After testifying that he had saw no connection to Trump and Russia and that Trump wasn't being investigated this was probably the best time to let him go.

 

Unless I missed it, Comey never testified to any such thing. Despite Trump's self-serving statement in his termination letter, Comey and the FBI are now stating that no such communication (much less 3x) was made to Trump. (Query whether that is because if it happened, it probably would have violated FBI rules.)

 

The testimony I have heard so far is that the investigation is ongoing. Clapper has said on >1 occasion he has not seen evidence of active collusion between Trump and Russia, but that is a far cry from a definitive statement that it never happened.

Geez people, let's get it right. There is no investigation of Presidrnt Trump and ties to Russia. It is a counter intelligence probe into Russia's possibly trying to influence the election.

 

Slam President Trump all you like but get the facts straight.

 

Rely on whatever language parsing you like. The FBI and the Senate Intel cmte are investigating the role Russia played in the 2016 US election. Both have also stated there is no doubt that Russia's efforts were to improve Trump's chances. (The House may also be investigating, but that clown car is already in a ditch based on Nunes' actions and may not be able to be brought back out of it. Not sure if anyone cares.)

Is anyone on the right concerned by Session's involvement in this? He recused himself from both the Russia probe and the HRC investigation but chose to be actively involved in recommending the removal of the lead person involved in both matters? At a minimum, that creates a credibility gap - not something you really want in your AG.

Is anyone on the right concerned by the lack of a communications strategy surrounding this decision? 1st story - just following DAG recommendation. Once that story was countered by effective journalism (i.e., Trump had been planning for some time and asked Sessions and DAG to come up with written support for it), now admitting that it was Trump's call. Being so "tone deaf" as to expect this decision not to have been a big deal. Putting the "told me 3x" in the termination letter only to have that questioned by multiple sources now. Initially denying that Comey had recently requested more $ and agents for the Russia probe and now having to walk that back since it was apparently documented in numerous places and with numerous people.

Trump Fires FBI Director James Comey: Live Coverage of the Fallout

Is anyone on the right concerned by the lack of a communications strategy surrounding this decision? 1st story - just following DAG recommendation. Once that story was countered by effective journalism (i.e., Trump had been planning for some time and asked Sessions and DAG to come up with written support for it), now admitting that it was Trump's call. Being so "tone deaf" as to expect this decision not to have been a big deal. Putting the "told me 3x" in the termination letter only to have that questioned by multiple sources now. Initially denying that Comey had recently requested more $ and agents for the Russia probe and now having to walk that back since it was apparently documented in numerous places and with numerous people.

 

Im not the least bit concerned or do I care. I hope he fires the NSA guy too for letting leaks happen within the Obama Adm about Trump and secretly listening in on them.

Finally, is anyone on the right concerned by the "ham-handed" termination of an FBI Director via the delivery of an envelope to an address they knew / should have known Comey was not? This is not an hourly guy on a plant floor (although even he in most places would get a personal notification and exit process with HR rather than just a letter). You'd think after all those years on The Apprentice, Trump would have wanted to face the guy in person and give him the news. Guess not.

Rely on whatever language parsing you like. The FBI and the Senate Intel cmte are investigating the role Russia played in the 2016 US election. Both have also stated there is no doubt that Russia's efforts were to improve Trump's chances. (The House may also be investigating, but that clown car is already in a ditch based on Nunes' actions and may not be able to be brought back out of it. Not sure if anyone cares.)

 

A counter intelligence probe into Russia and an investigation into Predident Trump are two completely different things. That's not language, that's called facts.

Finally, is anyone on the right concerned by the "ham-handed" termination of an FBI Director via the delivery of an envelope to an address they knew / should have known Comey was not? This is not an hourly guy on a plant floor (although even he in most places would get a personal notification and exit process with HR rather than just a letter). You'd think after all those years on The Apprentice, Trump would have wanted to face the guy in person and give him the news. Guess not.

 

Why does he have to do it in person.

A counter intelligence probe into Russia and an investigation into Predident Trump are two completely different things. That's not language, that's called facts.

 

The left dont want to know the difference.

A counter intelligence probe into Russia and an investigation into Predident Trump are two completely different things. That's not language, that's called facts.

 

The facts are that the FBI is neither confirming or denying that they told Trump that he wasn't being investigated.

Im not the least bit concerned or do I care. I hope he fires the NSA guy too for letting leaks happen within the Obama Adm about Trump and secretly listening in on them.

 

Concerning the bolded, that may part of why Comey is let go. It seems he and the FBI saw no evidence to support President Trump's claims. And they said so. I don't think the President liked the answer he got. Doesn't mean it was true. To this point, that assertion (like any involvement between Russia and Candidate Trump) is pure speculation.

The left dont want to know the difference.

 

I think that might be said for most all parties involved in this mess.

The facts are that the FBI is neither confirming or denying that they told Trump that he wasn't being investigated.

 

President Trump put the FBI and James Comey in a pickle by revealing that Comey allegedly told him three times (once at dinner and twice on the phone according to President Trump) he wasn't being investigated.

President Trump put the FBI and James Comey in a pickle by revealing that Comey allegedly told him three times (once at dinner and twice on the phone according to President Trump) he wasn't being investigated.

 

Yes but that doesn't mean that Trump is telling the truth. His track record hurts him. Or maybe Comey was lying to him. Why won't McCabe confirm or deny what was said instead of copping out by saying he doesn't know what Comey told Trump and also saying that the FBI won't confirm or deny if Trump is actually part of the investigation?