Former FBI director James Comey has released his prepared remarks for tomorrow before the Senate Intelligence Committee. In the remarks Comey makes it clear that Trump wanted him to get the word out that Trump was not under investigation by the FBI. Is that a smoking gun? I think not. Trump also said he expects loyalty from those working for him. Isn’t that to be expected? Read Comey’s full opening remarks to the Committee here.
President Trump has nominated Christopher Wray, former head of the Justice Department Criminal Division, to replace Comey as the new head of the FBI. Read more about his appointment here. Not surprisingly, Democrats are screaming Trump made the appointment today to deflect from Comey’s testimony tomorrow. Virginia Senator Mark Warner was among the first to whine, here.
This is about one thing, and one thing only, keeping Republicans from using the power they gained at the polls during the past few election cycles. Democrats, having lost basically everything there is to lose, are now resorting to extreme measures to stop Republican voters from getting what they want. Democrats are using the courts for the same purpose. It isn’t enough for Republicans to win Congress, state legislatures, the Presidency, etc, to get what they want … because no matter what, Democrats will always use whatever methods they can to subvert the will of the people when what the people want doesn’t agree with their plans. That is what this is about.
The judiciary has been co-opted otherwise Trump’s ban would not have been forced to the Supreme Court for resolution.
The story here is about the blowhard in chief continually undercutting DOJ lawyers trying to defend his indefensible total ban of one religion by tweeting the opposite of what his lawyers are saying in court.
There is no prohibition against banning any one or any group to protect the interests of the American citizenry. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 banned by race and nationality. The 1917 immigration actbanned by literacy. The 1924 immigration act banned most of the world and only provided quotas for some favored groups. This idea that Muslims can’t be banned is a fiction of the left.
Wrong, Warmac999. As wrong as you can possibly be. We formed this country as a response to religious discrimination. It is the essence of our people that we reject discrimination based on religion.
If you truly believe what you wrote, you are beyond hope, devoid of any understanding of our nation and its formation. Race and nationality are not precedents that accommodate or tolerate discrimination based on belief.
From the beginning of the Republic, the value of religion was questioned. Here is the response to Thomas Payne by Ben Franklin when Payne attacked the religious foundation of the country.
TO THOMAS PAINE.
I have read your manuscript with some attention. By the argument it contains against a particular Providence, though you allow a general Providence, you strike at the foundations of all religion. For without the belief of a Providence, that takes cognizance of, guards, and guides, and may favor particular persons, there is no motive to worship a Deity, to fear his displeasure, or to pray for his protection. I will not enter into any discussion of your principles, though you seem to desire it. At present I shall only give you my opinion, that, though your reasonings are subtile and may prevail with some readers, you will not succeed so as to change the general sentiments of mankind on that subject, and the consequence of printing this piece will be, a great deal of odium drawn upon yourself, mischief to you, and no benefit to others. He that spits against the wind, spits in his own face.
But, were you to succeed, do you imagine any good would be done by it? You yourself may find it easy to live a virtuous life, without the assistance afforded by religion; you having a clear perception of the advantages of virtue, and the disadvantages of vice, and possessing a strength of resolution sufficient to enable you to resist common temptations. But think how great a portion of mankind consists of weak and ignorant men and women, and of inexperienced, inconsiderate youth of both sexes, who have need of the motives of religion to restrain them from vice, to support their virtue, and retain them in the practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great point for its security. And perhaps you are indebted to her originally, that is, to your religious education, for the habits of virtue upon which you now justly value yourself. You might easily display your excellent talents of reasoning upon a less hazardous subject, and thereby obtain a rank with our most distinguished authors. For among us it is not necessary, as among the Hottentots, that a youth, to be raised into the company of men, should prove his manhood by beating his mother.
I would advise you, therefore, not to attempt unchaining the tiger, but to burn this piece before it is seen by any other person; whereby you will save yourself a great deal of mortification by the enemies it may raise against you, and perhaps a good deal of regret and repentance. If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be if without it. I intend this letter itself as a proof of my friendship, and therefore add no professions to it; but subscribe simply yours,
You assume Islam is a religion, I do not. I know of no other religion that is as political as Islam and enforces its laws with such draconian measures. I no of no other religion that would establish a government such as a theocratic caliphate. I no of no other religion that is inherently violent and militaristic, and kills or enslaves people indiscriminately.
