President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey this evening in a surprise move. Various politicians and the media have openly referred to the act as “Nixonian” and “another Saturday Night Massacre.” I have previously stated how the Saturday Day Massacre has been misrepresented. I also do not agree with Jeff Toobin on CNN tonight that the decision was clearly due to the fact that Comey’s investigation was getting “too close” to President Trump. I do not see how one can reach that conclusion after months of criticism over Comey’s past conduct, including widespread anger from Democrats over his public statements on Hillary Clinton. I agree that the timing is concerning and legitimately questioned. However, the Administration may also have waited for the Deputy Attorney General to be confirmed to allow a career prosecutor to review the matter and to concur with the decision. Democrats denounced Comey over his actions regarding the Clinton Administration. The matter was given to the Deputy Attorney General who was just confirmed recently.
President Trump took efforts in his letter state that Comey assured him that he was not under investigation. He stated that “While I greatly appreciate you informing me, on three separate occasions, that I am not under investigation, I nevertheless concur with the judgement of the Department of Justice that you are not able to effectively lead the bureau.”
The White House released a memorandum from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, a respected career prosecutor. He found that Comey’s prior conduct did “substantial damage” to the FBI’s “reputation and credibility.” He noted that the FBI Director is never empowered to supplant federal prosecutors and assume command of the Justice Department” and that his conduct was “a textbook example of what federal prosecutors and agents are taught not to do.”
Rosentstein served in both Republican and Democratic administrations. He is not viewed as a political hack. Moreover, the firing of Comey results in the elevation of an individual widely denounced by Republicans: Andrew McCade. That would hardly be an optimal political switch. The question is whether the White House will bypass McCade due to his political controversy involving his wife and select someone else to serve as acting FBI Director.
Notably, Comey’s testimony last week resulted in a correction issued today by the FBI as to one of his representations. After that hearing, a source referred to Comey in saying that he was “as popular as cholera” on the Hill.
FBI directors generally hold 10-year term limits and cannot be reappointed, but Comey’s predecessor, Robert Mueller III was given special permission by Congress to serve an extra two years. However, the director is effectively an at-will employee who serves at the pleasure of the president. Only one president has fired a director. In 1993, President Bill Clinton fired William Sessions after the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility found ethical problems involving the use of FBI plane to visit his daughter and the payment for a security system installed in his home
162 thoughts on “TRUMP FIRES FBI DIRECTOR JAMES COMEY”
I continue to be amused by the constant efforts of many to attribute Mr. Trump’s decisions to coherent, rational thinking. The Comey firing is not complicated. Trump has become increasingly annoyed by the various investigations into alleged Russian connections with his campaign. Comey’s pursuit of the investigation was a sign of disloyalty. When Trump decides someone has been disloyal, he fires that person. He fired Comey because he can. All of the after-the-fact explanations by the White House are fluff.
I continue to be amused by the constant efforts of many to pretend they have direct knowledge of what actually annoys or motivates Trump. If they had any real knowledge, they would be accurately predicting his actions instead of providing a postmortem.
Mr. Trump is unpredictable because he operates on the basis of emotion and impulse, and that is precisely why his views on any given topic can change within the space of a day.
No. That isn’t true. But it is something that you desperately need to believe to protect your ego. Because if Trump isn’t emotional, then he might actually be intelligent, and that means that maybe you aren’t right about everything after all. And Democrats are like the Aristocrats of several centuries ago. They deem themselves having superior intellect simply by virtue of who they are. That is why you see so many Democrats on this website cluelessly offering up their opinion, or their conclusion about a thing, as superior to any actual facts or evidence about a thing. Heck, who needs inconvenient things like facts or evidence, when you are an intellectually and morally superior Democrat???
There’s some free psychoanalysis for you!
Wow. I see that you disagree. But you can skip the free psychoanalysis. I do not “desperately need to believe” anything and have no interest in pointless arguments about moral or intellectual superiority. My opinion of Mr. Trump is based on what I have observed in his public appearances, his public statements, his appointment choices and his daily reaction to events. Try as I might (with my limited capacities), I have been unable to discern within the man any core set of values or philosophical beliefs. He is needy, petulant, emotionally stunted and boorish. Frankly, I will be surprised should he survive a single term in office.
