|
||
| Thema: You Can’t Fire the Person Investigating You | Antwort auf: Resistance Schmesistance von Felix Deutschland | |
| Erstmal vorweg, dein beliebter Olbermann: >Was soll groß passieren? Um impeached zu werden, müssen beide Kammern ihn absolut hassen und er überhaupt keine Möglichkeiten mehr haben, sie zurückzugewinnen. Trump konsolidiert seine Macht. Wäre er nicht so ein Kackmongo und faules Stück Scheiße, hätte er Comey sofort bei seinem Amtsantritt gefeuert, aber dieser Kretin hat ja sogar noch öffentlich von ihm geschwärmt. Und ist erstmal drölf mal golfen gefahren, statt seinen eigenen Sauhaufen hinter ihm aufzuräumen. > >Ist halt trotzdem egal, weil im Gegensatz zu Nixon erstmal natürlich noch keine Smoking Gun oder so gefunden wurden, also fomal, soweit die Öffentlichkeit das wüsste, nichts passiert ist mit der Trump/Pants-Kampagne und Russland. Das würde die öffentliche Meinung beeinflussen, und die widerum würde die Abgeordneten in beiden Häusern beeinflussen usw. usf. Ja, die Smoking Gun fehlt. Und die Leute werden einfach langsam des Geschwafels über die "investigation into the Trump campaigns' ties to Russia's efforts to influence the last presidential election" überdrüssig. Man wird halt nun sehen müssen, in welche Richtung sich die Meinungswaage wegen der Comey-Affäre neigt, wenn überhaupt. Die nächsten Tage dürften spannend werden. Es kann gut sein, dass das einfach verpufft. Es kann auch sein, derzeit wohl unwahrscheinlicher, dass es Trump um die Ohren fliegt. In letzterem Fall stellt sich auch noch die Frage, ob Pence wirklich das geringere Übel ist. Außenpolitische Stabilität betreffend sicherlich, aber innenpolitisch ist das so ein Jesus-Freak, der angeblich glaubt, Schwule könnten mit Elektroschocks "geheilt" werden. Aber das wäre deren Problem. Mir wäre eben wohler, wenn jemand, der halbwegs bei Trost ist, die Macht über das stärkste Militär der Welt und dessen Atomwaffen hätte. Es ist schon ziemlich absurd, was da gerade abgeht. Die Art der öffentlichen Hinrichtung, völlig überstürzt und planlos rübergebracht, mit einem zeitlichen Ablauf und einer Begründung, die nahelegen, dass erst eine kürzlich getroffene Entscheidung nun nachträglich als monatelang geplant verkauft und mit Paper Trails belegt werden soll. Spicer versteckt sich hinter Büschen und gibt dann ein Press Briefing im Dunkeln. Die Conway taucht auf einmal wieder auf. Aber ja, derzeit gibt es nur wenige (Überraschung!) Kritikstimmen aus der Republikaner-Ecke. Der eigentlich haltlose Spin ist: "Die Demokraten wollten ihn doch gefeuert sehen," (sie wollten nicht, sie haben ihn kritisiert oder Rücktritt nahegelegt) "nun ist ihnen es denen auch nicht recht.". Als ob der Zeitpunkt und die Trumps vorherige, zur Begründing in Widerspruch stehende Aussagen keinerlei Relevanz hätte. Es könnte sein, dass sie damit durchkommen. Absurd auch, dass Trumps Dunstkreis angeblich völlig vom negativen Presse-Echo überrascht worden ist. Die glaubten echt, die würden von beiden Seiten dafür bejubelt, dass sie den Typen absägen, der gegen sie ermittelt. Die neueste Entwicklung ist ja nun, dass rauskam, dass Comey erst letzte Woche nach mehr Mitteln für seine Russland-Untersuchung angefragt hat (wohl der Strohhalm, der Trump zur endgültigen Entscheidung gebracht hat; analog zum Muslim/Travel-Ban sollten seine Handlanger dann eben nach einer alternativen Begründung suchen) und dass Comey nun nächste Woche zur Anhörung vor dem Senat geladen ist. Dürfte auch interessant werden. Ebenso, ob der drip-drip-drip aus der IC nun wieder Fahrt aufnimmt, könnte mir vorstellen, dass da ein paar Geheimdienstler nicht amüsiert sind. Eine Auswahl an Ausschnitten aus entsprechenden Artikeln: [http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/05/the_white_house_story_on_comey_s_firing_is_falling_apart.html] (Hier nur die Unterüberschriften rauskopiert, jede geht noch mit einem Text im Artikel in die Tiefe...) The White House Is Lying About Comey We do know two things: The explanations given by the White House are false, and the evidence points toward friction over the FBI’s Russia investigation. 1. The White House’s story has changed. 2. The story doesn’t fit the time frame the White House is presenting. 3. The story doesn’t fit the timeline of the past week. 4. The story doesn’t fit Trump’s prior statements. 5. The story doesn’t fit the speed of the firing. 