Trump Fired Comey - Welcome to 1984 America!!

Trump fired Comey, and he was planning to do so for about at least a week. I believe that while Comey was a bit clumsy at handling facts last week, there really wasn't enough ground for him to get fired - especially since his clumsiness actually pushed forward a stronger case against Abedin and co. I'm guessing that Trump wants to stymie all possible efforts by the government into the Russia investigation. And while the other agencies charged with that task are severely understaffed, the FBI was the frontrunner in leading the investigation - till now. From asking one of my cousins who works for Sen. McCain, it seems that camp is very very suspicious about this.

Despite his Republican pedigree, Comey was selected by President Barack Obama to replace Mueller atop the FBI in 2013, in part because of his reputation for independence and integrity. The Senate easily confirmed him.

I'm actually surprised the public has silently accepted the words of a president long known for misleading them.

Welcome to 1984, America, a world where the words are fed into your mouth by the government! Or idk, wilkommen America zu Reich Deutscheland im jahr 1933?

Comments (107)

May 10, 2017

Trump - Comey letter

    • 9
May 10, 2017

That shitpost mid-letter hahahaha "While I grealy appreciate you informing me, on three separate occasions, that I am not under investigation."

May 10, 2017

GMAFB. This isn't 1984 or 1933, Comey, or maybe it was Clapper, don't remember, literally just said, under oath, that there's no evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia. Trump dropped him as soon as he got to the crux of the matter.

Now, thinking rationally, Comey heavily influenced the election and made a myriad of mistakes in his final year, the biggest being his handling of the email case. The mishandling and subsequent mess has caused the FBI to lose a ton of credibility and the trust of the public that they are supposed to be protecting. To anyone remotely objective, he deserved to be fired.

May 10, 2017

Agree, he deserved to be fired. But why now? Could have been done much earlier, instead of when the investigation of Russian collusion is happening now.
And it was Clapper who mentioned that the Obama presidency had not wiretapped Trump in Trump Tower as he had claimed. Nothing about no evidence of collusion.
As for 1984 or 1933, I'm talking about the systematic removal of any forms of opposition, including the wildcard types like Comey, and replacing them with Yes-men supporters who'll stand by you. FYI, that was exactly how Hitler increased his power, and Erdogan is doing right now. Trump very well knows that a Congressional investigation is supplemented by externally gathered evidence, and right now, he's doing as much as he can to stymie those who collect that evidence. Comey will be replaced by someone far palatable to Trump's Russia Connection - maybe even Jared Kushner :P.

GoldenCinderblock: "I keep spending all my money on exotic fish so my armor sucks. Is it possible to romance multiple females? I got with the blue chick so far but I am also interested in the electronic chick and the face mask chick."

    • 1
    • 2
May 10, 2017

literally just said, under oath, that there's no evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia

No, that's wildly - Trumpian, even - inaccurate. Clapper did not say 'there is no evidence'. He said he was not aware of any evidence because he had not even been aware of the FBI investigation until Comey announced it at a House hearing in March.

There's a huge difference between 'there's no evidence' and 'not aware of any evidence'.

    • 1
Learn More

Side-by-side comparison of top modeling training courses + exclusive discount through WSO here.

May 10, 2017

Here is the video from yesterday

It seems like he said "not to my knowledge" if we are going to be hyper technical...

May 10, 2017

@Greg Marmalard I agree with you and also believe that the constant leaks from inside the FBI and the fact that investigations were being plastered in the media is also another catalyst for Comey's ousting. How is an investigation supposed to remain impartial when you have people leaking classified info and or its being covered blow-by-blow by MSM?

Of course the Democrats are going to have a field day with this. Rather than focus on why their party is so out of touch with a major segment of America they chose to continue playing politics and poking holes at things hoping something comes out so they can begin impeachment proceedings.

Sad times in America...

    • 3
    • 1
May 10, 2017

Trump applauded Comey for his handling of the email case. Even someone in real estate should be able to see that this is an extraordinary situation.

    • 1
May 10, 2017

When was this? Last time I checked, he criticized Comey for not prosecuting Clinton. Even in bloody April.

GoldenCinderblock: "I keep spending all my money on exotic fish so my armor sucks. Is it possible to romance multiple females? I got with the blue chick so far but I am also interested in the electronic chick and the face mask chick."

