|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
ashamed for voting for this dude, not that it even matters but shoulda just stayed at home on election day.
|
On May 11 2017 03:49 HalcyonRain wrote:
I must say Trump is excellent at rustling jimmies. Fire the FBI director that the Rats previously wanted fired and they go nuts. Off the Rats go on an irrelevant wild goose chase again, with the media in tow. Quite adorable.
Being director of the FBI is a nonpartisan job, so of course unflinching Democrats are going to run with some of the things he does, while denouncing others. That's the beauty of party-before-country, facts are no longer absolutes, and facts are in short supply to begin with. Just like Republicans who think this ongoing investigation between Trump and Russia is no big deal, and that people should just get over it and support Trump.
|
If he's that low, then that should raise awareness in congress to start the process of getting a real investigation going no? If they grow spines...
|
On May 11 2017 03:44 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 03:11 Danglars wrote:On May 11 2017 02:10 xDaunt wrote:On May 11 2017 02:08 Danglars wrote:On May 11 2017 01:27 ZeromuS wrote:On May 11 2017 01:24 Danglars wrote:On May 11 2017 01:14 TheLordofAwesome wrote:On May 11 2017 01:06 Danglars wrote:On May 11 2017 00:55 ZeromuS wrote:
hmmmmmm
The leaks here are pretty reassuring that any future coverup of the FBI's investigation of Trump's campaign aides will be immediately outed. Not my preferred reassurance but whatever. The investigation will continue apace and we'll find out if people like Flynn, Manafort, and Carter are guilty of more than we already know. But these constitutional crisis deranged lunatics on the left are a good reminder for Americans what the Trump administration is up against. CNN corroborated yesterday that there are grand jury subpoenas for associates of Michael Flynn. https://cnn.com/cnn/2017/05/09/politics/grand-jury-fbi-russia/index.htmlThe man who first reported the existence of grand juries involving the FBI investigation into Trump/Russia is Claude Taylor, former White House staffer. He also named the EDVA district as the location of all those juries. Now MSM is confirming this. Mr. Taylor also reports now that there are 25 sealed indictments in EDVA. He also says that state AG Schneiderman will be bringing RICO charges as well against Donald Trump and the Trump Org, and there is no presidential pardon power for state level offenses. Your thoughts? You mean aside from "The investigation will continue apace and we'll find out if people like Flynn, Manafort, and Carter are guilty of more than we already know?" There will be no coverup. Comey was heading the career FBI investigators that will find out the truth. Trump made bad staffing decisions and some former Trump associates made bad decisions. Frankly, if any of this is traceable to Trump it probably would've already been leaked, but I'm waiting for the investigation's conclusion. If some other state AG brings racketeering charges against Trump himself and Trump's company, that would be a new development and I'll follow it as details come out. At this point the fact Trump and his friends are doing everything they can to derail the investigation or delay its findings and get in its way is whats going to end up bringing him down. thats what happened to Nixon. For him it was the coverup No, you're making unverified claims about what's happening right now. The investigation continues, or were you under the impression Comey was personally involved in impaneling grand juries and gathering evidence? Don't confuse your own frustration born out of irrational Trump hatred (or rational Trump hatred that's infected your consideration of current events) for actual proof of obstruction. You have no evidence and your suppositions are faulty. Good luck convincing those on the left who are foaming at the mouth to get rid of Trump to actually consider the facts. I won't be continuing the pointless endeavor forever. The best case scenario is the final FBI report sobers some people up and the 2018 elections sobers more people up. High anxiety for long periods of time isn't good for the health. There's a reason why I haven't been posting much around here recently (above and beyond the fact that I've been busy). And you're kidding yourself if you think that there's any chance that any final report released by the FBI or any other investigative body exonerating Trump will be enough to put this Russia nonsense to bed.
I figured you went hiding in the bushes like Spicer because not even you wants to defend the onslaught of Trump administration incompetence.
|
FWIW
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-fbi-interim-idUSKBN18629K
President Donald Trump is considering four senior FBI officials to serve as the interim replacement for fired FBI Director James Comey, a White House official said on Wednesday.
The four candidates include acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, assistant FBI director in charge Paul Abbate, Chicago special agent in charge Michael J. Anderson and Richmond, Va., special agent in charge Adam Lee, the official said.
