A Loyalty Oath? C'mon...

[2aguy]

Comey has returned the ball in the "who said what to whom" discussion that Trump started with "Comey told me three times I am not under investigation." Comey's friends say, "Yeah, well the President asked him twice to take a loyalty oath."

Three times Comey said something, but with the President's batting average on accuracy, I'll wait to see if Comey wishes to clear that up. And that three times thing--like before the rooster crows, Peter, you will deny me three times....Kind of puts a stamp of authenticity on it, doesn't it?

Asking Comey to take a loyalty pledge is about the creepiest thing I've heard yet, and I thought I'd been creeped out by this guy before. Kneel and kiss my ring, swear you are my man, and maybe I'll let you keep your job. ???? Glad Comey said no. Convenient Trump didn't mention that part in his story about the dinner.

Right there on its website, the FBI says the bureau and its officials must only swear an oath to the Constitution — not even a president. The reason? Because the latter “too easily leads to tyranny”:

It is significant that we take an oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity. This is true for the simple reason that the Constitution is based on lasting principles of sound government that provide balance, stability, and consistency through time. A government based on individuals — who are inconsistent, fallible, and often prone to error — too easily leads to tyranny on the one extreme or anarchy on the other. The founding fathers sought to avoid these extremes and create a balanced government based on constitutional principles.
Analysis | Trump reportedly sought a loyalty pledge from Comey. The FBI says this ‘leads to tyranny.’

Don't forget, just because NYT and WaPo don't disclose their sources doesn't mean their sources aren't credible--WaPo broke Watergate, remember. Trump has planned all along to fire Comey? I'll bet he has, ever since Comey told him he wouldn't take a loyalty oath. Who else has been asked? Jeff Sessions? Pompeo? Did they say yes? Who else? Would be interesting to know.

Yeah.....you should believe this story when you believe that comey asked for more resources......false...and that the Deputy Director said he would quit over the way Trump fired Comey....also false.....

There are lies about Trump going around and you are silly to believe them...

More has come out on that conversation and will continue to come out. With a POTUS such as we have, I doubt if anyone would want to be made public. I wish Comey himself would tweet or invite CBS or PBS over and have a nice long chat with them about all of this. Letting everything about his side of the story be dismissed as "lies" is as damaging as being fired for wanting to pursue the investigation to its logical end.

The Deputy Director of the FBI, now acting Director......whose wife ran for senate backed by clinton minion Terry macaulife said they were lies........

 

[yiostheoy]

Comey has returned the ball in the "who said what to whom" discussion that Trump started with "Comey told me three times I am not under investigation." Comey's friends say, "Yeah, well the President asked him twice to take a loyalty oath."

Three times Comey said something, but with the President's batting average on accuracy, I'll wait to see if Comey wishes to clear that up. And that three times thing--like before the rooster crows, Peter, you will deny me three times....Kind of puts a stamp of authenticity on it, doesn't it?

Asking Comey to take a loyalty pledge is about the creepiest thing I've heard yet, and I thought I'd been creeped out by this guy before. Kneel and kiss my ring, swear you are my man, and maybe I'll let you keep your job. ???? Glad Comey said no. Convenient Trump didn't mention that part in his story about the dinner.

Right there on its website, the FBI says the bureau and its officials must only swear an oath to the Constitution — not even a president. The reason? Because the latter “too easily leads to tyranny”:

It is significant that we take an oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity. This is true for the simple reason that the Constitution is based on lasting principles of sound government that provide balance, stability, and consistency through time. A government based on individuals — who are inconsistent, fallible, and often prone to error — too easily leads to tyranny on the one extreme or anarchy on the other. The founding fathers sought to avoid these extremes and create a balanced government based on constitutional principles.
Analysis | Trump reportedly sought a loyalty pledge from Comey. The FBI says this ‘leads to tyranny.’

Don't forget, just because NYT and WaPo don't disclose their sources doesn't mean their sources aren't credible--WaPo broke Watergate, remember. Trump has planned all along to fire Comey? I'll bet he has, ever since Comey told him he wouldn't take a loyalty oath. Who else has been asked? Jeff Sessions? Pompeo? Did they say yes? Who else? Would be interesting to know.

