Donald Trump to James Comey: You’re Fired!

 

President Trump has fired FBI Director James Comey.

Here is Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein writing in a memo that Comey’s July 5, 2016, news conference was a fireable offense:

Read the whole thing, as well as Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s letter to Trump and Trump’s letter to Comey.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 257 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Can I have my tax cut now? I was told there would be tax cuts.

    John McCain and friends in the GOP Senate prefer to talk about Russia! Sad.

    • #121
  2. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Maybe now we’ll get to the bottom of the Susan Rice unmasking scandal.

    • #122
  3. Fred Cole Inactive
    Fred Cole
    @FredCole

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Can I have my tax cut now? I was told there would be tax cuts.

    Yeah.  Firing Comey means tax reform ain’t happening this year.

    • #123
  4. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
     

    Percival (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    This is great. Now the president who is under investigation by the FBI will be able to pick a new guy to be in charged the FBI.

    Hooray for accountability.

    Comey said three times that Trump isn’t under investigation.

    You’re right, of course. And I’m sure Donald Trump has nothing to worry about from an investigation. And he’s totally not terrified about what it’ll turn up.

    James Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence, said there was no evidence of collusion.

    What form would this collusion take? A phone call or email from the campaign telling the Russians to hack the DNC? They were going to do that anyway. Or maybe the Russians called up and asked what they should do with it? Nuts. Describe the supposed collusion in a way that doesn’t make me laugh and maybe I’ll reconsider.

    And all the evidence — all the evidence — of Russian involvement was collected and examined by Crowdstrike, an outfit that the DNC itself hired. The FBI is taking their word for it, apparently.

    • #124
  5. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Apparently, Colbert’s audience didn’t get the new liberal talking points. They cheered the news of Comey’s firing.

     

    • #125
  6. Joe P Member
    Joe P
    @JoeP

    For the people who are assuming that Trump’s motive is to bury the Russia investigation:

    What good would firing the FBI director do to stop that? It’s not like James Comey is out himself looking underneath Mar-a-Lago for the secret Soviet gold that was used to pay Trump and everyone around him off. It’s not like even if a new FBI director was put in place tomorrow that that entire investigation would stop cold and just go away.

    Even if you start with the premise that Trump is totally in Putin’s pocket in some dastardly illegal way, what does Comey’s firing accomplish? The best case would be that it sould delay an indictment or revelation a few more months. What would be the point of Trump doing that if Trump were actually dirty?

    • #126
  7. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Apparently, Colbert’s audience didn’t get the new liberal talking points. They cheered the news of Comey’s firing.

    But they booed properly at the name “Jeff Sessions.” So they’re trainable.

    • #127
  8. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Apparently, Colbert’s audience didn’t get the new liberal talking points. They cheered the news of Comey’s firing.

    But they booed properly at the name “Jeff Sessions.” So they’re trainable.

    They heard “Blah blah blah…Trump…blah blah blah…Jeff Sessions”. Colbert had to hit em on the snout with a newspaper to get em to bark at the right time.

    • #128
  9. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Apparently, Colbert’s audience didn’t get the new liberal talking points. They cheered the news of Comey’s firing.

    But they booed properly at the name “Jeff Sessions.” So they’re trainable.

    They heard “Blah blah blah…Trump…blah blah blah…Jeff Sessions”. Colbert had to hit em on the snout with a newspaper to get em to bark at the right time.

    Oh, I assumed Cue Card Guy was holding up a sign that said “Boo Now!”

     

    • #129
  10. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Joe P (View Comment):
    For the people who are assuming that Trump’s motive is to bury the Russia investigation:

    What good would firing the FBI director do to stop that? It’s not like James Comey is out himself looking underneath Mar-a-Lago for the secret Soviet gold that was used to pay Trump and everyone around him off. It’s not like even if a new FBI director was put in place tomorrow that that entire investigation would stop cold and just go away.

    Even if you start with the premise that Trump is totally in Putin’s pocket in some dastardly illegal way, what does Comey’s firing accomplish? The best case would be that it sould delay an indictment or revelation a few more months. What would be the point of Trump doing that if Trump were actually dirty?

