Why the Comey firing could be Trump’s Watergate moment

Yeah, that would take real stones and principles, the same ones they want everyone else to adhere to.

 

Except two of your points are wrong and one is, so far, fluff. Every intelligence head and most intelligence committee members -- including Democrats -- say they have seen no evidence pointing to Trump - Russian collusion. But everyone agrees there is evidence (though no proof) that Russia tried to interfere with our election process. The problem is the rabid anti-Trumpers, including the major media outlets, always conflate those two completely different issues because it makes a better sounding story.

Sessions did not lie to Congress about Russian contacts. He was asked if in the context of his being a Trump surrogate (which was the discussion going on) he met with Russians. He did not. But because he had met with Russians as part of his Senatorial duties, Sen. Franken thought that was good enough for the girls he goes with.... and again sounds a whole lot more exciting.

".....as evidence mounts that he accepted money from the Russian and Turkish governments....." What evidence? And who cares? You should be more concerned with the felonies clearly committed by the Obama administration in leaking, probably unmasking, and probably recording Flynn. But I know, not near as much fun.

Watergate had a crime. The Comey incident has no crime. One big embarrassing difference.

 

Go ahead, Dems ... begin impeachment.

 

Wrong.

There was no direct collusion between the two principals - Trump and Putin. But the jury is out about some Trump "helpers" on his re-election committee who had contacts with Russian intelligence agents about Hillary Clinton - whom Putin hated with a passion.

See here, from the Guardian::UK was given details of alleged contacts between Trump campaign and Moscow - excerpt:

Where there's smoke, there's fire ...

 

That's all you got to say?

Should have kept it to yourself ...

 

nm .....

 

Put up or shut up.

 

Very intelligent response . . . . .

 

The GOP have to grow a set and start supporting their principles.

 

I think meds need to be issued to libs at this point. It's becoming uncomfortable and down right sad to watch the insane meltdown. Actually it's kind of fun. Getting the popcorn ready.

 

This thread is heavy on the crapola.

Moving right along ...

 

Which principles?

 

The ones that they hold the Democrats to........

 

I'm not completely convinced the Dems want to impeach him either. If he is such a dead weight that the GOP loses control of Congress in the mid-terms then better to subject him to a succession of Benghazi-style inquiries that damage him while leaving him in place. Might make for an interesting GOP Primary season

Of course, the Dems then have to pick a decent Presidential candidate. Patchy record at best on that one.

 

Naw, it is CNNs Scoopgate that is going to take him out. Two scoops of vanilla ice cream passed the line of intorable.

Firing Comey, that's ok. He's got Schumer, Pelosi, Reed and Clinton to call as character witnesses.

 

sometimes where there is smoke there is putrid ash.
Did UK and the Guardian get their info from the same agent of dossier fame????

 

I'm tired of hearing Russia-Trump-impeachment. If you have anything, let's see it. Otherwise, be quiet. Stop commenting.

 

I could not agree more. Moreover, he is patently incompetent as a PotUS. He can't keep his effing mouth shut, like a child bleating cuz he can't have his way.

There's plenty of political talent in the nation, and I will repeat the principal conclusion of the last elections: Hillary won the popular-vote, she deserved to be PotUS. This Electoral College is an anti-democratic (small "d") device for manipulating political outcomes.

Only the popular-vote should be allowed to determine any election in the nation, regardless of its outcome. The Electoral College shifts the balance to smaller populations who's vote is thus favored. It is antiquated and undemocratic - and high-time we rid national politics of it!

Ditto gerrymandering - both political artifacts make America look like some Banana Republic of south America.

Period.

 

Your system would allow one party to create a huge amount of giveaways in several localized areas and thereby steal the election. The electoral college prevents that from happening.

 

That's not happening in any nation in Europe where the popular-vote is the ONLY method of electing a PotUS.

Besides, your "giveaways" are just a prejudicial manner of speaking. Social Democracies, of which the EU is the primary example, has as a first-priority the general well-being of the nation. Yes, these are "give-aways" because they help guaranty the well-being of individuals.

Of which, you could care less.

You have no sense of community or universality. Or the fact that we all live in the same collective, where we are dependent upon one another.

But come a war, you are the first to have "our boys" go and die in it ...

 

"unpleasant" is when Tony was toppled this is going to be a landslide for democrats come mid term. You can feel it in the winds even oh this board. Long time supporters are questioning more and more. Of course there will be those who would vote in a bag of **** hanging on a tree is someone stuck a GOP label on it but they are a minority even of those who normally call themselves republicans. What I am seeing is an awful lot of the more modoreate and thoughtful conservatives being very very disenfranchised and I think it is starting to be enough that they are considering crossing party lines to send a strong message. That being 'If you are going to govern the country then GOVERN IT and that includes putting forth GOOD candidates"

 

Yeah and they are the same ones who often look down thier noses because we are constitutional monarchies

 

THE POPULAR VOTE

Much of the instability in modern "democracies" (of which there is a great variety amongst nations) is in multi-party systems that are the bedrock of any real-democracy. South America is a prime example. However, most of the "manipulation of politics" derives from uniquely two-party system as ours in the US. (Gerrymandering - key to manipulating particularly state politics - is simply one one more manner of doing so.)

(Moreover, if a people want to believe the Boob-tube BS about political candidates, then that is their failing. But, most modern democracies (with a brain) tend to avoid "sensationalizing" politics by means of TV-commercials.)

It was in the early 19th century key to obtaining "fluency" (by preventing "anarchy") to establish a "regulator" of the voting system. The greatest fear at the time was that anarchists could manipulate a voting population that barely knew how to read and write.

That fear is no longer necessary in the 21st century and we should dump the Electoral College. It has no useful purpose any longer; moreover it is un-democratic as six-elections defying the outcome of the Popular Vote have proven in our history. Only the Popular Vote* in a True Democracy can elect a bonafide government locally, state or nationally.

All other forms of voting are deviants from the most basic "code of authenticity" in any real and truthful democracy ...

*And were we to drop the nonsense of no "individual authenticity of nationality" by means of a National Identity Card, then we'd have much lower levels of voting fraud - and no voting manipulation on the basis of ethnicity.

 

And yet you think you know those on the right and think you know what I feel about same sex marriage. Here's a clue for you, just because I use that as an example doesn't mean I agree or disagree with it. Otherwise you could not deny my main point that you lefties only like the rules that meet your agenda. You are perfectly ok with changing them to suit your needs.

 

The United States is not a "social democracy" it's a Representative Republic. As far as the "general well-being of the nation" how's that working out for them?