6. All the things Comey did during the period when Trump ostensibly turned against him were related to Russia. 7. Administration sources have connected the Russia-related events to Trump’s decision. 8. Trump’s decision followed direct lobbying by Roger Stone. 9. Rosenstein’s memo allegedly followed a request to him from Comey for more resources to investigate Russia. 10. Having fired Comey, the White House is substituting its own account of what his investigation has found. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2017/05/10/daily-202-firing-fbi-director-comey-is-already-backfiring-on-trump-it-s-only-going-to-get-worse/5912635de9b69b209cf2b7fb] Donald Trump has surrounded himself with sycophants and amateurs who are either unwilling or unable to tell him no. Trump just walked headlong into a political buzz saw. Senior officials at the White House were caught off guard by the intense and immediate blowback to the president’s stunning decision to fire James Comey. They reportedly expected Republicans to back him up and thought Democrats wouldn’t complain loudly because they have been critical of Comey for his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation. Indeed, that was the dubious excuse given publicly for his ouster. But as all three cable news channels showed live footage of Comey’s motorcade winding through Los Angeles traffic en route to the private plane that would bring him home to Washington, the West Wing shifted into damage-control mode. “After Spicer spent several minutes hidden in the bushes behind these sets, Janet Montesi, an executive assistant in the press office, emerged and told reporters that Spicer would answer some questions, as long as he was not filmed doing so. Spicer then emerged. ‘Just turn the lights off. Turn the lights off,’ he ordered. … Spicer got his wish and was soon standing in near darkness between two tall hedges, with more than a dozen reporters closely gathered around him. For 10 minutes, he responded to a flurry of questions, vacillating between light-hearted asides and clear frustration with getting the same questions over and over again. [http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/10/comey-firing-trump-russia-238192] Trump had grown enraged by the Russia investigation, two advisers said, frustrated by his inability to control the mushrooming narrative around Russia. He repeatedly asked aides why the Russia investigation wouldn’t disappear and demanded they speak out for him. He would sometimes scream at television clips about the probe, one adviser said. (...) Trump had grown angry with the Russia investigation — particularly Comey admitting in front of the Senate that the FBI was investigating his campaign — and that the FBI director wouldn’t support his claims that President Barack Obama had tapped his phones in Trump Tower. (...) But the fallout seemed to take the White House by surprise. Trump made a round of calls around 5 p.m., asking for support from senators. White House officials believed it would be a “win-win” because Republicans and Democrats alike had had problems with the FBI director, one person briefed on the administration’s deliberations said. [http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/james-comey-ausschuss-laedt-ex-fbi-chef-als-zeugen-a-1147094.html] Comey soll am kommenden Dienstag im US-Senat zum Stand der Ermittlungen in der Russland-Affäre aussagen. Der Geheimdienst-Ausschuss habe Comey als Zeugen in eine nichtöffentliche Sitzung eingeladen, sagte eine Sprecherin des Ausschussvorsitzenden. Ob Comey kommt, ist noch unklar. "Wir haben ihm erst heute geschrieben", sagte der demokratische Senator Mark Warner. Gleichzeitig "ermuntert" die Regierung das FBI nach Angaben ihrer Sprecher, die Ermittlungen darüber abzuschließen, ob Russland in den amerikanischen Präsidentschaftswahlkampf 2016 eingegriffen hat. [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/us/politics/trump-comey-firing.html] On Capitol Hill, at least a half-dozen Republicans broke with their leadership to express concern or dismay about the firing of James B. Comey, who was four years into a decade-long appointment as the bureau’s director. Still, they stopped well short of joining Democrats’ call for a special prosecutor to lead the continuing investigation of Russian contacts with Mr. Trump’s aides. At the White House, Mr. Trump shrugged off accusations of presidential interference in a counterintelligence investigation. He hosted a surreal and awkwardly timed meeting in the Oval Office with Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, and Sergey I. Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States. Mr. Kislyak’s private meetings with Mr. Trump’s aides are a key part of the sprawling investigation. White House officials denied American reporters permission to witness the Oval Office meeting or take photographs, but Russian state news outlets published images taken by their official photographer of a beaming Mr. Trump shaking hands with the envoys. The pictures quickly spread on Twitter. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-trumps-anger-and-impatience-prompted-him-to-fire-the-fbi-director/2017/05/10/d9642334-359c-11e7-b373-418f6849a004_story.html] At his golf course in Bedminster, N.J., Trump groused over Comey’s latest congressional testimony, which he thought was “strange,” and grew impatient with what he viewed as his sanctimony, according to White House officials. Comey, Trump figured, was using the Russia probe to become a martyr. Back at work Monday morning in Washington, Trump told Vice President Pence and several senior aides — Reince Priebus, Stephen K. Bannon and Donald McGahn, among others — that he was ready to move on Comey. First, though, he wanted to talk with Attorney General Jeff Sessions, his trusted confidant, and Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, to whom Comey reported directly. Trump summoned the two of them to the White House for a meeting, according to a person close to the White House. The president already had decided to fire Comey, according to this person. But in the meeting, several White House officials said Trump gave Sessions and Rosenstein a directive: to explain in writing the case against Comey. The pair quickly fulfilled the boss’s orders, and the next day Trump fired Comey — a breathtaking move that thrust a White House already accustomed to chaos into a new level of tumult, one that has legal as well as political consequences. Rosenstein threatened to resign after the narrative emerging from the White House on Tuesday evening cast him as a prime mover of the decision to fire Comey and that the president acted only on his recommendation, said the person close to the White House, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. “He wasn’t doing a good job,” Trump told reporters Wednesday. “Very simple. He wasn’t doing a good job.” But the private accounts of more than 30 officials at the White House, the Justice Department, the FBI and on Capitol Hill, as well as Trump confidants and other senior Republicans, paint a conflicting narrative centered on the president’s brewing personal animus toward Comey. Many of those interviewed spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to candidly discuss internal deliberations. Trump was angry that Comey would not support his baseless claim that President Barack Obama had his campaign offices wiretapped. Trump was frustrated when Comey revealed in Senate testimony the breadth of the counterintelligence investigation into Russia’s effort to sway the 2016 U.S. presidential election. And he fumed that Comey was giving too much attention to the Russia probe and not enough to investigating leaks to journalists. (...) One intelligence official who works on Russian espionage matters said they were more determined than ever to pursue such cases. Another said Comey’s firing and the subsequent comments from the White House are attacks that won’t soon be forgotten. Trump had “essentially declared war on a lot of people at the FBI,” one official said. “I think there will be a concerted effort to respond over time in kind.” Die Lage gestern war zumindest aber so, dass viele Republikaner die Nummer klein reden oder übergehen wollten. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/after-comeys-ouster-democrats-press-for-independent-probe-of-russias-meddling-in-election/2017/05/10/88c45624-3529-11e7-b373-418f6849a004_story.html] The furor over President Trump’s abrupt firing of FBI Director James B. Comey grew Wednesday with the revelation that Comey had sought more resources for an investigation into possible coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian government shortly before he was dismissed. (...) While Democrats discussed strategy, Republicans were trying to move on — a sign of how unwelcome these developments are for their agenda. [http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/05/comey_s_gone_and_the_gop_doesn_t_care_is_there_anything_trump_could_do_to.html] Republican indifference to the Comey firing is the latest evidence that this is a party defined not by conservatism but by its will to power. (...) On Wednesday morning, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell took to the Senate floor to support the president’s decision and dismiss talk of a special committee or independent prosecutor. “Today we’ll no doubt hear calls for a new investigation,” said McConnell, “which can only serve to impede the current work being done.” (...) What will pull the GOP away from Trump? Nothing, it seems. At a time in which the president himself tests the strength of our democracy, we know what the Republican Party stands for: party over country, power over everything. >trotz allem lauten Getöse immer mal wieder seltsam eier- und planlose Presse, die immer noch damit ringt, was sie jetzt alles davon halten soll. Immer in der Angst, dass wenn Trump auch nur einen Iota Erfolg haben könnte mittel- und langfristig, sie alle weg vom Fenster sein können und teilweise schonmal "für den Fall, dass" erschreckende Servilität durchblicken lassen. Nun, es geht. Sie haben manchmal seltsame Rückfälle (wie bei der Jubelei, als er die Raketen auf den Flughafen abgeschossen hat, da wurden auf beiden Seiten positiv berichet, selbst MSNBC verstieg sich in einer Beschreibung der "Schönheit der amerikanischen Waffen" und zitierte über dem Bildmaterial irgendeinen ollen Dichter... völlig Gaga). Aber grundsätzlich scheint da recht konstanter Gegenwind zu blasen, die Frage ist eben, ob das noch wen juckt. Hier und da (und nicht nur immer der Olbermann) wird Trumps Geisteszustand neuerdings in Frage gestellt. Was längst überfällig ist. Wobei das auch nur Opinion Pieces und Blog Einträge sind, die auf WaPo und anderen illustren Domains gehosted werden. Da bin ich mir gar nicht so sicher, wie man die werten soll - sind das Mitarbeiter der Post, freie Journalisten oder kann da jeder einen Blog aufmachen? Der hier jedenfalls ist ein bekannter Commentator mit Pulitzer Price. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-has-a-dangerous-disability/2017/05/03/56ca6118-2f6b-11e7-9534-00e4656c22aa_story.html] It is urgent for Americans to think and speak clearly about President Trump’s inability to do either. This seems to be not a mere disinclination but a disability. It is not merely the result of intellectual sloth but of an untrained mind bereft of information and married to stratospheric self-confidence. Oder ist nicht nur Trump, sondern die Amis an sich nicht mehr ganz frisch? [http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/05/we_can_t_let_trump_shake_away_his_past_decisions.html] Lawyers, judges, and elected officials (not to mention the rest of us) wake up every day asking whether the crazy mess of pretexts and justifications proffered by Trump and his defenders really is a crazy mess or whether the fact that it is proffered by the president of the United States somehow makes it reasonable. It’s an inquiry separate and apart from whether it was “legal” or “permissible” to fire Comey. The legality of the firing is one thing—the better question is whether the reasons proffered for the firing are normal or reasonable. In essence, “are we nuts for even accepting this rationale?” has become the hottest game in town. Oder wie sagte Comey angeblich selber? [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/us/politics/how-trump-decided-to-fire-james-comey.html] After President Trump accused his predecessor in March of wiretapping him, James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, was flabbergasted. The president, Mr. Comey told associates, was “outside the realm of normal,” even “crazy.” >Edit: Lies' dir lieber mal Sachen durch über Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, Roger Aisles und die ganze Rasselbande durch, deren Biografien und Lebenswege. Danke für den Hinweis, mache ich mal bei Gelegenheit. ***Diese Nachricht wurde von membran am 11.05.2017 19:29 bearbeitet.*** |
||
| < Auf diese Nachricht antworten > | ||