It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to Kill Flynn Investigation

page: 21
32
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:05 AM
link   
Excellent development...
Texas Republican Rep. Pete Sessions has asked to also see the memo's Comey should have kept about his discussions with Loretta Lynch following her meeting with Bill Clinton.




posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
Soo, the NY times do not want to show the memos, but they are willing to read all their content to the people and more embellished if they are truth.

The intelligence committee asked them to release the memo, but they don't want too.

Love it.

Impeach the news media for bias, corruption, lies and encouraging dissent


Do you have a link for that? Are they refusing??



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler



If the tarmac meeting was improper, then you should be asking for the leaks of what was discussed in that meeting.


That makes no sense. Just because I think it was bad form for the meeting to occur as it did, does not mean I should want someone to leak what was discussed.



This is important because your stance is if the leaks are true, they should be leaked. Well that sets the precedent then, you feel that any wrong doing should have the facts of it leaked. yet I don't see you calling for that details of that meeting being leaked.


Your logic is all over the place and are making many assumptions.

Yes, the meeting on the tarmac was wrong because it looked bad to the public. That does not mean I think there was any wrongdoing taking place that would require a leak.

Surely you can understand the difference.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: UKTruth

Actually is been reported right now that if is true that Comey leaked classified memos he is now put in legal jeopardy.


Nothing personal...your post makes no sense? What reporting are you listening to?

Comey does not have the memo's?

He created and officially filed them at FBI. The acting Director of FBI has them..FBI leadership has them..

Comey did not leak the Memo's, people at FBI did.

How are they classified? What memos have been leaked vs. described?



He is doom.


I am sure Trump feels that about Comey..



Still the NY times is been asked to produce the memos, so far they have not been able to do so.


The NYT does not and never claimed to have the Memos?? Why would they be asked to produce memos they never claimed to have? When anyone can ask DOJ/FBI since the memos are OFFICIAL RECORDS..

Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R) has made a formal request to FBI for the COmey Memos and is asking for all relevant Memo's of meetings and discussions with the WH between FBI and Trump.

The Senate intelligence committee has formally requested any and all audio recordings the WH has involving meetings with DOJ or FBI.





At the end legal experts are claiming that this so call memos are no in any way enough to claim obstruction of an investigation because at the time Flynn was cleared by the FBI and Comey from the Russia link.



That is bizarrely factually wrong..And it makes no sense..



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler



If the tarmac meeting was improper, then you should be asking for the leaks of what was discussed in that meeting.


That makes no sense. Just because I think it was bad form for the meeting to occur as it did, does not mean I should want someone to leak what was discussed.



This is important because your stance is if the leaks are true, they should be leaked. Well that sets the precedent then, you feel that any wrong doing should have the facts of it leaked. yet I don't see you calling for that details of that meeting being leaked.


Your logic is all over the place and are making many assumptions.

Yes, the meeting on the tarmac was wrong because it looked bad to the public. That does not mean I think there was any wrongdoing taking place that would require a leak.

Surely you can understand the difference.


Gowdy has all but confirmed he has seen evidence that the Clintons and the DoJ were far more entangled during the investigation than the public know. Requests have now been made by one Congressman to see Comey's memo's relating to discussions with Loretta Lynch about that conversation on the tarmac. They don;t need to be leaked. They can be provided to Congress. I assume the meticulous straight shooting hero Comey will have such memo's.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: UKTruth

Actually is been reported right now that if is true that Comey leaked classified memos he is now put in legal jeopardy.


Nothing personal...your post makes no sense? What reporting are you listening to?

Comey does not have the memo's?

He created and officially filed them at FBI. The acting Director of FBI has them..FBI leadership has them..

Comey did not leak the Memo's, people at FBI did.

How are they classified? What memos have been leaked vs. described?



He is doom.


I am sure Trump feels that about Comey..



Still the NY times is been asked to produce the memos, so far they have not been able to do so.


The NYT does not and never claimed to have the Memos?? Why would they be asked to produce memos they never claimed to have? When anyone can ask DOJ/FBI since the memos are OFFICIAL RECORDS..

Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R) has made a formal request to FBI for the COmey Memos and is asking for all relevant Memo's of meetings and discussions with the WH between FBI and Trump.

The Senate intelligence committee has formally requested any and all audio recordings the WH has involving meetings with DOJ or FBI.