Yes, hundreds of years ago, wars of conquest involved other religions. But only islam has that distinction today.
Islam is a religion. You are simply playing rhetorical games again, further discrediting real conservatives. You are fulfilling your function, Warmac9999, sowing war among conservatives.
1. the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc., that guides an individual, social movement, institution, class, or large group.
2. such a body of doctrine, myth, etc., with reference to some political and social plan, as that of fascism, along with the devices for putting it into operation.
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
You reap what you sow. Republicans taught Democrats this lesson, now you suffer under its yoke. Welcome to the world you wrought. It is completely dysfunctional.
The curious case of James Comey: Part 2
After listening to the hearings this AM, I found a couple of things additionally curious.
First, why did Comey without ever having met Trump decide he was a liar. If you look at the campaign, both candidates lied their respective rear ends off with the only one exposed being Clinton thanks to wikileaks and project veritas. Who prompted Comey to make such an assumption?
Second, and it was the sad spectacle of John McCain who somehow stumbled onto the right question. If Russia’s influence in the election is so disturbing, why aren’t both the Clinton and Trump campaigns part of the investigation? Comey dismissed Clinton in July 2016 yet the investigation into Russian meddling continues today. Comey had no reasonable answer for the prejudicial focus on the Trump campaign.
Of course, we now know that Comey leaked information to a friend. somewhat of a revelation but not really. It does go to his credibility and, possibly, criminal behavior but the leaks have been coming from the investigation and intelligence area for a number of months. The fact that Lynch tried to squash the investigation into Clinton isnt something that I find particular curious as it was obvious that something liked it had happened when the director of the FBI took the role of Attorney General.
I’m embarrassed for the media, more so because it’s seemingly impossible for them to be embarrassed for themselves. It is a circus, with all the usual clowns. Never in my life have I seen the media fabricate so much out of so little, this entire situation is spun from pocket lint and news anchor’s farts. I cannot believe this nonsense has become as absurd as it has, it would be funny if it weren’t so pathetic.
Worse, the people who are waving fingers and dancing around this media masterpiece have no idea that they look like a village full of village idiots and that the average American is watching in disbelief. These “reporters” and their week long countdown have created a paper mache Punch and Judy style castle for Comey’s testimony today, and launched the whole creation over the shark. Unbelievable. Purple clouds and pixie dust.
It’s off the charts.
It sorta started with with the over throw of Egypt and Libya (Israel and the US, with an assist from Facebook) which led to Benghazi, which led to the Clinton e mails, which led to the Trump WH, which led to the left wing media paying back the Republicans for the 8 years of right wing hell that Fox and Limbaugh dumped on Obama.
Don’t forget, we started messing with the Russian election first. They retaliated by messing with ours. The AIPAC, and anybody else with a checkbook can influence our elections. So how come we are so obsessed with the Russians? We invaded the middle-east under 2 Bush WH’s. The Russians said they had seen enough when Israel and the US got to Syria. What they do not tell you is that Israel is engineering most of this. They can do this because they control Wall St., i.e. the money.
The media runs the government because they dictate the agenda. Wall St. owns the media. Israel controls Wall St. Wall St. controls government via lobbyists carrying checkbooks and purchasing politicians as if they were a pack of cigs or a loaf of bread. Media and government are in bed together. We foot the bill for it all every time we purchase something that is advertised on the media.
We’re screwed. Unless people wake up. Don’t hold your breath.
This idea that Russian interference is somehow unique is silliness. Every nation with any kind of intelligence capability tampers with other nations. It goes from seeking tidbits at conferences, to recruiting spies, to tampering with corporations and governments. My goodness, we have even overthrown entire governments.
Comey basically turned the NYTimes into paper for the bottom of the bird cage. Yikes.
The real story here is why congress is not holding hearings to investigate what can be done to control the rising cost of healthcare. (Competition) What can be done to take the money out of Washington. What can be done about a lot of things.
Yet, congress acts out this investigative BS because it won’t piss off the checkbook carrying lobbyists. In other words, it won’t affect their incoming cash flow like fixing healthcare or immigration would.
America is screwed.
The real story here is mass hallucination within the media. This entire fabrication will someday be studied in the same way that scientists study the Salem witch trials. Maybe there’s a fungus in the rye ? Or maybe its just Trump derangement syndrome. Whatever it is, the media has totally lost it.
