Social Question

stanleybmanly's avatar

I just watched a news clip of Donald describing Joe Biden as a “low IQ individual”. Does Trump even have a clue?

Asked by stanleybmanly (19992points) 2 months ago from iPhone

I mean, is he actually unaware of the “rumors” about himself?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

103 Answers

ragingloli's avatar

You mean “Bidan”.

stanleybmanly's avatar

I didn’t realize that he had first tweeted it. I just caught the comment he made to a reporter on Biden’s low intelligence.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

He did it in a foreign country, pissed off factor is bipartisan !

Oh yes he is CLUE-LESS !

flutherother's avatar

Trump does not have a clue. I watched him insult a fellow American and former vice president and prefer to side with the man who is likely the worst dictator on the planet. That aside he went on to say he wants to strike a nuclear deal with Iran as though unaware that he had torn up the nuclear deal the world had already negotiated.

KNOWITALL's avatar

haha, Trumps right imo. I wondered who would post about this before doing their homework. Now I know.

Biden opposed school busing for desegregation in the 1970s. He voted for a measure aimed at outlawing gay marriage in the 1990s. He was an ally of the banking and credit card industries.

He chaired the 1991 Clarence Thomas hearings that gave short shrift to the sexual harassment allegations raised by Anita Hill. He backed crime legislation that many blamed for helping fuel an explosion in prison populations. He eulogized Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.), who rose to prominence as a segregationist. He backed the Iraq war.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-biden-senate-record-controversies-20190318-story.html

Biden voted for the Iraq War and the Patriot Act.

He opposes marijuana legalization

He has also stated his opposition to federal funding of abortions.

Biden supports capital punishment.

ragingloli's avatar

They should be best buddies, then.

hmmmmmm's avatar

Why do people listen to anything Trump says? What does “low IQ individual” even mean? Biden is a complete piece of shit, but that has nothing to do with IQ.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Trump is womanizer, thug and gangster @KNOWITALL .

Does that make him a good judge of IQ ? While on foreign soil to bad mouth a past Vice President !

Maybe Biden and the Dems should bad mouth Trumpo while he is with Kim or Putin? Kim Jung Un has killed maybe 341 and Putin has no living journalist critics. Is that Trump’s next plan?

stanleybmanly's avatar

@KNOWITALL You force me to consider your assessment of those advocating such “ideals” as low IQ individuals. Is Biden a leftist?

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Tropical_Willie haha, then don’t vote for him, Willie.

Why do you love Biden so much, because he’s against ‘the gays’ and ‘blacks’? Why is he allowed to run on a Dem ticket with a record like his?

Obama’s Apology Tour was a low life move to many on the right and everyone survived. You’ll live.

https://www.heritage.org/europe/report/barack-obamas-top-10-apologies-how-the-president-has-humiliated-superpower

Dutchess_III's avatar

Clueless. Witless. Brainless. And every other ness there is.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@KNOWITALL Biden supports abortions: QED he is in your eyes a person with a low IQ or the El Diablo.

How many of his girl friends and mistresses has he paid to have an abortion ??

canidmajor's avatar

The governor of Montana was interviewed the other day and the thing that struck me the most was his answer to the question: “Do you think Trump is a good role model?”
I have to paraphrase here, but after talking about the way Trump belittles people and demeans them with mocking nicknames, Governor Bullock said “We expect better of our pre-schoolers.”
We do. It is embarrassing to have a grown man say things in public that we tell our young children are mean and unacceptable.

A lot of these antics are not about discussing issues, they are simply about mocking and demeaning other people. I am amazed that anyone takes such a person seriously.
Anyone, that is, other than another person who publicly mocks and demeans other people.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Tropical_Willie I didn’t say that-ever, you did.

So you agree with Trump then?!

Biden supports abortion but NOT with Federal Funds. That has consistently been one of the chief reasons why the Pro-Life movement HAD to get involved in the battle more politically than just at the pulpit or protests.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Where does Federal Funds for abortion even come in? If they don’t have insurance they have to pay for it out of their pocket like they do all their other medical expenses.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Dutchess_III Here’s an old article that breaks it down the easiest.