At the end legal experts are claiming that this so call memos are no in any way enough to claim obstruction of an investigation because at the time Flynn was cleared by the FBI and Comey from the Russia link.



That is bizarrely factually wrong..And it makes no sense..


Yes, the acting FBI Director should have them... the same one who said there has been no attempt to date by the Whitehouse to interfere with the investigation - under oath. Or is he in on it too and lying to Congress?



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler



If the tarmac meeting was improper, then you should be asking for the leaks of what was discussed in that meeting.


That makes no sense. Just because I think it was bad form for the meeting to occur as it did, does not mean I should want someone to leak what was discussed.



This is important because your stance is if the leaks are true, they should be leaked. Well that sets the precedent then, you feel that any wrong doing should have the facts of it leaked. yet I don't see you calling for that details of that meeting being leaked.


Your logic is all over the place and are making many assumptions.

Yes, the meeting on the tarmac was wrong because it looked bad to the public. That does not mean I think there was any wrongdoing taking place that would require a leak.

Surely you can understand the difference.


Gowdy has all but confirmed he has seen evidence that the Clintons and the DoJ were far more entangled during the investigation than the public know. Requests have now been made by one Congressman to see Comey's memo's relating to discussions with Loretta Lynch about that conversation on the tarmac. They don;t need to be leaked. They can be provided to Congress. I assume the meticulous straight shooting hero Comey will have such memo's.


There possibly could have been some shenanigans going on and I'll wait to see what comes out.

That being said, that has very little to do with the point I was making in regards to Grambler's assumptions on how and when I personally think info should be leaked.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
Soo, the NY times do not want to show the memos, but they are willing to read all their content to the people and more embellished if they are truth.


Seriously.....WTF reporting are you listening to.

The NYT does not have and never claimed to have the Memo's..
If you bothered to even read the original article that is being discussed.



The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of it to a Times reporter.



The intelligence committee asked them to release the memo, but they don't want too.


You are Confused.. Jason Chaffetz requesting the series of memos from the FBI including all communications between FBI and the Trump Administration regarding Russia or Flynn investigations.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler



If the tarmac meeting was improper, then you should be asking for the leaks of what was discussed in that meeting.


That makes no sense. Just because I think it was bad form for the meeting to occur as it did, does not mean I should want someone to leak what was discussed.



This is important because your stance is if the leaks are true, they should be leaked. Well that sets the precedent then, you feel that any wrong doing should have the facts of it leaked. yet I don't see you calling for that details of that meeting being leaked.


Your logic is all over the place and are making many assumptions.

Yes, the meeting on the tarmac was wrong because it looked bad to the public. That does not mean I think there was any wrongdoing taking place that would require a leak.

Surely you can understand the difference.


Gowdy has all but confirmed he has seen evidence that the Clintons and the DoJ were far more entangled during the investigation than the public know. Requests have now been made by one Congressman to see Comey's memo's relating to discussions with Loretta Lynch about that conversation on the tarmac. They don;t need to be leaked. They can be provided to Congress. I assume the meticulous straight shooting hero Comey will have such memo's.


There possibly could have been some shenanigans going on and I'll wait to see what comes out.

That being said, that has very little to do with the point I was making in regards to Grambler's assumptions on how and when I personally think info should be leaked.


It' still a valid question. If you are happy to use leaked information then you should want more leaks to reveal the 'truth' to you. Otherwise you are being led by chance, by people willing to break the law. You see only a portion of the truth and are not concerned when the rest of it is kept secret.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler



If the tarmac meeting was improper, then you should be asking for the leaks of what was discussed in that meeting.


That makes no sense. Just because I think it was bad form for the meeting to occur as it did, does not mean I should want someone to leak what was discussed.



This is important because your stance is if the leaks are true, they should be leaked. Well that sets the precedent then, you feel that any wrong doing should have the facts of it leaked. yet I don't see you calling for that details of that meeting being leaked.


Your logic is all over the place and are making many assumptions.

Yes, the meeting on the tarmac was wrong because it looked bad to the public. That does not mean I think there was any wrongdoing taking place that would require a leak.

Surely you can understand the difference.