Well here's problem. Comey got himself in a jam --- NOT because the problem of loyalty to the American people lies at the FBI level.. He got into trouble trying to protect the integrity of FBI from the blatant political hacks in charge of the DOJ and his bosses. So however dedicated to the Republic the folks at the FBI are --- That's not the issue.

OBVIOUSLY -- they DO become "loyal" to the party in power. BECAUSE -- they are not independent of the AG and the DOJ and partisan protection of their own.. And that's how this problem started...

These 2 tired, corrupt and aimless parties have to go. You gotta quit REWARDING them by making elections a contest about winning.. Because we're ALL LOSING right now..

FBI, DOJ and AG perhaps shouldn't be appointed, then. In Maine, the AG is elected by secret ballot of the legislature, which is pissing off our governor no end because she has pulled Yates-type refusals to represent his bullshit lawsuits on several occassions and he can't fire her. LOL
I'm not saying the FBI and DOJ directors should be elected by the Congress--good god what a mess that would be--but maybe there is another way? DOJ and FBI are two of the organizations that can stand between us and tyranny. They should have a bit of neutrality in some way.

The way the USA does things is that the POTUS nominates and the Senate confirms/ratifies since it is related to the "administration" of government/justice etc.

 

[yiostheoy]

There's just too power and too much professional spying and leaking going on. The spying and blackmail has to stop...

Leaking is a good thing when it is true.

It is a 1st Amendment check and balance on the powers of government.

Why would you NOT want it this way ???

 

[yiostheoy]

What's the difference behind Lynch and Company's unspoken loyalty oath and Trump asking (if he did indeed do that) for loyalty to current elected Admin? Don't think Obama/Clinton machine PURGED all of the opposition out of the top spots?
It's easier to do when there's not this much attention. It's SOProcedure for DC..

My take is -- the "loyalty oath" has been taken out of context at best. Probably more to do with loyalty to take ORDERS. Which certainly is within his right. Even if they are stupid -- Admin killing type orders.

You're not troubled by what Adolf did either huh ??

You saw what happened to Germany, and you're not troubled ??

 

[yiostheoy]

I wish Comey himself would tweet or invite CBS or PBS over and have a nice long chat with them about all of this. Letting everything about his side of the story be dismissed as "lies" is as damaging as being fired for wanting to pursue the investigation to its logical end.

As a civilian again and having been nonjudiciously terminated by Trump, Comey is a free man again, with all the rights of the Bill Of Rights and the other Constitutional Amendments.

He can say anything to anybody.

 

[yiostheoy]

Okay, that's your perspective, but if possible I'd prefer not to readjudicate that whole thing. It's my fault for bringing it up, but it was to explain why Comey did what he did in that case.
This is about the fact that Trump is calling for loyalty oaths. He would NEVER release that "tape" he has; it would also prove that Comey didn't tell him he wasn't being investigated.

As a state licensed professional myself, I have never been able to give any CEO or CFO any such "loyalty oaths" either.

I have always had to tell them I was obliged to obey the State and Federal laws, and while I would promise not to rat on them, I could not promise them anything else. If I learned of a crime in progress I would be forced to recuse myself and resign, and then answer any questions that anybody in an official capacity asks me.

But as long as THEY obeyed the State and Federal laws they should have nothing to worry about.

 

[OldLady]

I agree Comey got stuck in a fix, but am I the only person alive who remembers Loretta Lynch on national tv saying that she was not going to actually recuse herself from the Clinton case but that she would rely on the recommendations of the FBI in the case to assuage any fears about the meeting on the tarmac? If Comey had given his recommendations to Lynch privately and then Lynch stood before the American people and said "No prosecution, folks" do you think ANYONE would have believed it was the FBI's recommendation?

Tough shit for Lynch. The FBI does not make that decision to go to trial. And if it does make a recommendation to NOT prosecute -- it should never be a public spectacle in an election year. SHE and the other partisans at DOJ never HAD credibility on that matter. And HER poor judgement with Mr WhoreHopper put Comey in a pickle.

As for the public believing her -- She and Comey would be in a Congressional hearing the NEXT DAY -- to confirm the situation.. The public would KNOW that it was DOJ that decided not to prosecute and Comey would have to lay out the rationale for his recommendation. Which STILL contradicts the decision not to prosecute. The excuse that Ms Clinton was TOO STUPID TO REALIZE they were seriously violating security law and protocol would STILL remain public. There would have been calls for BOTH of them to be fired.

