Howie Carr on Festivus and Impeachment - 12/18/2019

Why Did Trump Fire Comey?

The Left is apoplectic now that Donald Trump has fired FBI Director Jim Comey, despite calling for this very thing themselves for most of a year.  Many reasons have surfaced as to why Trump may have taken this action at this time.  Among them:

• Comey's bizarre press conference last summer where he laid out the case against Hillary Clinton's handling of classified information, and then excused her on the basis of "intent", which, of course, is not part of the statute.
• Comey's bizarre intervening in the Loretta Lynch / Bill Clinton tarmac meeting.
• Comey's bizarre letter re-opening the Clinton matter days before the election.  (Which actually hurt her, and helped Trump.)
• Comey's bizarre recent testimony in front of Congress.
• The Left believes Comey was onto Trump's supposed Russia collusion, and therefore had to be eliminated. (Yet, Trump would have to fire the entire FBI to keep that from being made public, since an investigation of that scope would likely involve hundreds.)   

That said, there is another strong case for why Donald Trump fired Jim Comey.  He is a partisan.

Remember Trump's famous tweet about being bugged by Barack Obama?  Right before that tweet, Reince Priebus, WH Chief of Staff, had asked Jim Comey to publicly state what he had already been saying privately, that there was zero evidence of any Russia collusion.  Comey turned him down flatly saying, A) the FBI doesn't get involved in political squabbles, and B) they don't comment about investigations.  Then, right after that, Trump tweeted about his phones being tapped, and what did Comey do?  He immediately, and publicly, came out and said there was no evidence Obama bugged Trump.

Bam! Trump knew instantly he had a partisan FBI director who was applying a double standard.


(UPDATE)
Here's a timeline of the events from 2/24 to 5/8:

2/24 -  Reince Priebus asks James Comey to publicly admit there is no evidence of Russia collusion. Comey turns him down citing it as a political squabble and part of an investigation he cannot comment on.

3/4 - Trump tweets about Barack Obama wiretapping him. 

3/5 - James Comey immediately and publicly denies Obama had Trump wiretapped.  How could he possibly know this within a day, and be so certain that he could state it publicly given that the resources available to a POTUS for surveillance go well beyond the FBI?  And how could he possibly comment on this political squabble while the Russia collusion squabble was off limits?

3/20 - Comey public testimony undercuts Trump's claim of wiretapping.  Apparently, Comey had been calling Trump "crazy" among colleagues for his tweet.

4/4 - It turns out members of the Trump transition were surveilled and improperly unmasked - the equivalent of being wiretapped.

5/8 - Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's memo makes case against Comey, which Trump uses as his opportunity to fire James Comey.  

Did Obama Bug Trump Tower?

(UPDATED)
According to several sources, including a piece in the Guardian from January 11, the Obama DOJ (FBI) did attempt to obtain FISA warrants to bug Trump associates.  Here's the paragraph:

The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The Fisa court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation.

Once again Trump is most likely right.

Was this justified or just a ruse to gain compromising information? If the FBI has proof Trump is a Russian agent and is doing Putin's bidding, why keep it secret?   Why allow Trump to set-up a rogue government just to have it all scrapped as he's hauled off to prison for treason?  

And once again James Comey has a lot to explain. 

UPDATE: In addition to the above, the New York Times, no ally of Trump's, reported on January 20th about "wiretaps" which grabbed information on Trump associates.  (UPDATE 3/9: The Times has changed their headline online to better fit their current narrative.  Haha. Hat tip to Andrew McCarthy who has been unequaled in his commentary on all this.) 

But all the evidence of eavesdropping notwithstanding, it is probably besides the point. Trumps tweet about Barack Obama wiretapping him is brilliant on several levels:  

• Right before Trump's tweet, Reince Priebus had approached James Comey and asked him to state publicly what he was already saying privately, that there was no collusion between Trump and Russia.  Comey turned him down flatly saying the FBI doesn't get involved in political arguments.  Then Trump tweets, and Comey IMMEDIATELY denies any wiretapping by Obama!  Trump smoked him out, uncovered his hypocrisy, and now knows which side his FBI director is on. 
• Leaks of wiretapped phone calls and private conversations have been dogging Trump since day one.  Now that he has implicated Barack Obama, the price for leaking has gone up exponentially for the left.  Any new leaks further implicate Barack Obama who doesn't want anyone, much less a special prosecutor, digging into his business.  
• Note that Obama's response to Trump's tweet did not deny any wiretapping!  He just denied ordering it, and laid the blame on Loretta Lynch and the DOJ.  (Side note: Loretta Lynch has been calling for violent insurrection against Trump lately.  See here.)
• Democrats have been spun-up calling for congressional investigations, independent prosecutors, and media investigators to look into the dubious claims of Russia collusion in the Trump campaign.  Now the playing field is level and both claims must be taken equally seriously.  Guess which side has more exposure now?           

  

Menendez Hypocrisy

The FBI is investigating Senator Bob Menendez's (D-NJ) connections to a scandal involving underage prostitutes, a Florida donor, unreimbursed and undocumented donations, legislative favors, and said donor's tax status.  The Pop Media, especially network news, is uninterested in reporting these allegations.  According to them, it's not newsworthy because there is no hypocrisy involved.  After all Senator Menendez is a Democrat and Democrats don't go around preaching about morals and values.  When a Republican allegedly cheats on his wife, solicits gay sex, or takes illegal donations, that's news because they are always going on about family values and moral standards.  Apparently, Democrats can't possibly be held to account because they espouse no values and set no standards of accountability or behavior.

Well, I call bullshit.  Turns out Bob Menendez is all about protecting "exploited children".  Hmmmm, wouldn't underage prostitutes fall into that category?        

Menendez is a member of the Congressional Missing & Exploited Children's Caucus!!!

Statement Of Purpose

1. To build awareness around the issue of missing and exploited children for the purpose of finding children who are currently missing and to prevent future abductions.

1. To create a voice within Congress on the issue of missing and exploited children and introduce legislation that would strengthen law enforcement, community organizing and school-based efforts to address child abduction.

1. To identify ways to work effectively in our districts to address child abduction. By developing cooperative efforts that involve police departments, educators, and community groups we can heighten awareness of the issue and pool resources for the purpose of solving outstanding cases and preventing future abductions.

Source: Congressional Caucus Web site 01-CMECC0 on Jan 8, 2001