The official said the Justice Department is running the process with job interviews being conducted by Attorney General Jeff Sessions and deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
(Reporting By Steve Holland)
Aside from this pool of candidates, dumb question (kinda) coming up - I always took "acting" and "interim" to be the same thing. McCabe is already "acting" director. But now they are interviewing for an "interim" post? Am I just tripping up on semantics here/reading the article wrong or is there an actual difference that I'm clearly not aware of, in how an "acting" position and an "interim" position is treated?
|
Andrew McCabe. Haha I realize that's too clever for Trump's camp, that's gotta just be an obliviousness to perception from the FBI.
McCabe's wife, Jill, ran as a Democrat for Virginia state senate in 2015 but lost. The Wall Street Journal reported in 2016 citing campaign finance records that the political-action committee of Democratic Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe gave nearly $470,000 to her campaign, and that McCabe later helped oversee the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server.
Source
|
On May 11 2017 04:13 biology]major wrote:
ashamed for voting for this dude, not that it even matters but shoulda just stayed at home on election day.
That's the only healthy reaction. The basic mechanism that fuels Trump's support among his base is the same mechanism behind conspiracy theories. Every counter-evidence (he is unpopular, he embarrasses the US internationally and domestically, he is scandal ridden etc..) are only taken as further evidence that there "must be something to him". If he makes everybody mad he obviously must be correct. Just like every counter-evidence to conspiracy theories is only taken as evidence that the opponents are desperate and trying to hide something. This is pretty problematic reasoning because you can't ever convince them. By definition literally everything will only drive them further.
This happens in this thread all the time too. When xDaunt says that he didn't expect a "paragon of virtue" and that liberal anxiety is only evidence of Trump's skill you've entered leader cult territory.
|
On May 11 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 04:02 HalcyonRain wrote:On May 11 2017 04:00 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On May 11 2017 03:49 HalcyonRain wrote:
I must say Trump is excellent at rustling jimmies. Fire the FBI director that the Rats previously wanted fired and they go nuts. Off the Rats go on an irrelevant wild goose chase again, with the media in tow. Quite adorable. Do you really prefer a president who rustles jimmies by doing stupid things instead of someone who actually does his job in a proper manner? Is the schadenfreude worth it? Oh I don't know, political theater is always somewhat entertaining from time to time. But you're right, I'd much rather he get to more important matters such as tax reform. Although this really didn't take much time beyond, "Comey, you're FIRED!". Tax reform isn't happening. They can't even deal with the ACA repeal, which has to come before any attempts to reform the tax code. They need Democrats on board to pass tax reform and Trump's tax plan is not a pill they are willing to swallow.
No it won't happen anytime soon. If the Cans win a few seats in the senate though it might, but that's awhile away. But even so they'd have to defeat the H&R Block and other Tax Preparer's lobby to do it. I'd still rather he be working on taxes though.
|
On May 11 2017 04:14 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 03:49 HalcyonRain wrote:
I must say Trump is excellent at rustling jimmies. Fire the FBI director that the Rats previously wanted fired and they go nuts. Off the Rats go on an irrelevant wild goose chase again, with the media in tow. Quite adorable. Being director of the FBI is a nonpartisan job, so of course unflinching Democrats are going to run with some of the things he does, while denouncing others. That's the beauty of party-before-country, facts are no longer absolutes, and facts are in short supply to begin with. Just like Republicans who think this ongoing investigation between Trump and Russia is no big deal, and that people should just get over it and support Trump.
I can count the number of elected democrats who asked for Comey’s firing on one hand. Sure, a lot of them were hyper critical of how he did things, but almost none of them were directly calling for him to be fired. The argument that elected Democrats were calling for him to be removed is per projection by the Trump camp.
|
On May 11 2017 04:15 ShoCkeyy wrote:
If he's that low, then that should raise awareness in congress to start the process of getting a real investigation going no? If they grow spines...
The Senate Intelligence Committee and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence apparently aren't conducting real investigations in Congress. I wonder how many more are needed until you're happy.
|
On May 11 2017 04:23 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 04:15 ShoCkeyy wrote:
If he's that low, then that should raise awareness in congress to start the process of getting a real investigation going no? If they grow spines... The Senate Intelligence Committee and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence apparently aren't conducting real investigations in Congress. I wonder how many more are needed until you're happy.