I didn't even think it was so out of bounds to decide not to prosecute her. He said without intent, cases don't get won. The reason the FBI has a 98% success rate is because they don't prosecute cases they aren't sure they can win. Our D.A. here makes the same decision on a daily basis. It's a routine decision.

Just FTRecord, Comey was correct in asserting that cases like this were normally handled thru sanctions WITHIN the agency where they occur. Because a criminal trial at classified levels is difficult and expensive and does no more good --- than FIRING someones' ass, YANKING their clearances and making sure they never handle classified info in the future. That's how it's NORMALLY done. (I know a bit about this world). But in this case, the defendant was the Sec of State in CHARGE of that dept AND its security compliance. And for that unprecedented reason -- there SHOULD have been an indictment. Mrs WhoreHopper was FULLY aware of what she set up to circumvent normal security protocols.

Okay, that's your perspective, but if possible I'd prefer not to readjudicate that whole thing. It's my fault for bringing it up, but it was to explain why Comey did what he did in that case.
This is about the fact that Trump is calling for loyalty oaths. He would NEVER release that "tape" he has; it would also prove that Comey didn't tell him he wasn't being investigated.

So -- back to what YOU'RE interested in...

What's the difference behind Lynch and Company's unspoken loyalty oath and Trump asking (if he did indeed do that) for loyalty to current elected Admin? Don't think Obama/Clinton machine PURGED all of the opposition out of the top spots?
It's easier to do when there's not this much attention. It's SOProcedure for DC..

My take is -- the "loyalty oath" has been taken out of context at best. Probably more to do with loyalty to take ORDERS. Which certainly is within his right. Even if they are stupid -- Admin killing type orders.

Thanks.
What's the diff? Because I doubt if it is "SOP" for POTUS to ask the director of independent agencies for an oath of loyalty to anything. These hot shots all have been sworn in to defend law, order and the American Way already. What would POTUS be asking the Director of the FBI to be loyal to, other than that? Himself. It's the only logical answer. It stinks to high heaven and you damned well know it.
Loyalty to "take orders?" Orders about what?
Considering the fact that Comey was in charge of an ongoing investigation into Trump and his campaign, it is indefensible to ask for a "loyalty oath" from Comey.

 

[OldLady]

Comey has returned the ball in the "who said what to whom" discussion that Trump started with "Comey told me three times I am not under investigation." Comey's friends say, "Yeah, well the President asked him twice to take a loyalty oath."

Three times Comey said something, but with the President's batting average on accuracy, I'll wait to see if Comey wishes to clear that up. And that three times thing--like before the rooster crows, Peter, you will deny me three times....Kind of puts a stamp of authenticity on it, doesn't it?

Asking Comey to take a loyalty pledge is about the creepiest thing I've heard yet, and I thought I'd been creeped out by this guy before. Kneel and kiss my ring, swear you are my man, and maybe I'll let you keep your job. ???? Glad Comey said no. Convenient Trump didn't mention that part in his story about the dinner.

Right there on its website, the FBI says the bureau and its officials must only swear an oath to the Constitution — not even a president. The reason? Because the latter “too easily leads to tyranny”:

It is significant that we take an oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity. This is true for the simple reason that the Constitution is based on lasting principles of sound government that provide balance, stability, and consistency through time. A government based on individuals — who are inconsistent, fallible, and often prone to error — too easily leads to tyranny on the one extreme or anarchy on the other. The founding fathers sought to avoid these extremes and create a balanced government based on constitutional principles.
Analysis | Trump reportedly sought a loyalty pledge from Comey. The FBI says this ‘leads to tyranny.’

Don't forget, just because NYT and WaPo don't disclose their sources doesn't mean their sources aren't credible--WaPo broke Watergate, remember. Trump has planned all along to fire Comey? I'll bet he has, ever since Comey told him he wouldn't take a loyalty oath. Who else has been asked? Jeff Sessions? Pompeo? Did they say yes? Who else? Would be interesting to know.

Yeah.....you should believe this story when you believe that comey asked for more resources......false...and that the Deputy Director said he would quit over the way Trump fired Comey....also false.....

There are lies about Trump going around and you are silly to believe them...