You make a good point. The entirety of journalism is on display and the obvious bias makes virtually every news organization look utterly ignorant and emotionally bankrupt. If any school of journalism does its real job, this debacle in journalism ought to be studied and the students constantly reminded about the importance of facts and logic. So far, the fake news is dominating everything to the point where even the dumbest people can easily see it.
The curious case of James Comey.
What I found most interesting after reading Comey’s commentary was his decision not to write after action memos on talks with Obama but always on Trump. The rest of his commentary is obviously recollection but why would you chose one approach by not recording Obama and another by recording Trump – did he really trust Obama that much? Sounds to me like he was covering his rear end knowing that he had made a number of mistakes and his position as FBI chief was at risk. He was anticipating what was going to happen and he prepared for it. Another possible reason is that he is politically biased and really didn’t want to have to account for his discussions with Democrat President Obama. At this point, the why of this choice is probably the most important question that can be asked. The rest is going to be nitpick both left and right.
The decision to memorialize any particular conversation in written notes or memos has its origin in the content of the conversation memorialized, not its subjects or participants. Because sensitive words were spoken, they were memorialized.
The good news with Comey: Few doubt his unbiased independence. Everyone thinks he hates them, and that includes both HRC and DJT.
Pursuing the allegations as regards Russia should not be and is not a partisan issue. We should all take issue with any suggestion of foreign influence in our elections and government processes.
Now you make an assumption that nothing of importance was discussed with Obama. Let us hear Comey say that as well as the nature of the conversation with Obama.
I doubt his unbiased independence because I saw him assume the role of the Attorney General when he presented his analysis of Hillary Clinton’s misuse of her e-mail. Obama should have fired him for doing so but somehow managed to let it slide.
I agree about Russia but then let it be about Russia and our election, not just about Trump. There is every reason to assume that there were issues with Hillary and her staff vis-a-vis Russia. Let Mueller have a broad charter not just a Trump-Russia only charter.
No, I make the assumption nothing worth memorializing was discussed with Obama, else it would’ve been memorialized in a memo by Comey, whose integrity, dilligence and independence are unassailable.
If you think he was anti-HRC and should’ve been canned by Obama, what makes you think that supports the notion that he is now anti-DJT? More likely he is tough on everyone precisely because he was the head of the FBI.
Trump-Russian is the question precisely because of his actions and his words, both of which warrant an investigation. We should begin no unwarranted investigations lest they dilute the focus warranted ones do.
he only met with Obama twice – one was to say goodbye – you are making up news again
Then let us hear the sum and substance of both. Wouldn’t it be important if Obama said to Comey upon departure that he should keep records for leaking to the press.
Sure, that would be important, but there’s nothing other than your imagination to suggest it even possibly true. Remember, Comey was a registered Republican most of his adult life, choosing independence when heading the FBI. Comey circulated the memos among his senior staff, not the press, and were not leaked by him.
All I suggest is that it is a valid question to be asked. At this point, all we have is Comey’s written record based on recollections from meetings with Trump. There is no recording as far as we know to corroborate his memory. Similarly, there is even less when it comes to obama.
It is not a valid question. It is unwarranted because there is no evidence whatsoever to support it. In fact, you are challenging someone with unblemished credibility aplenty, our nation’s top law enforcement officer, and you yourself have none whatsoever. You have proven the opposite, that you are willing to lie, claiming you did not seek to undermine Obama out of respect for his office, a demonstrable falsehood.
As Comey just swore in his testimony, it was a combination of the circumstances, the subject matter, and the person. He fully explained it under oath.
And yet Comey pondered allowed that there might actually be tapes – he didn’t know. How interesting.
He pondered it because Trump said it publicly, you lying fool. And Comey said it sure would be great if there were tapes. Warmac9999, you’ve got to be a liberal plant sent her to make conservatives look bad.
You keep getting more and more emotional. Of course Trump said it and Comey suddenly realized that there might actually be tapes which could change the nature of his recollections. If you are a conservative, you sure don’t sound like it. You sound more like those on bearing drift who claim to be conservative but then act like the very swamp dwellers that undermine Trump at every step. My candidate was Cruz and my second was Trump. So far, I am quite pleased with most of the Trump actions – particularly Grouch.