The House Committee that was run by Devin Nunes? Really?
|
On May 11 2017 04:20 HalcyonRain wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On May 11 2017 04:02 HalcyonRain wrote:On May 11 2017 04:00 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On May 11 2017 03:49 HalcyonRain wrote:
I must say Trump is excellent at rustling jimmies. Fire the FBI director that the Rats previously wanted fired and they go nuts. Off the Rats go on an irrelevant wild goose chase again, with the media in tow. Quite adorable. Do you really prefer a president who rustles jimmies by doing stupid things instead of someone who actually does his job in a proper manner? Is the schadenfreude worth it? Oh I don't know, political theater is always somewhat entertaining from time to time. But you're right, I'd much rather he get to more important matters such as tax reform. Although this really didn't take much time beyond, "Comey, you're FIRED!". Tax reform isn't happening. They can't even deal with the ACA repeal, which has to come before any attempts to reform the tax code. They need Democrats on board to pass tax reform and Trump's tax plan is not a pill they are willing to swallow. No it won't happen anytime soon. If the Cans win a few seats in the senate though it might, but that's awhile away. But even so they'd have to defeat the H&R Block and other Tax Preparer's lobby to do it. I'd still rather he be working on taxes though.
They need 8 seats and to hold the House against an angry and very animated opposition that has been provided with unlimited ammunition for 2018. The bid to get elected trying to take away healthcare protections only got them into power. Not sure it was a good plan for holding on.
|
On May 11 2017 04:24 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 04:23 Danglars wrote:On May 11 2017 04:15 ShoCkeyy wrote:
If he's that low, then that should raise awareness in congress to start the process of getting a real investigation going no? If they grow spines... The Senate Intelligence Committee and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence apparently aren't conducting real investigations in Congress. I wonder how many more are needed until you're happy. The House Committee that was run by Devin Nunes? Really?
And it is the House, which is a joke on these issues at all times.
|
Also, in 2018 Clinton isn't on the ballet. But Trump certainly will be.
|
United States44296 Posts
On May 11 2017 04:20 HalcyonRain wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On May 11 2017 04:02 HalcyonRain wrote:On May 11 2017 04:00 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On May 11 2017 03:49 HalcyonRain wrote:
I must say Trump is excellent at rustling jimmies. Fire the FBI director that the Rats previously wanted fired and they go nuts. Off the Rats go on an irrelevant wild goose chase again, with the media in tow. Quite adorable. Do you really prefer a president who rustles jimmies by doing stupid things instead of someone who actually does his job in a proper manner? Is the schadenfreude worth it? Oh I don't know, political theater is always somewhat entertaining from time to time. But you're right, I'd much rather he get to more important matters such as tax reform. Although this really didn't take much time beyond, "Comey, you're FIRED!". Tax reform isn't happening. They can't even deal with the ACA repeal, which has to come before any attempts to reform the tax code. They need Democrats on board to pass tax reform and Trump's tax plan is not a pill they are willing to swallow. No it won't happen anytime soon. If the Cans win a few seats in the senate though it might, but that's awhile away. But even so they'd have to defeat the H&R Block and other Tax Preparer's lobby to do it. I'd still rather he be working on taxes though.
Have you actually seen his tax plan? Do you know what's in it? Because I do, and it's not anything anyone should want.
|
On May 11 2017 04:29 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 04:20 HalcyonRain wrote:On May 11 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On May 11 2017 04:02 HalcyonRain wrote:On May 11 2017 04:00 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On May 11 2017 03:49 HalcyonRain wrote:
I must say Trump is excellent at rustling jimmies. Fire the FBI director that the Rats previously wanted fired and they go nuts. Off the Rats go on an irrelevant wild goose chase again, with the media in tow. Quite adorable. Do you really prefer a president who rustles jimmies by doing stupid things instead of someone who actually does his job in a proper manner? Is the schadenfreude worth it? Oh I don't know, political theater is always somewhat entertaining from time to time. But you're right, I'd much rather he get to more important matters such as tax reform. Although this really didn't take much time beyond, "Comey, you're FIRED!". Tax reform isn't happening. They can't even deal with the ACA repeal, which has to come before any attempts to reform the tax code. They need Democrats on board to pass tax reform and Trump's tax plan is not a pill they are willing to swallow. No it won't happen anytime soon. If the Cans win a few seats in the senate though it might, but that's awhile away. But even so they'd have to defeat the H&R Block and other Tax Preparer's lobby to do it. I'd still rather he be working on taxes though. Have you actually seen his tax plan? Do you know what's in it? Because I do, and it's not anything anyone should want.
