JAMES COMEY says President Trump Asked Him to JAIL JOURNALISTS for Leaking Classified Info.

double post

originally posted by: carewemust
""President Donald Trump asked former FBI Director James Comey to consider imprisoning journalists for reporting classified information, The New York Times reported, citing a memo the head G-Man wrote after speaking to Trump.

Lol. Way to make something embarrassing about Trump a topic about Hillary again. When are you guys going to let Trump stand on his own merits and stop comparing what he does to what Hillary may have done?

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Wiki leaks. I think that counts as releasing it to the world.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Yeah I bet you do.

Too bad the news is all about trump though.

a reply to: Flatfish

President Trump is mentally retarded and like many of his supporters, hasn't got the slightest clue with respect to ethical behavior or how to conduct himself as POTUS. He's in way over his head and the sooner he is removed from office, the sooner the GOP can begin the long process of repairing their newfound reputation as the party of hypocrisy, ignorance and immorality. It's also kinda ironic how the "Right's" favorite news source, Fox News, is simultaneously experiencing their own expose' of similar predatory behavior within their own ranks. Go figure!

Of course all Trump supporters are mentally retarded! Nevermind all the evidence that has been showing that the Hillary and Bernie supporters are the ones who are. How about them DNC leaks? You know the ones that showed that Hillary supporters were rigging the primary and Ole Bernie just sat back and let it happen! Hmm wonder why... Oh and how about all those allegations about CNN's racism? Interesting how that isn't being reported on.
Now when and where has Comey himself said anything about these memos??? Even the Times has admitted to not seeing the memo. They were read

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.

linkAre you familiar with the term cherry picking? Because without an actual memo or a under oath statement from Comey this is about as real as the Obama was a homosexual articles we used to see so much of.

originally posted by: hangedman13
a reply to: Flatfish

President Trump is mentally retarded and like many of his supporters, hasn't got the slightest clue with respect to ethical behavior or how to conduct himself as POTUS. He's in way over his head and the sooner he is removed from office, the sooner the GOP can begin the long process of repairing their newfound reputation as the party of hypocrisy, ignorance and immorality. It's also kinda ironic how the "Right's" favorite news source, Fox News, is simultaneously experiencing their own expose' of similar predatory behavior within their own ranks. Go figure!

Of course all Trump supporters are mentally retarded! Nevermind all the evidence that has been showing that the Hillary and Bernie supporters are the ones who are. How about them DNC leaks? You know the ones that showed that Hillary supporters were rigging the primary and Ole Bernie just sat back and let it happen! Hmm wonder why... Oh and how about all those allegations about CNN's racism? Interesting how that isn't being reported on.
Now when and where has Comey himself said anything about these memos??? Even the Times has admitted to not seeing the memo. They were read

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.

linkAre you familiar with the term cherry picking? Because without an actual memo or a under oath statement from Comey this is about as real as the Obama was a homosexual articles we used to see so much of.

For starters, I don't think I ever mentioned a single memo from anyone and as far as I'm concerned, there's ample evidence to substantiate Trump's mental disorders without any memo input whatsoever.

And this has absolutely nothing to do with Hillary nor can Trump's actions be justified by constantly referring back to her.

She has nothing to do with Trump's daily displays of unadulterated ignorance and flat out stupidity.

Much less, that of his supporters.

a reply to: uncommitted
I'll give you one:

Hillary - Ruling establishment. Clear evidence trail admitted to on national TV by the Director of the FBI. Gets a pass because Comey saw fit to let her slide.

Comparison:

Trump - New guy, non-ruling establishment. At best questionable or no evidence of wrong doing. Expresses his "hope" that Comey will do the same for Flyn that he did for Hillary. Media and congress go full retard to get him impeached.

There's more but I just got home. I'm sure I'm not telling you anything you don't know already so don't act like you don't know what I'm talking about.

- Thanks

a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

No, that's nothing more than your opinion, I know on ATS opinions these days are usually passed on as facts, but I'm afraid I don't work like that.

a reply to: hangedman13

Are you familiar with the term cherry picking? Because without an actual memo or a under oath statement from Comey this is about as real as the Obama was a homosexual articles we used to see so much of.

Relax! A special counsel has been appointed. Soon Comey will testify under oath and Trump will invoke Executive Privilege and our brief national nightmare will be over.

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

No, that's nothing more than your opinion, I know on ATS opinions these days are usually passed on as facts, but I'm afraid I don't work like that.

Cmon, be more specific. The opinion I see is categorizing them. The rest is truth that those on the left don't want to face.

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

No, that's nothing more than your opinion, I know on ATS opinions these days are usually passed on as facts, but I'm afraid I don't work like that.

Cmon, be more specific. The opinion I see is categorizing them. The rest is truth that those on the left don't want to face.

No, you said Comey gave Clinton a free pass - but you have nothing to actually confirm that with have you? You are using your own speculation to establish that as a fact. The truth you don't want to see it seems that if Trump asked Comey not to take that particular investigation further (wow, so many investigations) then that was a bad thing. Interesting though that you do seem to be of the opinion that he did exactly that.

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

No, that's nothing more than your opinion, I know on ATS opinions these days are usually passed on as facts, but I'm afraid I don't work like that.

Cmon, be more specific. The opinion I see is categorizing them. The rest is truth that those on the left don't want to face.

No, you said Comey gave Clinton a free pass - but you have nothing to actually confirm that with have you? You are using your own speculation to establish that as a fact. The truth you don't want to see it seems that if Trump asked Comey not to take that particular investigation further (wow, so many investigations) then that was a bad thing. Interesting though that you do seem to be of the opinion that he did exactly that.