    Every time a Democrat is asked about evidence of Trump-Russia collusion they say “there is no evidence…yet.” When will the answer just be “no, there is none”? Comey gave the Democrat-media complex the drama they needed to keep the story alive. If you replace Comey with a boring, tight-lipped, by-the-book professional, the masses are gonna tune out, and the story dies. At some point, you have to have evidence that implicates Trump himself. I doubt that exists.

    • #130
  11. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    it makes me sick that they’re investigating Russia instead of Benghazi and an illicit secret email server in a bathroom and a secretary of  state who compromised national security and used her power for personal gain. Why can’t we ever act like we’re the ones who won?

    • #131
  12. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Seems like you can’t have it both ways, but for the moment the Democrats are willing to forgive and forget all that Hillary server stuff if Comey will dish some good dirt on Trump and Putin. We’ll see what happens next.

    Doing this tells me that either Trump knows they have nothing, or he’s dumber than even I thought. I’m giving him the benefit of a doubt for the time being. ;)

    • #132
  13. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    Trinity Waters (View Comment):

    Speaking as a long-time Jonah reader/supporter, he’s fulla C**p. Sorry to say so, but his mind has taken a detour into leftie land. I read this and hear, Blah, blah, blah, Ginger.

    You didn’t actually read it, did you?

    • #133
  14. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    it makes me sick that they’re investigating Russia instead of Benghazi and an illicit secret email server in a bathroom and a secretary of state who compromised national security and used her power for personal gain. Why can’t we ever act like we’re the ones who won?

    CFR Chapter VI:

    The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall be established by the Attorney General. The Special Counsel will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated.

    It looks to me like the DAG (since the AG is recused) has the authority to specify what should be investigated. The DAG could specify Trump campaign-Russian collusion to hack the DNC and HRC’s email server. Inclusion of the latter would probably send the Dem’s through the roof and expose their obvious political motivations. Besides, HRC’s crimes are much easier to prove than President Trump’s. If it’s a witch hunt they want, then let their witch be hunted too.

    • #134
  15. Roberto Inactive
    Roberto
    @Roberto

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Apparently, Colbert’s audience didn’t get the new liberal talking points. They cheered the news of Comey’s firing.

    But they booed properly at the name “Jeff Sessions.” So they’re trainable.

    They heard “Blah blah blah…Trump…blah blah blah…Jeff Sessions”. Colbert had to hit em on the snout with a newspaper to get em to bark at the right time.

    It was rather amusing, like a pack of barking seals.

    • #135
  16. Guruforhire Inactive
    Guruforhire
    @Guruforhire

    Umbra Fractus (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Seems like you can’t have it both ways, but for the moment the Democrats are willing to forgive and forget all that Hillary server stuff if Comey will dish some good dirt on Trump and Putin. We’ll see what happens next.

    Doing this tells me that either Trump knows they have nothing, or he’s dumber than even I thought. I’m giving him the benefit of a doubt for the time being. ?

    I think its more that he’s from business he lets his managers choose their own team; and rosenstien didn’t like comey, thus Trump backed his guy.

    I don’t think we have to look to far into it.

    • #136
  17. JcTPatriot Member
    JcTPatriot
    @

    Joe P (View Comment):
    Even if you start with the premise that Trump is totally in Putin’s pocket in some dastardly illegal way, what does Comey’s firing accomplish? The best case would be that it sould delay an indictment or revelation a few more months. What would be the point of Trump doing that if Trump were actually dirty?

    Joe, you’re trying to talk logic to people who just plain hate President Trump and don’t care about truth any more. Even the Democrats, including Feinstein and others, are now admitting that there is no evidence, and there likely never will be any evidence (after over 180 days of digging) that the “Russian Interference” is not a hoax.

    So, when even the Democrats admit there is no evidence, and still the folks on here can’t accept that Trump won fair and square, nothing you can ever say will change their minds. They are hopelessly lost. From now on, whenever one of The Lost mentions Russia, I’m just moving on to the next comment.