It wouldn't surprise me for a second if their tax bill ended up looking like their healthcare bill. This administration has been laughably ineffectual from the start, and they can't seem to put any good looking words together on the same piece of paper.
|
On May 11 2017 04:29 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 04:20 HalcyonRain wrote:On May 11 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On May 11 2017 04:02 HalcyonRain wrote:On May 11 2017 04:00 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On May 11 2017 03:49 HalcyonRain wrote:
I must say Trump is excellent at rustling jimmies. Fire the FBI director that the Rats previously wanted fired and they go nuts. Off the Rats go on an irrelevant wild goose chase again, with the media in tow. Quite adorable. Do you really prefer a president who rustles jimmies by doing stupid things instead of someone who actually does his job in a proper manner? Is the schadenfreude worth it? Oh I don't know, political theater is always somewhat entertaining from time to time. But you're right, I'd much rather he get to more important matters such as tax reform. Although this really didn't take much time beyond, "Comey, you're FIRED!". Tax reform isn't happening. They can't even deal with the ACA repeal, which has to come before any attempts to reform the tax code. They need Democrats on board to pass tax reform and Trump's tax plan is not a pill they are willing to swallow. No it won't happen anytime soon. If the Cans win a few seats in the senate though it might, but that's awhile away. But even so they'd have to defeat the H&R Block and other Tax Preparer's lobby to do it. I'd still rather he be working on taxes though. Have you actually seen his tax plan? Do you know what's in it? Because I do, and it's not anything anyone should want.
Are you implying that his tax plan would get through both the House and Senate unmolested? I doubt it will. I'd LIKE something that moves the corporate tax rate down to 20-23% and removes deductions, also switching to a territorial tax system would be nice as well.
Individual taxes...well I'd take whatever I can get here, as long as it makes it less complicated. I doubt anything will even come close to happening with individual taxes though.
|
On January 12 2017 03:33 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2017 03:29 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 12 2017 03:09 Sermokala wrote:On January 12 2017 01:51 Doodsmack wrote:On January 12 2017 01:44 Sermokala wrote:On January 12 2017 01:30 Doodsmack wrote:
CNN reported true information, beyond that it's just the reaction of the audience. Individual responsibility right? You say that CNN reported true information and then you say that the reaction of the audience is their responsibility? Do you understand how this is contradictory? If we were sure that what CNN reported was true then we should act on it. The problem is that we don't know for sure what part of what CNN reported is true and what isn't because they don't have a verifiable source for it. They're simply reporting on hearsay and rumors regardless of how credible those rumors are they're simply not something an organization that trades in public trust should be dealing with. The true information that CNN reported on is that Trump was briefed on the memos. CNN said the memos are not corroborated. The true information that CNN reported on was that trump was briefed ON MEMOS. CNN can't verify what the memos are nor what they contained. This means that what Trump was briefed on is rumor and hearsay. On January 12 2017 01:51 Acrofales wrote:On January 12 2017 01:44 Sermokala wrote:On January 12 2017 01:30 Doodsmack wrote:
CNN reported true information, beyond that it's just the reaction of the audience. Individual responsibility right? You say that CNN reported true information and then you say that the reaction of the audience is their responsibility? Do you understand how this is contradictory? If we were sure that what CNN reported was true then we should act on it. The problem is that we don't know for sure what part of what CNN reported is true and what isn't because they don't have a verifiable source for it. They're simply reporting on hearsay and rumors regardless of how credible those rumors are they're simply not something an organization that trades in public trust should be dealing with. What do you mean? CNN reported there was an intelligence briefing about unverified information regarding Russia having leverage over Trump. There is nothing to act on except to attempt to verify that latter information. The briefing itself is newsworthy. Just as Comey's letter to Congress was newsworthy 2 weeks before the election. Comey's letter is in a different world considering it was in response to an already made public investigation. The briefing and the memos in question are not public and have nothing behind the allegation of what they contain(ed). They could have been in truth about anything else and nothing would change about what CNN reported on thats the problem. Comey makes an announcement that next week he has dirt on Hillary. Next week comes by and he shows us emails related to Weiner. Once again, the information was fairly meaningless because there was no dirt on Hillary. Comey knew that. But he presented it as evidence against Hillary before even telling us what it was, and even though the investigation was over since July, he decided to wait until November to announce. The anger was from how he attempted to create a feeling of there being evidence against Hillary to rile up anti-hillary sentiments. Not the actual emails he shared because, once again, there were no emails showing any wrongdoing. I didn't like that Comey published that letter in the week before the election without backing it up with serious evidence. However, I understand why Comey did it as a purely CYA move for himself. He was damned if he released the letter and damned if he didn't. His circumstances were very different from those faced by a news organization such as CNN deciding whether to publish what is, on its face, a gossip column.