More has come out on that conversation and will continue to come out. With a POTUS such as we have, I doubt if anyone would want to be made public. I wish Comey himself would tweet or invite CBS or PBS over and have a nice long chat with them about all of this. Letting everything about his side of the story be dismissed as "lies" is as damaging as being fired for wanting to pursue the investigation to its logical end.

The Deputy Director of the FBI, now acting Director......whose wife ran for senate backed by clinton minion Terry macaulife said they were lies........

Has said WHAT were lies, 2AGuy? I heard him on the news first thing this a.m. and I did not hear him accusing anyone of lies then except Trump.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Did Trump ever ask for a loyalty oath or did democrats make this up too?

 

[2aguy]

Comey has returned the ball in the "who said what to whom" discussion that Trump started with "Comey told me three times I am not under investigation." Comey's friends say, "Yeah, well the President asked him twice to take a loyalty oath."

Three times Comey said something, but with the President's batting average on accuracy, I'll wait to see if Comey wishes to clear that up. And that three times thing--like before the rooster crows, Peter, you will deny me three times....Kind of puts a stamp of authenticity on it, doesn't it?

Asking Comey to take a loyalty pledge is about the creepiest thing I've heard yet, and I thought I'd been creeped out by this guy before. Kneel and kiss my ring, swear you are my man, and maybe I'll let you keep your job. ???? Glad Comey said no. Convenient Trump didn't mention that part in his story about the dinner.

Right there on its website, the FBI says the bureau and its officials must only swear an oath to the Constitution — not even a president. The reason? Because the latter “too easily leads to tyranny”:

It is significant that we take an oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity. This is true for the simple reason that the Constitution is based on lasting principles of sound government that provide balance, stability, and consistency through time. A government based on individuals — who are inconsistent, fallible, and often prone to error — too easily leads to tyranny on the one extreme or anarchy on the other. The founding fathers sought to avoid these extremes and create a balanced government based on constitutional principles.
Analysis | Trump reportedly sought a loyalty pledge from Comey. The FBI says this ‘leads to tyranny.’

Don't forget, just because NYT and WaPo don't disclose their sources doesn't mean their sources aren't credible--WaPo broke Watergate, remember. Trump has planned all along to fire Comey? I'll bet he has, ever since Comey told him he wouldn't take a loyalty oath. Who else has been asked? Jeff Sessions? Pompeo? Did they say yes? Who else? Would be interesting to know.

Yeah.....you should believe this story when you believe that comey asked for more resources......false...and that the Deputy Director said he would quit over the way Trump fired Comey....also false.....

There are lies about Trump going around and you are silly to believe them...

More has come out on that conversation and will continue to come out. With a POTUS such as we have, I doubt if anyone would want to be made public. I wish Comey himself would tweet or invite CBS or PBS over and have a nice long chat with them about all of this. Letting everything about his side of the story be dismissed as "lies" is as damaging as being fired for wanting to pursue the investigation to its logical end.

The Deputy Director of the FBI, now acting Director......whose wife ran for senate backed by clinton minion Terry macaulife said they were lies........

Has said WHAT were lies, 2AGuy? I heard him on the news first thing this a.m. and I did not hear him accusing anyone of lies then except Trump.

He said they did not request more money or resources for investigating Russia...he said he did not say he was going to quit....both of those stories were reported with heavy breathing by the democrat press......

 

[OldLady]

I wish Comey himself would tweet or invite CBS or PBS over and have a nice long chat with them about all of this. Letting everything about his side of the story be dismissed as "lies" is as damaging as being fired for wanting to pursue the investigation to its logical end.

As a civilian again and having been nonjudiciously terminated by Trump, Comey is a free man again, with all the rights of the Bill Of Rights and the other Constitutional Amendments.

He can say anything to anybody.

He will never be able to offer any classified information. Were I in his shoes, I would be involved in quite the tweet war with a certain POTUS, however. Maybe he DID tell Trump he wasn't under investigation. I can't imagine he did, but why else is he remaining silent while the Blowhole drags him through the mud some more? I get it he doesn't want to quibble about being fired. Comey should be laying Trump out in lavender for the rest of this crap.

 

[OldLady]

Comey has returned the ball in the "who said what to whom" discussion that Trump started with "Comey told me three times I am not under investigation." Comey's friends say, "Yeah, well the President asked him twice to take a loyalty oath."

