I believe Comey's pre-election statement about Clinton's emails, whether warranted or not, was a factor that helped propel Yrump to a narrow victory. That said, I believe this former FBI Director's assessment of Trump's character and crimjnality is validated by known evidence.
I hope voters are paying attention!
Former FBI Director James Comey asked American voters Sunday night to end Donald Trump's presidency with a "landslide" victory for his opponent in 2020.
"All of us should use every breath we have to make sure the lies stop on January 20, 2021," Comey told an audience at the 92nd Street Y on New York City's Upper East Side. He all but begged Democrats to set aside their ideological differences and nominate the person best suited to defeating Trump in an election.
"I understand the Democrats have important debates now over who their candidate should be," Comey told MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace, "but they have to win. They have to win."
Over the course of more than an hour, Comey repeatedly derided Trump's character, again likening the atmosphere around the President to what he saw in prosecuting mafia figures and suggested that Trump's tweets could eventually amount to witness tampering. Asked if Trump might be an unindicted co-conspirator in some of the crimes recently described by special counsel Robert Mueller, Comey said he didn't know, "but if he's not there, he's certainly close."
Still, Comey said he hoped that Trump would be swept out of office without being impeached. Framing the rise of Trumpism as a political ill the country needed to exorcise at the ballot, he expressed a hope that Americans would "in a landslide rid ourselves of this attack on our values."
"Removal by impeachment would muddy that," he said, and potentially leave a third of the country feeling like their chosen leader had been removed in a "coup."
If Comey had not stabbed Clinton in the back over the emails, we might not be in this situation today. I do not agree with his last statement that an impeachment would be considered "a coup" because a president cannot be impeached without an act committed by that president that is considered a cause for impeachment. So the all-wise Comey speaks again. He needs to choose a side and stick with it. And we need to stop listening to him. What a jerk!
He said "potentially leave a third of the country feeling like their chosen leader had been removed in a coup."
He is right. All you need to do is read the comments of Trump's fans (even here).
So...we are supposed to sympathize with the feelings of the Trump fans with no regard to the feelings of Clinton fans at all. Words like "potentially", "a third", and "feeling like" are that important to you? I was looking at his overall meaning, not nitpicking words.
That's not what he said. And is not about what's important to me or nitpicking words. You obviously didn't understand "his overall meaning".
But you can think whatever you want.
You put the emphasis on those words of his. I didn't. I still think Comey is a two-faced jerk.
I think Comey worries too much about his image. I also think he is genuinely concerned about this president and sincerely wants the American people to know how corrupt and lacking in character he is.
I don't think he is a jerk. I'd have him over for dinner. Now, Trump? There's a jerk! lol
And I agree completely with Comey's statement about the election being the vehicle for a verdict.
Regardless of the Left v. Right, impeach v. celebrate, rhetoric, I too think the best possible outcome, for our nation, and the public's confidence in our democratic process, would be a public verdict - via the ballot box.
Anything else will forever be clouded by claims of partisan politics.
"And I agree completely with Comey's statement about the election being the vehicle for a verdict"
An election is the ideal vehicle for delivering that verdict.
But when people are blatantly tampering with the steering to make it so the vehicle can only turn right, I think something needs to be done as a matter of urgency.
The combination of:
election fraud (real not fake)(3)
the apparent unwillingness to address vulnerabilities in voting machines(4)
power grabs by lame duck officials voted out of office(5)
and continued meddling by foreign governments(6) . . .
. . . all adds up to an extraordinary (and deliberate) attack on the mechanism that could remove Trump from office.
When democratic processes themselves are under attack like this, the adults in Congress (I assume there's still some) nee to intervene.
As long as any action taken is within the bounds of what the Constitution allows, then I could care less about the bleating of Trump and his acolytes who, in my humble opinion, abandoned reason long before now.