    • #137
  18. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Roberto (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Apparently, Colbert’s audience didn’t get the new liberal talking points. They cheered the news of Comey’s firing.

    But they booed properly at the name “Jeff Sessions.” So they’re trainable.

    They heard “Blah blah blah…Trump…blah blah blah…Jeff Sessions”. Colbert had to hit em on the snout with a newspaper to get em to bark at the right time.

    It was rather amusing, like a pack of barking seals.

    That’s all these shows are. So-called “Comedian” comes out and spews out ignorant political garbage, audience of low-information voters (i.e., Democrat base) barks and applauds like trained seals.

    I’m waiting for the day someone from the audience just yells SHUT UP! or dozens of people just walk out. For all I know that already happens, but it’s edited out by airtime.

     

    • #138
  19. Robert McReynolds Member
    Robert McReynolds
    @

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
     

    Percival (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    This is great. Now the president who is under investigation by the FBI will be able to pick a new guy to be in charged the FBI.

    Hooray for accountability.

    Comey said three times that Trump isn’t under investigation.

    You’re right, of course. And I’m sure Donald Trump has nothing to worry about from an investigation. And he’s totally not terrified about what it’ll turn up.

    I am guessing that an investigation will turn up exactly what Di-Fi says it will:

    • #139
  20. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    it makes me sick that they’re investigating Russia instead of Benghazi and an illicit secret email server in a bathroom and a secretary of state who compromised national security and used her power for personal gain. Why can’t we ever act like we’re the ones who won?

    CFR Chapter VI:

    The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall be established by the Attorney General. The Special Counsel will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated.

    It looks to me like the DAG (since the AG is recused) has the authority to specify what should be investigated. The DAG could specify Trump campaign-Russian collusion to hack the DNC and HRC’s email server. Inclusion of the latter would probably send the Dem’s through the roof and expose their obvious political motivations. Besides, HRC’s crimes are much easier to prove than President Trump’s. If it’s a witch hunt they want, then let their witch be hunted too.

    Good point. But theirs can’t be a witch hunt because a witch hunt means looking for something that isn’t there.

    • #140
  21. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Can I have my tax cut now? I was told there would be tax cuts.

    Yeah. Firing Comey means tax reform ain’t happening this year.

    Yeah, and Trump had no chance of being elected president. Oh wait…

    • #141
  22. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    Joe P (View Comment):
    For the people who are assuming that Trump’s motive is to bury the Russia investigation:

    What good would firing the FBI director do to stop that? It’s not like James Comey is out himself looking underneath Mar-a-Lago for the secret Soviet gold that was used to pay Trump and everyone around him off. It’s not like even if a new FBI director was put in place tomorrow that that entire investigation would stop cold and just go away.

    Even if you start with the premise that Trump is totally in Putin’s pocket in some dastardly illegal way, what does Comey’s firing accomplish? The best case would be that it sould delay an indictment or revelation a few more months. What would be the point of Trump doing that if Trump were actually dirty?

    Every time a Democrat is asked about evidence of Trump-Russia collusion they say “there is no evidence…yet.” When will the answer just be “no, there is none”? Comey gave the Democrat-media complex the drama they needed to keep the story alive. If you replace Comey with a boring, tight-lipped, by-the-book professional, the masses are gonna tune out, and the story dies. At some point, you have to have evidence that implicates Trump himself. I doubt that exists.

    The point is to investigate until they find something that can be used either legally or politically against Trump.  They want a special prosecutor that will investigate Trump and all around him continuously until he is impeached and a new election is held.

    • #142
  23. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    Joe P (View Comment):
    For the people who are assuming that Trump’s motive is to bury the Russia investigation:

    What good would firing the FBI director do to stop that? It’s not like James Comey is out himself looking underneath Mar-a-Lago for the secret Soviet gold that was used to pay Trump and everyone around him off. It’s not like even if a new FBI director was put in place tomorrow that that entire investigation would stop cold and just go away.

    Even if you start with the premise that Trump is totally in Putin’s pocket in some dastardly illegal way, what does Comey’s firing accomplish? The best case would be that it sould delay an indictment or revelation a few more months. What would be the point of Trump doing that if Trump were actually dirty?