Conservative view:
...taxpayers subsidize roughly 24% of all abortion costs in the U.S. with 6.6% borne by federal taxpayers and the remaining 17.4% picked up by state taxpayers. If we apply the 24% figure to the total number of abortions, this is equivalent to taxpayers paying the full cost of 250,000 abortions a year, with about 70,000 financed by federal taxpayers and 180,000 financed by state taxpayers.
Abortions are financed in a variety of ways. According to a Guttmacher Institute survey in 2011, 69% of abortions are paid for entirely out of pocket. Another 15.6% report using Medicaid, while 7.3% used a non-Medicaid source of coverage (although this 2011 survey did not indicate the type of coverage—employer-sponsored or non-group, etc.). 8.6% reported not knowing whether they used third party coverage.

Everyone knows that Medicaid is taxpayer-funded, so the foregoing would appear to answer my question. But this is exactly where things get complicated. First, as we’ll see, Medicaid is not the only vehicle by which taxpayers end up subsidizing some part of abortion costs. It’s not easy figuring out what share of abortions is paid by federal taxpayers vs. state/local taxpayers so I’ve done the best I can with readily available data.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/10/02/are-american-taxpayers-paying-for-abortion/#6ccb21f16a4b

Liberal view:
As we’ve noted, federal dollars do not actually fund abortions. A longstanding provision known as the Hyde Amendment excludes Planned Parenthood and other medical providers from using federal dollars to pay for most abortion services, except in instances of rape, incest or when a woman’s life is in danger.

Abortion opponents argue that even these types of federal payments mean that the government is indirectly supporting abortion, so they have pursued various legal and regulatory approaches to shut down the federal funding streams that currently support organizations like Planned Parenthood.

Indeed, estimates show that the organization receives about 40 percent of its funding from the government. Planned Parenthood receives more than $500 million in combined state and federal government funds.

Planned Parenthood gets most of its funding through Medicaid reimbursements and from Title X, a Health and Human Services grant program that funds comprehensive family planning services.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1357/defund-planned-parenthood/

Dutchess_III's avatar

“Reality #1: Direct Federal Payment is Allowed for Abortions Under Relatively Rare Circumstances
The Hyde Amendment is a rider to the annual Labor/Health and Human Services (HHS)/Education appropriations bill which prevents Medicaid and any other programs under these departments from funding abortions, except in limited cases.

Those cases are “when the woman’s life is threatened by “physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.”

Are you suggesting we just let those women die @KNOWITALL?

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Dutchess_III Um no, the mothers health is less than 1% of all abortions. I won’t use such small numbers/cases to justify abortion numbering in the millions.

This isn’t about the Hyde Amendment itself, I was posting in direct response to your question about Federal Funding since no one else did. You’re welcome.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Well yeah because abortion is wrong and the woman was dumb enough to get knocked up.
again with the abortion debate?
This will blow your mind I have no problem with my tax dollars going for abortions to women that need them, I think now and always will,l until born THE WOMAN comes first,I know I will burn in hell but oh well.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 This was never about abortion as a subject, questions were asked and I answered.

I will tell you that as someone interested in US politics, who doesn’t live here, you should keep yourself informed about politics/ religion, etc…and why they are so important that middle America elected Trump and may do so again.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@KNOWITALL…those numbers, and including the Hyde Amendment, came from the link to Forbes that you provided to prove your point. Are you saying your source is wrong now?

SQUEEKY2's avatar

I have about given up on the orange lier,I pray and hope America isn’t dumb enough to re-elect the fool, but one thing about right wing voters they seem to love chocolate covered lies and nobody dishes it out better than the orange super goof.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Dutchess_III
Which numbers are you referring to? There are none in your post.

I was giving you the number of abortions where the life of the mother was at risk, for context.

Dutchess_III's avatar

In other words, outside of a medical necessity it’s considered an elective surgery. No insurance will pay for it.
The information I posted here was copied and pasted from your source. Are you saying they’re wrong?

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Dutchess_III No, I’m not saying the Hyde Amendment doesn’t exist, but I think plenty of people on the Right would debate that’s it’s okay to use their taxpayer funds for any abortion.

I’m just frankly floored that THAT is the question you asked after I posted articles from both sides.

Anyway, back to Biden and not abortion.