(1) https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/p … rs-247905/
(2) https://www.gq.com/story/republican-ger … -wisconsin
(3) https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/05/poli … index.html
(4) https://www.wired.com/story/voting-mach … g-village/
(5) https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/10/us/p … dwest.html
(6) https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics … wray-trump
". . . all adds up to an extraordinary (and deliberate) attack on the mechanism that could remove Trump from office. "
LOL Or is a failed attempt to get someone else elected. Much like the DNC fudging the primaries, right?
Don, your citations certainly warranted investigation. Several didn't survive.
The Crosscheck program is so discredited that the few remaining states using it have suffered court defeats of their resulting actions.
Gerrymandering is a bi-partisan opportunity. It was just the Republicans turn at the helm this last go-round. That too will probably change. Gerrymandering is an atrocity. Let's see how the Democrats address it when they have the power to dso so.
You were spot on in your election fraud citation. One state - one instance. What are the national implications?
The same goes for those stupid lame duck legislature actions. Geez, you would think they just plain forgot about our court systems. But on a national level, could such actions be compared to the Democrats choice of the "majority" nuclear option when it comes to rigging the game?
Amd who wouldn't think foreign meddling would continue in this cyber age? It isn't like they, (those foreign actors), paid a price. That is on the American voter - to wise up.
I disagree. Our system is strong enough for the voter's will to be demonstrated. Comey's point stands as I see it.
For those wondering about Trump's ties to the mob...he's a piece from The Federalist in 2015.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/28/how … o-the-mob/
If you think Trump did not have ties to organized crime, you're not paying attention.
Even though I agree with Comey (and I know he's a private citizen now), I don't think this helps. I don't think he should be this vocal, at least while the investigation is on going. It just fuels Trump's base and their conspiracy theories.
I think you have a valid point. I wonder if Comey feels guilt over his hand in the last election? He is clearly a fallible human being, just like the rest of us.
Ha! I get to disagree with the always reasonable Islandbytes.
I think a voice like Comey's is exactly what is needed now. He makes his opinion of Pres. Trump clear, but in a way that is also, clearly, not partisan. And he also makes clear his preference for a ballot box solution - which I heartily endorse.
To hell with offering a target for 'the base', just as to hell with offering more 'tweets' for his opposition. Let folks declare their belief at the ballot box.
Consider this; What was the last presidential investigation, or slanderous charge that you could view as not a partisan attack?
Comey's plea takes that consideration out of the picture.
I agree with you (and with what he said). It should be the case. But even in this thread we can see is not. Unfortunately , given what happened in the last elections (and what could happen again), I believe there's factors for him to consider. Like I said, at least while the investigation is ongoing. Eventhough he's not longer part of the FBI, he's still part of the investigation.
(I mean, I could care less what trumpsters think, I just don't want him reelected. LOL )
Sounds like Comey has been reading our own Jake Earthshine. Very much like Jake's rants, isn't he?
Comey repeatedly derided Trump's character
likening the atmosphere around the President to what he saw in prosecuting mafia figures
Trump's tweets could eventually amount to witness tampering.
Comey said he didn't know, "but if he's not there, he's certainly close."
Yep. Jake all over, wasn't he? Lots of ugly rhetoric but never anything of substance.
Just keep on not believing your own eyes and ears.
But where was he completely wrong Wilderness?
You have also derided Trump's character.
Considering the admin shuffles, and the various "off the record comments" - think Tillerson and Mattis, and the televised cabinet "lovefest - Thank you Mr. President" meeting, do you think the mafia reference is completely off-base?
As for the tweets - we are in the realm of what the definition of "is" is aren't we? I think there is standing for claims for and against that point - so who is right?
And that last one would also apply to Comey's "certainly close" comment. You might disagree that those tweets concretely say what they are being portrayed as saying, but can you confidently assert that they didn't?
"do you think the mafia reference is completely off-base?"
Yeah. There is exactly zero indication that Donald Trump has any connections to the mafia, in any country in the world. Not even hiring the enforcers young son to mow his yard without knowing who it was. A gross exaggeration, then, without any basis in reality.
"As for the tweets - we are in the realm of what the definition of "is" is aren't we?"