For the truly curious (and open-minded) it’s all there. Comey described two unremarkable meetings with President Obama in three years. On the other hand, he describes nine meetings with President Trump in six months, every one of which features the President attempting to exert exceptional and unethical influence over Comey. At that rate, Trump would have met with Comey 54 times during the same span in which Obama met with Comey only two times.
On the other hand, if one has unquestioning loyalty to the President, one will invent a reason to make that Comey’s fault.
You raise another point of interest – why so few meetings with obama. Americans suffered terrorist attacks, riots, the rise of BLM, the fast and furious debacle, and more. All of this would seem to be of interest to a sitting president yet obama was strangely quiet about it as if he wasn’t really interested in law enforcement. On the contrary, Trump expressed substantive interest in law enforcement and would naturally want to meet with his law enforcement team.
Oh, and don’t tell me obama wasn’t interested in the loyalty and trustworthiness of key government officials. That is ridiculous.
Some fair questions. To start with, Fast and Furious occurred 2009-2011, and the report was released before Comey’s appointment. So it was .. over in all but the minds of the most whacked conspiracy theorists and the ignorant.
Why so few meetings with President Obama? I don’t know. I believe the norm is that Presidents let the FBI do it’ thing, but I hope to see some historical analysis.
I will be heartened if the Trump-Comey meetings turn out to be about strong law enforcement, but according to Comey, they were about selective non-enforcement of the law, which is a big problem. If you read his testimony, you will see that.
Why didn’t Comey meet directly with President Obama in matters including BLM? Perhaps because, as Comey writes (PLEASE read the testimony?) it is unusual for the FBI director to meet one-on-one with the president. It is far more normal for the FBI to turn investigations over to the attorney general, who has the discretion to prosecute.
I have friends who worked in the Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43, and Obama White Houses. None have encountered the use of loyalty pledges in any form, beyond an oath to the Constitution.
Comey and the Clintons… really? Really?
Selective note keeping is very curious, and that is why it is important. The common practice in investigation is to keep meticulous notes if recordings are unavailable. The director of the FBI is certainly aware of the practice as agents are required to do it in preparation for potential legal activities.
Memorializing of any meetings with the key protagonists is an important area of concern. If Comey was diligent with Trump but not so in dealings with the obama administration that is clearly prejudicial. You had Bill Clinton meeting with Lynch. You had the entirety of the Hillary Clinton debacle. I would question what criteria Comey used when committing interviews to memo. Unless well explained, this is troubling behavior for an FBI director.
Bill Clinton meeting with AG Lynch was a complete stinker that deserved more attention.
If you see a pattern of prejudice by Comey, you are free to assert prejudice. Problem is, no such pattern exists. And again, Comey explains why he felt he should take these unusual steps — he obviously felt Trump was attempting to out him in a compromising position. You seem to be paying attention to everything except the statement..
We do not know if a pattern of prejudice exists until the question is asked.
By the way, Corey Lewindoski said the trump was concerned about comey’s loyalty to the country because of comey’s bizarre behavior in 2016. This is a reasonable an interpretation of why trump asked the question.
It appears Comey interpreted it individually not nationally so now we have the question of what trump meant by the question. So much for clarity – or should I say cloudy.
Except that Trump publicly praised Comey for his handling of the Clinton affair, which “Trump’s” any Lewinowski claim.
During the campaign.
The DOJ/ Clinton meeting was not investigated apparently. But Comey did meet with Lynch after that meeting. Any notes of that?
No idea. So there are these hearings today. Nothing else changes whether or not Trump did what Comey is saying he did. Out out all the chaff, false equivalences, and conspiracy shade you want. This is real.
Really? You now have Comey’s testimony about Lynch.
Apparently you missed Comey’s testimony, but are undeterred when it comes to commenting on it?
He stated that Lynch instructed him to characterize the Clinton email investigation as a “matter,” which was the same characterization being used by the Clinton Campaign. That and the Phoenix meeting compelled hom to make his July announcement.
Nope, heard the comment. Lynch essentially directed him to use a word that was consistent with the word used by the Clinton campaign.
So what you are telling me is that Obama, as president, never requested loyalty. That is absurd. If you have such friends as you say, ask them if they could get higher level positions if they weren’t going to support the agenda of the current president.