So Comey stated the numerous violations involving transmission of information that was categorized at the highest security levels, then he goes on to say that he's not going to recommend charges. If that's not a free pass then I don't know what is. I've personally seen people's lives ruined for lesser violations involving their security clearances

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

No, that's nothing more than your opinion, I know on ATS opinions these days are usually passed on as facts, but I'm afraid I don't work like that.

Cmon, be more specific. The opinion I see is categorizing them. The rest is truth that those on the left don't want to face.

No, you said Comey gave Clinton a free pass - but you have nothing to actually confirm that with have you? You are using your own speculation to establish that as a fact. The truth you don't want to see it seems that if Trump asked Comey not to take that particular investigation further (wow, so many investigations) then that was a bad thing. Interesting though that you do seem to be of the opinion that he did exactly that.

So Comey stated the numerous violations involving transmission of information that was categorized at the highest security levels, then he goes on to say that he's not going to recommend charges. If that's not a free pass then I don't know what is. I've personally seen people's lives ruined for lesser violations involving their security clearances

I'm sure you have. If there was sufficient evidence to prosecute Comey would have been overruled - sadly for you I guess, trial by ATS isn't a reality.

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

No, that's nothing more than your opinion, I know on ATS opinions these days are usually passed on as facts, but I'm afraid I don't work like that.

Cmon, be more specific. The opinion I see is categorizing them. The rest is truth that those on the left don't want to face.

No, you said Comey gave Clinton a free pass - but you have nothing to actually confirm that with have you? You are using your own speculation to establish that as a fact. The truth you don't want to see it seems that if Trump asked Comey not to take that particular investigation further (wow, so many investigations) then that was a bad thing. Interesting though that you do seem to be of the opinion that he did exactly that.

So Comey stated the numerous violations involving transmission of information that was categorized at the highest security levels, then he goes on to say that he's not going to recommend charges. If that's not a free pass then I don't know what is. I've personally seen people's lives ruined for lesser violations involving their security clearances

I'm sure you have. If there was sufficient evidence to prosecute Comey would have been overruled - sadly for you I guess, trial by ATS isn't a reality.

Who would Comey have been overruled by exactly? The DOJ? Lynch?

There were a multitude of prosecutors who went public saying that from what Comey said there was plenty of evidence to prosecute, and that the "intent" reason for not charging was not legal.

originally posted by: BlueAjah

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Mike.Ockizard

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

No, that's nothing more than your opinion, I know on ATS opinions these days are usually passed on as facts, but I'm afraid I don't work like that.

Cmon, be more specific. The opinion I see is categorizing them. The rest is truth that those on the left don't want to face.

No, you said Comey gave Clinton a free pass - but you have nothing to actually confirm that with have you? You are using your own speculation to establish that as a fact. The truth you don't want to see it seems that if Trump asked Comey not to take that particular investigation further (wow, so many investigations) then that was a bad thing. Interesting though that you do seem to be of the opinion that he did exactly that.

So Comey stated the numerous violations involving transmission of information that was categorized at the highest security levels, then he goes on to say that he's not going to recommend charges. If that's not a free pass then I don't know what is. I've personally seen people's lives ruined for lesser violations involving their security clearances

I'm sure you have. If there was sufficient evidence to prosecute Comey would have been overruled - sadly for you I guess, trial by ATS isn't a reality.

Who would Comey have been overruled by exactly? The DOJ? Lynch?

There were a multitude of prosecutors who went public saying that from what Comey said there was plenty of evidence to prosecute, and that the "intent" reason for not charging was not legal.

I'm sure he'd have been overruled. I'm also sure the fact that she isn't the subject of a 'special prosecutor' or in jail right now - which was yet another broken Trump promise - highlights that there wasn't sufficient evidence to pursue or surely Trump would have?

a reply to: uncommitted
Overruled by whom? At the time we still had Clinton allies heading the DOJ. As for evidence needed to prosecute, Comey stated there was no intent. But I don't see any intent in the statute:

18 U.S.C. Section 793(f). This provision states: Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document. . .relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer, Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

SOURCE

a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

Trump apparently tried a few times to cozy up to Comey. Calling him to "chat" on the phone and Comey had to remind him of the proper protocols if he wanted to communicate with him.
It's reported that Comey tried to avoid contact with trump. There is a video of Comey and trump at some Whitehouse function where Comey, called over by trump, crosses the room and reaches long to shake hands and trump tries to draw him into a bro-hug that Comey refuses to return. He says he tried to blend in with the drapes so trump wouldn't acknowledge him but trump called him over.
Comey says the moment troubled him as he saw it as trump trying to compromise the distance Comey wanted to professionally maintain between them.

a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

No, what Comey said was no prosecutor would ever bring a case. No prosecutor would ever bring a case..none...no court of law would touch it...
You can take his opinion on the situation any way you like but he never gave her a free pass. They had nothing prosecutable. Period.

a reply to: BlueAjah

All the dedicated FBI agents that spent a year investigating the case would have surely had a say if they did not concur with what Comey said.
Jesus don't you think if any evidence had been buried they would have been up in arms and would have said so?
You guys are absolutely absurd in your thinking.

CAN WE GET BACK TO THE SUBJECT OF THE THREAD WHICH IS TRUMP NOT HILLARY?

Trump lawyering up today.

I guess Twitter will work where ever he goes. Wouldn't want to miss any of his words of wisdom. Tee hee hee.