In all seriousness, your statement “I have been unable to discern within the man any core set of values or philosophical beliefs. He is needy, petulant, emotionally stunted and boorish. ” is a walking, talking, crawling upon its belly like a reptile, screaming textbook manifestation of PSYCHOLOGICAL PROJECTION.
I know that you truly believe that you are simply offering intelligent, arm’s-length opinions about Trump, but to the trained eye, the things you say are just blatant self-defense mechanisms. It is like when the FBI BAU Team goes to a crime scene, and the poor victim has been stabbed 198 times, and one of the Investigators drolly says, “Hmmm. I think this was personal. . . ”
Duh! Calling Captain Obvious! This is the same conclusion one comes to when reading your Trump putdowns. They are gross overkill, and far beyond intelligent commentary, or even a competent evidentiary basis. Thus, your comments reveal more about yourself, and your mental functioning, than they do about Trump.
Please consider seeking professional help. If you can come to understand the deep emotional roots of your thought processes, then increased happiness will not be the direct result, but instead, an indirect result of better understanding of your own humanity, and coming to grips with it.
For Pete’s sake, I have closely followed Trump since he first announced his candidacy. The guy’s a moral slob. And why in the world would I seek advice from the “trained eye” of someone who hides her identity behind a pseudonymous reference to a member of the Manson cult and once ardently pursued birtherism fantasies? Trained in what, precisely?
Squeek, I apologize for my last comment. It was cruel. However, I have many concerns about Mr. Trump that I consider legitimate and serious, and I find that his supporters tend to dismiss criticism without a willingness to discuss anything in depth.
I didn’t think it was cruel, nor did I need an apology. Sometimes I am just a b*tch, and fully deserve what I get. Plus, I don’t take any of this stuff personally, and I hope that you don’t.
And true, you are right that you have a right to an opinion about Trump, and it doesn’t have to agree with mine. FWIW, I also think he has made some boo-boos, but I do not require perfection in a President. But I think sometimes, the criticisms can go too far, way beyond any reasonable basis. A “Freudian Slip” only requires one word. The same with other words and terms that can reveal more about the speaker than the object of the speech. For example, if I slam some other chick, and say she is crazy, irrational, and her boobs are too perfect. Now crazy and irrational, I might get a pass on. But you can bet the “boobs being too perfect” is going to come off as pure jealousy of the boobs. And justifiably so.
The same is true of some of the words that you used. For example, ask yourself what kind of a mindset allows one person to call another person “boorish.” Or petty, or childish. Those terms require a speaker to think themselves in a superior position to the object. IMHO, calling Trump “boorish” has a necessary precondition that you consider yourself not-boorish, and more sophisticated than Trump.
Which is why I said what I did. Now as to whether I am right or wrong, only you and any potential therapist can know for sure. 🙂
Moral slob? I’ll bet you’ve been retained by far worse. 🙂
The truth is that over the course of 40+ years, I have litigated against more than a few mini-Trumps: the guy who sells the single working mom a “reliable” car that breaks down on the way home from the lot; the contractor who rejects a sub’s draw request and agrees to give him enough to meet “net payroll” so that he can at least keep his crew together; the real estate investors who convince an elderly woman to hold a second mortgage, promise to pay off the first, and pay neither while collecting rent on the property until the inevitable foreclosure; the business partner who starts a “side” business with inventory from the partnership; and my favorite, the promoter who solicits monies from members of his own church to invest using “biblical” principles.
I have also represented banks and developers and large corporations, but that’s what pays the bills. My main client base is represented by the true examples I noted above, and that’s where most of the damage we do to each other occurs, in situations in which the victims cannot afford attorney’s fees and there are no insurance companies on the other end to satisfy a judgment. LOL. My goal in going to law school was not to make a lot of money, and my wife will tell you that I have ably succeeded in my goal. In any event, I have developed a deep disdain over the years for people who take advantage of employees, or who prosper through fraud or who use bankruptcy as a weapon against those who lack the wherewithal to secure themselves in advance. And that, rightly or wrongly, is how I view Mr. Trump based upon his business dealings and his demonstrated lack of respect for other human beings, Squeeky’s psychiatric observations notwithstanding.
