Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTrump's New FBI Pick Shouldn't Get a Hearing
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/trump-fbi-pick-christopher-wray-shouldnt-get-a-hearing-w486263
Trump's New FBI Pick Shouldn't Get a Hearing
Christopher Wray might be qualified, but Trump shouldn't get to pick someone who will investigate him
By Jesse Berney
2 hours ago
I don't care about Christopher Wray's qualifications. People who know him consider him a "serious, respectable" pick or a "smart, serious, and professional" one. It doesn't matter.
Donald Trump told James Comey to back off his investigation of Michael Flynn. He asked him for his loyalty. After Comey refused both requests, Trump fired him for (sorry) trumped-up reasons. He then admitted in an interview with Lester Holt he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation.
Let that sink in: The president fired the director of the FBI to impede and obstruct an investigation into himself and his staff. Why on earth would we even consider allowing that same man to nominate Jim Comey's successor?
How could we possibly trust that anyone Trump chooses to head the FBI hasn't offered him some kind of assurance? Or that Trump hasn't made it clear to him he too will be fired if the FBI continues its investigations?
snip//
Wray may be eminently qualified to serve as FBI director, or he may have troubling blemishes on his record that make him a terrible choice. Under normal circumstances, we'd rely on the confirmation process to suss that out.
But Wray shouldn't get a confirmation hearing. No one nominated for the job by Trump should. It's not a hard question. If you're under a cloud of suspicion, you shouldn't get to pick the guy looking into you. And no matter how experienced and serious Wray may be, he accepted a job Trump never should have been allowed to fill. That alone marks his judgment as questionable.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 4639 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump's New FBI Pick Shouldn't Get a Hearing (Original Post)
babylonsister
Jun 2017
OP
democrats can only stop by use of a filibuster and Mcconnel can throw the nuclear option at that
beachbum bob
Jun 2017
#2
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)1. Wray has help obstruct to Christies benefit. Nope.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)2. democrats can only stop by use of a filibuster and Mcconnel can throw the nuclear option at that
MrPurple
(985 posts)3. Filibustering appointees was already nuked by Harry Reid
That's how Betsy Devos got in with a tie break vote from Pence. The only way Wray could be stopped would be if 3 Republican Senators crossed over and voted against him.