Dutchess_III's avatar

They are used only when the mother’s life is at risk. It says so right in the source you provided. Should we just let those women die? Why debate a point that is already settled?

The second source you posted was simply blathering. It made no sense.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Dutchess_III haha, the liberal response is blathering? I couldn’t agree more….lol, but I wanted to be fair and post both responses to that issue.

I’m not sure you understand what Pro-Life means. We don’t want anyone to die, not the babies and not the mothers.

Stache's avatar

@KNOWITALL What does anything you have written here have to do with this question?

Dutchess_III's avatar

Did you even look at your sources before you posted it? The second one adds 0 to the issue. It’s a truth o meter of a comment that trump may have made in 2016. The comment is ”“I would defund it because of the abortion factor, which they say is 3 percent. I don’t know what percentage it is. They say it’s 3 percent. But I would defund it, because I’m pro-life.” It hasn’t been determined if he said it or not.

The question of whether tax payers fund abortions has been answered by your source: “Direct Federal Payment is Allowed for Abortions Under Relatively Rare Circumstances.”

Why is this something you want to debate? It’s was settled.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Dutchess_III Yes, and there’s good liberal information there.

The tax payer funded abortions is somewhere in the middle of the two actually, neither is 100% above board (imo.)

haha, we don’t debate here, it’s all so partisan and prejudicial it’s not even funny. What kind of liberal puts Biden up as a Pres nominee with that record? Seriously?!

Dutchess_III's avatar

Forbes is not a liberal site. It’s reputable.

The PolitiFact Truth o Meter isn’t what I use to face check. I use Snopes. And it added nothing to your argument except nonsense.

Actually, neither link supported your argument in the least.

hmmmmmm's avatar

Yesterday I had one of the most delicious salads I’ve had in years.

Dutchess_III's avatar

LOL!! Yesterday Rick made fried chicken, mashed potatoes and gravy just for me.

hmmmmmm's avatar

Yum. I’ve never tried to make fried chicken. It seems way too intimidating. Something something Trump Biden abortion.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Good for Rick!

Dutchess_III's avatar

I can honestly say he makes the best fried chicken I’ve ever eaten. One of his secrets is to crush saltines up in the flour dredge. He also makes a bombass BBQ sauce.

Also, trump is a damn embarrassment to this country. I think Biden is OK, but a little past his time.

hmmmmmm's avatar

^ I’m sure Rick makes a mean fried chicken, but Biden is really a horrible piece of garbage in every possible way.

stanleybmanly's avatar

He’s a throwback to the 60s and nobody’s cutting edge political theorist. The Clarence Thomas hearings were a shock for me, because I knew so little about him.

Yellowdog's avatar

You probably still don’t.

A LOT of women who had worked with Clarence Thomas spoke on his behalf. He was a very prolific advocate of women. Anita Hill’s depiction was not at all compatible with what everyone else described, It was just another smear attempt from the left, similar to what they did with Bork and tried to do with Kavanaugh.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Yes. Of course.

Dutchess_III's avatar

The thing is, I can’t imagine Obama picking a despicable person to be his running mate….

hmmmmmm's avatar

^ He actually has a record. Look at it. It’s atrocious. Nothing secret here.

Response moderated (Spam)
Yellowdog's avatar

The story which is the premise of this question turns up, as usual, to be a fake story.

When, oh when, will you ever learn that your sources aren’t reputable?

Trump tweeted, in a tweet about a different subject, that he smiled when Kim Jong Un described Joe Biden as a “low I.Q. individual” And no, he didn’t misspell Biden’s name, either.

If your news lies constantly, even if you like what it says, why do you trust it?

janbb's avatar

“If your news lies constantly, even if you like what it says, why do you trust it?”

flutherother's avatar

If your president lies constantly, even if you like what he says, why do you trust him?

chyna's avatar

@Yellowdog Are you saying that @stanleybmanly is a liar and watched a news clip where Trump did not say Biden has a low IQ?

Demosthenes's avatar

Trump’s just being an edgelord as usual. In both agreeing with KJU and the content of his statement.