Your wife may agree with your statement but I suspect both of you place a higher value on the work you have done.
I have 100% confidence that Donald Trump the citizen has not achieved whatever he has in his private sector dealings without moral blemish. I also believe he has largely succeeded because he could afford to work the law to his advantage. For that I blame those that write and enforce the law. That being said, I’m not concerned with his everlasting soul. My concerns about his character and qualifications for President are now moot. If we are going drag character into the political equation then let’s amend the constitution to require some measurable character standard to be met for qualification for office (and to stay in office). That isn’t going to happen. So lacking that, let’s enforce the standard the framers intended and eliminate every legal maneuver that enables EVERY public servant to ignore their oath of office.
Just out of curiosity, Squeeky, are you an MD psychiatrist, or just a PhD psychologist?
Perhaps neither. I just slept at a Holiday Inn last night!
Just to throw a little gasoline on the fire:
I see that Trump had the Russian ambassador in for a talk today. Maybe the ambassador was giving The Donald his latest instructions. Or maybe threatening what The Donald had better do, “or else.” Or maybe The Donald was making a report to the ambassador, as to how well the Trump properties were doing, thanks to Russian investments.
My, my, my. And The Donald thinks that all this will just go away?
Oh FFS, the POTUS can’t meet with the Russian ambassador? Seriously? Are you ill?
When Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton had their “meeting on the tarmac,” most posters here knew — just KNEW — that the meeting could not possibly be innocuous, and had to involve scheming and nefarious dealings of some sort. Without any proof whatsoever.
Well, I can be just as paranoid about Trump with respect to ANY meetings with any Russians. In my opinion, he should avoid any direct PRIVATE conversations with Russians (even the ambassador) until the issues surrounding possible Russian interference in our elections are settled, by independent investigation.
Another interesting examination of these events:
“I also do not agree with Jeff Toobin on CNN tonight that the decision was clearly due to the fact that Comey’s investigation was getting “too close” to President Trump. I do not see how one can reach that conclusion after months of criticism over Comey’s past conduct, including widespread anger from Democrats over his public statements on Hillary Clinton.”
Gee Jonathan, just what the hell are you saying? Comey said he followed the facts in his investigations. The Democrats criticized his handling of the Clinton email matter. Does that bar them from his handling of the Trump collusion with Russia? No, it does not.
Look at this Jonathan and tell everyone about that legitimate concern of yours over the timing of the firing:
People fired by Trump:
People investigating Trump:
I’m beginning to discern a pattern, if you will.
It’s hard for me to see any U.S. ties to Russia…except for the Flynn thing and the Manafort thing and the Tillerson thing and the Sessions thing and the Kushner thing and the Carter Page thing and the Roger Stone thing and the Felix Sater thing and the Boris Ephsteyn thing and the Rosneft thing and the Gazprom thing and the Sergey Gorkov banker thing and the Azerbajain thing and the “I love Putin” thing and the Donald Trump, Jr. thing and the Sergey Kislyak thing and the Russian Affiliated Interests thing and the Russian Business Interests thing and the Emoluments Clause thing and the Alex Schnaider thing and the hack of the DNC thing and the Guccifer 2.0 thing and the Mike Pence “I don’t know anything” thing and the Russians mysteriously dying thing and Trump’s public request to Russia to hack Hillary’s email thing and the Trump house sale for $100 million at the bottom of the housing bust to the Russian fertilizer king thing and the Russian fertilizer king’s plane showing up in Concord, NC during Trump rally campaign thing and the Nunes sudden flight to the White House in the night thing and the Nunes personal investments in the Russian winery thing and the Cyprus bank thing and Trump not releasing his tax returns thing and the Republican Party’s rejection of an amendment to require Trump to show his taxes thing and the election hacking thing and the GOP platform change to the Ukraine thing and the Steele Dossier thing and the Leninist Bannon thing and the Sally Yates can’t testify thing and the intelligence community’s investigative reports thing and the Trump reassurance that the Russian connection is all “fake news” thing and the Spicer’s Russian Dressing “nothing’s wrong” thing