May 10, 2017

As much as I'm looking forward to the new Game of Thrones season there's no way it tops this. No fucking way.

May 10, 2017

Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General, who was confirmed in Senate by 96-4 vote, wrote a letter recommending firing Comey. You can read the letter:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39866767
Memorandum for the Attorney General

FROM: Rod J Rosenstein
SUBJECT: Restoring public confidence in the FBI

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has long been regarded as our nation's premier federal investigative agency. Over the past year, however, the FBI's reputation and credibility have suffered substantial damage, and it has affected the entire Department of Justice. That is deeply troubling to many Department employees and veterans, legislators and citizens.

The current FBI Director is an articulate and persuasive speaker about leadership and the immutable principles of the Department of Justice. He deserves our appreciation for his public service. As you and I have discussed, however, I cannot defend the Director's handling of the conclusion of the investigation of Secretary Clinton's emails, and I do not understand his refusal to accept the nearly universal judgment that he was mistaken. Almost everyone agrees that the Director made serious mistakes; it is one of the few issues that unites people of diverse perspectives.

The director was wrong to usurp the Attorney General's authority on July 5, 2016, and announce his conclusion that the case should be closed without prosecution. It is not the function of the Director to make such an announcement. At most, the Director should have said the FBI had completed its investigation and presented its findings to federal prosecutors. The Director now defends his decision by asserting that he believed attorney General Loretta Lynch had a conflict. But the FBI Director is never empowered to supplant federal prosecutors and assume command of the Justice Department. There is a well-established process for other officials to step in when a conflict requires the recusal of the Attorney General. On July 5, however, the Director announced his own conclusions about the nation's most sensitive criminal investigation, without the authorization of duly appointed Justice Department leaders.

Compounding the error, the Director ignored another longstanding principle: we do not hold press conferences to release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation. Derogatory information sometimes is disclosed in the course of criminal investigations and prosecutions, but we never release it gratuitously. The Director laid out his version of the facts for the news media as if it were a closing argument, but without a trial. It is a textbook example of what federal prosecutors and agents are taught not to do.

In response to skeptical question at a congressional hearing, the Director defended his remarks by saying that his "goal was to say what is true. What did we do, what did we find, what do we think about it." But the goal of a federal criminal investigation is not to announce our thoughts at a press conference. The goal is to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to justify a federal criminal prosecution, then allow a federal prosecutor who exercises authority delegated by the Attorney General to make a prosecutorial decision, and then - if prosecution is warranted - let the judge and jury determine the facts. We sometimes release information about closed investigations in appropriate ways, but the FBI does not do it sua sponte.

Concerning his letter to the Congress on October 28, 2016, the Director cast his decision as a choice between whether he would "speak" about the FBI's decision to investigate the newly-discovered email messages or "conceal" it. "Conceal" is a loaded term that misstates the issue. When federal agents and prosecutors quietly open a criminal investigation, we are not concealing anything; we are simply following the longstanding policy that we refrain from publicizing non-public information. In that context, silence is not concealment.

My perspective on these issues is shared by former Attorneys General and Deputy Attorneys General from different eras and both political parties. Judge Laurence Silberman, who served as Deputy Attorneys General under President Ford, wrote that "it is not the bureau's responsibility to opine on whether a matter should be prosecuted." Silberman believes that the Director's "Performance was so inappropriate for an FBI director that [he] doubt[s] the bureau will ever completely recover." Jamie Gorelick, Deputy Attorney General under President George W. Bush, to opine that the Director had "chosen personally to restrike the balance between transparency and fairness, department from the department's traditions." They concluded that the Director violated his obligation to "preserve, protect and defend" the traditions of the Department and the FBI.

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who served under President George W Bush, observed the Director "stepped way outside his job in disclosing the recommendation in that fashion" because the FBI director "doesn't make that decision". Alberto Gonzales, who also served as Attorneys General under President George W Bush, called the decision "an error in judgement." Eric Holder, who served as Deputy Attorneys General under President Clinton and Attorneys General under President Obama, said that the Director's decision "was incorrect. It violated long-standing Justice Department policies and traditions. And it ran counter to guidance that I put in place four years ago laying out the proper way to conduct investigations during an election season." Holder concluded that the Director "broke with these fundamental principles" and "negatively affected public trust in both the Justice Department and the FBI".