On November 03 2016 12:13 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 12:07 Doodsmack wrote:
Saying that the private server was for the purpose of concealing a giant State/CF corruption scandal is one giant assumption. Scandal exhaustion is a function of the profit driven media that is making scandals out of innocuous emails. The only real potential instances of corruption that I'm aware of are Morocco/Mosaic, Uranium One, donors getting State jobs, and the DNC. To say we have a daily cascade of scandals or a disqualifying cybersecurity transgression is a bit biased. Much of this information is coming from "FBI sources" (whatever that means), so I wouldn't count it out as being speculative or a "giant assumption." Fox is also reporting that FBI sources are telling them that an indictment is likely. I'm thinking that it's more and more likely that Comey was forced to write that letter to Congress to save his own ass.
On November 04 2016 14:21 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +Deep divisions inside the FBI and the Justice Department over how to handle investigations dealing with Hillary Clinton will probably fester even after Tuesday’s presidential election and pose a significant test for James B. Comey’s leadership of the nation’s chief law enforcement agency.
The internal dissension has exploded into public view recently with leaks to reporters about a feud over the Clinton Foundation, an extraordinary airing of the agency’s infighting that comes as the bureau deals with an ongoing threat of terror at home and a newly aggressive posture from Russia.
Comey, meanwhile, has come under direct fire for his decision to tell Congress that agents were resuming their investigation of Clinton’s use of a private email server — a revelation that put him at odds with his Justice Department bosses and influenced the presidential campaign.
“He’s got to get control of the ship again,” said Robert Anderson, a former senior official in the FBI who considers Comey a friend. “There’s a lot of tension in the organization, and there’s a lot of tension in Congress and the Senate right now, and all that counts toward how much people trust the FBI.” [...]
Not long after Comey’s new letter to Congress was made public last week, multiple media outlets reported that he had sent the missive against the advice of top Justice Department officials, who felt that commenting publicly on the inquiry would violate a long-standing policy not to take overt steps in investigations that could have an impact so close to an election. Before the weekend was over, the Wall Street Journal revealed there was a different, ongoing feud between FBI agents in New York and career public integrity prosecutors at the Justice Department over whether there was cause to investigate the Clinton Foundation. [...]
“I don’t know what your parents taught you, but mine always taught me you can’t care what people think about you. I do,” he said at a recent conference to mark the 10th anniversary of the Justice’s Department’s National Security Division. “I do because the institution I’m lucky enough to lead depends upon the American people believing that we are honest, competent and independent.” WaPoComey might just survive this as a conflicted but stalwart defender of the institution.