and the Chaffetz not willing to start an investigation thing and the Chaffetz suddenly deciding to go back to private life in the middle of an investigation thing and the The Lead DOJ Investigator Mary McCord SUDDENLY in the middle of the investigation decides to resign thing and the appointment of Pam Bondi who was bribed by trump in the trump university scandal appointed to head the investigation thing and the The White House going into full-on cover-up mode, refusing to turn over the documents related to the hiring and subsequent firing of Flynn thing and the Chaffetz and White House blaming the poor vetting of Flynn on Obama thing and the Poland and British intelligence gave information regarding the hacking back in 2015 to Paul Ryan and he didn’t do anything thing and the Agent M16 following the money thing And now the trump team KNEW about Flynn’s involvement but hired him anyway thing and The Corey Lewendowski thing and the Preet Bharara firing thing but before he left he transferred evidence against trump to a state level Schneiderman thing And the Betsy Devos’ Brother thing And the Sebastian Gorka thing And the Greg Gianforte from Montana thing And the pence actually was warned about Flynn before he was hired thing and the Pence and Manafort connection thing And the 7 Allies coming forward with audio where trump was picked up in incidental wire tapping thing and the carter Page defying the Senate’s order to hand over his Russian contact list AND NOW the trump wants to VETO Sally Yates’ testimony thing!!!
SO yeah there’s probably nothing there!
Why are you letting the facts get in the way of your opinions? That is unusual around here.
The timing of the firing of Comey stinks to high heaven. Regardless of what your opinion of Comey is. Turley turns a blind eye to that. Which is unfortunately typical for him these days.
One could also say that the timing was perfect.
This is an interesting take on the situation:
I knew that Comey’s net worth was in the millions, but I had read that he had some Berkshire Hathaway stock and other lucrative investments. How do you earn $6mil working for Lockheed Martin?
From the article:
“Comey has been a deep state operative for most of his professional career:
He earned more than $6 million in one year working for Lockheed Martin (manufacturer of the F-35 debacle), the year they became a Clinton Foundation donor.
He became a member of the board at HSBC bank shortly after NY AG at the time Loretta “tarmac” Lynch let the Clinton Foundation partner slide with a slap on the wrist for laundering drug money.
He let Hillary off the hook for egregious illegal violations of national security by recommending not to prosecute her.”
This part: “While I greatly appreciate you informing me, on three separate occasions, that I am not under investigation, I nevertheless concur with the judgement of the Department of Justice that you are not able to effectively lead the bureau.” … is, to me, incongruous – to be polite about it. Difficult to believe that a lawyer of Comey’s experience — federal prosecutor, Deputy US Attorney General — would even think of making such a statement, under the circumstances.
Comey’s boss decided that he had to go
Not President Trump.
The President took the recommendation seriously
and acted accordingly.
Given the past propensity of this blog to tilt toward Trump this commentary should not come as a surprise.
A bunch of Putin Trump bots over here
If anybody knows the answer: why can the President fire the FBI Director, but the IRS Commissioner has to be impeached by Congress? Can Trump fire the IRS guy? Just wondering……
Nevermind, I found my own answer. My research indicates that the IRS Comm’r can either be fired by the Pres or impeached by Congress, but if the House votes to impeach, it has to be confirmed by the Senate.
Sometimes I feel like life is imitating the art of Mean Girls.
Explain to me again who we’re not speaking to?
Comey was the darling of Republicans. He was anathema to Republicans. Comey was the darling of the Democratic Party. He was the sole reason Hillary Clinton lost and the Dems hate him. He’s too political. He’s non biased. He had no business sharing the status of an in progress investigation to the public. He had a public duty to reveal the status of the investigation.
It’s enough to make my head spin.
He is not only a polarizing figure; his magnetic field seems to flip every few months as to whom he’s accused of aiding and abetting and who sees him as a political hack.
When Trump follows the recommendations of his Deputy AG, he’s “Nixonian.” (Even though Trump was not under investigation.) If he had not followed the recommendation, Dems would have accused him of protecting the man who single handedly topped the blameless Queen of the DNC.
