I'm not interested in obscure, "legal-speak" mumbo-jumbo
Don't It bother you that the president said that he fired Comey because he wouldn't stop Investigating Russia and his clean-up speak crew tried to tells us that Comey was fired because he was too hard on Hillary's handling of the emails.
The hypocrisy.
Sometimes Presidents have to make command decisions to save a nation, instead of waiting for some clueless, legalistic paper-pushers with malicious political agenda's to argue over what color to paint the lifeboats in the middle of a hurricane, if you know what I mean.
Trump IMO Is clueless and his appointments are not good.
Let the Captain do his job.
He shoots himself In the foot and then It's reported.Looking the other way Is not a good thing to do and expect to be taken seriously.I'm talking about those that report the news(CNN).
This latest "jihad" of the judicial branch, orchestrated by disgruntled liberal extremists, is a sickening, misguided, abuse of the balance of powers of American government.
If you are talking about causing fear,Dona!d Trump fits the bill.It's sickening.
This is still "One Nation Under God," last time I checked, not "one nation under the judicial branch,"
Seems like people Idolized Donald Trump.
No, it doesn't bother me that Trump fired Comey, even though I liked some of his views. The FBI Director used the authority of his office to go lightly on Ms. Clinton, something I agree with because of her executive privilege, and also Comey's statement that "only those who intentionally commit crimes belong in jail," (paraphrase from memory), and he was considered a hero by some. But, couldn't Comey's excusal of Hillary's actions also be considered "obstruction of justice?" And, when he went after President Trump, an agency having decades of sophisticated surveillance experience, that can, if they wished, break into anyone's computer, phone, or listen in on their conversations using micro-technology. (they could have "bugs" the size of mosquito's in my car, for instance, here in the Alaska wilderness, down-loading my personal data and GPS info to passing satellites). When the FBI investigated Trump, without any congressional approval or ANY approval that I'm aware of--basically acting above the law, it's considered "obstruction of justice" when Pres. Trump fires him, something he is famous for, and which is a part of his job, for their exceeding the authority and purpose of their office, which is to protect America, not legally attempt to entrap civilian leaders with every phone call.
Theoretically speaking, If a powerful government agency with extremely sophisticated technology and experience, covertly investigates a president, it could be considered a threat against national security by those in the military and other organized defenses, which would, hypothetically, authorize them to use "deadly force" i.e., electronic, political, financial or other means, to protect the president and the interests of America, except without a gun, as used by a rogue, trigger-happy officer in gunning down an apparently innocent african-american motorist when he reached for his wallet, who obeyed every rule of engagement with the law regarding concealed weapons, who was acquitted for legalized murder recently in America.
Anything that threatens the stability of America, especially the office of Presidency, could be seen as a threat to national security, and in some circles, would be the equivalent of subversive behavior, or felony behavior, if they were not authorized to do so. So, who authorized Comey to investigate? Did he have any accountability? Any consequences for a wrongful investigation?
Well. "Your'e Fired" works.
I believe President Trump was authorized by the authority of his office to fire the FBI director to protect the Office of President of the USA, to remove an individual who may not have been acting in the best interests of America, but, in the best interests of misguided legalism, and political maneuvering.
It's far more important to make sure that a ship at sea in a storm is on course, i.e., normalize relations with Russia, than to argue over technicalities about legalities over phone calls about issues that were made before the ship set sail, and appear to use a powerful government agency to manipulate the legal inexperience of a newly, legally elected president.
So, who was allegedly obstructing justice? Director Comey in excusing Ms. Clinton and targeting the president, or President Trump in firing him for, what he believes, were actions that were a threat to national security, i.e, destabilizing the American presidency, which, hypothetically, could portray director Comey as an "enemy of the state," justifying his firing.
Internet violations, which can be vague, unintentional, and the effects of any damage done is very difficult to guage, I believe are going to be an important part of the sweeping justice reform that is coming to America down the road. This is one of the positive aspects of Mr. Obama's legacy, calling solitary confinement of teens, for instance an "affront to our humanity" (paraphrase from memory). The justice system in America is still in the dark ages, increases crime exponentially due to it's ineffectiveness in stopping drug abuse, clearly amounts to "cruel and unusual punishment," a violation of the 8th amendment with "mega-sentences" for addicts and mentally ill, and for those who may be manipulated by drug dealers or others with malicious intent.
American justice still has very little safeguards for deliberate, malicious targeting of citizens by the government, unethical or illegal corporate maneuvering and quashing of small business entreprenuers, or small-town threats to multi-billion dollar competition from creative business ideas, gangster-targeting of perceived enemies or threats to their empires, or political targeting of individuals that might not agree with the status quo, et al (all of which Christian servants of God who act in the best interests of the will of God are protected from).