Gowdy has all but confirmed he has seen evidence that the Clintons and the DoJ were far more entangled during the investigation than the public know. Requests have now been made by one Congressman to see Comey's memo's relating to discussions with Loretta Lynch about that conversation on the tarmac. They don;t need to be leaked. They can be provided to Congress. I assume the meticulous straight shooting hero Comey will have such memo's.


And what do you think the reason is that the Congress hasn't pursued investigation into wrongdoing in the Clinton investigation before now? Just asking.
edit on 17-5-2017 by jordan77 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: jordan77

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler



If the tarmac meeting was improper, then you should be asking for the leaks of what was discussed in that meeting.


That makes no sense. Just because I think it was bad form for the meeting to occur as it did, does not mean I should want someone to leak what was discussed.



This is important because your stance is if the leaks are true, they should be leaked. Well that sets the precedent then, you feel that any wrong doing should have the facts of it leaked. yet I don't see you calling for that details of that meeting being leaked.


Your logic is all over the place and are making many assumptions.

Yes, the meeting on the tarmac was wrong because it looked bad to the public. That does not mean I think there was any wrongdoing taking place that would require a leak.

Surely you can understand the difference.


Gowdy has all but confirmed he has seen evidence that the Clintons and the DoJ were far more entangled during the investigation than the public know. Requests have now been made by one Congressman to see Comey's memo's relating to discussions with Loretta Lynch about that conversation on the tarmac. They don;t need to be leaked. They can be provided to Congress. I assume the meticulous straight shooting hero Comey will have such memo's.


And what do you think the reason is that the Congress hasn't pursued investigation into wrongdoing in the Clinton investigation before now? Just asking.


All that we know is that we don't have the full information - as per Gowdy's statements.
I think the Clintons, with help, colluded with the DoJ to make sure no charges would ever be brought.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:29 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth



If you are happy to use leaked information then you should want more leaks to reveal the 'truth' to you


When did I say I was "happy to use leaked info"?

I think my position has been pretty clear. Even with this info being "leaked" we still have to wait and see what comes of it. To say the leaks are true or false at this point seems illogical.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: UKTruth

Actually is been reported right now that if is true that Comey leaked classified memos he is now put in legal jeopardy.


Nothing personal...your post makes no sense? What reporting are you listening to?

Comey does not have the memo's?

He created and officially filed them at FBI. The acting Director of FBI has them..FBI leadership has them..

Comey did not leak the Memo's, people at FBI did.

How are they classified? What memos have been leaked vs. described?



He is doom.


I am sure Trump feels that about Comey..



Still the NY times is been asked to produce the memos, so far they have not been able to do so.


The NYT does not and never claimed to have the Memos?? Why would they be asked to produce memos they never claimed to have? When anyone can ask DOJ/FBI since the memos are OFFICIAL RECORDS..

Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R) has made a formal request to FBI for the COmey Memos and is asking for all relevant Memo's of meetings and discussions with the WH between FBI and Trump.

The Senate intelligence committee has formally requested any and all audio recordings the WH has involving meetings with DOJ or FBI.





At the end legal experts are claiming that this so call memos are no in any way enough to claim obstruction of an investigation because at the time Flynn was cleared by the FBI and Comey from the Russia link.



That is bizarrely factually wrong..And it makes no sense..


Yes, the acting FBI Director should have them... the same one who said there has been no attempt to date by the Whitehouse to interfere with the investigation - under oath. Or is he in on it too and lying to Congress?


McCabe can only testify as to what he is aware of.
Comey was working to insulate the investigation from Trumps WH..But he also buttoned down each and every accounting and memo contemporaneously in case they needed to be referenced in the future. He had Aides and Senior Staff review each Memo when written so there would be multiple witnesses of the accounting in time.

AND ...Between the Senate Intelligence Committee demanding the purported audio tapes from Trump..
And the House asking for the Comey Memos and an accounting of all contact between Trump and the FBI..
And the DOJ Inspector General being asked by congress to investigate the circumstances of Comeys firing..

We should get to the bottom of things within a couple weeks..



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: jordan77

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: jordan77

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: jordan77
a reply to: allsee4eye

He didnt have to order Comey for it to be improper. The mere suggestion of attempting to influence the investigation would be enough.


Incorrect.
For obstruction of justice to be claimed, the intent to corrupt the investigation has to be proven.