This kind of reminds me of Russia. Dems accuse Trump of being a Russian puppet, but Trump keeps sending out fighter jets to roust them out of our airspace, and relations have been decidedly hostile, which, again, the Dems have a problem with. They blame Trump for our deteriorating Russian relations, completely ignoring the ejection of all the Russian diplomats, and the searing anti-Russia rhetoric. Maybe, just maybe, there is more than one person to blame for the current state of affairs.
Maybe the Dems need someone to help them keep their stories straight. Because it is obvious that they just hate Republicans and will flounder around for any reason to keep hammering home the ad hominem message that they are EVIL. And apparently enough people just nod along without noticing the reversals.
No it isn’t. Karen S just gave a very cogent analysis of the complete lack of honor and integrity exhibited by the Democratic Party higher-ups. True to Democratic form, you just call names and eschew any sort of reasoned analysis. Because truth, consistency, and good sense can’t stand in the way of promoting the DNC Propaganda Du Jour.
Yep. The Little Rotten Apples don’t fall far from the Rotten Democratic Party Tree.
Well said to both Squeeky and Karen!
Never ending babble from a poorly written script
The word “Republicans” has 11 letters, and you respectfully spell it out each time. The word “Democrats” has 9 letters, and yet you feel obliged on no fewer than 5 occasions to refer to them as “Dems”. Perhaps you think one-syllable words are perjorative and using them as descriptors makes you appear clever in the way you’ve inserted a subtle criticism in the sub-text? You might want to read Hemingway, or if that’s too hard, you might consider how civil discussions between partisans who disagree are at the heart of functioning democracy. Just a thought.
A “RepubliCon” is a member of the Republican Party who is a convict. An ExCon is an ex Republican. A con man is both. Comey is a con man who knows too much.
statsguy – Hemingway writes at a 5th grade reading level, so is that some kind of insult?
My guess is that career politicians are p**sing themselves as we speak. 🙂
Other than lacking the confidence of Democrats and Republicans in Congress, what was wrong with Comey?
I’d prefer the first person to be fired to be the egregious John Koskinen.
I suspect one problem may be that the Department of Justice is a jumble of agencies which are customarily under the authority of multiple departments in state government and especially local government. The federal police are placed under the jurisdiction of prosecutors, who, as we speak are addled by the contemporary progressive conception of law, wherein it’s an instrument of political warfare. Separating the federal police and federal prosecutors would at least get the police away from the prosecutors. Having the Attorney-General and U.S. Attorneys serve fixed terms might assist in promoting professionalism. OTOH, it might just feed the sort of corruptions of the life-tenured appellate judiciary.
The bar is poisonous, and corrupts everything.
The head of the FBI was the place to start.
IRS Comm’r Koskinen didn’t do anything. He was appointed well after the Lois Lerner scandal. He was asked to testify before Congress as to what he knew of the matter, and he did so. The big gripe is that the IRS failed to turn over all of her emails. The agency relied on quasi-professional IT employees to retrieve them, and they were unable to retrieve some deleted emails. The IRS IT guy who testified before Congress about his efforts is legally blind. Which is actually rather comical, although unfortunate. He was hired under civil service mandates to hire the disabled. That was Koskinen’s mistake. He was new to the agency and didn’t realize how inept their in-house IT Dept is. He should have brought in an outside IT company to secure the emails. Of course, then he would be blamed for wasting money. But an outside, independent contractor that has well qualified, well-paid IT professionals could have retrieved all the emails early on and avoided the conspiracy nut speculation.
IRS Comm’r Koskinen didn’t do anything. He was appointed well after the Lois Lerner scandal.
Yes he did. He was responsible for the long-running game of hide-the-ball. If you think he was ever acting in good faith, I’m selling bridges.
This is all better than Hillary The 8th.
We have no
Idea how badly this ends.
Fiddling while the world burns…
No, that was President Obama.
He coloring red lines on maps not fiddling. In a safe space, you know.
Actually, Trump is causing the world to burn.
The world was on fire when Trump took office. The Muslim Marxist called Obummer left it a mess.
And we have a WINNER!