|
On May 11 2017 04:36 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2017 03:33 xDaunt wrote:On January 12 2017 03:29 Thieving Magpie wrote:On January 12 2017 03:09 Sermokala wrote:On January 12 2017 01:51 Doodsmack wrote:On January 12 2017 01:44 Sermokala wrote:On January 12 2017 01:30 Doodsmack wrote:
CNN reported true information, beyond that it's just the reaction of the audience. Individual responsibility right? You say that CNN reported true information and then you say that the reaction of the audience is their responsibility? Do you understand how this is contradictory? If we were sure that what CNN reported was true then we should act on it. The problem is that we don't know for sure what part of what CNN reported is true and what isn't because they don't have a verifiable source for it. They're simply reporting on hearsay and rumors regardless of how credible those rumors are they're simply not something an organization that trades in public trust should be dealing with. The true information that CNN reported on is that Trump was briefed on the memos. CNN said the memos are not corroborated. The true information that CNN reported on was that trump was briefed ON MEMOS. CNN can't verify what the memos are nor what they contained. This means that what Trump was briefed on is rumor and hearsay. On January 12 2017 01:51 Acrofales wrote:On January 12 2017 01:44 Sermokala wrote:On January 12 2017 01:30 Doodsmack wrote:
CNN reported true information, beyond that it's just the reaction of the audience. Individual responsibility right? You say that CNN reported true information and then you say that the reaction of the audience is their responsibility? Do you understand how this is contradictory? If we were sure that what CNN reported was true then we should act on it. The problem is that we don't know for sure what part of what CNN reported is true and what isn't because they don't have a verifiable source for it. They're simply reporting on hearsay and rumors regardless of how credible those rumors are they're simply not something an organization that trades in public trust should be dealing with. What do you mean? CNN reported there was an intelligence briefing about unverified information regarding Russia having leverage over Trump. There is nothing to act on except to attempt to verify that latter information. The briefing itself is newsworthy. Just as Comey's letter to Congress was newsworthy 2 weeks before the election. Comey's letter is in a different world considering it was in response to an already made public investigation. The briefing and the memos in question are not public and have nothing behind the allegation of what they contain(ed). They could have been in truth about anything else and nothing would change about what CNN reported on thats the problem. Comey makes an announcement that next week he has dirt on Hillary. Next week comes by and he shows us emails related to Weiner. Once again, the information was fairly meaningless because there was no dirt on Hillary. Comey knew that. But he presented it as evidence against Hillary before even telling us what it was, and even though the investigation was over since July, he decided to wait until November to announce. The anger was from how he attempted to create a feeling of there being evidence against Hillary to rile up anti-hillary sentiments. Not the actual emails he shared because, once again, there were no emails showing any wrongdoing. I didn't like that Comey published that letter in the week before the election without backing it up with serious evidence. However, I understand why Comey did it as a purely CYA move for himself. He was damned if he released the letter and damned if he didn't. His circumstances were very different from those faced by a news organization such as CNN deciding whether to publish what is, on its face, a gossip column. Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 12:13 xDaunt wrote:On November 03 2016 12:07 Doodsmack wrote:
Saying that the private server was for the purpose of concealing a giant State/CF corruption scandal is one giant assumption. Scandal exhaustion is a function of the profit driven media that is making scandals out of innocuous emails. The only real potential instances of corruption that I'm aware of are Morocco/Mosaic, Uranium One, donors getting State jobs, and the DNC. To say we have a daily cascade of scandals or a disqualifying cybersecurity transgression is a bit biased. Much of this information is coming from "FBI sources" (whatever that means), so I wouldn't count it out as being speculative or a "giant assumption." Fox is also reporting that FBI sources are telling them that an indictment is likely. I'm thinking that it's more and more likely that Comey was forced to write that letter to Congress to save his own ass. Show nested quote +On November 04 2016 14:21 Danglars wrote:Deep divisions inside the FBI and the Justice Department over how to handle investigations dealing with Hillary Clinton will probably fester even after Tuesday’s presidential election and pose a significant test for James B. Comey’s leadership of the nation’s chief law enforcement agency.
The internal dissension has exploded into public view recently with leaks to reporters about a feud over the Clinton Foundation, an extraordinary airing of the agency’s infighting that comes as the bureau deals with an ongoing threat of terror at home and a newly aggressive posture from Russia.
Comey, meanwhile, has come under direct fire for his decision to tell Congress that agents were resuming their investigation of Clinton’s use of a private email server — a revelation that put him at odds with his Justice Department bosses and influenced the presidential campaign.
“He’s got to get control of the ship again,” said Robert Anderson, a former senior official in the FBI who considers Comey a friend. “There’s a lot of tension in the organization, and there’s a lot of tension in Congress and the Senate right now, and all that counts toward how much people trust the FBI.” [...]