Big difference between agreeing to support an agenda and agreeing to break the law. My in brief to WH staff included detailed coverage of the staff’s obligations to the Constitution and under a variety of regulations including the Hatch Act.
My experience and that of my colleagues says the idea that loyalty oaths are normal is complete crap. Try to provide even one scrap of verifiable fact to the contrary.
I wonder if you have considered that Comey broke the law when he released the memos to a friend. You and I both know that those memos are government property once they are written on government time. Comey sought no authorization to release the information and took it on his own initiative. At the very least he should have consulted with the Attorney General before doing so. The only claim I can see that he didn’t break the law would be the whistleblower statute.
This idea of government property is well established. If you worked at all in the area of R&D, members of the scientific community often found the government claiming rights to the intellectual property of the scientist. Eventually, this had to be adjusted in the law so that the scientist could actually benefit from his work once a grant or contract was finished.
I wrote a paper that had comments of key officials in it. My intent was to release it for publication. My public affairs officer asked if the officials had given me permission to release. I had to go back through the process and get the permission which was quite a hairy situation.
Finally, I am not talking about loyalty oaths but about loyalty to an administration and its goals and objectives. A loyalty oath means nothing in that regard.
You must be a contractor. Common in contracts is language stating all work products including meeting notes belong to the government.
Personal memoranda of government personnel are not as cut and dry.
And if you’d watched Comey’s testimony, you would have seen him address this question.
But you and I know you didn’t.
Never was a government contractor but a government employee. There is no such thing as a personal memo when I was on the job – always was government work product. To release anything to the public required a review not only by the boss but the public affairs office. Learned that the hard way and never repeated the mistake.
I was stunned that Comey made the claim about personal rather than governmental. He was almost certainly sitting in a government car and typing on a government laptop to create these memos. He then discussed them with other government officials which put them in jeopardy upon their release. Comey commits a primal act and tries to excuse it by claiming personal work product – wow, just wow.
He definitely did say he used a government machine and a government car. I’m still waiting for that to come up in the news. Yes, that one is a standard to which GS employees would be held more strictly than SESs.
If you can push through the reflexive distrust of all news media that is expected at TBE, you’ll appreciate this editorial piece.
Read the WAPO editorial but don’t see that it applies to this discussion of criminal behavior by Comey. He should certainly know as a very long term government employee that his work product is government property.
By the way, never heard of any distinction between SES and GM (used to be GS) employee. Political appointees did serve at the behest of the president so there might be a different standard – I just don’t know.
GS not GM. Typo.
I was referring more generally to the generally more liberal (but arbitrary, in the case of Gen Petraeus) standards of conduct applied to the most senior members of the executive branch. It’s nothing new, and may not be ethically right, but it won’t bring about the end times either.
The intelligence people in front of those idiot Senators were not about to bash Trump after seeing what happened to Comey.
Israel runs the whole works anyhow.
That was pretty showy, wasn’t it? They indicated they ranted to talk in a classified setting. I bet that session was far less emotional. And hopefully somewhat more revealing.
Let me spell it out for Warmac. Comey did the Clinton press conference as ordered by Loretta Lynch last summer because she was not about to indict a Clinton which would cause her and Obama unbelievable problems. Comey took care of it, gave not only Hillary a fairly clean get away, but Lynch and Obama also. Bill sprung the Comey bailout idea on Lynch the PREVIOUS WEEK on the airport tarmac in Vegas. Loretta Lynch was always going to be “teflon” because she was the first woman AG and black to boot. Doesn’t matter one bit if she was qualified.
Perhaps it’s long over due to stop believing Comey is “Mister Clean” as the media woukd like you to think. I have never seen a clean lawyer.
Trump threw Rosenstein to the dogs when he fired Comey. Sessions and Trump were not getting along after the recusal. This pissed of Rosenstein so bad, he appointed a specialist prosecutor to stick it to Trump. Sessions showed Trump he wasn’t one of his bitches by allowing Rosenstein to appoint a special pain in Trumps ass for years to come.
The media, Limbaugh, nor Fox News will tell you all this because Obama, the Clinton’s, and first female AG were all untouchable. They had to be part of a Cinderella type story. First woman AG,, first black Pres, first everything. Had to be a clean fairy tale for America.
It’s all crooked.