Da Libruls! Da Libruls! Da Libruls!
False and false again.
Quit bbroadcasting lies.
So, what evidence do you cite, that Obama is either a Muslim or a Marxist? If he is a Muslim, why does he keep going to church? If he is a Marxist, why did he never call for the abolition of private property?
For the record, I couldn’t care less what he is, as long as he is no longer the President. Now that being said, you cannot really be that naive. How far along in politics do you believe anyone would rise by professing to be Muslim (may happen yet) and more importantly, calling for the abolition of private property?
That is the difference between an Executive and a Politician.
Personally I’m finding the change very refreshing. He’s learning that like in the military world no one is not expendable and everyone has one to three backups. He’ll let the pundits hee haw and gee haw around and then name someone he’s already picked. This will make a fine practice run on nuking as a daily exercise followed by a seriously great series of exercises for VP Pence who is going to be more than prepared for his eight.
We’re already getting feelers and questions in the non-party affiliated or represented crowd. Like the man in the golf movie Let The Big Dogs Rip- or something ha ha!
You may well see both the Democrats and Reublicans disappear as parties replaced by the Constitutional Republic Party AND Constitutional Centrist Coalition IN the center. The Menshevics to the left and the moderate whatever RINOs on the right. What’s left of them – if anything – or something.
Do you favor the installation of, say, a Turkish style authoritarian presidency?
No. I’d favor an old-style American judiciary that stays in its goddamn lane. It’s time for Congress and the President to make their lives nasty.
Do you think that the judiciary should have any role to check overreach on the part of the President or Congress? What, exactly should be the judiciary’s “goddamn lane”?
1. Adjudication of individual cases and in so doing avoidance of policy questions unless they cannot be avoided.
2. Respect for democratic choice except when an unambiguous constitutional standard has been breached, with the proviso that stare decsis should restrain a federal judge from declaring paper money unconstitutional. Hint: any use of the equal protection clause to second guess a legislative body is invalid. Hint: the distinction between inter-state and intra-state commerce is not factitious.
Time for a special prosecutor.
Yep. Hillary must be held accountable. And Lois Lerner, Douglas Shulman, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, John Koskinen Jon Corzine, &c.
You forgot Bob Menendez
Seems like that is what is happening here.
You know this is the story line CNN and BSNBC will be running over and over – that Trump is acting like he’s still a reality TV star.
I want to know what happens to Loretta Lynch in all this? Nothing? SHE, in large part, caused this crisis by meeting with Bubba on her plane, and by allegedly refusing to empanel a grand jury in order to protect Hillary.
You know that Hillary is not an innocent victim here – and that Bubba never really wanted to be emasculated by his wife into playing second fiddle in the White House. That would have been way too painful for Bill Clinton AND the rest of the world to watch.
Trump just took care of firing the man Hillary blamed for her loss.
This whole story that took place during the Obama Admistration 2016, in the middle of a presidential campaign, every one involved acted badly and in some cases criminally.
None of this would have happened if Hillary Clinton did not try to bypass government rules, laws and procedures in setting up a hidden, private mail server instead of using secure govt servers.
Moreover, Hillary by stalling all investigations into the illegal email server did herself no favors by not getting the issue cleared up before the election.
Bill Clinton should never have discussed a single thing with AG Loretta Lynch while his wife was under investigation.
AG Loretta either should not have allowed the meeting or once it occurred, recuse herself from any decisions on the Clinton affair.
Comey finally should not have imposed himself on the election process in any way and let the investigators and those responsible make their prosecutorial recommendations without interference.
Hopefully, we can take some lessons learned from the broken Justice system we had under Obama.
We dodged some huge bullets here. The rule of law was at stake.
The dictator does not care about the rule of law.
Joe – since Congress is spinning it’s wheels, somebody has to do something. Trump got advice from both his AG and a career Asst AG to fire Comey. That is not the act of a dictator.
Yes, but Obama’s out of office now, so let’s stop dwelling about the past.
Be happy to. Here’s a suggestion. He and Mooch move to Chicago or Honolulu, petition for re-admission to the bar, work as ordinary lawyers for the next dozen years or so, take no honoraria, and keep the frequency of their public statements somewhere around the level established by Presidents Eisenhower, Bush pere, and Bush fils.
