monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Wray is in a tough spot. I have sympathy for him.

On the one the one hand he has to deal with the politicization of the Bureau as handed to him, and on the other, he has to cultivate certain levels of loyalty and trust among the rank and file in order to be an effective leader.

It's fairly clear that he wants to establish an identity that is independent of excessive White House interference and that he very much doesn't wish to be seen as Trump's hatchetman for the FBI, however, he is walking a tightrope and needs to be very careful. While it would no doubt be received with delirious joy by the Resistance if he stakes out a position of resistance and even defiance, unless the President and the White House are clearly calling upon him to lead the FBI in conducting illegal or highly inappropriate activities, he will not be serving either the Bureau or the nation.

The argument concerning the firing of an FBI Director has raged in this forum, but whether or not it conforms with every nuanced or arcane legal interpretation out there of the Constitution or various statutes, the political (and I believe legal) reality is that a President can fire an FBI Director without being guilty of obstruction of justice. The Director and his or her supporters can argue that such obstruction was the reason for the termination, but they still have to make the legal and political case.

Should Wray wobble on the tightrope and start falling towards defiance, he is going to get fired. Depending upon the circumstances he could land on his feet or, like Comey, fall on his head. Only a very clear case of the former wherein Wray is the hero who helped bring down a tyrant is going to be a plus for the Bureau and the country.

Trump opponents need to take a deep breath every now and then and abandon the hyperbolic and absurd notion that everything Trump does is corrupt and an effort to either turn the nation over to oligarchs or establish himself as a dictator. Regardless of whatever poll you may want to trot out to attempt to prove otherwise, we are not in a situation where the American people as a whole have lost all faith and confidence in the man elected as President. They are not longing for a Liberator to arrive on the scene and save them and the nation from Trump. They will demand untainted proof before they accept Trump's removal of office as necessary and just. Should Wray ever find such proof then he should defy the President with all his strength, otherwise, he will simply be another politically motivated participant in a dangerous and chaotic Roman circus.

His future success, I believe, will depend upon whether or not he has accurately ascertained the prevailing mindset of the rank & file. I don't personally know any FBI agents and even if I did, I wouldn't know enough to be able to determine how the majority feel about this whole mess. Both sides love to contend that they know how the average FBI agent in the field feels, and they both contend that he or she is disappointed, angry and demoralized. Of course, each side has diametrically opposed claims for why this is so.

If there is a consensus among the R&F that they and their beloved Bureau are under a partisan siege by the WH & the GOP, they are probably loving Wray's resistance concerning this memo. If, on the other hand, they feel that they and their beloved Bureau have been unjustly tarnished by a hyper-partisan leadership that cared more for personal gain than the institution they led or, for that matter, justice, they may be pulling out the hair over the possibility that Wray will not be the reformer for whom they hope.

A certain siege mentality developed among members of law enforcement and the intelligence agencies long before Trump took office. It must be quite difficult for dedicated agents trying to serve and protect their country to ever feel that the elected government has their back because it has been shown time and time again that it does not, and this must be especially so for the new darlings of the Left, CIA Agents. Enhanced interrogation of terrorist suspects under one Administration is deemed legal and proper, but with the results of one election, a new Administration comes to town and decides that not only is it illegal, but that consideration needs to be given towards prosecuting those agents who engaged in it when it was legal. One doesn't need to be a cynic to appreciate that there is no shortage of politicians who are quite content with throwing individual members of law enforcement and intelligence to the wolves if it will enhance their personal careers.

With this as a long-standing backdrop, I suspect the R&F probably appreciate their new Director's efforts to at least not fully roll over in the face of what is undeniably a partisan war wherein using what is factual and proper is not the first concern of all of the participants. However, I also suspect that they are, in the main, sick and tired of the Byzantine antics of their leadership and that they want a Director who will use his political skills and clout to protect them and their mission and not their own personal fortunes.

We'll get a better idea of the lay of the land in the days and weeks ahead. If Wray maintains an emphasis on moving on and doing the work of the American people, then I think he will have a good chance of succeeding in his leadership challenge. If he falls under the American Saviour spell that Comey seemed to cast upon himself as a delusion for the politicization of the Burea that was either thrust upon him or which he used for personal gain, he better have a lot more goods on Trump than it appears Comey did. I really don't think the FBI's rank & file appreciate the sort of limelight they've been subjected to and would like it to stop.

After the hugh give away to the wealthy 1%, he can pick his job a with any salary he wants!

But, the swamp is the normal profession, agreed. There he could get experience in designing legislation he never did while in Congress.

Fervent anti-communism was always a good draw but the real lunacy got started in a big way when the GOP realized it could capture the evangelical vote, thereby locking up the Bible Belt. Now some people might point out that the Democratic Party has a similar lock on black, minority, and urban voting blocs. But it doesn't require the same amount of nuttiness — which may provide some explanation for the Dem's typical poor showing in the midterms. Their base is simply not as committed.

Most average Dem voters (I'm excluding party activists) agree with the party positions and can probably name off a few important issues but few of them seem to exhibit the same degree of single-mindedness and uncritical obedience to the tribal chiefs, like the rank-and-file rightists who proudly call themselves "dittoheads" because they've chosen to simply agree with everything Limbaugh says. Uncritically following the leader comes naturally to people with a theocratic mindset. Through some hideous turn of events someone like Trump emerges from the field of sixteen potential candidates, someone who has no allegiance to many traditional Republican values but no problem — "my pastor told me to vote for Trump because, you know, Hillary, guns, and abortion." I can't think of issues that rank-and-file Democrats subscribe to with as much certainty and vehemence.

In part it is, just as was the sharp rise that preceded it.

The Fed is responding to the growing signs of a resumption in inflation, and accelerating its wind down of the "quantitative easing" that has sustained our economy for the past decade or more. One result of QE is that the cumulative effects have grown the Fed's balance sheet to dangerous proportions - requiring the withdrawal of Fed "funds" from the market. That and the recent increase in interest rates have necessarily changed the market's dynamic -a short term disruption, but beneficial in the long term.

In addition I (and many others) believe that stocks were becoming overvalued in the enthusiastic and accelerating boom. A small correction now may avoid a worse one later. Indeed this was a likely factor in the Fed's recent decisions.

Predicting the future state of the economy involves many factors including consumer confidence, employment levels, wage growth and business investment. (Each of these are interrelated and involve different time dynamics for discernible effects to emerge.) All of these indicators point to continued economic growth at higher rates than we have seen in a long time, and higher than progressive savants recently deemed possible in today's world. How much higher remains to be seen. However, I believe the indicators are very good

The stock market reacts to these things too, but with the additional human factors affecting investor behaviors as a group. These naturally involve excesses and overreactions in both directions.

We both shall see what follows in the weeks ahead.

The Memo Doesn’t Vindicate Trump. It’s More Proof of Obstruction.

The only hope of tRump and his corrupt cohorts is his/their 33% base. Any jury of 12 will have 3-4 members on their side. They only need 1 to be so twisted that regardless of the abundance of evidence against, they will be so loyal as continue to "blindly" back tRump; therefore, continuing the corruption.

In other words, the repuklians are conspiring to corrupt the jury pool - with tRump...... Anyone who justifies these acts are below contempt and weakens American Democracy!

The above is the only paragraph I am going to respond to, take what you want from it.

Anyway. I am aware the President can fire the FBI director when he wants to. However, Mr Trump wants political cover, thus the memo. duh

Political cover which the memo does not provide. In fact, the memo plus Nunes's collusion with the WH creating it, plus the exclusion of Dems in the process and finally, tRump's twits prove obstruction of justice. This duffus is a crook, LOCK HIM UP!

You have this whole thing totally backward and always have had. The question is not whether the executive has the power to fire someone. The question is whether that firing impedes a legally empowered investigation. That is a totally separate matter and that's where the obstruction, which it is pretty clear Trump did, comes in/. Twp separate matters, NOT one as you keep trying to make it.,