Former Deputy Attorneys General Gorelick and Thompson described the unusual event as "read-time, raw-take transparency taken to its illogical limit, a kind of reality TV of federal criminal investigation," that is "antithetical to the interests of justice".

Donald Ayer, who served as Deputy Attorneys General under President HW Bush, along with former Justice Department officials, was "astonished and perplexed" by the decision to "break[] with longstanding practices followed by officials of both parties during past elections." Ayer's letter noted, "Perhaps most troubling... is the precedent set by this departure from the Department's widely-respected, non-partisan traditions."

We should reject the departure and return to the traditions.

Although the President has the power to remove an FBI director, the decision should not be taken lightly. I agree with the nearly unanimous opinions of former Department officials. The way the Director handled the conclusion of the email investigation was wrong. As a result, the FBI is unlikely to regain public and congressional trust until it has a Director who understands the gravity of the mistakes and pledges never to repeat them. Having refused to admit his errors, the Director cannot be expected to implement the necessary corrective actions.

    • 2
May 10, 2017

Agre, he was a it clumsy about the political fallout of his actions, and thus deserved to be fired. But should've been done much earlier, instead of now. Firing away the nation's lead detective on the case is only going to make it harder for the gummint to investigate the Trump-Russia connection (which IMO is huge, considering the amount of indirect evidence involved).

GoldenCinderblock: "I keep spending all my money on exotic fish so my armor sucks. Is it possible to romance multiple females? I got with the blue chick so far but I am also interested in the electronic chick and the face mask chick."

May 10, 2017

One of your cousins works for Sen. McCain? Ask them what it is like working for a man who practically wants to start a war in every other country on the planet...

Please does McCain really think that Rand Paul is working for Putin because he consistently votes in an non-interventionist fashion?

Or he could just be a crazy old dude!

May 10, 2017

Asked about the first question. It's a Vietnam veteran sense of entitlement - the right to attack every person in their home country. Age does make a guy crazy.

GoldenCinderblock: "I keep spending all my money on exotic fish so my armor sucks. Is it possible to romance multiple females? I got with the blue chick so far but I am also interested in the electronic chick and the face mask chick."

May 10, 2017

No matter what you think of Trump (like or dislike) one cannot help but to make the observation that he is constantly shooting himself in the foot. Why renew interest in the Russia situation (unless he believes the FBI are getting close to a breakthrough in the investigation)? Then they use the HRC investigation as justification when he could have been fired for those "transgressions" months ago, Trump asked Comey to stay on for 6 more years despite knowing about how he handled the HRC investigation. This all just increases the outcry for a special investigator.

    • 5
May 10, 2017

thank you

GoldenCinderblock: "I keep spending all my money on exotic fish so my armor sucks. Is it possible to romance multiple females? I got with the blue chick so far but I am also interested in the electronic chick and the face mask chick."

    • 2
May 10, 2017

Is it possible to play zero-dimensional chess?? @TNA and other Trump cult members - You've hit your stop loss; time to exit the position.

    • 2
    • 1
May 10, 2017

New York Times just released a Comey story: "Days before he was fired, James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, asked the Justice Department for a significant increase in money and personnel for the bureau's investigation into Russia's interference in the presidential election, according to three officials with knowledge of his request". I mean cmon...

May 10, 2017

You do understand that you can write anything in press "according to sources"?

"According to three officials with knowledge, Trump has a secret Russian boyfriend"

However ff the NYT story is true, then then timing is pretty damning.

    • 2
    • 2
May 10, 2017

Of course any publication can do anything. But then who do I trust more, the New York Times or Donald fucking Trump? Not to mention his reasoning for the firing is absurd as he knew about Comey's handling of the HRC investigation for months and asked him to stay on for the rest of his term. I mean it is pretty easy to assume he is lying and trying to stifle the Russia investigation for one reason or another.

    • 1
    • 1
May 10, 2017

Becoming more obvious that Trump has something to hide.

    • 1
May 10, 2017

THANK YOU.

I don't understand why there isn't a public outcry in the US against his actions. Time and again, he's showing that he's got skeletons to hide.

GoldenCinderblock: "I keep spending all my money on exotic fish so my armor sucks. Is it possible to romance multiple females? I got with the blue chick so far but I am also interested in the electronic chick and the face mask chick."

    • 1
May 10, 2017

Because Obama's skeletons were much larger. This will be politicized the same way Benghazi was, the IRS scandal was (targeting conservative groups), the billions that vanished under his watch, our support for ISIS, etc. It's politics.

