I am not going to leap to the conclusion that this firing was actually about the substance of the Russia investigation (“Comey was getting too close to the truth!” or whatever). But there are press reports that Trump simply loses his shit every time he sees something about the Russia investigation on TV: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/10/comey-firing-trump-russia-238192
At the moment, I am inclined to think this was some Trump-Bannon temper tantrum about those meanie swamp-dwelling Obama people who are trying to take Trump down because deep state, without having a single fucking clue how big a mistake this is.
In other words, anger plus incompetence equals SAD!
And Donald Trump was so stunned by these new revelations about Comey’s behavior that he fired him the same day he received Rosenstein’s memo. Shouldn’t someone take a little time to digest all that new information, maybe get an alternate view, before calmly deciding how best to proceed?
I wish memos were timestamped. I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump’s was written first.
President Grant.
God, that’s weird!
In my understanding, Grant’s reputation has been rehabilitated considerably in recent years, and much of its tarnishing was due to Lost Cause and similar pro-Confederacy propaganda.
Based on a non-statement from James Clapper, the investigations are possibly starting to reveal Trump’s business interests in Russia. That could be what spooked him.
I’ll leave this here:
" Democracy dies in darkness."
There are several layers of irony in the whole situation:
a)The ostensible reason for the firing is quite reasonable in itself. Comey showed very poor judgment in the way he handled the e-mail investigation.
b)Of course that is not the real reason for the firing which is that Trump is angry about the Russia investigation, a completely illegitimate reason to fire Comey.
c)I am skeptical that the firing will help Trump with his real agenda. Perhaps he hopes that he will be able to appoint a loyalist who will quash the investigation. Even if the Republicans are willing to tolerate, this there are other powerful forces like the media, public opinion and the FBI bureaucracy which will be difficult to push aside.
d)If Hillary had won, I suspect she would have found it difficult to fire Comey and wouldn’t have done it.
I assume that Spicer must not have been looking photogenic.
It would be interesting (and funny) if this really is a matter that Rosenstein wrote a letter in his own, maybe thinking that the President would use it in the future along with twenty other general complaints and items of evidence against Comey’s stability, just to have Trump see the thing and jump on it like it was the endless word of God himself. One can imagine that Rosenstein got the shock of his life when he heard the announcement.
One imagines that he’ll be far more careful in what he sends the President’s way in the future. “What would an idiot do if he misunderstood the intent of this letter? Hm.”
The wrong reasons and the wrong timing are what many improper actions are made of. Trump has just made it something of an Olympic-level sport.
No, it’s immature, disrespectful and to be expected.
This is entirely possible. In President Trump’s case, evidence would indicate it’s the more likely explanation for most of what he does that is right. Even blind squirrels yadda yadda…
And this is important. The subpoenas are irrelevant, unless one can directly tie them to Director Comey.
I have already opined that the testimony last week, combined with the news on Tuesday that the FBI was going to have to “correct” that testimony as regards the Abedin emails, was the trigger for doing what the President did when he did. And yes, it may be a bit precipitous, but then when has Donald Trump been known for being one who takes his time making up his mind?
Damn, I was hoping for some good flowers …
Lots of people are saying this. But they carefully gloss over the reason why Director Comey is somehow so important to that investigation. That is, what evidence is there that the investigation won’t go on just as aggressively without Director Comey in charge of the FBI? And if it was Russia, why was yesterday the day that things had to happen? Why not tomorrow? Or Monday? Or last week? Or next week? Why fire him when he’s not even in town? Why fire him without even the courtesy of a call to him?
It’s not enough to point at something and say it stinks, therefore it’s a skunk. It helps to at least point out the stripes…
The Senate appears to think it’s a big deal.
Saying your opponents “carefully gloss over” is an accusation that people are thinking about the question and are not answering it because of their bias.
It would be okay of Comey was just gone, but they will replace him. Most likely with someone who will put the brakes on the investigation.
If Trump was aware of how these things worked, this would be the right question. But he’s not. His level of understanding is such that he probably figured Comey was the problem, and firing Comey would bring the FBI’s investigation to a halt.
Because yesterday was the day that Comey made him look really bad on TV.
It also may have been the day that he got Rosenstein’s memo giving him a justification for firing Comey.
You can’t compare Trump to Grant (or anyone else, FTM). Trump is an impetuous child-like man. He does things differently.
I mean, I’m sure anyone in a hot seat position like Comey’s has any number of people who want or don’t want him fired at any time, with all sorts of arguments on both sides of the point. If such a person gets fired for Reason A, it’s always hard to say that Reason B wasn’t also a factor, since it will be brought up in discussions of the matter and will be a reason why so-and-so didn’t support him etc. But that’s not to say Reason B is the primary factor.
So far ISTM that the Trump-Russia connection is mostly sound-and-fury, with an enormous amount of resources chasing after shadows and only coming up with yet more shadows. I’m skeptical of the whole issue and tend to think there’s nothing substantive to it, and am not inclined to think Trump has any genuine fears on this score. Of course he may just be upset about commentary about it, nonetheless.
I doubt if she would have fired him, but for a different reason. If Hillary had won, left-wing anger at Comey would not have been at nearly the level it’s currently at. It’s mostly a post-election phenomenon.
Besides for not being as big of a deal if she won anyway, there would also be different perspectives on the impact. Prior to the election most Democrats weren’t pleased with the letter but didn’t think it would matter, especially when the reinvestigation was completed prior to the election, and had she won this position would have been vindicated.
Republicans have 52 seats in the Senate, so they need near-unanimous Republican support to get anyone approved. I have no doubt that independence WRT the Russia investigation will be a major issue for Senators contemplating the confirmation vote.
Though you could argue that Trump may not have appreciated this.
Good thing they don’t have a replacement lined up yet. But yeah, when they do, it’s gonna be the sort of toady who will do his best to kill the investigation.
What did Comey say during the hearing last week that was so bad? Honest question, I read about Sally Yates’ testimony but didn’t see much about Comey’s.