Three times Comey said something, but with the President's batting average on accuracy, I'll wait to see if Comey wishes to clear that up. And that three times thing--like before the rooster crows, Peter, you will deny me three times....Kind of puts a stamp of authenticity on it, doesn't it?

Asking Comey to take a loyalty pledge is about the creepiest thing I've heard yet, and I thought I'd been creeped out by this guy before. Kneel and kiss my ring, swear you are my man, and maybe I'll let you keep your job. ???? Glad Comey said no. Convenient Trump didn't mention that part in his story about the dinner.

Right there on its website, the FBI says the bureau and its officials must only swear an oath to the Constitution — not even a president. The reason? Because the latter “too easily leads to tyranny”:

It is significant that we take an oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity. This is true for the simple reason that the Constitution is based on lasting principles of sound government that provide balance, stability, and consistency through time. A government based on individuals — who are inconsistent, fallible, and often prone to error — too easily leads to tyranny on the one extreme or anarchy on the other. The founding fathers sought to avoid these extremes and create a balanced government based on constitutional principles.
Analysis | Trump reportedly sought a loyalty pledge from Comey. The FBI says this ‘leads to tyranny.’

Don't forget, just because NYT and WaPo don't disclose their sources doesn't mean their sources aren't credible--WaPo broke Watergate, remember. Trump has planned all along to fire Comey? I'll bet he has, ever since Comey told him he wouldn't take a loyalty oath. Who else has been asked? Jeff Sessions? Pompeo? Did they say yes? Who else? Would be interesting to know.

Yeah.....you should believe this story when you believe that comey asked for more resources......false...and that the Deputy Director said he would quit over the way Trump fired Comey....also false.....

There are lies about Trump going around and you are silly to believe them...

More has come out on that conversation and will continue to come out. With a POTUS such as we have, I doubt if anyone would want to be made public. I wish Comey himself would tweet or invite CBS or PBS over and have a nice long chat with them about all of this. Letting everything about his side of the story be dismissed as "lies" is as damaging as being fired for wanting to pursue the investigation to its logical end.

The Deputy Director of the FBI, now acting Director......whose wife ran for senate backed by clinton minion Terry macaulife said they were lies........

Has said WHAT were lies, 2AGuy? I heard him on the news first thing this a.m. and I did not hear him accusing anyone of lies then except Trump.

He said they did not request more money or resources for investigating Russia...he said he did not say he was going to quit....both of those stories were reported with heavy breathing by the democrat press......

You're right. He also said the majority of FBI personnel had deep respect and positive feelings toward Comey. Did he say damn it I outta quit when he found out the WH was using him as a patsy? Probably he did. Doesn't mean he meant it.

 

[OldLady]

Did Trump ever ask for a loyalty oath or did democrats make this up too?

Who would make up something that weird?

 

[L.K.Eder]

Oath to moronic narcissist freak, what is not to like?

 

[flacaltenn]

I agree Comey got stuck in a fix, but am I the only person alive who remembers Loretta Lynch on national tv saying that she was not going to actually recuse herself from the Clinton case but that she would rely on the recommendations of the FBI in the case to assuage any fears about the meeting on the tarmac? If Comey had given his recommendations to Lynch privately and then Lynch stood before the American people and said "No prosecution, folks" do you think ANYONE would have believed it was the FBI's recommendation?

Tough shit for Lynch. The FBI does not make that decision to go to trial. And if it does make a recommendation to NOT prosecute -- it should never be a public spectacle in an election year. SHE and the other partisans at DOJ never HAD credibility on that matter. And HER poor judgement with Mr WhoreHopper put Comey in a pickle.

As for the public believing her -- She and Comey would be in a Congressional hearing the NEXT DAY -- to confirm the situation.. The public would KNOW that it was DOJ that decided not to prosecute and Comey would have to lay out the rationale for his recommendation. Which STILL contradicts the decision not to prosecute. The excuse that Ms Clinton was TOO STUPID TO REALIZE they were seriously violating security law and protocol would STILL remain public. There would have been calls for BOTH of them to be fired.

I didn't even think it was so out of bounds to decide not to prosecute her. He said without intent, cases don't get won. The reason the FBI has a 98% success rate is because they don't prosecute cases they aren't sure they can win. Our D.A. here makes the same decision on a daily basis. It's a routine decision.

