Should Trump Re-Hire Comey?

[pErvinalia]

What he said was clear and unambiguous. You're interpretation is, as usual, head-scratchingly bizarre. Here's what he said:

...and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia's efforts.

It couldn't be any clearer or unambiguous. I beggars belief that you can read that and think that the investigation isn't expressly looking for links between Trump et al and Russia.

Seriously, go fuck yourself. I don't give a flying fuck what you think "beggars belief" and your rude insults which are part and parcel of your thoroughly disagreeable, mean spirited and unpleasant personality.

You poor snowflake.

You left out the statement of what he said the investigation is: "I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of our counter-intelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election." That's the investigation. Comey has said it six ways from Sunday that they "follow the evidence" and "keep an open mind" which is why that "includes any links..." as you've stated above. It would also "include" anything they find out about non-Trump people involved, and even other candidates' people.

You claimed that the investigation isn't specifically looking at links between Trump's team and Russia. You are categorically unequivocally wrong. Comey's statement is perfectly clear that links between the Trump team and Russia are being investigated.

God damn, you are an insufferable prick, you know that? I only say that to be helpful, actually. Stop being such an insulting douchebag, and people can talk to you without it constantly, every single time, devolving into a fight.

The answer is simple. Stop being so fucking dishonest, and you'll get an easier time from us. Your dishonesty is off the charts. Sort your own fucking problems out before trying to transfer them across to us.

[Forty Two]

What he said was clear and unambiguous. You're interpretation is, as usual, head-scratchingly bizarre. Here's what he said:

...and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia's efforts.

It couldn't be any clearer or unambiguous. I beggars belief that you can read that and think that the investigation isn't expressly looking for links between Trump et al and Russia.

Seriously, go fuck yourself. I don't give a flying fuck what you think "beggars belief" and your rude insults which are part and parcel of your thoroughly disagreeable, mean spirited and unpleasant personality.

You poor snowflake.

LOL, you're such a fag.

You left out the statement of what he said the investigation is: "I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of our counter-intelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election." That's the investigation. Comey has said it six ways from Sunday that they "follow the evidence" and "keep an open mind" which is why that "includes any links..." as you've stated above. It would also "include" anything they find out about non-Trump people involved, and even other candidates' people.

You claimed that the investigation isn't specifically looking at links between Trump's team and Russia. You are categorically unequivocally wrong. Comey's statement is perfectly clear that links between the Trump team and Russia are being investigated.

No.... the statement is perfectly clear that if there are any such links, they would be "included" in the investigation - Comey includes anyone in the investigation if that's where evidence leads. Comey didnot say that there are links being investigated. Read his statement again. That would include "any" links... and "whether there was any collusion..." He'snot saying there were links and they're investigating them, or that there was collusion and and they need to know how far it went. It was a very carefully worded statement, and you have to read the whole thing, not just the blurb that sticks in your pea brain and gives you what you want.

God damn, you are an insufferable prick, you know that? I only say that to be helpful, actually. Stop being such an insulting douchebag, and people can talk to you without it constantly, every single time, devolving into a fight.

The answer is simple. Stop being so fucking dishonest, and you'll get an easier time from us. Your dishonesty is off the charts. Sort your own fucking problems out before trying to transfer them across to us.

Go fuck yourself, you lying piece of shit.

And, can it with the "us" - it's not an "us" - it's you. You're the insufferable prick, and you're hard time is not some calling to task. You're an idiot. Your brain works at half speed, and it's remarkable that you actually think you have some intelligence. You're the worst kind of stupid - the kind that doesn't even recognize its own shortcoming. Your accusations of dishonesty are mere projections of your own personality. Most of your arguments are built on dishonesty and Bush League tactics.

[pErvinalia]

You left out the statement of what he said the investigation is: "I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of our counter-intelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election." That's the investigation. Comey has said it six ways from Sunday that they "follow the evidence" and "keep an open mind" which is why that "includes any links..." as you've stated above. It would also "include" anything they find out about non-Trump people involved, and even other candidates' people.

You claimed that the investigation isn't specifically looking at links between Trump's team and Russia. You are categorically unequivocally wrong. Comey's statement is perfectly clear that links between the Trump team and Russia are being investigated.

No.... the statement is perfectly clear that if there are any such links, they would be "included" in the investigation

BULLSHIT! God you are interminable. It explicitly INCLUDES investigating potential links. It LITERALLY SAYS THEY ARE INCLUDED. This is why debating with you is such a goddamn waste of time.

God damn, you are an insufferable prick, you know that? I only say that to be helpful, actually. Stop being such an insulting douchebag, and people can talk to you without it constantly, every single time, devolving into a fight.