    • 1
May 10, 2017

I don't understand why it's hard for Trump supporters to admit that this was handled so poorly. Did he deserve to be fired a few times? Yes. Was this the time to do it? Obviously not. Maybe if we put this in other terms everyone will see this for what it is. You are a BSD rouge trader, who set off internal reg flags. Internal audit and Risk management are holding meetings about your fuck ups. Before they finish the audit report to send to your boss, you fire them. How is that okay? Even if you assume Trump/Russia innocence, it is both not a good look and not democratic in timing.

May 10, 2017

The only problem I have with this logic is that people are saying that to have a completely competent investigation they need to have somebody that they already acknowledge is incompetent and prone to make mistakes?

May 10, 2017

I think it's just the fact that he already started it so he should be the one that finishes it is what bothers me. I agree with your point though it makes sense. But in my opinion once you bring a new person to lead an investigation and it gets shaken up with even more publicity and now the person leading it gets chosen by its' target, compromises its independence.

May 10, 2017

Then let's get an independent special investigator period. Trump should be the one asking for this if he has nothing to hide. To date, he has shown a propensity to interfere with the investigation, it all seems extremely suspect.

May 10, 2017

Just the next logical move in the all out warfare that is the deepstate vs. Trump. I am reasonably certain that the Comey firing has nothing to do with the Russia investigation (which is a complete false flag witch hunt btw). Trump family has long been intimately connected with the FBI going back to his father. I think it's reasonable to assume that the President has more/better information about Comey's performance than we do, so happy to give the benefit of the doubt here.

We're about to see shit get real though. Last time the deepstate fired back Mike Flynn got fired. My guess in Bannon goes next.

    • 4
May 10, 2017

From the media reports, the firing more likely had to do with Russia than not. Why would anyone give Trump the benefit of the doubt? He lies consistently and shamelessly. Him being president is cool but the guy simply isn't trustworthy, he isn't a career politician yet he is somehow MORE untrustworthy than the average politician.

    • 1
May 10, 2017

My observation about the timing of this: A big headline from last week was Hillary saying that Comey cost her the election. That if the election was held on Oct. 27th, she would be our president.
This week, after a spike from the Left in hatred of Comey, Trump fires him. Now, suddenly, the Left loves Comey.

This stuff happens over and over. Trump knows that the Left will contradict him no matter what he says, so he uses that to draw attention to certain things.

-Remember when Kellyanne sat with her legs on the couch? That picture, showing "racist" Trump meeting with dozens of black leaders, was plastered all over the internet.
-Remember when Spicer said that "Not even Hitler used chemical weapons on his own people", and the media started to say that Hitler comparisons are ridiculous?
-Remember when Trump said he was wire-tapped, and then didn't provide evidence? And then all his opponents spent weeks saying that there was absolutely no basis to this claim, only to discover a few weeks later that Trump was surveilled and that unmaskings occurred?
-Remember when Trump wouldn't say that he would accept the results of the election if he lost? Personally, I think he had internal polling info and knew he had a shot at winning. His opposition blew up, saying this was undemocratic, only to riot in the streets a few weeks later when their candidate lost.

I can go on and on. This is Trump's style, he's done it before and he'll do it again. Some of you see it as Trump being a huge liar. I see it as Trump expertly controlling his opposition because they only care about contradicting him.

    • 4
May 10, 2017

People weren't mad about the hitler comparison to assad, they were mad because hitler did use chemical weapons...

May 10, 2017

Regarding the Kellyanne photo thing, the Democrat senators did come under fire for their comments. On the other hand, nobody cared nor cares about Trump's meeting with black leaders. On the contrary, the black community has negative views now, ever since he planned to reduce funding to HBCU colleges.

They still haven't found evidence that Trump was being "wiretapped"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/w...
AFAIK, the Trump team relied on strong analytics from a British firm funded by Robert Mercer. From a tweet analysis and more, they optimized the flow of right-wing news and made people vote red. On the other hand, the Clinton team had a hard time forcing people to vote because the general vibe her campaign gave was "Chill, we're going to win this easy-peasy." I'm pretty sure Trump wouldn't have accepted the results and would still publicly go after Obama for "gaming" the election and causing his defeat. I mean, even now, he's still blaming the previous administration for his loss in the overall vote count, and is being the whiny baby.

