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's Public hearing - opening statement

page: 11
38
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert


No. Comey did not inject himself. He was thrown in to it.


Remember when Comey was a great hero for publicly announcing that he was reopening the Clinton email investigation because some of her emails may have wound up on a pervert's mobile phone?




posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: introvert


Or he did not recommend what the partisans wanted him to recommend.


Rosenstien is partisan?



If he wants to keep his job....



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001


If he wants to keep his job....


Yet all the big name Dems called for Comey
to resign, be fired, etc.

Seems like Rosenstien's views fit right in with that.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:40 PM
link   
When we first heard about this document, or documents, " ATS Team Trump Extraordinaire" vehemently denied there were documents. Remember that? There were no documents, many of you said. It was 'fake news".

Well, here they are, and you claim now the documents and testimony are somehow a vindication? Sorry, not in this timeline.

There is no vindication, but nor is there a conviction.

However, last time I checked if you rob a bank, and make the excuse that you didn't know it was illegal, the crime still counts.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: shooterbrody

The prepared comments were released by the Senate Intelligence Committee. Here they are linked from the intelligence.senate.gov website.


Awww come on, not even a little "but, but, the Russians..." in your post.

Your off your game today.


edit on 7-6-2017 by Nucleardoom because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   
What crime has been committed besides the leaks?

We'll see what questions are asked comey tomorrow.




posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   
You can download the 'official' doc from here :Scribed

There are a few pararaphs that are quite striking for differing reasons
Dowload and save the original !


...snip (opening prealable)...
I first met then-President-Elect Trump on Friday, January 6 in a conference room at Trump Tower in New York.
I was there with other Intelligence Community (IC) leaders to brief him and his new national security team on the
findings of an IC assessment concerning Russian efforts to interfere in the election.

At the conclusion of that briefing, I remained alone with the President-Elect to brief him on some personally sensitive aspects of the information assembled during the assessment.

The IC leadership thought it important, for a variety of reasons, to alert the incoming President to the existence of this material, even though it was salacious and unverified.

Among those reasons were:
(1) we knew the media was about to publicly report the material and we believed the IC should not keep knowledge of the material and its imminent release from the President-Elect; and (2) to the extent there was some effort to
compromise an incoming President, we could blunt any such effort with a defensive briefing.

The Director of National Intelligence asked that I personally do this portion of the briefing because I was staying in my position and because the material implicated the FBI’s counter-intelligence responsibilities.

We also agreed I would do it alone to minimize potential embarrassment to the President-Elect.
Although we agreed it made sense for me to do the briefing, the FBI’s leadership and I were concerned that the briefing might create a situation where a new President came into office uncertain about whether the FBI was conducting a counter-intelligence investigation of his personal conduct.


Will Comey elaborate much tomorow ?


Right from the start,
Comey tells Trump
that he, Trump, is not under investigation
for the goldenshower'n'hookerst thing

There's more though
and i'm purposely leaping over the 'in context paragraph'
It's an espionage A to Z brief for dummies ...



... snip... prior to the January 6 meeting, I discussed with the FBI’s leadership team whether I should be prepared to assure President-Elect Trump that we were not investigating him personally.

That was true; we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him.
We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted.

During our one-on-one meeting at Trump Tower, based on President-Elect Trump’s reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, I offered that assurance.


Hmm hmmm,
this couldn't have been at all reassuring to Trump ! :

we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him. We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted.

Comey, tells Trump that ....!

And again, at the "dinner date"

.. During the dinner, the President returned to the salacious material I had briefed him about on January 6, and, as he had done previously, expressed his disgust for the allegations and strongly denied them.

He said he was considering ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn’t happen.

I replied that he should give that careful thought because it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally, which we weren’t, and because it was very difficult to prove a negative.

He said he would think about it and asked me to think about it.


Brilliant !

The Fynn business:


.. snip ... I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December.

I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign.

I could be wrong, but I took him to be focusing on what had just happened with Flynn’s departure and the controversy around his account of his phone calls.

Regardless, it was very concerning, given the FBI’s role as an independent investigative agency.
The FBI leadership team agreed with me that it was important not to infect the investigative team with the President’s request, which we did not intend to abide.


At which point the FBI director seems to have 'chain of command' issues
If you're the pope, whouddya call, you ?
If you're the boss of the goddamn FBI you call :
Spoiler : the DoJ ...


... snip .. We concluded it made little sense to report it to Attorney General Sessions, who we expected would likely recuse himself from involvement in Russia-related investigations.
(He did so two weeks later.)
The Deputy Attorney General’s role was then filled in an acting capacity by a United States Attorney, who would also not be long in the role.

After discussing the matter, we decided to keep it very closely held, resolving to figure out what to do with it down the road as our investigation progressed.

The investigation moved ahead at full speed, with none of the investigative team members – or the Department of Justice lawyers supporting them – aware of the President’s request. Shortly afterwards, I spoke with Attorney General Sessions in person to pass along the President’s concerns about leaks.