The answer is simple. Stop being so fucking dishonest, and you'll get an easier time from us. Your dishonesty is off the charts. Sort your own fucking problems out before trying to transfer them across to us.

Go fuck yourself, you lying piece of shit.

And, can it with the "us" - it's not an "us" - it's you.

It's really not. How unaware are you? Me, Hermit, L'Emmy, Jim, Brian and others.

You're the insufferable prick, and you're hard time is not some calling to task. You're an idiot. Your brain works at half speed, and it's remarkable that you actually think you have some intelligence. You're the worst kind of stupid - the kind that doesn't even recognize its own shortcoming. Your accusations of dishonesty are mere projections of your own personality. Most of your arguments are built on dishonesty and Bush League tactics.

Nice rant, DaveDodo. Here's a tip, when people like L'Emmy, Hermit, Brian or I point out problems in your "arguments", ADDRESS them, and address them honestly, if you want to avoid the constant charge of being dishonest. Ignoring rebuttals that destroy your world view doesn't lend itself to projecting a persona who can accept being wrong.

[Brian Peacock]

The thrust of the current 'rubuttal' is that investigating links between "Trump et al and Russia" is not an investigation of Donald J Trump's links with Russia - in effect, the narrative is that Trump's not personally responsible in any eay for the actions of the organisation which got him elected.

[pErvinalia]

That's not actually his rebuttal. His rebuttal is inexplicably that the investigation is focussing no more on any Trump team links with Russia than, say, any Democrat links with Russia. It nonsensical, of course. Comey's quote is quite clear.

[Brian Peacock]

That's merely a stepping stone.

[Forty Two]

The thrust of the current 'rubuttal' is that investigating links between "Trump et al and Russia" is not an investigation of Donald J Trump's links with Russia - in effect, the narrative is that Trump's not personally responsible in any eay for the actions of the organisation which got him elected.

In any way? I wouldn't go that far. He's not responsible for everything his organization does. It's no different for other politicians either.

The investigation is, per se, about links. The investigation is, according to Comey, about Russia's meddling in the election. If there are illegal things going on which involve Trump organization personnel, or Trump himself (or Hillary, or Newt, or Obama, or Paul Ryan, or anyone else), then of course that will be explored.

To date, the consistent statement has been that so far there is no evidence of any collusion between Trump organization people and the Russians - no improper links.

Talking to Russians is not illegal. Having business relationships is not illegal. It's not immoral. it's not unethical. It's not illegal or a problem if Russia favors one candidate. It's not even a problem if Russia "meddles" in lawful ways - like if they engage in advertising or propaganda on their own to support one candidate or another.

The thread that seems to exist, at least by way of rumor, is that Russia is thought, by some intelligence folks, to have been the entity that got ahold of the Democrats' emails, and spread them around to favor Trump. The "links" that would be improper here would be if someone in the Trump campaign was involved or communicating with the Russians in order to accomplish that. However, as of today, I think it's fair to say that the evidence of that is a maximum of zero. Isn't it?

What other "links" are a problem? I mean, Nancy Pelosi lied, or misstated, about her interactions with the Russian ambassador. She said she never met with him, but she is shown in photographs meeting with him. So, is that improper? Probably not. And, the fact of the misstatement is not a big deal either. It only becomes a big deal if you have an ax to grind and want to assume the worst in every instance.

[Forty Two]

That's not actually his rebuttal. His rebuttal is inexplicably that the investigation is focussing no more on any Trump team links with Russia than, say, any Democrat links with Russia. It nonsensical, of course. Comey's quote is quite clear.

It is quite clear. The reason he mentions that it "includes" what he said it included is because that's what the Senate Democrats he's talking to had been asking about and that's what he's explaining with his prepared statement.

He doesn't even confirm that there are any "links" with Russia. He just confirms that it's not ruled out. And, there is a long bit of testimony, which you don't bother with, because the snippet you keep on about gives you what you want, where he is pressed and pressed and pressed to disclose that he is or isn't including different people in the investigation, and he consistently refuses to answer, saying he wouldn't even say one way or the other.

[Brian Peacock]

... It only becomes a big deal if you have an ax to grind and want to assume the worst in every instance.

Ha! I see what you did there.

[pErvinalia]

That's not actually his rebuttal. His rebuttal is inexplicably that the investigation is focussing no more on any Trump team links with Russia than, say, any Democrat links with Russia. It nonsensical, of course. Comey's quote is quite clear.

It is quite clear. The reason he mentions that it "includes" what he said it included is because that's what the Senate Democrats he's talking to had been asking about and that's what he's explaining with his prepared statement.