I certainly agree with the crooked and comey’s partipation in it. Comey is by no means squeaky clean and it is absurd to claim he is after his bizarre behavior last year.
What part of that comment do you think is not true?
I hate to think that racism played a part, but, unfortunately, I think you are all too correct. The Democrat Party, now the party of the welfare class, has thrown away the working class for the minority votes.
Both party’s are doing whatever it takes to suck in PAC and campaign cash to keep their sorry asses in office and get rich off the taxpayer. Neither party is what they would be without our corrupt campaign and PAC finance system. Nothing but a bunch of crooked lawyers.
The working class is just a part of the welfare class who can get credit cards.
Well, I worked a lot of 16 hour days to pay for a bunch of bums sitting on their rear ends so don’t tell me that there is no difference between those who work and those who bum.
I do, however, agree that greed has become a way of life in DC and it really needs to stop or we will lose our liberty to the socialist totalitarians and their new world order.
Then you are a little late to the party. The final countdown for freedom started decades ago, but no one paid attention.
Anyhow, when the right time comes Trump will no doubt pardon Flynn and all the others if necessary. And, the next Democrat president will fire the FBI director because the Republicans did. On and on it goes.
Meanwhile, people cannot afford healthcare. Good job continue to leave.
Obamacare is collapsing. Now there are no insurance companies in Ohio. California is going insane with the idea of single payer to the tune of $400B. Even with this, the Democrats are stonewalling any changes to obamacare and, not surprisingly, the Republicans are acting like idiots. Meanwhile, if you get sick, off to the emergency room or urgent care as that is all that is available. And if you get really ill, well there is always hospice.
The Dems want to fix Obamacare, but they will not change the name. If things are so bad in Ohio, then why will Republicans in Ohio not go for Trumpcare? The industry is collapsing Obamacare to get more money out of the government and us. You people are to ignorant to see beyond Limbaughoney.
To end Obamacare, you have to come up with $800 BILLION to put into MediCare, because Obamacare saved Medicare $800 BILLION.
Both party’s are nothing but crooked lawyers and lying con artists.
Even Trump’s AG, Deputy AG, and others have some ethical line they won’t cross, even for Trump.
Yea, all the above. We got three or four separate investigations into Trump and the Russians going on all at taxpayer expense.
Somehow I think some of this is a smokescreen for screwing up healthcare even worse than it is, tax reform, cutting SS and Medicare which are not in trouble, and running up debt and spending with infrastructure.
Just giving the press a bunch of BS to feed us.
I can’t compete with pessimism like that.
Well, I thought about what you say. I am certainly a pessimist.
But, are the optimists or pessimists running this country in the ground?
Both political party’s continue to run this country in the ground. Name one piece of legislation passed and signed that gives any reason to be optimistic?
The US House continues to pass anti-blue collar legislation under the cover of the Trump chaos. Bills such as HR 1180 and HR 10.
3 meetings and 6 telephone conversation do not constitute 9 meetings.
Remember the “Yes We Can” crowd that was so detached from reality they would become incensed at the assertion their president’ s poop stank?
Among conservatives are corresponding Trump devotees, equally detached from reality.
Yeah, okay, a teleconference isn’t a meeting…
No one should expect loyalty from the head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, our nation’s top law enforcement officer. The head of the FBI must be independent and loyal only to the truth and the law as he or she understands it.
Who appoints him to his job?
He is appointed for a 10-year term by the people of the US who pay his salary and provide him resources and authority. President nominates, Senate confirms, and he must swear “I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
So who’s he going to support when the war starts? While everyone one is busy pissing around we have a whole bunch of our kids getting ready to be stuck in the middle of the first skirmish of the next world war. We will be too busy fighting amonst our selves to even notice.
Those words are going to be pretty damned hollow when we lose three entire commands of our kids while everyone was playing political word games.
Commands of our kids? Not sure about that, but if you are suggesting a world war is imminent then you are absolutely supporting the notion that we need to get to the bottom of this and quickly so. The head of the FBI supports the United States of America, which stands for the proposition that no person is above our laws.
Your question “So who’s he going to support when the way starts?” is ridiculous. We all know whom he swore to support: The American people and their Constitution.
In fact, Flynn took money from Turkey (>$500k) and Russia (~$40k) without proper reporting. In fact, POTUS gave Russians access to classified US intelligence in an exclusive meeting. In fact, when last we walked into a room with our allies lined up on one side of the room and Nicaragua and Syria on the other side of the room, we stood with the two losers.