You won’t see me vote for Biden, but his previous Neoconesque positions aren’t a matter of IQ. Though I do agree that opposing marijuana legalization, supporting the Iraq War, and supporting capital punishment do kind of make you an asshole.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Oh. It was from March. That’s why I couldn’t find it. I didn’t look far enough back.

kritiper's avatar

Hey, hey, HEY! The guy is a genius! (A genius of a DOUCHE!)

jca2's avatar

If my 11 year old used the insulting language Trump uses, she’d probably be reprimanded at school – she’d definitely be reprimanded if I heard her speak that way. I think Trump is the first President who was so undiplomatic. I know there are those who like it. I think it sounds so uncouth.

Dutchess_lll's avatar

It sounds trashy.

chyna's avatar

Definitely not Presidential.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Trained by
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Putin?

Yellowdog's avatar

So, its okay to call Trump all the things you, and the media, call him—even n the tirades running in this thread, But if he describes Joe Biden as a ‘low I.Q.’ (which he is)—is abhorent?

Check yourselves.

Stache's avatar

^ That’s hilarious. Trump does nothing but insult anyone he doesn’t like with 3rd grade insults. He is not presidential. He’s a joke. He gets what he gives.

Yellowdog's avatar

Actually, he responds to those who have accused or slandered him, especially when they have their downfall, or do something noteworthy and detrimental.

The things Trump says are nothing compared to the lies, slander, and unfounded accusations of treason said daily by Democrats in congress, the media, and others who have lied or misrepresented some issue.

Think of how many times Joe Biden has called Trump a racist. Yet Biden has a terrible record, Trump was never called a racist until he became a presidential candidate and has no record of racism. Yet, the worst thing Trump has called Biden is “Sleepy Joe” or “Low I.Q.” (which adequately describes someone who insists China isn’t a threat).

stanleybmanly's avatar

@chyna thank you. I’m just beside myself, absolutely devastated that @Yellowdog chooses to believe me hostile to honest Don, the people’s friend. Now that my feelings are sufficiently hurt, let me crawl off to bed to suffer this humiliation in silence and darkness. Fiddle de dee. Tomorrow’s another day.

mazingerz88's avatar

American trump worshipers forgot they are Americans. Which makes them ALL clueless including trump himself. It’s that simple.

jca2's avatar

@Yellowdog: I haven’t called Donald Trump anything on this thread. He calls women fat, insults dead prisoners of war (McCain), tweets that people are stupid, makes fun of their looks, calls them crazy, the list goes on and on. This is what we expect and tolerate from our President?

mazingerz88's avatar

^^You’ll never catch trump worshipers criticizing trump’s despicable stunts. You can bet your life you’ll read deflections.

janbb's avatar

One wonders if the Trumpists have ever seen actual footage of Trump in action at a rally?

flutherother's avatar

Trump is president, he represents America when he travels abroad. He shouldn’t be seen agreeing with appalling dictators particularly when they are insulting fellow Americans. It seems too obvious to need spelling out.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Yellowdog Although I’m not a big Trump fan, I agree with you.

Honestly, it’s amusing to see the Trump bashing over freaking Biden of all people.

stanleybmanly's avatar

I agree. It isn’t so much the Biden trashing that makes this incident noteworthy. It’s the idea that TRUMP would publicly announce himself qualified to rate ANYONE’s intelligence!

kritiper's avatar

@Yellowdog I didn’t mention Joe Biden.
Consider me “checked.”

ucme's avatar

Oh look…echo chamber!!

Fluther
Trump
Same old tired predictable faces/arguments
Faux outrage

KNOWITALL's avatar

@ucme Let’s talk about your country awhile, it has to be more interesting. :)

Dutchess_III's avatar

Oh oh! Special Counsel Mueller is talking about his investigation One of the first things he said was ”‘If we had the confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime we would have said so”

Dutchess_III's avatar

They found that the Russians stole private information and released it through various outlets to influence the election toward trump. They also found that Russian operatives posed as Americans and posted stuff on Facebook to influence the election.
And it looks like the gullible right fell for it all, hook, line and sinker.

Yellowdog's avatar

Maybe Mueller should name a crime that they don’t have confidence Trump did not commit.