Not long after Comey’s new letter to Congress was made public last week, multiple media outlets reported that he had sent the missive against the advice of top Justice Department officials, who felt that commenting publicly on the inquiry would violate a long-standing policy not to take overt steps in investigations that could have an impact so close to an election. Before the weekend was over, the Wall Street Journal revealed there was a different, ongoing feud between FBI agents in New York and career public integrity prosecutors at the Justice Department over whether there was cause to investigate the Clinton Foundation. [...]
“I don’t know what your parents taught you, but mine always taught me you can’t care what people think about you. I do,” he said at a recent conference to mark the 10th anniversary of the Justice’s Department’s National Security Division. “I do because the institution I’m lucky enough to lead depends upon the American people believing that we are honest, competent and independent.” WaPoComey might just survive this as a conflicted but stalwart defender of the institution.
Trump and Xdaunt clearly have similar views of the FBI director. It’s crazy how closely they line up. Its like they are the same person. There is a real chicken and egg issue here that we may never get to the bottom of.
|
United States44296 Posts
On May 11 2017 04:35 HalcyonRain wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2017 04:29 KwarK wrote:On May 11 2017 04:20 HalcyonRain wrote:On May 11 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On May 11 2017 04:02 HalcyonRain wrote:On May 11 2017 04:00 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On May 11 2017 03:49 HalcyonRain wrote:
I must say Trump is excellent at rustling jimmies. Fire the FBI director that the Rats previously wanted fired and they go nuts. Off the Rats go on an irrelevant wild goose chase again, with the media in tow. Quite adorable. Do you really prefer a president who rustles jimmies by doing stupid things instead of someone who actually does his job in a proper manner? Is the schadenfreude worth it? Oh I don't know, political theater is always somewhat entertaining from time to time. But you're right, I'd much rather he get to more important matters such as tax reform. Although this really didn't take much time beyond, "Comey, you're FIRED!". Tax reform isn't happening. They can't even deal with the ACA repeal, which has to come before any attempts to reform the tax code. They need Democrats on board to pass tax reform and Trump's tax plan is not a pill they are willing to swallow. No it won't happen anytime soon. If the Cans win a few seats in the senate though it might, but that's awhile away. But even so they'd have to defeat the H&R Block and other Tax Preparer's lobby to do it. I'd still rather he be working on taxes though. Have you actually seen his tax plan? Do you know what's in it? Because I do, and it's not anything anyone should want. Are you implying that his tax plan would get through both the House and Senate unmolested? I doubt it will. I'd LIKE something that moves the corporate tax rate down to 20-23% and removes deductions, also switching to a territorial tax system would be nice as well. Individual taxes...well I'd take whatever I can get here, as long as it makes it less complicated. I doubt anything will even come close to happening with individual taxes though.
Oddly enough research tends to suggest that lowering taxes at a corporate rate while raising flow-through taxes (like capital gains) generally works better. It's unpopular because instead of the corporation earning 50k, paying 20k in taxes and then handing out 30k in untaxed capital gains to you it results in the corporation earning 50k, paying 10k in taxes and then you paying 25% tax on your 40k dividend for 30k in your pocket. But it results in significantly less offshoring of profits and individuals are less likely to evade taxes than businesses. Corporate taxes probably should be lowered, but only if flow-through taxes are raised.
Honestly though the main priority is funding the fucking IRS. It's criminally underfunded and that allows big entities to systematically avoid meeting their tax obligations because the IRS isn't capable of making them pay. And those tax obligations just get passed down to the people on the street who the IRS can definitely collect from. The run down trucks I see with bumper stickers on them saying "DEFUND THE IRS" are just about the stupidest thing imaginable, these people seem to genuinely believe that it's them who will be beating the underfunded IRS. The less funding the IRS gets the more the tax burden shifts from people with the wealth and incentive to dodge taxes to the people who can't defend themselves.
Right now for every additional dollar we give the IRS they come back with $17 in unpaid taxes that they collected with that dollar. At which point you tell them to keep those $17 and they come back with $289. Rinse and repeat. We should fund the IRS until each additional dollar in enforcement results in less than a dollar in unpaid taxes collected.
Individual taxes, Trump's plan is class warfare. Ending exemptions, ending HoH, ending 10%. And you're right that the tax prep lobby owns DC, we're not getting what we really need which is PAYE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
