- Joined
- 25 Jan 2017
- Messages
- 4,726
- Reaction score
- 64
- Country
One minute you are suggesting that law enforcement do not do the job properly, then you suggest that they could be denied the funds to do the job properly, and that would be OK.
Trump commits political suicide?
- Thread starter noseall
- Start date
Sponsored Links
D
Doggit
It's odd how you view things Wannabe. My point was that Trump didn't need to fire him, he could have just refused to fund the investigation, and that's got nothing to do with them not doing their job properly.
D
Doggit
This is American politics we're talking about, not reality Noseall.
He may well have been getting too close to the truth (whatever that is) but there is more than one way of killing a cat. Firing him suggests he was, but whilst withdrawing funds would also have, Trump could have then said it was a waste of time and resources, and the FBI should be getting on with more important things. It's just politics, and the perception of.
Former justice dept officials & politicians from both parties called Mr. Comey's revelation about Hilary Clintons emails just 11 days prior
to the election
"An improper , astonishing and perplexing intrusion into politics"
Mr Comey a former member of the republican party spent 15 years as a federal prosecuter before serving in George Dubya Bushes administration
Afaik trump is only the 2nd president to dare sack an FBI director.
No president dared to sack Hoover as he kept files on pretty much all the top politicians ,including info aquired by phone taps
to the election
"An improper , astonishing and perplexing intrusion into politics"
Mr Comey a former member of the republican party
spent 15 years as a federal prosecuter before serving in George Dubya Bushes administration Afaik trump is only the 2nd president to dare sack an FBI director.
No president dared to sack Hoover
as he kept files on pretty much all the top politicians ,including info aquired by phone taps Sponsored Links
Truth ???
Putin put trump into power
or if it was not for Putin Trump would not have got electedNo doubt you believe it noseall
figures tbh interfering in elections or other countries democratic process . What like Obama
Who came over here during the Brexit campaign & said that the U.K would be at the back of the trade deal que with the USA ??? if we dared to vote for Brexit ??
Obama president of the USA who's closest allie has been the UK ,who has supported & fought in every conflict along side the USA since WW2
(vietnam apart) Obama good riddance to bad rubbish imho. same go's for the Clintons
Do you believe that a case gets closed when funds are lean?
I think the timing of the Clinton email thing helped dent Clintons chances along with supposed assistance from the Ruskies.Putin put trump into power
Otherwise why is a brash, orange, bad haired liar in power.
D
Deleted member 63160
Because he won the election?
Because he won the election & people voted for him ,that is how a democracy works. As for being a liar,thats politics & politicians
In many cases if they told the entire truth people would not vote for them
Joe Public does not want the truth or the entire truth, he wants to hear as to whats in it for him/them
Truth
Russian conspiracy
That's not what I said.
Cases have boundaries and limits RE what to investigate, and where to stop.
A practical reason would be finance, and time: a cynical reason would be to not go where those in charge don't want the investigator digging.
I don't believe that limiting the FBI resources would inhibit the investigation. It would have probably rendered lesser cases obsolete or 'shelved'.
D
Doggit
Actually, American democracy isn't the same as ours. They have the ordinary voters, and then they have the electoral college, and it's these people that that elect the president, and there's a varying proportion of electoral voters per state. Now they should vote the same as the ordinary voters do, but 4 states voted for George W bush instead of Al gore, and all they got was a fine, so democracy in America isn't that democratic.
You could say the same sort of things about Britain.
More than two candidates, yet first past the post victor.
Prime Minister chosen by the largest group of those victors.
Head of State chosen by even dafter method.
So democracy in Britain isn't that democratic.
Even if it were, democracy isn't that great anyway, is it?
More than two candidates, yet first past the post victor.
Prime Minister chosen by the largest group of those victors.
Head of State chosen by even dafter method.
So democracy in Britain isn't that democratic.
Even if it were, democracy isn't that great anyway, is it?
I don't know any different. What's the alternative? Are there better alternatives?
I suppose you could have a kind of democracy whereby you can deceitfully enhance your chances of winning voters. Now there's a thought.
Coin toss?
Sponsored Links