If there is a war coming, we need a great commander-in-chief who is fully in control of his faculties, not a Twitter keyboard. I prefer Pence to Trump especially if we are to fight a world war.
Trump selected Mathis and Tillerson. Both are better than their Obama counterparts.
Mattis, Tillerson, both outstanding public servants. Both publicly rebuked Trump for failing to stand with our allies on the Paris Accords. It was an easy choice he completely blew.
No, the Paris Accords were the implementation of UN Agenda 21. The easy choice was to get out of it.
When we walk in a room with all our friends and the vast majority of the world on one side (essentially, our allies) and Nicaragua and Syria on the other side of the room, Trump chose to stand with Nicaragua and Syria.
Apparently, you support that choice. You, too, would choose to stand with despots, distancing yourself from our allies. It marks you as a complete fool, just as has happened to our country, standing with Nicaragua and Syria.
Agenda 21 is voluntary, non-binding, no enforcement and therefore no implementation other than a path to development for less-developed countries.
This was an easy choice. Trump blew it. Stand with your allies and friends, they bring you more power than all the armaments in the world.
You and I will have to disagree on the implications of UN Agenda 21. My local BOS was spending $500k per year to study its implementation, so unless the USA is a less developed country you are wrong.
Again, you are a plant sent here to tarnish the good name of intelligent conservatives. You are doing your job well.
North Korea criticized Trump for abandoning the Paris Accords.
If you would actually cite North Korean statements in support of any argument you make you are an ignorant fool. We know better that to even listen to a word they say.
We stand with two “allies” on the Paris Accords: Nicaragua and Syria.
Ignorance. total ignorance. Allies are far more important and this one defines the US in a terrible way. You are despicable for defending it, worse still for citing North Korea in any way in support. I repeat: You are a plant sent here to discredit conservatives and obviously so.
You claim to be a conservative yet you support the socialist position of the Paris Accords. You sound more like a Bush “moderate” Republican than a conservative. That is OK, but don’t wrap yourself in the conservative flag when you advocate for positions that aren’t conservative in any manner. I also get it you don’t like Trump but that doesn’t suddenly convey the mantle of conservatism on you.
I really wonder if you have thought through what conservatism is. I believe that the Constitution is the foundation of conservatism. I frankly don’t like that the USA is now a bastion of socialism run from an overpowering and all too often unresponsive DC establishment. Draining the swamp is conservative. Cutting the welfare state is conservative. Avoiding positions simply because they are politically correct is conservative. Getting government out of the lives of individuals and families is conservative. Throwing money at whatever whim seems to be current is not conservative.
There is nothing socialist about standing with one’s friends and alliances. I absolutely support standing with our allies in the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, France and many many more.
Besides, if we are honest and educated, we must describe the current system as socialist. Yes, the current system, which is what a conservative attempts to conserve.
In fact, our governments provide all manner of services to citizens with conscripted tax money, which includes non-essentials that go beyond pure socialism. All very different from communism, of course, but our life in Virginia/US is clearly socialist, even under strong Republican leadership.
How do you describe our current governments, federal, state and county, if not socialist? Can you actually claim it is purely capitalist? On what basis?
I agree that the current system is socialistic. I do not wish to preserve it. I believe that we have strayed far from the constitutional mandate and our liberties are at risk accordingly. Socialism eventually leads to misery to quote Churchill
Just one key point: At one point, we were the largest creditor nation in the world. Today, we are the largest debtor nation in the world. That is what socialism has done for us. (I look at the EU as an example of where socialism eventually takes us and it is rather unpleasant. There is effectively no freedom of speech and no mechanism to defend oneself. If you protest anything the governments do, you end up in court or fined. France is now a martial law state and I wonder if the UK is far behind.)
You gotta love it when people use Obama like the gold standard to compare the Trump administration with. Obama sucked as president. Saying someone is better than Obama was doesn’t mean nothing.
The danger in undermining the president, as the democrats and some republicans are doing, gets people killed. I didn’t like obama and thought him a snake, but I still supported the presidency as undermining it undermined the nation. You are correct here as Trump has to clean up the geopolitical mess made by Obama and it is worldwide in scope.
