Former FBI Director James Comey: "86 47"

[tyroneweaver]

well if gretchen whitmer had any aspirations... she's toast

 

[MayorQuimby]

The FBI needs to seize his cell phone, papers, laptops, and his wife's underwear drawer.
The use of deadly force should be authorized, if anyone resists with force.
Basically, the Biden DOJ/FBI's Mar-a-Lago protocol.

I wish, but doubt it.

Hyena does not attack another hyena.

Seizing personal property without proper justification is a violation of civil rights.

This is in theory true, however, since when does the government care about people's civil rights?

Btw, not a rhetorical question.

You’ve lost your minds. Paranoia is a serious mental health issue. Please seek help.

I don't think it's paranoia. You have to look at the position of someone like Comey. If he hates Trump and wants to incite violence against him, he's not gonna come right out and say it. He has to do it in a round-about way, hence the seashells.

But it wasn’t a crime. He was never indicted or prosecuted.

Actually, the link between whether someone's committed a crime and whether someone's indicted/prosecuted can be weak sometimes. There are cases where someone did commit a crime, but he beat the rap, and escaped punishment somehow.

There is a lot of corruption in the judiciary system. I wouldn't put too much trust in someone's innocence just because he's not put in jail.

Kind of hard to charge someone who took unclassified memos.

Of course, you guys have a history of trying to get false charges against your political enemies.

That's literally the Left/Democrats.

Calling that a threat is absolutely delusional.

Actually, it is a rather ambiguous case, and can be argued either way. Kind of like when protestors go to protest against someone, and then chant, "We know where you live". It can be a threat, depending on who you ask.

However, the fact you outright dismiss it, calling people "delusional" tells me you are very eager to defend any wrongdoings, as long as it's against Trump. You are obviously biased and I would not put much stock in what you have to say.

Fun fact:

Marener's a member of the Astrology Society.

For retards.

Hey! I am an actual member of the Astrology Society. I am very offended.

 

[DonGlock26]

I hadn't heard that, but if so it couldn't happen to a more deserving asshole.

He's going to have some serious legal bills now at best.

 

[DonGlock26]

well if gretchen whitmer had any aspirations... she's toast

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

He used to BE in the Secret Service.

And, ironically?

His mission was protecting Obama.

Still not his responsibility anymore.

 

[Marener]

Actually, it is a rather ambiguous case, and can be argued either way. Kind of like when protestors go to protest against someone, and then chant, "We know where you live". It can be a threat, depending on who you ask.

The fact that it can be argued either way makes it essentially impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[shockedcanadian]

In Canada we have the most unaccountable police agencies. Creepy really. Bad apples in higher positions moving to other police forces when they operate nefariously, tossing abusers of civil liberties around, especially in Ontario.

It's a major reason our global reputation is in the mud and will remain so for the foreseeable future barring some real courage of political leadership here.

Has America has now become just a bunch of wannabe Canadians?

I don't know U.S law but I do not think this should rise to the level of a court case. Now, what the former administration did to Trump and his family really hurt their reputation but Trumps team shouldn't continue down the spiral just to cause the same harm. Be the bigger men and don't replicate abuse of power. It would serve him better politically to advise publicly that he is a leader, not an abuser of power as SOME people were...

This post should elicit a visit or phone call from the Secret Service, no? Based on his position and being a public figure, he should explain clearly his intentions with such a post just as many Americans might have to speak to them.

This is fairly standard in instances in which a threat is made against the U.S president, is it not?

 

[DonGlock26]

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard Says James Comey Should be "Arrested and Put Behind Bars" for Threatening the Life of President Trump - The Last Refuge

Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, is pulling no punches in her view of the direct threat against President Donald Trump that has been made and promoted by former FBI Director James Comey. Speaking to Fox News, Director Gabbard outlines that there is “no way” James Comey did not...

theconservativetreehouse.com

 

[SeaMajor7]

Congress should subpoena his ass so he can clarify what his cryptic post means ON THE RECORD.

 

[MayorQuimby]

The fact that it can be argued either way makes it essentially impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Yet you have no problem outright dismissing it, calling people "delusional".

I am amazed.... in a very bad way.

 

[ColonelAngus]

If Don Jr made the exact same Tweet, but it was 86 46, you lefty commie cult ***** would claim it means nothing and you would ignore it?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I do not believe you liars.

If DJTjr did the exact same thing, but put 46, every single one of you TDS honks would be apoplectic and you ******* know it.

Why do you insist on being full of shit?

 

[Marener]

Yet you have no problem outright dismissing it, calling people "delusional".

I am amazed.... in a very bad way.

It’s delusional to believe it could only mean one thing.

 

[DonGlock26]

 

[JGalt]

Wrong.
The term 86 has never been used to imply violence.

"Eight feet long, 6 feet deep."

 

[MayorQuimby]

It’s delusional to believe it could only mean one thing.

But they did not say that it could only mean one thing, though. They said it meant something, as in, they thought it was a threat. They did not say, "this can only be a threat" or anything.

Anyway, I fail to see why this is even important. Regardless of whether people are being unreasonable/delusional, you aren't doing much better yourself. You try very hard to explain away Comey's behavior, categorically denying any possibility that this could be a call to harm Trump. You are just like these people except you are on the opposite side.

 

[shockedcanadian]

But they did not say that it could only mean one thing, though. They said it meant something, as in, they thought it was a threat. They did not say, "this can only be a threat" or anything.

Anyway, I fail to see why this is even important. Regardless of whether people are being unreasonable/delusional, you aren't doing much better yourself. You try very hard to explain away Comey's behavior, categorically denying any possibility that this could be a call to harm Trump. You are just like these people except you are on the opposite side.

Such an opinion coming from you is very rich indeed...

 

[Billiejeens]

No president has ever deported without hearing, illegally slashed congressional fundings, or illegally imposed tariffs without congressional approval.

You have described actions committed by a single person


Do you have even the most vague understanding of the process of impeaching and removing a sitting President and how many people it takes?

 

[MayorQuimby]

Such an opinion coming from you is very rich indeed...

How so, dearie?

Btw, good morning.

 

[shockedcanadian]

How so, dearie?

Btw, good morning.

Don't worry, I'm ready. Been ready for some time.

 

[Marener]

But they did not say that it could only mean one thing, though. They said it meant something, as in, they thought it was a threat. They did not say, "this can only be a threat" or anything.

Anyway, I fail to see why this is even important. Regardless of whether people are being unreasonable/delusional, you aren't doing much better yourself. You try very hard to explain away Comey's behavior, categorically denying any possibility that this could be a call to harm Trump. You are just like these people except you are on the opposite side.

No, they’re definitely saying it can only mean one thing both explicitly and implicitly.

Comey is a serious person and the idea that he is calling for violence is absurd.