His tweets could eventually exonerate him, make him a virtual god with near infinite understanding and knowledge, too, but I don't see Comey mentioning that side of it. So...yeah, it isn't about looking into your crystal and predicting the future; it's about what is known right now. And Comey is no different than anyone on this forum; until we know then there should be no insinuations of guilt. And "certainly close" is just such an insinuation, for we all know and understand how it will be taken in the public areana.
Awww geez Wilderness. It was a mafia-like reference, not a mafia connection reference.
As for the rest ... yep, like the rest of us, it is just opinion and supposition. That was my point.
OK - the mafia operates completely outside the law, selling drugs, gambling and protection. When did Trump do that? Or in what other way is Trump operating like the mafia?
I get that it was opinion. Seems to me that we have enough millions of opinions without evidence already; another big name is unnecessary and can only be presented to promote mob rule. Yes, I get that he denied that, but why else did he say it at all?
He originally made the mafia-like reference in his book.
For example, in a discussion of a White House meeting with Trump and then chief of staff Reince Priebus in February 2017, Comey says that “because he never stops talking”, Trump “pulls all those present into a silent circle of assent”.
“The encounter left me shaken,” he writes. “I had never seen anything like it in the Oval Office. As I found myself thrust into the Trump orbit, I once again was having flashbacks to my earlier career as a prosecutor against the mob. The silent circle of assent. The boss in complete control. The loyalty oaths. The us-versus-them worldview. The lying about all things, large and small, in service to some code of loyalty that put the organization above morality and the truth.”
Comey appears way too political. I hope this isn't indicative of how he was when he was supposed to be an impartial fact seeker. Although, I fear it is.
Well, do you think an impartial fact seeker would approve of the President of the United States seeking a personal loyalty pledge? Do you think an impartial fact seeker would view that request as appropriate or even legal? What about when the President requests the impartial fact seeker stop investigating the president's former associate? Do you think an impartial fact seeker would view that request as appropriate or legal?
I'm thinking an impartial fact seeker would respond with the same astonishment and distaste that James Coney displays.
I wonder if Comey is tired of Trump attacking him and smearing his reputation on Twitter.
Maybe if Trump shut up, Comey would too.
Please don't tell Bozo Trump to stop impeaching and incriminating himself on twitter: I've never witnessed a bigger bizarre looking dummy in all my life and of course I always knew he and many family members would end up in prison and now prosecutors already have him with indictment material for at least one crime he's been implicated in, and smart money says there are many more to come:
He won't be indicted until all investigations are concluded to avoid a crazy pre-mature "Trump Tantrum" where he maniacally fires everyone in sight before jumping off the white house dome:
As was already said, Comey shot Clinton in the foot during the election. Comey is a hapless camera wh#re, in my opinion. Considering that, his opinion is about as valuable,to me, as pig poop.
Comey shot Clinton in the back, not the foot, but I agree with everything else you said.
Not so, Clinton shot Clinton in the foot.
Clinton violated the rules, and the law, regarding Top Secret information, because she felt she was above the law (at best), or because she was deliberately allowing all her friends in Russia and China gain easy access to all that information (at worst).
If she hadn't had a private server, it wouldn't have happened. If she hadn't played dumb, "did I wipe the server, do you mean with a cloth?"
If she didn't call anyone who didn't support her "deplorables", if she wasn't so arrogant as to say "its my turn" as if the voters didn't have a say in it.
If she hadn't been complicit in one scandal after another, all of which Democrats ignored or made excuses for, its laughable when these people who supported the most corrupt and criminal politician in our lifetimes bash Trump supporters for ignoring his warts.
The highest members within the DNC have come out against her, exposed how she abused her power, stole money from other politicians for her own campaign, fixed the election results so she could steal the nomination from Bernie Sanders.
It truly boggles the mind, that regular people still support her. I understand the talking heads on TV supporting her, that's their job, they kiss her butt if that's what they are instructed to do or they lose their jobs. But any rational American with an IQ above freezing should be sick to death of Clinton, of hearing about her, or seeing her... she is as much the reason why the Democratic party can't move forward on to better things as anyone.