Impeachment though doesn't necessarily require criminality though. So even if his intent can't be proven legally, there's still enough to make an argument he is unfit. I don't expect partisan republicans to go along with it without some criminal charge though. But a criminal charge is not necessarily required.


Impeachment would require lawmakers to believe that Trump tried to obstruct justice in this case. If any such impeachment hearing was brought, there would need to be some clear evidence to convict. Much more than a memo will be required.

Nixon actually refused a subpoena for the full tapes. Clinton was proven to have lied under oath.

Your idea of 'enough' simply isn't enough. Think about the consequences of bringing an impeachment trial based on what someone wrote. Any President would then be dancing on egg shells in any meeting with his staff, worried that one of them would just make something up and put it in an official memo. Worse, a member of the cabinet could be bribed (or blackmailed) into writing memo's alleging anything they wanted. ALL the President's power would be effectively removed with an easy method for just a handful of people to get rid of him. Think things through before jumping on the propaganda train.


None of that is plausible.

Presidents wouldn't be afraid to talk because most of them know the deal. And they engender trust and faith from their staff, unlike this guy. It's Trump that's oblivious and thinks trying to get the FBI director to shut down investigations is a good idea.

Your theory seems based around the premise that Comey made up this memo, which is highly dubious.

And you're talking about cabinet members being bribed or blackmailed like that's a thing outside of Michael Flynn.

Any President wouldnt be worried about any of this, just this clown.

When the Russia investigation finishes up (whenever that is), I'm confident there will be plenty to take this guy down. Because by then, there'll surely be another dozen scandals or episodes of misconduct he will have gotten himself into. Just keep giving him rope.

Then even Trump sycophants will they up their hands and tap out.


You entirely missed the point, which shows you are not thinking.
If you rely on written memo's, the route to removing a President becomes as simple as getting someone in a position of influence who meets with the President regularly to lie about what the President said/asked them to do. That would be it. Nothing more required. The American system of govt can not survive that kind of process, especially in the current environment. There has to be more than one persons say so. Pretty obvious really, which goes back to the point where you were initially incorrect. There is certainly not enough right now to impeach.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5




We should get to the bottom of things within a couple weeks..

until trump learns the 2 words most 20th century presidents rely on in a scandal

EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: UKTruth

Actually is been reported right now that if is true that Comey leaked classified memos he is now put in legal jeopardy.


Nothing personal...your post makes no sense? What reporting are you listening to?

Comey does not have the memo's?

He created and officially filed them at FBI. The acting Director of FBI has them..FBI leadership has them..

Comey did not leak the Memo's, people at FBI did.

How are they classified? What memos have been leaked vs. described?



He is doom.


I am sure Trump feels that about Comey..



Still the NY times is been asked to produce the memos, so far they have not been able to do so.


The NYT does not and never claimed to have the Memos?? Why would they be asked to produce memos they never claimed to have? When anyone can ask DOJ/FBI since the memos are OFFICIAL RECORDS..

Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R) has made a formal request to FBI for the COmey Memos and is asking for all relevant Memo's of meetings and discussions with the WH between FBI and Trump.

The Senate intelligence committee has formally requested any and all audio recordings the WH has involving meetings with DOJ or FBI.





At the end legal experts are claiming that this so call memos are no in any way enough to claim obstruction of an investigation because at the time Flynn was cleared by the FBI and Comey from the Russia link.



That is bizarrely factually wrong..And it makes no sense..


Yes, the acting FBI Director should have them... the same one who said there has been no attempt to date by the Whitehouse to interfere with the investigation - under oath. Or is he in on it too and lying to Congress?


McCabe can only testify as to what he is aware of.
Comey was working to insulate the investigation from Trumps WH..But he also buttoned down each and every accounting and memo contemporaneously in case they needed to be referenced in the future. He had Aides and Senior Staff review each Memo when written so there would be multiple witnesses of the accounting in time.

AND ...Between the Senate Intelligence Committee demanding the purported audio tapes from Trump..
And the House asking for the Comey Memos and an accounting of all contact between Trump and the FBI..
And the DOJ Inspector General being asked by congress to investigate the circumstances of Comeys firing..

We should get to the bottom of things within a couple weeks..



So you are now saying that McCabe hasn't seen the memo's?

You said earlier:

He created and officially filed them at FBI. The acting Director of FBI has them..FBI leadership has them..


McCabe is the acting FBI Director.

