• Happy 24th Birthday to Yappi.com!! Just made it with a minute left before the Birthday was over!! Link

Trump to nominate Christopher Wray as FBI director

Yappi

Yappi

Go Buckeyes
President Donald Trump announced Wednesday he plans to nominate Christopher A. Wray, the former assistant attorney general in charge of the Justice Department's criminal division, to be the next FBI director.

Trump's announcement comes one day before former FBI Director James Comey, whom Trump fired last month, is set to testify in a bombshell hearing before the Senate.

"I will be nominating Christopher A. Wray, a man of impeccable credentials, to be the new Director of the FBI. Details to follow," Trump tweeted Wednesday morning.
Click to expand...

Read more:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/politics/christopher-wray-fbi-director/index.html
 
 
Wasn't Eric Holder Obama's legal advisor in his 1st campaign? Wasn't he a student terrorist that occupied the ROTC offices and renamed them for MalcomX? He also worked with Clinton on the scandalous Marc Rich pardon (another example of the Clinton's pay-to-play philosophy). Holder also represented politicians and corporations before becoming the AG........ and you are worried about Wray?
 
SWMCinci said:
Wasn't Eric Holder Obama's legal advisor in his 1st campaign? Wasn't he a student terrorist that occupied the ROTC offices and renamed them for MalcomX? He also worked with Clinton on the scandalous Marc Rich pardon (another example of the Clinton's pay-to-play philosophy). Holder also represented politicians and corporations before becoming the AG........ and you are worried about Wray?
Click to expand...

I literally asked 1 question. Seek psychiatric help.
 
I don't care who lawyers represent. That argument is always weak imo. That is their job. Doesn't mean they condone the activity or act.

More interested in his views and credentials in law enforcement, investigative work, counter-intelligence etc. Never heard of him before but from what I gather at 1st blush he seems qualified. Given the suspicion of the man being accused of obstruction of justice for firing his predecessor (Comey), now getting to appoint his replacement (what a great system we have, lol), I will reserve judgment till I learn more.
 
TigerPaw said:
I don't care who lawyers represent. That argument is always weak imo. That is their job. Doesn't mean they condone the activity or act.

More interested in his views and credentials in law enforcement, investigative work, counter-intelligence etc. Never heard of him before but from what I gather at 1st blush he seems qualified. Given the suspicion of the man being accused of obstruction of justice for firing his predecessor (Comey), now getting to appoint his replacement (what a great system we have, lol), I will reserve judgment till I learn more.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry where is Trump being charged with Obstruction of Justice for firing Comey? I haven't heard that one before....
 
TigerPaw said:
I don't care who lawyers represent. That argument is always weak imo. That is their job. Doesn't mean they condone the activity or act.

More interested in his views and credentials in law enforcement, investigative work, counter-intelligence etc. Never heard of him before but from what I gather at 1st blush he seems qualified. Given the suspicion of the man being accused of obstruction of justice for firing his predecessor (Comey), now getting to appoint his replacement (what a great system we have, lol), I will reserve judgment till I learn more.
Click to expand...

I don't think you've heard the term "obstruction of justice" with regard to the firing of Comey except from Democrats and liberal ideologues. The investigation is being handled by actual FBI agents, not appointees. Did you have these same fears when Eric Holder refused to appoint a special counsel for Fast and Furious (which was being investigated by people that worked for him) or where Loretta Lynch refused to appoint a special counsel to investigate the likely Democrat Party presidential candidate and refused to charge her (in a case similar to a dozen others that DID involve people getting charged) for mishandling government documents?
 
SWMCinci said:
I don't think you've heard the term "obstruction of justice" with regard to the firing of Comey except from Democrats and liberal ideologues.
Click to expand...

Obviously, lol. Certainly didn't hear it on Fox! But also a lot more Republicans than you'd care to admit too. And I said accused. Spin it however you want he fired and appointed an FBI Director during an investigation into Russian meddling and multiple contacts with his campaign that he has repeatedly denied and called a hoax. Which is called a lie btw. But an acceptable lie for Pubs. Like most of the other lies we've gotten. Kinda like alternative facts. If Orwell was still around he could write a sequel.
 
TigerPaw said:
Obviously, lol. Certainly didn't hear it on Fox!
Click to expand...

A 10-second search of the FNC website quickly debunks this.


TigerPaw said:
But also a lot more Republicans than you'd care to admit too. And I said accused. Spin it however you want he fired and appointed an FBI Director during an investigation into Russian meddling and multiple contacts with his campaign that he has repeatedly denied and called a hoax. Which is called a lie btw. But an acceptable lie for Pubs. Like most of the other lies we've gotten. Kinda like alternative facts. If Orwell was still around he could write a sequel.
Click to expand...

This doesn't even resemble the Queen's English, so it's difficult to respond to it.
 