Just FTRecord, Comey was correct in asserting that cases like this were normally handled thru sanctions WITHIN the agency where they occur. Because a criminal trial at classified levels is difficult and expensive and does no more good --- than FIRING someones' ass, YANKING their clearances and making sure they never handle classified info in the future. That's how it's NORMALLY done. (I know a bit about this world). But in this case, the defendant was the Sec of State in CHARGE of that dept AND its security compliance. And for that unprecedented reason -- there SHOULD have been an indictment. Mrs WhoreHopper was FULLY aware of what she set up to circumvent normal security protocols.

Okay, that's your perspective, but if possible I'd prefer not to readjudicate that whole thing. It's my fault for bringing it up, but it was to explain why Comey did what he did in that case.
This is about the fact that Trump is calling for loyalty oaths. He would NEVER release that "tape" he has; it would also prove that Comey didn't tell him he wasn't being investigated.

So -- back to what YOU'RE interested in...

What's the difference behind Lynch and Company's unspoken loyalty oath and Trump asking (if he did indeed do that) for loyalty to current elected Admin? Don't think Obama/Clinton machine PURGED all of the opposition out of the top spots?
It's easier to do when there's not this much attention. It's SOProcedure for DC..

My take is -- the "loyalty oath" has been taken out of context at best. Probably more to do with loyalty to take ORDERS. Which certainly is within his right. Even if they are stupid -- Admin killing type orders.

Thanks.
What's the diff? Because I doubt if it is "SOP" for POTUS to ask the director of independent agencies for an oath of loyalty to anything. These hot shots all have been sworn in to defend law, order and the American Way already. What would POTUS be asking the Director of the FBI to be loyal to, other than that? Himself. It's the only logical answer. It stinks to high heaven and you damned well know it.
Loyalty to "take orders?" Orders about what?
Considering the fact that Comey was in charge of an ongoing investigation into Trump and his campaign, it is indefensible to ask for a "loyalty oath" from Comey.

When there's a history of having partisan bosses with no credibility that want you to take the heat for them --- I suppose it should come as no surprise to a "veteran" like Comey. He definitely HELPED the Dems. Read that again. HE DID. He chose his JOB over any allegiance to those "higher purposes" you're spouting. And maybe he just wanted to defuse a classic showdown.

So -- maybe the word "loyalty" actually wasn't used. WE DON'T KNOW. Probably never will. The question could have been -- "Are you done helping the Democrats?" I would have asked that of him... Given the putrid history of this breach of justice....

 

[flacaltenn]

What's the difference behind Lynch and Company's unspoken loyalty oath and Trump asking (if he did indeed do that) for loyalty to current elected Admin? Don't think Obama/Clinton machine PURGED all of the opposition out of the top spots?
It's easier to do when there's not this much attention. It's SOProcedure for DC..

My take is -- the "loyalty oath" has been taken out of context at best. Probably more to do with loyalty to take ORDERS. Which certainly is within his right. Even if they are stupid -- Admin killing type orders.

You're not troubled by what Adolf did either huh ??

You saw what happened to Germany, and you're not troubled ??

This has nothing to do with Adolf or the Nazis. Anytime you put that much power in the hands of partisans that are no more now than 2 primitive warring tribes -- you've ALREADY LOST your control of your government and your freedom...

 

[Vastator]

I agree Comey got stuck in a fix, but am I the only person alive who remembers Loretta Lynch on national tv saying that she was not going to actually recuse herself from the Clinton case but that she would rely on the recommendations of the FBI in the case to assuage any fears about the meeting on the tarmac? If Comey had given his recommendations to Lynch privately and then Lynch stood before the American people and said "No prosecution, folks" do you think ANYONE would have believed it was the FBI's recommendation?

Tough shit for Lynch. The FBI does not make that decision to go to trial. And if it does make a recommendation to NOT prosecute -- it should never be a public spectacle in an election year. SHE and the other partisans at DOJ never HAD credibility on that matter. And HER poor judgement with Mr WhoreHopper put Comey in a pickle.