    Every time a Democrat is asked about evidence of Trump-Russia collusion they say “there is no evidence…yet.” When will the answer just be “no, there is none”? Comey gave the Democrat-media complex the drama they needed to keep the story alive. If you replace Comey with a boring, tight-lipped, by-the-book professional, the masses are gonna tune out, and the story dies. At some point, you have to have evidence that implicates Trump himself. I doubt that exists.

    The point is to investigate until they find something that can be used either legally or politically against Trump. They want a special prosecutor that will investigate Trump and all around him continuously until he is impeached and a new election is held.

    Let’s expand the scope of the investigation to include Hillary’s email server. Can any reasonable person say that’s not a fair compromise?

    • #143
  24. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    The point is to investigate until they find something that can be used either legally or politically against Trump. They want a special prosecutor that will investigate Trump and all around him continuously until he is impeached and a new election is held.

    At this point I think they’re not even shooting that high. They know there’s nothing there, but they want to keep the investigation going just so they can say, “The President is under investigation.”

    • #144
  25. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    Joe P (View Comment):
    For the people who are assuming that Trump’s motive is to bury the Russia investigation:

    What good would firing the FBI director do to stop that? It’s not like James Comey is out himself looking underneath Mar-a-Lago for the secret Soviet gold that was used to pay Trump and everyone around him off. It’s not like even if a new FBI director was put in place tomorrow that that entire investigation would stop cold and just go away.

    Even if you start with the premise that Trump is totally in Putin’s pocket in some dastardly illegal way, what does Comey’s firing accomplish? The best case would be that it sould delay an indictment or revelation a few more months. What would be the point of Trump doing that if Trump were actually dirty?

    Every time a Democrat is asked about evidence of Trump-Russia collusion they say “there is no evidence…yet.” When will the answer just be “no, there is none”? Comey gave the Democrat-media complex the drama they needed to keep the story alive. If you replace Comey with a boring, tight-lipped, by-the-book professional, the masses are gonna tune out, and the story dies. At some point, you have to have evidence that implicates Trump himself. I doubt that exists.

    The point is to investigate until they find something that can be used either legally or politically against Trump. They want a special prosecutor that will investigate Trump and all around him continuously until he is impeached and a new election is held.

    Let’s expand the scope of the investigation to include Hillary’s email server. Can any reasonable person say that’s not a fair compromise?

    Yes, that is not a fair compromise.

    Hillary is toast, she has no political future – trading risk to Trump’s future for risk to Hillary’s is frankly stupid. IF there is to be special prosecutors they should look into Hillary’s email server – and the cover up that prevented criminal action against her and her minions. Its the cover up, that extends right into the democrat establishment.  Shouldn’t there be some kind of Probable Cause, in order to get a special prosecutor?

    • #145
  26. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    Joe P (View Comment):
    For the people who are assuming that Trump’s motive is to bury the Russia investigation:

    What good would firing the FBI director do to stop that? It’s not like James Comey is out himself looking underneath Mar-a-Lago for the secret Soviet gold that was used to pay Trump and everyone around him off. It’s not like even if a new FBI director was put in place tomorrow that that entire investigation would stop cold and just go away.

    Even if you start with the premise that Trump is totally in Putin’s pocket in some dastardly illegal way, what does Comey’s firing accomplish? The best case would be that it sould delay an indictment or revelation a few more months. What would be the point of Trump doing that if Trump were actually dirty?

    Every time a Democrat is asked about evidence of Trump-Russia collusion they say “there is no evidence…yet.” When will the answer just be “no, there is none”? Comey gave the Democrat-media complex the drama they needed to keep the story alive. If you replace Comey with a boring, tight-lipped, by-the-book professional, the masses are gonna tune out, and the story dies. At some point, you have to have evidence that implicates Trump himself. I doubt that exists.

    The point is to investigate until they find something that can be used either legally or politically against Trump. They want a special prosecutor that will investigate Trump and all around him continuously until he is impeached and a new election is held.

    Let’s expand the scope of the investigation to include Hillary’s email server. Can any reasonable person say that’s not a fair compromise?