Frankly, I expected more spine from US politics. That's why I prefer the power plays in China myself. It's quite entertaining when opponents take the fight into the realms of sabotage and underhandedness.

GoldenCinderblock: "I keep spending all my money on exotic fish so my armor sucks. Is it possible to romance multiple females? I got with the blue chick so far but I am also interested in the electronic chick and the face mask chick."

Learn More

Side-by-side comparison of top modeling training courses + exclusive discount through WSO here.

May 10, 2017

So in the past few days we've had:

1.) Trump saying he decided to fire Comey long ago, despite originally citing Rosenstein's recommendation as the reason
2.) The acting director describe the Russia investigation (the one Trump calls a witch Hunt) as "highly significant"
3.) The Senate has now served Flynn with a subpeona
4.) A tweet tirade by Trump threatening to release "tapes" of conversations with Comey if Comey leaks anything

This thing is just beginning folks.

p.s. Unrelated yet related, asshat Sessions just instructed prosecutors to seek the harshest possible sentence on low-level drug offenders. MAGA

    • 1
May 12, 2017

I think Trump had an interest in making the country stronger, but he just didn't have a lot of good ideas that would've actually worked. It's time for him to relinquish his chair as POTUS. He's culturally unfit, as he causes an uproar with every move. Nothing he does resemble the America I'd like to live in, just in terms of his execution. And, I believe his approvals are still in the toilet after 100 days. What happens in these situations as an employee? You get the boot.

    • 1
May 10, 2017

You will have an opportunity to express that view in 3.5 years. In the meantime, you guys had better start to find an actual candidate who can beat him. I literally think the left is so preoccupied hating on Trump that they haven't thought about positioning for the next step. Who's it gonna be; Liz Warren? Mark Warner? Chuck Schumer? Those guys will get completely wrecked. My guess is they will end up running Mark Cuban in an all out reality TV billionaire royal rumble! Need a strong personality to beat a strong personality.

    • 1
May 12, 2017

bump

May 10, 2017

My god what has happened to my country. We all knew a Trump presidency would be a complete trainwreck, but this has somehow managed to be even worse than I feared....and we're barely 5% into Trump's four years in the White House.

I survey the damage from the first 100 days and am legitimately scared at what the US will look like four years from now.

    • 2
    • 3
May 12, 2017

Yeah interesting turn of events that's for sure. Comey must have been getting close to uncovering something.

May 10, 2017

It's almost like the Hillary supporters were screaming for Comey to be fired, and then Trump fired Comey, and now they are at mad at Trump for doing what they asked.... strange how that works!

EDIT: Why am I getting MS when I proved my claim with evidence? Is that "triggering" for you people? At least try refuting the statements, instead of just getting mad at me and throwing MS...

    • 3
    • 5
May 10, 2017

Read statements by democratic congressmen, you will find many comments criticizing Comey for his handling of the HRC investigation, almost none call for his outright firing.

May 10, 2017

There would not have been any uproar if Trump had fired him in January or February.

May 10, 2017

There would have been uproar no matter what...

People who hate Trump get mad at him for anything he does even if it was something they wanted him to do. Just look at the pic I posted above, even if he does exactly what his haters want, then they will still get mad.

    • 1
    • 5
May 10, 2017

So I was right again? You will both just stop responding and then throw MS at me or insult me?

Please try refuting that statements or at least provide a proper response with reasoning...

    • 1
May 10, 2017

Right about what, exactly?

Let me ask you this: What would your response have been if Obama had fired Comey before leaving office?

    • 1
May 10, 2017

Are you asking me about a hypothetical situation?

Right about the claim I made, which I then provided proof for... So I got MS thrown, and then after the proof no one responds. It happened in the other thread really. Why don't we debate things that have actually happened, instead of hypothetical situations?

What is funny is, liberals hate Trump because he does the same thing they do. He operatives in a narrative over reality world, and liberals do this too, but then they hate it when he does it.

Case in point the last few threads, whenever I provide someone with objective facts that run counter to the liberal narrative, they just insult me or start throwing MS at every single one of my posts...

Never a refutation or counter argument, and they never admit when they are wrong... just like Trump does...

    • 1
Best Response
May 10, 2017

Jimminy Cricket on a pogo stick. No , I'm not asking about a hypothetical.