As for the public believing her -- She and Comey would be in a Congressional hearing the NEXT DAY -- to confirm the situation.. The public would KNOW that it was DOJ that decided not to prosecute and Comey would have to lay out the rationale for his recommendation. Which STILL contradicts the decision not to prosecute. The excuse that Ms Clinton was TOO STUPID TO REALIZE they were seriously violating security law and protocol would STILL remain public. There would have been calls for BOTH of them to be fired.

I didn't even think it was so out of bounds to decide not to prosecute her. He said without intent, cases don't get won. The reason the FBI has a 98% success rate is because they don't prosecute cases they aren't sure they can win. Our D.A. here makes the same decision on a daily basis. It's a routine decision.

Just FTRecord, Comey was correct in asserting that cases like this were normally handled thru sanctions WITHIN the agency where they occur. Because a criminal trial at classified levels is difficult and expensive and does no more good --- than FIRING someones' ass, YANKING their clearances and making sure they never handle classified info in the future. That's how it's NORMALLY done. (I know a bit about this world). But in this case, the defendant was the Sec of State in CHARGE of that dept AND its security compliance. And for that unprecedented reason -- there SHOULD have been an indictment. Mrs WhoreHopper was FULLY aware of what she set up to circumvent normal security protocols.

Okay, that's your perspective, but if possible I'd prefer not to readjudicate that whole thing. It's my fault for bringing it up, but it was to explain why Comey did what he did in that case.
This is about the fact that Trump is calling for loyalty oaths. He would NEVER release that "tape" he has; it would also prove that Comey didn't tell him he wasn't being investigated.

So you've heard this tape? So one does in fact exist?

 

[Vastator]

What's the difference behind Lynch and Company's unspoken loyalty oath and Trump asking (if he did indeed do that) for loyalty to current elected Admin? Don't think Obama/Clinton machine PURGED all of the opposition out of the top spots?
It's easier to do when there's not this much attention. It's SOProcedure for DC..

My take is -- the "loyalty oath" has been taken out of context at best. Probably more to do with loyalty to take ORDERS. Which certainly is within his right. Even if they are stupid -- Admin killing type orders.

You're not troubled by what Adolf did either huh ??

You saw what happened to Germany, and you're not troubled ??

By seeing the condition Germany is in today, along with the UK, compounded by Stalin's astronomical death toll... Its clear that we backed the wrong horse. But I digress... Hind sight is 20/20...

 

[Vastator]

Did Trump ever ask for a loyalty oath or did democrats make this up too?

Who would make up something that weird?

Liberals...

 

[Votto]

Comey has returned the ball in the "who said what to whom" discussion that Trump started with "Comey told me three times I am not under investigation." Comey's friends say, "Yeah, well the President asked him twice to take a loyalty oath."

Three times Comey said something, but with the President's batting average on accuracy, I'll wait to see if Comey wishes to clear that up. And that three times thing--like before the rooster crows, Peter, you will deny me three times....Kind of puts a stamp of authenticity on it, doesn't it?

Asking Comey to take a loyalty pledge is about the creepiest thing I've heard yet, and I thought I'd been creeped out by this guy before. Kneel and kiss my ring, swear you are my man, and maybe I'll let you keep your job. ???? Glad Comey said no. Convenient Trump didn't mention that part in his story about the dinner.

Right there on its website, the FBI says the bureau and its officials must only swear an oath to the Constitution — not even a president. The reason? Because the latter “too easily leads to tyranny”:

It is significant that we take an oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity. This is true for the simple reason that the Constitution is based on lasting principles of sound government that provide balance, stability, and consistency through time. A government based on individuals — who are inconsistent, fallible, and often prone to error — too easily leads to tyranny on the one extreme or anarchy on the other. The founding fathers sought to avoid these extremes and create a balanced government based on constitutional principles.
Analysis | Trump reportedly sought a loyalty pledge from Comey. The FBI says this ‘leads to tyranny.’

Don't forget, just because NYT and WaPo don't disclose their sources doesn't mean their sources aren't credible--WaPo broke Watergate, remember. Trump has planned all along to fire Comey? I'll bet he has, ever since Comey told him he wouldn't take a loyalty oath. Who else has been asked? Jeff Sessions? Pompeo? Did they say yes? Who else? Would be interesting to know.

I hear "W" lied about WMD's as well.

Do you reckon it's too late to bring him to justice?

Or how about the Truthers who say that the government was responsible for 911?