    Yes, that is not a fair compromise.

    Hillary is toast, she has no political future – trading risk to Trump’s future for risk for Hillary’s is frankly stupid. IF there is to be special prosecutors they should look into Hillary’s email server – and the cover up that prevented criminal action against her and her minions. Its the cover up, that extends right into the democrat establishment. Shouldn’t there be some kind of Probable Cause, in order to get a special prosecutor?

    I would not count Hillary out yet.  She still has an election or two left in her if the Left gets behind and really pushes.  Part of that push is to tear down Trump and the GOP.  Given that #NeverTrump and GOP Establishment are behind it maybe they can get the old girl elected yet.

    • #146
  27. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    Joe P (View Comment):
    For the people who are assuming that Trump’s motive is to bury the Russia investigation:

    What good would firing the FBI director do to stop that? It’s not like James Comey is out himself looking underneath Mar-a-Lago for the secret Soviet gold that was used to pay Trump and everyone around him off. It’s not like even if a new FBI director was put in place tomorrow that that entire investigation would stop cold and just go away.

    Even if you start with the premise that Trump is totally in Putin’s pocket in some dastardly illegal way, what does Comey’s firing accomplish? The best case would be that it sould delay an indictment or revelation a few more months. What would be the point of Trump doing that if Trump were actually dirty?

    Every time a Democrat is asked about evidence of Trump-Russia collusion they say “there is no evidence…yet.” When will the answer just be “no, there is none”? Comey gave the Democrat-media complex the drama they needed to keep the story alive. If you replace Comey with a boring, tight-lipped, by-the-book professional, the masses are gonna tune out, and the story dies. At some point, you have to have evidence that implicates Trump himself. I doubt that exists.

    The point is to investigate until they find something that can be used either legally or politically against Trump. They want a special prosecutor that will investigate Trump and all around him continuously until he is impeached and a new election is held.

    Let’s expand the scope of the investigation to include Hillary’s email server. Can any reasonable person say that’s not a fair compromise?

    Yes, that is not a fair compromise.

    Hillary is toast, she has no political future – trading risk to Trump’s future for risk for Hillary’s is frankly stupid. IF there is to be special prosecutors they should look into Hillary’s email server – and the cover up that prevented criminal action against her and her minions. Its the cover up, that extends right into the democrat establishment. Shouldn’t there be some kind of Probable Cause, in order to get a special prosecutor?

    I would not count Hillary out yet. She still has an election or two left in her if the Left gets behind and really pushes. Part of that push is to tear down Trump and the GOP. Given that #NeverTrump and GOP Establishment are behind it maybe they can get the old girl elected yet.

    Count her out. She’ll be 70 in October, not in good health. I highly doubt that in 2020 at 74, she’ll be capable of running for anything.

    • #147
  28. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    I would not count Hillary out yet. She still has an election or two left in her if the Left gets behind and really pushes. Part of that push is to tear down Trump and the GOP. Given that #NeverTrump and GOP Establishment are behind it maybe they can get the old girl elected yet.

    Count her out. She’ll be 70 in October, not in good health. I highly doubt that in 2020 at 74, she’ll be capable of running for anything.

    The Democrats don’t have anybody else.

    :: sad trombone ::

    • #148
  29. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    Given that #NeverTrump and GOP Establishment are behind it maybe they can get the old girl elected yet.

    Image result for facepalm

    • #149
  30. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    I would not count Hillary out yet. She still has an election or two left in her if the Left gets behind and really pushes. Part of that push is to tear down Trump and the GOP. Given that #NeverTrump and GOP Establishment are behind it maybe they can get the old girl elected yet.

    Count her out. She’ll be 70 in October, not in good health. I highly doubt that in 2020 at 74, she’ll be capable of running for anything.

    The Democrats don’t have anybody else.

    :: sad trombone ::

    They’ll find somebody

    ::sad trombone::

    In 2 presidential runs the democrat donor class dumped around (if not more than) $2 billion dollars on her campaigns. They have virtually nothing to show for it. I dont think she’ll be able to raise the cash to run again.

    • #150
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.