Do YOU have confidence that I did NOT eat a Wendy’s today? State that, so that people know it cannot be known if I didn’t.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Be quiet @Yellowdog. Meuller is tearing you and your cronies to pieces….but of course you can’t see it because you don’t have the critical thinking skills required to figure out what he’s saying.

He said due to precedent the president can not be charged with a Federal Crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional.
Maybe something will change.

Dutchess_III's avatar

“He did NOT say the president was cleared of all wrong doing. He did NOT say ‘No collusion no obstruction.’ ”
However there was most certainly obstruction by the Russians. He was unable to unequivocally trace it directly back to the president or his. That’s called being honest and following our laws.

Yellowdog's avatar

So, Rosenstein sends a memo to Trump to fire Comey because … on July 5 2016, Comey named a litany of actual felonies Hillary Clinton committed but he did not charge her with it—because, Comey said she didn’t INTEND to do it and “no reasonable prosecutor would charge her. She didn’t intend to keep classified material out of government oversight by keeping her activities on a secret server. She did not INTEND to destroy subpoenaed devices and emails. So Comey didn’t “charge her and you are not supposed to taint someone with crimes which you do not intend to charge them with.

Yet, Mueller can imply Trump committed unnamed, unspecified crimes which there is no evidence for (after the most thorough, expensive, exhaustive investigation in U.S. history) and taint HIS reputation with crimes not named—because he (Mueller) couldn’t prove that Trump did NOT commit a crime, but he might have INTENDED to commit obstruction.

Can’t you not see these standards are diametrically opposed? Trump is guilty of no crime but might have had intent. Hillary committed a litany of ACTUAL felonies but won’t be charged because she had no intent. She did them all by accident.

Yellowdog's avatar

I will agree with you on one point. Mueller needs to get his ass subpoenaed before congress. He doesn’t get a ‘get out of jail free’ card He has a LOT to answer for.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Haven’t you heard? Under trump we get to ignore subpoenas.

jca2's avatar

I thought it was funny how when Hillary was running for President, they made such a big deal about how she was using a non-governmental (non-secure) email. Now we find out that Trump’s whole family uses AOL or Snapchat or whatever they’re using for their work communication. So hypocritical.

Dutchess_III's avatar

It’s insane, isn’t it. But, after listening to Mueller today, I would bet the Russians were behind it turning into what it did. And the conservatives were willing to go along with it.

The last thing he said was ”“I will close by reiterating the central allegation of our indictments — that there were multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election,” Mueller said Wednesday at the Justice Department, his first public remarks since taking over the nearly two-year investigation. “That allegation deserves the attention of every American.””

Dutchess_lll's avatar

Seriously??? “Pathetic man-child: White House had Navy cover up name on USS John McCain for Trump visit to Japan.”
Jesus. Grow up.

Stache's avatar

The Mueller report is like the bible: Republicans have never read it, but still pretend to know what it says. :D

Yellowdog's avatar

@jca2 Hillary committed the espionage act with classified marerial and conducting secret business—and destroyed subpoenaed evidence. That’s a bit more serious than communicating with AOL.

Dutchess_lll's avatar

She has been cleared. Why can’t you accept that the FBI and the Justice Department are smarter than you and they know what they’re doing?

Yellowdog's avatar

THe only reason I mentioned Hillary was because I was explaining why Jim Comey was fired.

Rod Rosenstein sent a memo to Trump recommending it because its against regulations for an investigator (Comey) or prosecutor to name a person’s crimes or alleged crimes unless you are going to charge them with those crimes.

On July 5th, 2016, a rather long list of rather serious crimes was listed on national television that Hillary committed, including obstruction and destruction of subpoenaed evidence,, but was given a pass. If they weren’t going to charge her, she should not have been tainted by listing the alleged crimes.

Then, once again, with Trump, Mueller and others are suggesting that Trump has committed crimes (His alleged crimes not named found no evidence of, and an obstruction case trying to be made)—Mueller is talking about all this but did not charge him with a crime. Again, you are not supposed to name alleged or implied crimes unless you find evidence and charge them

Hillary’s alleged crimes were named and proclaimed to the nation then she was let go. She should have merely been cleared. That’s why Comey was fired, according to Rosenstien’s recommendation. They did the same with Trump. Mueller is trying to imply a crime, but they did not find one or name one

I am fully confident that the system will work and that others are “smarter than me” in the results. The origins of all this mess are now being looked into. We will ultimately have transparency.