TigerPaw said:
..... Spin it however you want he fired and appointed an FBI Director during an investigation into Russian meddling and multiple contacts with his campaign that he has repeatedly denied and called a hoax. Which is called a lie btw. .......
Click to expand...

We are at least 9 months into this investigation and there is not a single piece of evidence that says Trump or anyone else on his team colluded with the Russians. They had contact, and it's already been reported that Obama had contact with various heads of state (including Russia) as a candidate and as the President-elect. So do we need to go back and investigate Obama and Putin? There was that famous open-mic incident where Obama offered up his to Putin and neither Holder nor Lynch investigated what THAT meant.

Right now, those are the facts. There's no there there. You've got contact, that is known. There is no evidence that there was anything to those contacts that harmed the US or could have potentially harmed the US. Maybe the special counsel will find something, but until/unless he does, Trump won and he and the Republicans better get their crap together and remake the government or someone else will be in charge in 2018.
 
Contact - with multiple denials of contact, and improper security filings. And as you say while no conclusions still an ongoing investigation involving several associates and activities. No evidence of collusion yet. Clear evidence of a hostile foreign act (by Russia) - which I thought was one of Comey's most stirring moments. Imploring and all but begging, we, namely GOP, understand the seriousness of their activities and what is at stake.

But no, thus far Trump is not a criminal, just very sleezy and "a liar". (Quote). Congrats?

So...assuming (and hoping) Trump at least, is vindicated to your satisfaction (however low that bar is) what to do about Russia SWMC? Let 'em back in?
 
Btw, did anyone catch McCain??? I was actually looking forward to him but OMG. He literally stroked out. Still not clear wtf he was trying to say.
 
TigerPaw said:
.......

So...assuming (and hoping) Trump at least, is vindicated to your satisfaction (however low that bar is) what to do about Russia SWMC? Let 'em back in?
Click to expand...

Now, we are where it makes sense to have discussions because most of it is known. So the Russians (still out is if it was the government, private individuals working for the government, or individuals that just wanted to demonstrate how stupid politicians are with their electronic equipment) hacked into and learned a bunch about the Clinton camp and made some of the stupidity public.

There are people (not me) that praised Assange and team for nearly the same thing if it was embarrassing GW Bush and Republicans or declared Manning a hero for embarrassing America (could it have tilted the 2008 election to Obie?). So electronic espionage needs to be investigated. I'm not sure you're ever going to find the individuals responsible or determine if it was on behalf of or at the behest of Putin and the Kremlin.

But let's look at what we actually do to people that are caught that ARE citizens? We let them run for President, we pay for their sex change and release them decades before they were due to be released, as long as they hurt our "enemies" what they do is okay because they are doing a service or demonstrating the foolishness of the individuals, companies, or agencies..... Look at the press and their coverage of candidates, they get to pick their winners and actively slant stories and commentary to help them get elected, and we celebrate the "freedom" of the press.

The Russians hacked into our political parties and candidates and actively embarrassed one of the candidates (who happened to lose). Other than the fact that they are a foreign power, is it really much different than what our own press has been doing for the last 25 years or so? Our political process HAS been hijacked, but it happened long before the 2016 election cycle, what do we do to get the press to be fair and balanced in their coverage? If a foreign power DOES try to actively change an election's outcome, what can we do about it?
 
SWMCinci said:
Now, we are where it makes sense to have discussions because most of it is known. So the Russians (still out is if it was the government, private individuals working for the government, or individuals that just wanted to demonstrate how stupid politicians are with their electronic equipment) hacked into and learned a bunch about the Clinton camp and made some of the stupidity public.

There are people (not me) that praised Assange and team for nearly the same thing if it was embarrassing GW Bush and Republicans or declared Manning a hero for embarrassing America (could it have tilted the 2008 election to Obie?). So electronic espionage needs to be investigated. I'm not sure you're ever going to find the individuals responsible or determine if it was on behalf of or at the behest of Putin and the Kremlin.

But let's look at what we actually do to people that are caught that ARE citizens? We let them run for President, we pay for their sex change and release them decades before they were due to be released, as long as they hurt our "enemies" what they do is okay because they are doing a service or demonstrating the foolishness of the individuals, companies, or agencies..... Look at the press and their coverage of candidates, they get to pick their winners and actively slant stories and commentary to help them get elected, and we celebrate the "freedom" of the press.

The Russians hacked into our political parties and candidates and actively embarrassed one of the candidates (who happened to lose). Other than the fact that they are a foreign power, is it really much different than what our own press has been doing for the last 25 years or so? Our political process HAS been hijacked, but it happened long before the 2016 election cycle, what do we do to get the press to be fair and balanced in their coverage? If a foreign power DOES try to actively change an election's outcome, what can we do about it?
Click to expand...

by the way, what was Obama and him using the Americans TAX dollars to influence some voting in Israel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top