And voluntarily relinquish their Secret Service detail after 12 years; and eschew any ‘presidential library’.
You know this is the story line CNN and BSNBC will be running over and over – that Trump is acting like he’s still a reality TV star.
Which he is indeed doing…
I think you’re projecting your own insecurities about “emasculation.” Bill Clinton clearly wanted Hillary to be the first female president of the U.S. and that is why he met with Loretta Lynch. It was Lynch who should have declined the meeting. But her action was a breach of DOJ ethics rules, not a crime. So there really isn’t anything that can be done about ol’ LL. She was a political hack doing the bidding of Obama. She’s retired somewhere, probably writing a book to make money and defend her tattered reputation.
Reblogged this on pundit from another planet.
Comey, Comey bo bomi
banana fanna fo fomi
fee fi fo momi
Try posting something intelligent for once…
You might find it refreshing…
ukFay uFay on the ooyaeh. You live in a republic which is stupid. I will post something intelligent. Ever hear of the Cointel Program? Probably not. Ever hear of J. Edgar Hoover? Probably not.
John Edgar Hoover (January 1, 1895 – May 2, 1972), better known as J. Edgar Hoover, was the first Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) of the United States. He was appointed as the sixth director of the Bureau of Investigation — predecessor to the FBI — in 1924 and was instrumental in founding the FBI in 1935, where he remained director until his death in 1972, aged 77. Hoover is credited with building the FBI into a larger crime-fighting agency than it was at its inception and with instituting a number of modernizations to police technology, such as a centralized fingerprint file and forensic laboratories.
Later in life and after his death, Hoover became a controversial figure as evidence of his secretive abuses of power began to surface. He was found to have exceeded the jurisdiction of the FBI, and to have used the FBI to harass political dissenters and activists, to amass secret files on political leaders, and to collect evidence using illegal methods. Hoover consequently amassed a great deal of power and was in a position to intimidate and threaten sitting presidents. According to biographer Kenneth Ackerman, the notion that Hoover’s secret files kept presidents from firing him is a myth. However, Richard Nixon was recorded as stating in 1971 that one of the reasons he did not fire Hoover was that he was afraid of reprisals against him from Hoover.
According to President Harry S. Truman, Hoover transformed the FBI into his private secret police force. Truman stated: “we want no Gestapo or secret police. The FBI is tending in that direction. They are dabbling in sex-life scandals and plain blackmail. J. Edgar Hoover would give his right eye to take over, and all congressmen and senators are afraid of him.”
In 1979, there was a large increase in conflict in the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) under Senator Richard Schweiker, which had re-opened the investigation of the assassination of President Kennedy and reported that Hoover’s FBI “failed to investigate adequately the possibility of a conspiracy to assassinate the President”. The HSCA further reported that Hoover’s FBI “was deficient in its sharing of information with other agencies and departments”.
Because Hoover’s actions came to be seen as abuses of power, FBI directors are now limited to one 10-year term, subject to extension by the United States Senate.
J. Edgar Hoover Was Homosexual, Blackmailed by Mob, Book Says
February 06, 1993|From Associated Press
WASHINGTON — A new book contends that former FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover was a homosexual who was blackmailed by the Mafia into denying the existence of organized crime for decades.
Author Anthony Summers writes in his book, “Official and Confidential: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover,” that top organized crime figures Meyer Lansky and Frank Costello obtained photos of Hoover’s alleged homosexual activity with longtime aide Clyde Tolson and used them to ensure that the FBI did not target their illegal activities.
There long have been rumors that Hoover was homosexual, often arising from his sharing a bachelor house with Tolson for years. Hoover was FBI director from 1924 until he died in 1972. Tolson is also dead.
Another Hoover biographer who heard the rumors of homosexuality and blackmail, however, said he was unable to corroborate them.
As head of the FBI, Hoover obtained information about the sexual lives of Washington’s power elite, including John and Robert Kennedy, Eleanor Roosevelt and others, according to a number of biographers.