Yellowdog's avatar

I listened to Mueller’s ten minutes again. I want to point out that not only did he not name any crime, but he said that it is “unconstitutional” to charge a sitting president with a crime, and that’s why he couldn’t charge the President with said unnamed, unknown crime.

I want to point out that it is NOT unconstitutional to indict a sitting president. It is not even against the law. It is against DOJ guidelines—which, according to Barr and Rosenstien, do not have to be followed. And according to Barr, Rosenstien, and the DOJ, Mueller said on three occasions was not a factor in their decision not to indict, in spite of what Mueller said yesterday.

All this noise is because, even though there was no crime, there was no “proof of innocence.” Kind of like trying to charge someone with shoplifting a day later because the accused cannot produce a receipt, though store security cameras and other exculpatory evidences do not show that a crime occurred and may even prove otherwise. That lack of a receipt a day later is not proof of guilt.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

^^^^^ I got too admire you for being such a loyal extreme right winger,your dedication to the right is amazing

Yellowdog's avatar

Why not compare Trump’s address to the Air Force Acadamy today with Hillary’s commencement speech at Yale—where she bawled that an election was stolen from her and that Trump was guilty of crimes—at a commencement speech.

Can you even imagine Trump bringing this into a commencement address?

Tropical_Willie's avatar

“NO COLLUSION is part of the Trumpo speeches most of the time.

Mueller as a member of the DOJ and the DOJ _ _ _ _CANNOT _ _ _ _INDICT a sitting President, what means if he does get re-elected is something else. Maybe he do end around by Executive Order declare himself President forever !

You don’t understand @Yellowdog ! !

Nice speech written by one of the staff members,

stanleybmanly's avatar

@Yellowdog Are you kidding? Are you seriously telling us that TRUMP is incapable of badmouthing ANYONE in a commencement or any other speech? “Can you even imagine Trump bringing this into a commencement speech?” I really do believe you must subsist in some bizarre universe paralleling what passes here for reality.

Yellowdog's avatar

If there was a crime, he would definitely indict

If there was a crime, and even if Mueller couldn’t indict, Mueller would have said what that crime was, but say they couldn’t indict because of some DOJ guideline that you cannot indict a sitting president. But he named no such crime now or when the report was done.

No one is required to prove innocence or non-guilt. A crime needs to be proven and charged. In this case, one was not even named or evidence found. You’re trying to run with a lack of evidence NOT proving there WASN’T one.

Stache's avatar

Trump doesn’t even know how to speak to children. He brought up the border wall to kids waiting to see the Easter Bunny.

Yellowdog's avatar

Actually, a child asked him about it.

chyna's avatar

So what? Couldn’t he be the ADULT for once and tell the child it wasn’t the time or place to talk about it? What the hell would trump have said if the kid had asked about abortions?

Yellowdog's avatar

What he said was the wall was being built. The kid probably knew that much. He laughingly said the boy was a future conservative.

If a child had asked about abortion, what do you think Trump would have said?

Dutchess_III's avatar

He would have said, “Abortion is wrong. They tear defenseless babies limb from limb in an abortion.”

SQUEEKY2's avatar

And yet it’s cool for him to pay his Bimbo’s to get one.
But a rape victim sorry lady you have to have this precious child.

Yellowdog's avatar

Yeah, man. Cool.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Make up your mind. One minute you swear that Comey was out to nail Trump, the next, you admit that he in effect handed the dummy the election through outing Hillary. Which is it?

Yellowdog's avatar

Rosenstein wanted Comey fired for naming Hillary’s crimes but not indicting.

It was not his call to clear Hillary. And if you are not going to prosecute, you are not supposed to list their crimes.

Trump took Comey up on that. He had been thinking about firing Comey anyway, in part at least because Comey and Brennan were trying to blackmail Trump with the Dossier, a fake document, and were spreading it to six major news outlets.

If someone is involved in a sinister plot and disseminating bad information to the media, and seems to be working for political enemies and using the document falsely with FISA warrants, well, you fire them at the very least.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther