Comey Testimony

Look, Russian meddling in our elections through illegal means isn't something we should just passively accept. If Presidential candidates or even persons within a presidential campaign collude with the Russians and set up some kind of a quid pro quo .... that's a horrific criminal act. Nothing of that sort has been proven and it's not something I even alledge. But if you think because a man is president it's within his prerogative to tell the FBI ... "There's nothing to see here, don't look into it," then we disagree. We live in a country with rule of law... civil service, etc. and even within the executive branch there is some separation of power. Even on a state and municipal level city cops can investigate issues of mayoral corruption, the Texas Rangers can investigate the governor or attorney general.
 
I don't have a problem checking into it, but I already know the answer, and so do the Democrats and anyone else with any sense. The Russians meddled in the election. They try to meddle in everything to further their interests, just like Uncle Sam does. Big surprise, huh?

The Democrats on the intelligence committee already know what happened, and have stated that there is no evidence of collusion. If there were, it would have been leaked more than Trump's urine on a Russian *****. The NSA, more than likely, has every phone call made by the Trump admin. recorded, and they all know what was said. There was no collusion, but there may be some hope of tarnishing Trump with false accusations, so the circus keeps rolling.

Trump's problem is that he actually seems to give the circus some of his attention. He should be out touting his record of overturning regulations that have hurt American business, and busting his *** getting the tax reduction in place. Why they don't do so is beyond understanding.
 
In regards to the build up of his testimomy by CNN (which I saw because my girlfriend loves watching it)...

wheres-the-kaboom-theres-supposed-to-be-an-earth-shattering-kaboom-marvin-the-martian-12-21-12.jpg.cf.jpg
 
Crockett said:
Look, Russian meddling in our elections through illegal means isn't something we should just passively accept.
Click to expand...
So far the only meddling that I have heard alleged is some sort of support of Wikileaks. In my opinion, Wikileaks has done the US voter a public service by uncovering corruption at the DNC including collusion with the MSM and the HRC campaign. They did the job that the MSM should have been doing for decades. The really comical part of the outrage from the left is that no one has ever claimed that any of the Wikileaks emails were fabricated.

Does anyone believe that the Democrats/MSM would have been so outraged if Wikileaks had only released emails of Republicans?
 
Regarding Comey's testimony, it really only confirmed that Comey had no business being the FBI Director. He allowed Loretta Lynch to manipulate him and public perception of the HRC email investigation. No question in my mind that he let HRC go because he wanted to appease his boss.

Trump made some inappropriate suggestions to Comey but no obstruction of justice. Newsflash, Trump is an amateurish douche who says inappropriate stuff. Lynch on the other hand should be called to testify regarding her efforts to influence the HRC investigation and whether Obama had directed her to do so.
 
The only important thing that happened in politics yesterday was that P.M. May of U.K. and her conservative party got their asses kicked by a bunch of socialists that make Bernie Sanders seem kind of OK.

The Comey hearing was truly a nothing burger.
 
iatrogenic said:
I don't have a problem checking into it, but I already know the answer, and so do the Democrats and anyone else with any sense. The Russians meddled in the election. They try to meddle in everything to further their interests, just like Uncle Sam does. Big surprise, huh?
Click to expand...
If there is no chance there is anything to it, why did campaign officials lie about contacts with the Russians and seek backdoor channels to communicate with the Kremlin? Inquiring minds want to know.
 
OUBubba said:
Trump has said the conversation was recorded.
Click to expand...

Typical leftist twisting of words to fit their baseless argument.

Trump actually tweeted "James Comey better hope that there are no "tapes" of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!".

Once again, he didn't say there were tapes. He said Comey better hope there aren't any before deciding to leak his side of the story.

Better hope there aren't tapes = DT said he has recordings. Gimme a break.

DT clearly used a taunt and bait tactic that worked like a charm. Comey confirmed yesterday he did leak his side of their conversations after seeing the tweet. And that admission further destroyed his credibility while trying to paint an obstruction claim.

Your claiming DT said there ARE tapes is the same bs spin Comey is saying about interpreting "I hope ___" as a directive to let Flynn off.

Your collusion arguments were lame to begin with after countless months and Dems admitted no evidence at all. Now they're only getting lamer since your all-in stance on DT-Russia collusion was blown out of the water yesterday.
 
Crockett said:
If there is no chance there is anything to it, why did campaign officials lie about contacts with the Russians and seek backdoor channels to communicate with the Kremlin?
Click to expand...

There's no doubt a few should've come clean right off as their Russian (or any other foreign officials) communications were normal for their positions.

There's still no shred of evidence any of it was inappropriate and the Dems have been briefed and are well aware of that.

However backdoor channels don't indicate a shred of wrongdoing. I imagine we now have multiple backdoor channels set up with several countries in this political climate. It's not an uncommon practice in the least and has been used by every administration.

If nearly every contact the prez or his staff has with a foreign leader ends up revealed in the tabloid MSM on a regular basis, backdoor channels are a must.

What people are disregarding is the MSM is endangering all of us with these continuous classified leaks, including the countless ones they make up.

The hesitation of sharing intel it creates in other countries is a serious issue. I assume some countries even demanded more backdoor communications for this very reason.
 
Crockett said:
If there is no chance there is anything to it, why did campaign officials lie about contacts with the Russians and seek backdoor channels to communicate with the Kremlin? Inquiring minds want to know.
Click to expand...

What I find funny is that it's routine to reach out to other countries before inaugural. They probably made the same phone call to China and many more countries. Obama people did it as well. No laws were broken. I'm guessing Flynn felt like it would be a big deal made of by the MSM, so he just thought it was easier to deny it without any proof. But who knew that there were illegal surveillance of our citizens by the Obama Admin. Because the old admin did something illegal (call it what you want, but everyone knows) they got someone in trouble that did nothing illegal before lying about it. Our country is so a$$ backwards right now. I'm glad Flynn was exposed though even it was illegal. I'd rather it come out that he's not at the start then get deep into Trumps admin to find out more lies that might of or possibly would of come out. Besides, his replacement is better.
 
Crockett said:
If there is no chance there is anything to it, why did campaign officials lie about contacts with the Russians
Click to expand...

Probably for the same reason why democrats such as Pelosi and McCaskill lied about meeting with Russian officials.
 
I haven't watched the hearing... so...

1) Did Comey say anything evidencing that Trump colluded with the Russians?
2) Did Comey say anything evidencing obstruction of justice on Trump's part?
3) Did Comey say anything that directly contradicted accusations against Trump by the NY Times or any other major media outlet?
 
Comey took notes of his Trump meeting because he assumed Trump would lie. Then he was given an illegal order to stop an investigation because Trump hoped he would, but when asked if he would still be the FBI director under Trump had he not been fired he answered yes.

Okay, I think I've got it now: He's full of crap.
 
horninchicago said:
Comey took notes of his Trump meeting because he assumed Trump would lie. Then he was given an illegal order to stop an investigation because Trump hoped he would, but when asked if he would still be the FBI director under Trump had he not been fired he answered yes.

Okay, I think I've got it now: He's full of crap.
Click to expand...
I wish you could write as clearly as James comey. Maybe we'd understand what you're getting at.
 
bystander said:
I haven't watched the hearing... so...

1) Did Comey say anything evidencing that Trump colluded with the Russians?
Nope
2) Did Comey say anything evidencing obstruction of justice on Trump's part?
Depends on how you construe it, but I don't see any actionable criminal intent.
3) Did Comey say anything that directly contradicted accusations against Trump by the NY Times or any other major media outlet?
Yep -- leaked info attributed to anonymous folks turned out not to be accurate.
Click to expand...
 
After watching the media and political ***** Comey give his July 4th Clinton exoneration, who would ever give him any credibility? Then he admits Lynch pressured him on the investigation and that he leaked information to the press. He should be in jail.
 
It's interesting that the Left wants Trump impeached though there has been no evidence put forward that he has committed any high crimes and misdemeanors unless I'm missing something. But when it comes to actual law-breaking, the Sanctuary city issue is alive and well on their activist front....

Are we about laws or about politics.

Ok, that was a dumb question.
 
Did Comey commit a crime?

http://themarkromano.com/index.php/...y-may-have-committed-a-crime-by-leaking-memo/

".... One of the most interesting new disclosures today in the Comey hearing was the admission by former FBI Director James Comey that he intentionally used a “friend” on the Columbia law faculty to leak his memos to the media. Comey says that he did so to force the appointment of a Special Counsel. However, those memos could be viewed as a government record and potential evidence in a criminal investigation.

Notably, Columbia Law School Professor Daniel Richman on a faculty webpage reads that he is “currently an adviser to FBI Director James B. Comey.” Richman specializes in criminal law and criminal procedure.

The problem is that Comey’s description of his use of an FBI computer to create memoranda to file suggests that these are arguably government documents. Comey admitted that he thought he raised the issue with his staff and recognized that they might be needed by the Department or Congress. They read like a type of field 302 form, which are core investigatory documents.

The admission of leaking the memos is problematic given the overall controversy involving leakers undermining the Administration. Indeed, it creates a curious scene of a former director leaking material against the President after the President repeatedly asked him to crack down on leakers.

Besides being subject to Nondisclosure Agreements, Comey falls under federal laws governing the disclosure of classified and nonclassified information. Assuming that the memos were not classified (though it seems odd that it would not be classified even on the confidential level), there is 18 U.S.C. § 641 which makes it a crime to steal, sell, or convey “any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof.”​
 
Joe Fan said:
Some analysis of whether Comey committed a crime

http://themarkromano.com/index.php/...y-may-have-committed-a-crime-by-leaking-memo/

".... One of the most interesting new disclosures today in the Comey hearing was the admission by former FBI Director James Comey that he intentionally used a “friend” on the Columbia law faculty to leak his memos to the media. Comey says that he did so to force the appointment of a Special Counsel. However, those memos could be viewed as a government record and potential evidence in a criminal investigation.

Notably, Columbia Law School Professor Daniel Richman on a faculty webpage reads that he is “currently an adviser to FBI Director James B. Comey.” Richman specializes in criminal law and criminal procedure.

The problem is that Comey’s description of his use of an FBI computer to create memoranda to file suggests that these are arguably government documents. Comey admitted that he thought he raised the issue with his staff and recognized that they might be needed by the Department or Congress. They read like a type of field 302 form, which are core investigatory documents.

The admission of leaking the memos is problematic given the overall controversy involving leakers undermining the Administration. Indeed, it creates a curious scene of a former director leaking material against the President after the President repeatedly asked him to crack down on leakers.

Besides being subject to Nondisclosure Agreements, Comey falls under federal laws governing the disclosure of classified and nonclassified information. Assuming that the memos were not classified (though it seems odd that it would not be classified even on the confidential level), there is 18 U.S.C. § 641 which makes it a crime to steal, sell, or convey “any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof.”​
Click to expand...

A crime, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder...
 
bystander said:
A crime, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder...
Click to expand...

Wonder how Petraeus looks at it?
He was tried and convicted for leaking personal memos. He was fined $10,000. He lost his security clearance. He got 2 years probation.

Comey was involved in that too
 
Joe Fan said:
Wonder how Petraeus looks at it?
He was tried and convicted for leaking personal memos. He was fined $10,000. He lost his security clearance. He got 2 years probation.

Comey was involved in that too
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to hear his take on this.
 
OUBubba said:
I wish you could write as clearly as James comey. Maybe we'd understand what you're getting at.
Click to expand...
Well, I was saying it in a sarcastic way. I'm not sure what was hard to follow about my comment. Comey claims these horrible and illegal things about Trump but would not resign. He would keep working for this liar who uses political pressure on him. So, like I said, it sounds like he is full of crap. Why would you continue to work for someone you assume is going to lie to you all the time and put political pressure on you?

Hope that clears it up, but if it doesn't that's okay, too.
 
Doesn't it seem odd that very few Republicans came out and supported President Trump after the Comey hearings? Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, and Jim Jordan were the only ones I heard say anything supportive. Maybe it's just the MSM only putting out what they want you to hear as usual. Or maybe Trump truly is a Washington outsider.
 
horninchicago said:
Well, I was saying it in a sarcastic way. I'm not sure what was hard to follow about my comment. Comey claims these horrible and illegal things about Trump but would not resign. He would keep working for this liar who uses political pressure on him. So, like I said, it sounds like he is full of crap. Why would you continue to work for someone you assume is going to lie to you all the time and put political pressure on you?

Hope that clears it up, but if it doesn't that's okay, too.
Click to expand...

I was able to follow it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top