Why the hate?

@katielass you could say he's been attacking the rule of law, and that will have negative consequences for the country.

@WoodyAq Name a law he has "attacked". I've got all day.

@katielass demanding loyalty from the FBI director; firing the FBI director in order to derail an investigation into his possible wrong-doing are things that he has done. He appears still to be conspiring to get the Mueller investigation shut down. That will be another if the conspiracy advances.

@WoodyAq Pretty sure Hillary has more evidence stacked against her in terms of mishandling classified information. that deserves a more thorough looking into.

@Aiminna it was looked into and conclusions drawn. And she isn't president as a result. On issues of corruption and nepotism, Trump has already exceeded her worst deeds many times over.

But bottom-line he is president and she isn't and her past misdeeds don't make his current ones okay.

@WoodyAq Well see, I already knew you couldn't cite any law that he has "attacked" or broken. As for "demanding loyalty from an FBI director" IF it happened its not against the law and we don't even have any evidence that it happened. What we do have is one who says it didn't happen and one who said it happened until he was put under oath and then he said that's how he "took it". Also comey is a known liar, he claimed publically that he never told trump he was not under investigation but had to admit that he did in fact tell him that three times, just as trump said, when he was put under oath.

So, let's move on to your next attempt to back up your claim. He fired comey. BFD. He is the resident and he can fire anyone he chooses and he can shut down any investigation that does not involve him. And as comey testified, he was not under investigation himself so he could have simply told comey to stop the investigation and it would have been legal and constitutional. But he didn't do that, according to comey's testimony trump asked him if he could go easy on Flynn. he also testified that no one, including trump, had ever tried to shut down any investigation, that it would have been a big deal and it had never happened in his experience. You're confused but I;m not. There was no investigation into Trump until comey illegally leaked to the media his notes which brought about the hiring of a special prosecutor and you can't even cite an accusation much less any evidence that trump has tried to stop it. I understand, it's wishful thinking on your part but at some point you simply have to accept reality He ain't gonna be impeached. I knew you didn't have anything but I appreciate that you demonstrated it for everyone to see.

@WoodyAq comey outlined an excellent case against her and then said he didn't recommend prosecution, something that is not his decision to make. Did lynch tell him to do that too? And the consensus, even among dum dums, is that she lost because she was a terrible candidate who didn't have a message.

@katielass I think you are confusing law and "rule of law". It is against the rule of law to demand that law enforcement officials serve you, not justice. It is against the rule of law to shut down an investigation because it is getting too close to you.

These actions may not involve criminal prosecution, but they obviously compromise the administration of justice, and if Trump's actions are accepted as a precedent, then we are going down a road that we haven't gone until now. But it's a road that other countries freely go-- like Venezuela, for instance.

@WoodyAq I proved you wrong in your assertion and that's the end of my participation. I knew you would not accept it but I didn't write it for you. I wrote it for that one or two people who are looking for the truth. Thanks for giving me the platform to show the difference between us.

@katielass well, you misunderstood the point and "proved" what you wanted to, rather than address the issue at hand. So, Good luck with your "truth" ...