Your 'claim' was about Clinton supporters. Which is pretty meaningless. If you want to set up a straw man then crow about being 'right' about something completely and utterly meaningless, be my guest; the rest of the adults will have a real conversation.

BobtheBaker (rightly) pointed out that almost no congressmen on the Dem side had called for him to be out-right fired. I recall some saying he needed to resign but I don't recall anyone calling for him to be fired.

The point - and I'll type slowly so you can follow along - is that if the Trump White House had these concerns that Comey was 'not doing a good job' since January (or even, apparently since Election Day), it begs the question as to why did Trump not fire Comey in January? Or February? Or March? Or April?

Trump praised Comey for his actions on the Clinton email issue last year.

What changed?

Why was Comey fired very shortly after apparently requesting additional funds for the investigation into Russia's meddling in the election?

The only thing that has changed is the increasing heat of the Russia investigation. Trump firing the very person in charge of that investigation looks very, very bad at best, Nixonian-level bad. And I'm almost more troubled by Trump's assertion in the letter that he was told - three times! - that he was 'not under investigation'.

Told his national security adviser might be comprised and susceptible to blackmail, Trump waits almost three weeks to fire him.

Claims to have doubts about the job performance and credibility of the head of the FBI, and Trump waits SIX MONTHS to fire him, including his entire first four months in office. Four months!

Doesn't like that the acting attorney general didn't follow his unconstitutional travel ban, and Trump fired her THAT DAY. He didn't wait days, not weeks, not months - within HOURS she was gone.

The point isn't so much that Comey was fired, the question is why wasn't it done many weeks or months ago? Because it looks very much like Comey was fired because he was pushing ahead with the Russia investigation.

Trump has a very easy way to show us we're wrong: call for an independent special prosecutor to investigate possible Russian meddling in the election. Even Nixon did that. Clinton did that.

    • 9
    • 1
May 12, 2017

Without getting into personal beliefs, I don't think anyone can say that it's not blatantly corrupt to fire the person investigating you for crimes against your country.

    • 1
May 10, 2017

Trump is not under investigation... Comey has said this multiple times... Do you want video evidence?

I don't like Trump but the way you people lie about him is absolutely ridiculous... and it exactly what he does...

May 12, 2017

Just got an update that Comey had just requested more money for the investigation before being fired ?

May 10, 2017

Yep. I posted it in the other thread (these really should be consolidated there is no reason for two threads). New York Times story

May 12, 2017

He should have fired him sooner.

The FBI is not supposed to confirm or deny investigations and just last year he absolved HRC of the the private email server investigation. Only two weeks later, on his own, decided to open it back up. He acts as if he is the only candid guy in Washington free of partisanship with his insinuations of HRC's emails and Trump's Russian ties.

Also, if Trump is really trying to cover up the Russian investigation, firing Comey does not upend the investigation. There are enough agents that have been working on it, that if there is truly damning evidence, it will surely be passed on or leaked.
Also no one trusts Comey. No matter the results of this investigation people on both sides are not going to be satisfied or believe him.

    • 2
May 12, 2017

The FBI director is appointed by the president. I think it's a little naive to think that the person that Trump nominates will be equally interested in investigating their boss right after their predecessor was fired.

May 12, 2017

Someone at lunch put it nicely - "Trump fired the guy who helped him win the election because he (Comey) was about to reveal who REALLY helped him win the election."

Funny but true.

May 12, 2017

imo it sounds like a personal [email protected]# You to Comey. Comey claims that he was at a meeting with one of his branches and heard it over the TV. Must have been a behind closed doors issue.

Bad timing but not a huge loss when you look at Comey's track record:

He had emails of the fort hood shooter about how he emphasized with the taliban and wanted to kill our soldiers to protect him. right before he went on a rampage and shot our 31 soldiers including a pregnant woman
Before the Boston Bombing the FBI had an interview with Tsarnov and let him go
During the Hillary Investigation he gave Clinton aides immunity and allowed them to destroy their laptops
The Father of the 2016 manhattan bomber turned his son in claiming he was a radical. The FBI cleared the son.
They had a 10 month investigation on the pulse night club shooter and closed his case prior to the shooter
There are also reports that they had informants on the garland attack but refused to act

but the most comical thing about is the hypocrisy on the left. Democrats had no problem bashing Comey and calling for his resignation/firing in 2016... but all of the sudden when Trump drops the hammer they made a complete 180 and are complaining that he was fired... pure comedy.