You seem to be flip flopping on points to suit your argument.

Two days after Comey was fired:

Virginia Sen. Mark Warner asked Andrew McCabe to pledge 'that if you come under any political influence from the White House or others to squash this investigation, or impede it in any way, that you will let this committee know.' 'I absolutely do,' McCabe said under questioning. McCabe told Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, however, that 'there has been no effort to impede our investigation to date.'

edit on 17/5/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth



Burr was not impressed by the sourcing. "I could write something and I could read it over the phone and tell them that it came from [Comey]," he told reporters. "I think the burden is on the New York Times, if they're reporting it and they've got somebody that's got the document, they need to get the document and get it released." Burr noted that he met with Comey the day before Trump fired him. "The director of the FBI shared more information with Sen. Warner and myself than any director has ever shared," he said. "I think something as material as that probably would have been something he would have shared, had it happened," he said.



LOL...

You cut the rest that statement:


“But, given that we were the last to meet with him before his departure, the last thing I think Director Comey was thinking about Monday afternoon at 4 o’clock when we met with him was that the next day he was going to get fired.”


www.pbs.org...

So much crazy and lies around here..
edit on 17-5-2017 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth



Burr was not impressed by the sourcing. "I could write something and I could read it over the phone and tell them that it came from [Comey]," he told reporters. "I think the burden is on the New York Times, if they're reporting it and they've got somebody that's got the document, they need to get the document and get it released." Burr noted that he met with Comey the day before Trump fired him. "The director of the FBI shared more information with Sen. Warner and myself than any director has ever shared," he said. "I think something as material as that probably would have been something he would have shared, had it happened," he said.



LOL...

You cut the rest that statement:


“But, given that we were the last to meet with him before his departure, the last thing I think Director Comey was thinking about Monday afternoon at 4 o’clock when we met with him was that the next day he was going to get fired.”


www.pbs.org...

So much crazy and lies around here..


That point is irrelevant to what Burr was saying. No one denies that Comey was surprised to be fired.
It does not negate the fact that Comey failed to mention this to the Senate Intelligence Committee just a day before he was fired. Burr thinks that would be unusual given the openness, which is the actual point.

Bottom line - Burr is sceptical that there is anything here and the onus is on the NYT to produce their evidence.
Can't really be more clear.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Indigo5




We should get to the bottom of things within a couple weeks..

until trump learns the 2 words most 20th century presidents rely on in a scandal

EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE


That doesn't work to stop impeachment. Still, there is nothing close to grounds for impeachment, unless the US is going to collapse into a state of removing Presidents on the say so of one man (not even appointed by the President and then fired by him).
edit on 17/5/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: UKTruth



Burr was not impressed by the sourcing. "I could write something and I could read it over the phone and tell them that it came from [Comey]," he told reporters. "I think the burden is on the New York Times, if they're reporting it and they've got somebody that's got the document, they need to get the document and get it released." Burr noted that he met with Comey the day before Trump fired him. "The director of the FBI shared more information with Sen. Warner and myself than any director has ever shared," he said. "I think something as material as that probably would have been something he would have shared, had it happened," he said.



LOL...

You cut the rest that statement:


“But, given that we were the last to meet with him before his departure, the last thing I think Director Comey was thinking about Monday afternoon at 4 o’clock when we met with him was that the next day he was going to get fired.”


www.pbs.org...

So much crazy and lies around here..


That point is irrelevant to what Burr was saying.


How?..It actually seems to completely contradict what you claimed his statement inferred.



No one denies that Comey was surprised to be fired.
It does not negate the fact that Comey failed to mention this to the Senate Intelligence Committee just a day before he was fired.



Which is it? He knew it was his last day, so should have mentioned this to the Committee the day before? Or he was surprised to be fired, so of course he didn't summarize his concerns of the last 5 months of Trump?


Bottom line - Burr is sceptical that there is anything here and the onus is on the NYT to produce their evidence.


Why? The NYT doesn't have the memos ...They are OFFICIAL, DOCUMENTED, ATTESTED TO and SHARED at the time...aka Memorialized contemporaneously evidence.

No worries though!

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz asks the FBI for records on communications between President Donald Trump and former FBI Director James Comey

www.cnbc.com...

These memos will be discussed in open hearing in the next couple weeks.
edit on 17-5-2017 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join