He doesn't even confirm that there are any "links" with Russia. He just confirms that it's not ruled out. And, there is a long bit of testimony, which you don't bother with, because the snippet you keep on about gives you what you want, where he is pressed and pressed and pressed to disclose that he is or isn't including different people in the investigation, and he consistently refuses to answer, saying he wouldn't even say one way or the other.

That's lovely, dear. But you claimed that they aren't looking into potential links between Trump's team and Russia. They are. Comey confirmed it.

[JimC]

And a leader should man up; if a member of "Trump's team" has done something wrong, designed to further the goals of the team, then the team leader needs to be held responsible.

[Forty Two]

That's not actually his rebuttal. His rebuttal is inexplicably that the investigation is focussing no more on any Trump team links with Russia than, say, any Democrat links with Russia. It nonsensical, of course. Comey's quote is quite clear.

It is quite clear. The reason he mentions that it "includes" what he said it included is because that's what the Senate Democrats he's talking to had been asking about and that's what he's explaining with his prepared statement.

He doesn't even confirm that there are any "links" with Russia. He just confirms that it's not ruled out. And, there is a long bit of testimony, which you don't bother with, because the snippet you keep on about gives you what you want, where he is pressed and pressed and pressed to disclose that he is or isn't including different people in the investigation, and he consistently refuses to answer, saying he wouldn't even say one way or the other.

That's lovely, dear. But you claimed that they aren't looking into potential links between Trump's team and Russia. They are. Comey confirmed it.

I claimed this: "This is not an investigation of the President's own affairs. The investigation is of Russia's meddling in the election. Comey mentioned that it "includes" anything they find out about the Trump campaign's communications, etc. However, it is NOT - expressly NOT -- an investigation OF Trump or of Trump's campaign or of the Trump administration. "

I did not claim that they aren't "looking into" something. This is your typical nonsense. I flat out say what Comey "included." What you're missing is the context, and the fact that nobody has been confirmed as being under investigation, and that it has been confirmed by Feinstein and such, through their conversations with Comey, that Trump is not under investigation himself. Comey has not said there are links they are investigating. He just said that if there are any, they would be included in the investigation and he also said that they follow where the facts lead - i.e., anywhere, to anybody, found to be involved in something potentially illegal. As of this a couple of weeks ago, there is expressly "no evidence" of any collusion between anyone on the Trump team and Russia.

[Forty Two]

And a leader should man up; if a member of "Trump's team" has done something wrong, designed to further the goals of the team, then the team leader needs to be held responsible.

Would 'twere that rule applied to Hillary Clinton....

[pErvinalia]

That's not actually his rebuttal. His rebuttal is inexplicably that the investigation is focussing no more on any Trump team links with Russia than, say, any Democrat links with Russia. It nonsensical, of course. Comey's quote is quite clear.

It is quite clear. The reason he mentions that it "includes" what he said it included is because that's what the Senate Democrats he's talking to had been asking about and that's what he's explaining with his prepared statement.

He doesn't even confirm that there are any "links" with Russia. He just confirms that it's not ruled out. And, there is a long bit of testimony, which you don't bother with, because the snippet you keep on about gives you what you want, where he is pressed and pressed and pressed to disclose that he is or isn't including different people in the investigation, and he consistently refuses to answer, saying he wouldn't even say one way or the other.

That's lovely, dear. But you claimed that they aren't looking into potential links between Trump's team and Russia. They are. Comey confirmed it.

I claimed this: "This is not an investigation of the President's own affairs. The investigation is of Russia's meddling in the election. Comey mentioned that it "includes" anything they find out about the Trump campaign's communications, etc. However, it is NOT - expressly NOT -- an investigation OF Trump or of Trump's campaign or of the Trump administration. "

I did not claim that they aren't "looking into" something. This is your typical nonsense. I flat out say what Comey "included." What you're missing is the context, and the fact that nobody has been confirmed as being under investigation, and that it has been confirmed by Feinstein and such, through their conversations with Comey, that Trump is not under investigation himself. Comey has not said there are links they are investigating. He just said that if there are any, they would be included in the investigation.. .

Stop lying. That's not what he said. He didn't say they "would be included". He said explicitly that they (potential links) ARE included.

[mistermack]

Why on Earth would the Russians collude with the Trump campaign?

If they don't like Hillary, then they might well sow some shit that harms her image. But they don't need any contact or help from Trump's buddies to do that.

If anyone swung the election for Trump, it was Comey, not the Russians.

He was the one who made the announcement about furthur investigation of emails. At the most critical time possible. And probably did swing the election result.

Maybe the Russians were paying Comey? This should be investigated.