Summers’ book, published by G. P. Putnam’s Sons, is excerpted in the March edition of Vanity Fair and is the subject of a documentary scheduled to air on PBS’ “Frontline” program.
This is the fifth book written by Summers, a former British Broadcasting Corp. journalist.
The new book quotes two former Office of Strategic Services officials who said they saw pictures of Hoover engaged in a sexual act with Tolson. One, John Weitz, said he could not recognize anyone in the photo he was shown at a dinner party in the 1950s but was told by his host, whom he would not identify, that it depicted Hoover and Tolson.
Summers writes that electronics expert Gordon Novel said that CIA counterintelligence chief James J. Angleton, now deceased, showed him several photos, including one of Hoover engaged in sexual activity with Tolson.
Summers writes that the Mafia may have obtained the photos from the OSS, the forerunner to the CIA. He offers the theory that OSS chief William Donovan and Hoover, while feuding over control of foreign intelligence, investigated each other and Donovan came up with the photos.
The Summers book quotes Susan Rosenstiel, the fourth wife of alleged mobster and liquor distributor Lewis Solon Rosenstiel, as saying she saw Hoover dressed in women’s clothes and involved in homosexual play at sex parties at the Plaza Hotel in New York City.
At one such party in 1959, she recalled seeing Hoover with “a red dress on and a black feather boa round his neck. . . . After about a half an hour, some boys came, like before. This time they’re dressed in leather. And Hoover has a Bible. He wanted one of the boys to read from the Bible, and he read, I forget which passage.”
She said the other boy engaged in sexual activity with Hoover.
In 1997, King’s son Dexter had a meeting with Ray and asked him, “I just want to ask you, for the record, um, did you kill my father?” Ray replied, “No. No I didn’t,” and King told Ray that he, along with the King family, believed him; the King family also urged that Ray be granted a new trial.
Dr. William Pepper, a friend of King in the last year of his life, represented Ray in a televised mock trial in an attempt to grant him the trial he never received. In November 1999 Pepper represented the King family in a wrongful death civil trial against Loyd Jowers. Loyd Jowers, a restaurant owner in Memphis, was brought to civil court in December 1999 and sued for being part of a conspiracy to murder Martin Luther King Jr. He was found legally liable, and the King family accepted $100 in restitution, an amount chosen to show that they were not pursuing the case for financial gain. The jury, concluding on December 8, found that Loyd Jowers as well as others, including governmental agencies had been part of a conspiracy  The King family has since concluded that Ray did not have anything to do with the murder of Martin Luther King Jr.
FBI Agent James Hosty was assigned to investigate Oswald for making threats against the President, and in fact interviewed him on Nov 22, 1963! He obviously did not detain him as a precaution while JFK was in Dallas. Yes, it was a massive blunder that changed history, but I think it was just a lazy or inept agent, not a part of some grand conspiracy.
TIN – the FBI docs on Kennedy are available in a couple of months, if Trump makes them available.
FBI Agent James Hosty was assigned to investigate Oswald for making threats against the President, and in fact interviewed him on Nov 22, 1963!
He actually went to work at the ordinary time commuting with his carpool and was there until the early afternoon, when he booked subsequent to the President’s murder. He wasn’t questioned by anyone until his apprehension (except very briefly by officer Tippitt, who got a bullet in his head for his trouble).
The urban legends in circulation about that day are just endless.
Lee HARVEY Oswald was a paid FBI informant as well as a CIA asset (also paid). HARVEY was set up by LEE Harvey Oswald. HARVEY did not shoot a firearm on !1/22/63.
John Armstrong spent 12 years investigating the two Oswalds. HARVEY was likely born in Hungary, and was practically a native speaker of Russian. Anyone interested in knowing more about the TWO Oswalds, should visit Harvey and Lee dot net
Comey deserved to be fired for handing out immunity like candy.
Christine Alford – why Comey did not press for charges against Huma is beyond me. He deserves to fired just for that.
Trump appears to be very guilty so needed to try to shut the investigation down.
No. Progtrash have an emotional need for him to be guilty. Fantasy will do the rest of the work.
The mad tyrant became enraged because Comey asked for
More money for the Russia investigation.
Comments are closed.