit through and through. There's no world where this is a smart and well thought through plan by a mastermind.
When he is using Jeff Sessions as an excuse- a man who is recused from both Russia and Clinton matters- Trump and his cronies are throwing law, due process, and precedent out the window. It is absolutely the time to panic. Checks and balances mean nothing if law is not followed.
He is literally following the Putin how to take authoritarian control of a government playbook to the letter. Trump is nowhere near as intelligent or ruthless as Putin, so who knows if he can pull it off. But there are clear signs of a dictatorial desire from this administration. People have lots of evidence to be concerned about this.
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
Third person?
Comey isn't some rogue PI who's personally digging up dirt on the nasty man in the White House. As director of the FBI, he was responsible for managing the people who managed multiple ongoing investigations. The investigation into Russia isn't going to sputter and falter because the director was fired. That is why we have an entire Bureau full of competent and capable people who work on these things.
The White House cannot summarily shut down the investigation, as Nixon tried to do, that would be an executive power grab.
SomewhatGroovy
Banned
Yep, as is Fox "News"
Vyse The Legend
Member
Lightning_Roller
Banned
So, can anyone lay this all out in a simple to understand matter?
King Tubby
Member
A new FBI director wouldn't have to shut down the fbi investigation, just hinder/neuter/limit it enough to keep it away from doing any "real" damage to Trump.
As much as you might try to downplay this, the fact remains that the President just interfered with an ongoing investigation into his own potential crimes or those of his subordinates by firing the director of those doing the investigation under extremely flimsy pretext. This absolutely has echoes of Nixon. It is absolutely alarming. And it's the strongest indication yet that the President is afraid of what the Russia investigation will uncover.
As much as you might try to downplay this, the fact remains that the President just interfered with an ongoing investigation into his own potential crimes or those of his subordinates by firing the director of those doing the investigation under extremely flimsy pretext. This absolutely has echoes of Nixon. It is absolutely alarming. And it's the strongest indication yet that the President is afraid of what the Russia investigation will uncover.
They understand perfectly about timing. Republicans raised a bit of hell when Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton met privately on that jet while that whole e-mails mess was going on during the campaign. Some dont care, others are scared shitless of getting replaced by their constituents who see politics and probably everything else as little more than a team sport. This is about winning and holding on to power more than anything else.
McConnell (GOP): Nothing to see here, lets move on
Schumer (Democrats): What administration is doing is dangerous and we need special prosecutor
Amibguous Cad
Member
This and Benji... like, seriously?
You do realize you're undermining norms important for the functioning of democracy in the service of cynicism, right? The only way those norms will be respected is if there is a political price to be paid for violating them, and you cannot exact that political price by saying "yeah, that's Trump, whaddya gonna do?"
They can't do shit about the international intelligence agencies investigations into the matter.
RurouniZel
Asks questions so Ezalc doesn't have to
A pre-existing condition?
UnluckyKate
Member
Pre existing condition unless you are congressman ?
- Status