I took the opportunity to implore the Attorney General to prevent any future direct communication between the President and me.

I told the AG that what had just happened – him being asked to leave while the FBI Director, who reports to the AG, remained behind – was inappropriate and should never happen. He did not reply.


This is towards the end, page 6, last para


...Then the President asked why there had been a congressional hearing about Russia the previous week – at which I had, as the Department of Justice directed, confirmed the investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign.

I explained the demands from the leadership of both parties in Congress for more information, and that Senator Grassley had even held up the confirmation of the Deputy Attorney General until we briefed him in detail on the investigation.

I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating President Trump.

I reminded him I had previously told him that.

He repeatedly told me, “We need to get that fact out.” (I did not tell the President that the FBI and the Department of Justice had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an open case on President Trump for a number of reasons, most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change.)



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:50 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Funny how trump asked him to stop the investigation into Flynn and that is obstruction.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Damiel

Please read more carefully: "an open counterintelligence investigation." That does not rule out an open criminal investigation, an open tax fraud investigation, an open corruption investigation....



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
When we first heard about this document, or documents, " ATS Team Trump Extraordinaire" vehemently denied there were documents. Remember that? There were no documents, many of you said. It was 'fake news".

Well, here they are, and you claim now the documents and testimony are somehow a vindication? Sorry, not in this timeline.

There is no vindication, but nor is there a conviction.

However, last time I checked if you rob a bank, and make the excuse that you didn't know it was illegal, the crime still counts.



Robbing a bank is entirely different. Poor analogy. In the case of whether this was obstruction of justice, 'no conviction' is vindication. Sorry, your hopes of obstruction of justice are dead unless Comey drops something else tomorrow. Get over it.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy


What crime has been committed besides the leaks?


Leaks are not necessarily crimes. Unless you have taken an oath to protect classified information, the First Amendment allows you to say anything you want to anyone you want.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001
And Comey, tororrow ... any ideas about that ?
hmm ?



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


Sorry, your hopes of obstruction of justice are dead unless Comey drops something else tomorrow.


Ah. Apparently you haven't heard that Trump is planning to "live tweet" during the hearing. If I wee Trump's lawyer, I would take away his phone, chain him up, and lock him in the cellar like a werewolf on the night of the full moon.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


Sorry, your hopes of obstruction of justice are dead unless Comey drops something else tomorrow.


Ah. Apparently you haven't heard that Trump is planning to "live tweet" during the hearing. If I wee Trump's lawyer, I would take away his phone, chain him up, and lock him in the cellar like a werewolf on the night of the full moon.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

It is serious dude. It's very very serious.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 06:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody

Funny how trump asked him to stop the investigation into Flynn and that is obstruction.


Comey is a little confusing about that part.

He quotes President Trump's words that said this:

“I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” I replied only that “he is a good guy.”


Then, when compiling his notes, he says this:

I immediately prepared an unclassified memo of the conversation about Flynn and discussed the matter with FBI senior leadership. I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December. I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign.


Source

As usual Comey is wishy washy.

edit on 7-6-2017 by queenofswords because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 06:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: burgerbuddy


What crime has been committed besides the leaks?


Leaks are not necessarily crimes. Unless you have taken an oath to protect classified information, the First Amendment allows you to say anything you want to anyone you want.


The first amendment doesn't actually allow that, but to your point yes leaks aren't necessarily crimes. In this case many of the leaks have been of classified info, and those are crimes.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 06:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Damiel

Please read more carefully: "an open counterintelligence investigation." That does not rule out an open criminal investigation, an open tax fraud investigation, an open corruption investigation....


Yes, do read more carefully:

Then the President asked why there had been a congressional hearing about Russia the previous week – at which I had, as the Department of Justice directed, confirmed the investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign. I explained the demands from the leadership of both parties in Congress for more information, and that Senator Grassley had even held up the confirmation of the Deputy Attorney General until we briefed him in detail on the investigation. I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating President Trump. I reminded him I had previously told him that. He repeatedly told me, “We need to get that fact out.” (I did not tell the President that the FBI and the Department of Justice had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an open case on President Trump for a number of reasons, most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change.)


This was the third time that Comey told Trump that he was not under investigation and this time it was related directly to Congresses investigation.

Sorry, but Trump was not under investigation then and there is no evidence to suggest he is now.

Your entire narrative is dying - you can hope for a bombshell tomorrow, but it's not looking good for your hopes and dreams.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

It has been a very bad day for trump and his admin.
You sure have a weird way of looking at things.



posted on Jun, 7 2017 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


Sorry, your hopes of obstruction of justice are dead unless Comey drops something else tomorrow.


Ah. Apparently you haven't heard that Trump is planning to "live tweet" during the hearing. If I wee Trump's lawyer, I would take away his phone, chain him up, and lock him in the cellar like a werewolf on the night of the full moon.


I guess having Trump convict himself via Twitter is about all you have left to pray for.




top topics



 
38
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join