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: 30
32
<< 27  28  29    31 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Everything you posted, is wrong.




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

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



I'll leave that there. Pretty clear from the person who defines the scope of the appointed special counsel.


They have made no such determination if prosecution is warranted. Of course not. They have to investigate it first. But if they find reason to, they can prosecute.


By the way using "SC/SP" is also spurious. There is no such thing as a special prosecutor.


Not any more. The title was changed.

The purpose and powers remain the same.


The powers are actually slightly different, with more oversight by the DoJ, not on a day to day basis, but in terms of recommendations to indict. No move to prosecute can be initiated by a special counsel - it is run through the DoJ, who can overrule. Thus a special counsel is still part of the Executive Branch.

Whereas a special prosecutor, a defunct role, was appointed by a panel of 3 judges, a special counsel is appointed by the DoJ and is bound by the policies of the DoJ.

This is an investigation and that is all.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: UKTruth

Everything you posted, is wrong.



You''ll have to provide some proof to back up your wild claims.
Till then, your protestations ring hollow.



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



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Just out of curiosity, has anyone actually SEEN this Comey memo?

No...?

I wonder if all the giddy little leftists out there dancing in the streets over this "memo" have any idea that IF it's even real, no laws were broken on Trump's end (18 U.S.C. 1510), but Comey may be guilty of concealing evidence (18 U.S.C. § 1001).

You're welcome





posted on May, 17 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Phoenix

Jan 23 Before Flynn lied to the FBI before he was reported to the DOJ before Yates warned the Whitehouse before Flynn lied to the Veep. Before Flynn was fired.
Sorry nope.
Flynn has NOT been cleared by the FBI.


If so where's the charges - oop ain't none - it's all in your mind.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: SBMcG

Yup many pointed that out but "they" ignore little details in zeal to stick something to walls.



posted on May, 17 2017 @ 10:51 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


No I don't, I don't have to do a thing. You're wrong.



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 12:39 AM
link   
a reply to: jtma508


How ironic that "magically" Comey had a memo claiming President Trump told him this...and Comey withheld this information until after he was fired?... hahahaha... This is "comey central" now...as in "comedy central"...

Knowing the fact that Comey was/is a plant of the Obama/Hillary elitists it is more likely that Comey made this memo up and then relayed the info to the CIA controlled WaPost.



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 04:43 AM
link   
I don't know if this has been posted yet, but here is a video of Comey on May 3rd, under oath, stating that he was NOT asked to stop any investigation.

Starts about 30 sec in.


Game, set and match. Or Comey lied under oath.



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 06:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: UKTruth


No I don't, I don't have to do a thing. You're wrong.



Well sure, you don't HAVE to justify your lies.
edit on 18/5/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone




posted on May, 18 2017 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: stosh64

hey how did you get that pic ? it is nice lol



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth




posted on May, 18 2017 @ 07:22 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth





posted on May, 18 2017 @ 08:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



I'll leave that there. Pretty clear from the person who defines the scope of the appointed special counsel.


They have made no such determination if prosecution is warranted. Of course not. They have to investigate it first. But if they find reason to, they can prosecute.


By the way using "SC/SP" is also spurious. There is no such thing as a special prosecutor.


Not any more. The title was changed.

The purpose and powers remain the same.


The powers are actually slightly different, with more oversight by the DoJ, not on a day to day basis, but in terms of recommendations to indict. No move to prosecute can be initiated by a special counsel - it is run through the DoJ, who can overrule. Thus a special counsel is still part of the Executive Branch.

Whereas a special prosecutor, a defunct role, was appointed by a panel of 3 judges, a special counsel is appointed by the DoJ and is bound by the policies of the DoJ.

This is an investigation and that is all.



As special counsel, Mueller is "authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters," according to the Justice Department order Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein signed.


www.cnn.com...



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 08:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



I'll leave that there. Pretty clear from the person who defines the scope of the appointed special counsel.


They have made no such determination if prosecution is warranted. Of course not. They have to investigate it first. But if they find reason to, they can prosecute.


By the way using "SC/SP" is also spurious. There is no such thing as a special prosecutor.


Not any more. The title was changed.

The purpose and powers remain the same.


The powers are actually slightly different, with more oversight by the DoJ, not on a day to day basis, but in terms of recommendations to indict. No move to prosecute can be initiated by a special counsel - it is run through the DoJ, who can overrule. Thus a special counsel is still part of the Executive Branch.

Whereas a special prosecutor, a defunct role, was appointed by a panel of 3 judges, a special counsel is appointed by the DoJ and is bound by the policies of the DoJ.

This is an investigation and that is all.



As special counsel, Mueller is "authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters," according to the Justice Department order Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein signed.


www.cnn.com...


What they are allowed to do is irrelevant.
Rosenstein has already been clear on the purpose. Investigation. I have already pointed out to you the difference between a special counsel and the now defunct special prosecutor role when it comes to appointment and then prosecution.



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 09:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: Indigo5

Annnnn it's "special counsel" NOT prosecutor as alleged.

That's very different than implied. Good try though.


It's actually the same position and I believe the titles were changed a while back. Special counsel still has the same investigative and prosecutor powers.


Also not correct.
A special counsel makes recommendations on prosecutions to the DoJ, who can over rule.
There is not even a suggestion of the prosecutorial process.
Nice try though.


You are confused or lying..

Let me know if you are still confused and I can give links and excerpts.

1983...they changed the name from Special Prosecutor to Special Counsel..

A Special Counsel has the ability to prosecute..

And if there is any doubt, Rosenstein re-affirmed that in his authorization doc you quoted..but strangely you did not include that part.



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: stosh64


???


He was asked if the DOJ or Attorney General told him to stop an investigation???


What does that have to do with the President saying he'd like Comey to let Flynn go?


The President is not the AG or DOJ and the President did not order the investigation stopped.


What a weird conflation of reality you seem to be attempting.



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: UKTruth


No I don't, I don't have to do a thing. You're wrong.



Well sure, you don't HAVE to justify your lies.


Well regretfully for you, you just sound disingenuous when you call someone a liar by them pointing out that you're lying and wrong. Boohoohoo, don't cry too hard, I know its difficult for the thin-skinned staunch Trump supporter but you'll get over it.

Again regretfully for you, my "lies" are being shown to be accurate with each passing day and you cant seem to come to terms with that.



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5


originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: stosh64


???


He was asked if the DOJ or Attorney General told him to stop an investigation???


What does that have to do with the President saying he'd like Comey to let Flynn go?


The President is not the AG or DOJ and the President did not order the investigation stopped.


What a weird conflation of reality you seem to be attempting.



They're trying to twist this into fitting the narrative that they wish was happening.

They are actually doing what they accuse people like us of doing all the time. It's pretty funny to watch.



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 27  28  29    31 >>

log in

join