You lie. You did not support Obama. You did in fact seek to undermine him as anyone who can search your name can easily find. Stop lying and live with reality. It is your right to differ with him, even to undermine him, but claiming now that you did not is demonstrably false.
I attacked his policies not his right to be president. As I said, I thought him to be a snake and saw him implement many unconstitutional policies through executive order. Unlike the current crop of leftists I did not attack his legitimacy to be president. I certainly was never a “birther” but I understood the concerns because he hide so much about himself.
The reality is that Trump, like obama , is a legitimate constitutionally elected president. You can think of him as a snake or whatever, but this constant drumbeat of impeachment from all sides is dangerous. So get with reality and stop lying to yourself.
Thanks to Obama, that is a real possibility. The Brits, French and Germans are already losing their kids and citizens in the streets.
This mess starting up in Qatar has the potential to have us in the middle of a middle east war with no one being our friends. Russia is already threatening to take out Americans who direct attacks against the Syrians, Turkey and Iran are joining with them, and I’m sure the Shia in Bahrain and even Iraq are not pleased with the situation either. Sitting ducks we are.
I have a friend who teaches in Qatar. You are correct about war as the Saudis have apparently partially blockaded Qatar ports.
Of course important, but after reading “The Art of the Deal” the last thing Trump values is a bunch of yes men and women around him. He wants tough people around him who won’t hide the truth from him and that is the type of loyalty anybody with a brain wants.
Maybe his ghost writer valued that, trump wants exactly the opposite.
You do realize that a man like Trump has a calendar with notes and also meets with people who he describes afterwards to keep his memory easily refreshed. He also describes his upbringing which a ghost writer can’t create. Finally, Trump describes his philosophy of decision making and action. You need to wake up and stop with this kind of balderdash.
Don’t tell me what to do old man.
Thinking is not your strong suit.
When all else fails resort to personal insults, congratulationz you sure is da smartier one.
You start with an insult and then get upset when you are called on it. I normally don’t respond to such tripe but decided to have some fun.
I am sorry you took that as an insult, It was a statement of fact. I don’t take advice from internet blowhards. Be courteous and you will get better responses.
And yet you insult once again. Do you not understand that?
I am sure in real life you are a very nice man with lots of werther’s originals for the neighborhood kids, but in this thread you instantly decide it is your place to dictate my course of action which can, and did create a hostile thread. Perhaps in the future we can get off on a better foot.
You made the claim that Trump’s book was ghost written without a shred of evidence to back it up. I responded with information that is consistent with the writing of such books.
Tony Schwartz ghost wrote the art of the deal, use the google. I assumed you would know this already.
I assumed Trump had a co-author – I just didn’t pay much attention to who it was. It is not unusual for someone like Trump, Obama, Clinton, etc to employ someone to co-author a biography or even a fiction series. The information to be included in such a book comes from the individual celebrity and is organized and presented by the co-author. This is not unlike what happens with professors and a student assistant who writes some paper and then adds the professor as credibility.
What I found interesting in reading about Schwartz is that Trump hired him even though he was really a far left liberal. I wonder if his hatred of Trump, which is rather obvious, has an actual root in some personal issue rather than him just not liking the guy and his politics. Schwartz doesn’t deny that Trump gave him the info so the author and celebrity relationship is pretty clear. I think it characterizes Trump quite well.
By the way, there are lots of people like Trump – highly competitive and ruthless. Winning and losing is important and competitors and obstructionists get trampled – do you really think that Obama didn’t act similarly? Trump survived and prospered in NYC, the mecca of the liberal left on the East Coast.
I don’t think comparing Obama and trump works on very many levels so I try not to do it.
Trump had a book. Obama had a book. Trump had a ghost writer. There are questions about obama’s authorship. I think comparison is relevant when there is a rather obvious attempt to denigrate one and excuse the other.
Yes, they are basically the same person, brothers from another mother. What are we talking about?
Trump is denigrated while Obama is praised.
Ok, keep doing that if you would like. I have to get back to the real world, but it has been a blast hanging out with you.
You are lost. Unbelievable.
Am guessing you haven’t read “The Art of the Deal”
I read it about 1990. It is like any other book that is written to sell itself. The truth is usually not a very good seller.
Trump surrounds himself with family if at all possible. You appear very naive as to how businesses/business people operate these days.
Honesty is loyalty.