Although I agree with most everything you said, I still say Comey's timing on his email statements had to be calculated to be the most damaging, and garner him the most publicity.
I don't have to like Clinton to be an advocate of fair play.
What she did was wrong. Did damage done warrant an indictment? I suspect yes, the government manipulated by that administration said no. So, although I would be immediately excused from a jury for obvious bias, I say she is innocent unto proven guilty, of punishable crimes. I still speak negatively about her, and that episode, because her behavior and comments when asked sound suspiciously guilty and the Clinton's have a history of incredibly suspicious and damning evidence never gaining traction enough to warrant punishment.
Yes, and they may have never convicted mob boss Al Capone of any crimes, that didn't make him any less a criminal who controlled the Chicago underworld. Judges were bought off and witnesses murdered, he was never convicted, as the Kingpin of crime in Chicago he was untouchable for a long time.
Until he was convicted of income tax evasion and later sentenced to 11 years in federal prison.
Clinton is a former SoS and former First Lady, and it was expected that she was going to be President, they weren't going to find her guilty of anything, and still won't, she has been part of 'their world' for over 30 years.
Although I generally agree with what LTL says here - guilty until proven innocent in a court of law - you make a good point. When political power (or money) is used to prevent even seeing the inside of a courtroom that definition of guilt is rather useless. Clinton made a complete joke of the justice system, every bit as much as Capone did.
I imagine so that you can bring them up for when Trump is incarcerated?
Don't bother, its a surprise to me he's still breathing, his evading some form of legal incarceration once he is no longer president is hard to imagine.
No one is perfect, and no one age 70 (Clinton or Trump) who is powerful enough to become president has gone through life without breaking some laws.
Clinton is an establishment crony. Having spent eight years in the WH, and another four as SoS, with decades of networking in the Halls of D.C. chances of her facing charges is nil. She not exactly J Edgar Hoover, with dirt on everyone, but probably pretty close.
Trump the outsider, the agitator, the man who tried to take on the Establishment, the man who thumbs his nose at everyone who doesn't support him, well, its just a matter of time before the tables are turned on him. Even if it is six years from now, sooner or later he will no longer be President, and his enemies, which by then would be legion, will come for him.
It is always a puzzle when two folks can see the same thing and reach different conclusions Live to learn.
I don't see Comey as being partisan at all. I can easily imagine different wording and statements he could make if he were, but I haven't seen that.
Could the difference be that you think he shouldn't be saying anything at all? Whereas I think, as a private citizen, he has as much right as any of us to speak out. I think he is being damned judicious in what he does say.
by Ralph Schwartz 3 years ago
James Comey just admitted he was a "leaker" to the media - should he be arrested?James Comey has been testifying today and in the course of his testimony has exonerated President Trump, made it clear that the President was never under investigation, and in a surprising revelation admitted...
by Jack Lee 18 months ago
He should get down on his knee and thank God.He could have been prosecuted for his miss deeds.He causes a distraction of our government, 2 years of Russian collusion investigation and 30 million dollars...
by John Coviello 3 years ago
Does Anyone Know Why President Trump Fired FBI Director James Comey?
by Don W 15 months ago
David Holmes has provided evidence that indicates Trump's motives for requesting the leader of Ukraine investigate Biden's son:"An official from the United States Embassy in Kiev confirmed to House impeachment investigators on Friday that he had overheard a call between President Trump and a...
by crankalicious 3 years ago
Say what you will about James Comey's performance as head of the FBI. You can think whatever you want about him. What is absolutely true is that he does NOT have the reputation of being a liar and there is historical evidence to back up his practice of taking accurate notes on his meetings. Both...
by crankalicious 2 months ago
Former National Security Adviser has called for President Trump to suspend the Constitution and call for limited martial law in order to re-run the election that would be overseen by the military due to the massive election fraud.Do you agree with General Flynn?Clearly, President Trump believes...
Copyright © 2021 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|