Watch Live: Mr. Comey Goes To Washington

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

lynch
rice
holder

which one will spill the beans on hillary?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

lynch
rice
holder

which one will spill the beans on hillary?

That House committee report just accused Eric Holder of lying to Congress and obstructing the Fast & Furious investigation. I'm guessing he's huddled up with his lawyer about now.

The more I listen to the testimony, the more it does not look good for Trump and it should be clear that the Russians did try to affect the election.

originally posted by: introvert
The more I listen to the testimony, the more it does not look good for Trump and it should be clear that the Russians did try to affect the election.

Fair enough thats your opinion.

I think that all non partisan people will see this as a black eye for the media and the case for obstruction of justice against trump.

I feel that members have gone through many points on this thread showing why.

This seems more persuasive than your feeling that this was bad for trump

a reply to: Grambler

This seems more persuasive than your feeling that this was bad for trump

It's not a feeling. It's an opinion. Comey was very specific and it sounds like he has his ducks in a row. I don't know what will come of it, but on the surface is doesn't put Trump in a good light.

The Lynch aspect is also very interesting. His words on that were also very specific.

a reply to: Grambler

It's also important to note the mention of the Russian bank VEB and the potential ties to Kushner.

a reply to: introvert

Try. Maybe. Any effect. I doubt. Russia was not able to affect any election in Europe. Brexit. Nope. France. Nope. If the US is the only country where Russia can succeed in affecting the election, then that speaks volumes about Obama's lack of action and cyber security.

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: introvert

Try. Maybe. Any effect. I doubt. Russia was not able to affect any election in Europe. Brexit. Nope. France. Nope. If the US is the only country where Russia can succeed in affecting the election, then that speaks volumes about Obama's lack of action and cyber security.

I don't care about that partisan crap.

The fact remains that Comey said there is "no fuzz" to that issue. Russia tried to affect the election. Not only does that mean those who tried to dismiss the entire Russia hacking aspect were wrong and it was a hostile act against the US, as was stated in the hearing.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

This seems more persuasive than your feeling that this was bad for trump

It's not a feeling. It's an opinion. Comey was very specific and it sounds like he has his ducks in a row. I don't know what will come of it, but on the surface is doesn't put Trump in a good light.

The Lynch aspect is also very interesting. His words on that were also very specific.

The Lynch argument is damning. Why did he keep no memos on that?

He admitted that he would have called a special prosecutor because he felt uneasy about the whiole thing, but he KNEW Hillary was nnocent.

Note how that changes with the discussion of Obstruction for Trump. he says he isn't the one to make that judgement, it should be a special prosecutor.

So feel uneasy with Lynch and hillary = no memo needed, but with Trump = memo.

He did what he had to do to ensure no special prosecutor for HIllary, but purposefully leaked info to the press to ensure a special prosecutor for Trump.

This is an unbelievable admission and proves his bias and that he was not qualified for his job.

I believe their is a good chance his leaks were criminal, and he should be prosecuted.

a reply to: introvert

Russia tries to affect every election. Every country does. That's not a secret. I don't need the FBI to tell me that. How many times has Russia succeeded? Not in Ukraine. No in Britain. Not in France. If the US is the only country where Russia has succeeded, the blame would be on Obama for not taking cyber security into consideration, not on Russia.

I can't help but feel this is the end for Hillary.


On a side note, Trump himself does not seem to be connected to the Russians in any significant way. If members of his campaign were although that would look bad on the president it does not directly harm the president.

a reply to: Grambler

The Lynch argument is damning. Why did he keep no memos on that?

He wasn't in the plane on that meeting. No memos to make. His opinion is informed by some sort of other evidence that was gathered and presented to him. I wonder what that is and it would seem to me that there maybe an investigation on that being conducted. Whatever he saw caused him to go to the public 1st.

He admitted that he would have called a special prosecutor because he felt uneasy about the whiole thing, but he KNEW Hillary was nnocent.

That is not what he said. He knew there was no case that could be made. She was not innocent by any means.

Note how that changes with the discussion of Obstruction for Trump. he says he isn't the one to make that judgement, it should be a special prosecutor.

Yes, because he is not in a position to be part of a full and complete investigation that could conclude whether charges are warranted or not. He is not in a position to make any judgement.

So feel uneasy with Lynch and hillary = no memo needed, but with Trump = memo.

Already addressed that.

He did what he had to do to ensure no special prosecutor for HIllary, but purposefully leaked info to the press to ensure a special prosecutor for Trump.

No. He said he did what he did because the investigation had concluded and he had concerns about Lynch's actions. So he brought it to the public. He probably didn't want to be part of the political shenanigans going on with Lynch.

This is an unbelievable admission and proves his bias and that he was not qualified for his job.

I disagree. I don't think he has any bias and did what he thought was right for the FBI, justice system and the American people.

I believe their is a good chance his leaks were criminal, and he should be prosecuted.

He already stated that the material he leaked was unclassified and personal property. He has the right as a private citizen to disclose whatever he wishes, now that he is no longer head of the FBI.

He's the former head of the FBI...he's covered his ass.

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: introvert

Russia tries to affect every election. Every country does. That's not a secret. I don't need the FBI to tell me that. How many times has Russia succeeded? Not in Ukraine. No in Britain. Not in France. If the US is the only country where Russia has succeeded, the blame would be on Obama for not taking cyber security into consideration, not on Russia.

Comey made it seem like this was a an effort of greater magnitude. Not just the run of the mill hack.

But like I said, I don't want to get in to the partisan crap. If you are hell bent on throwing Obama under the bus, take it somewhere else. I'd rather talk about the hearing today.

a reply to: Grambler

He did what he had to do to ensure no special prosecutor for HIllary, but purposefully leaked info to the press to ensure a special prosecutor for Trump.

Let's just repeat that again.

a reply to: introvert

There is no evidence Russia hacked DNC. I don't know who did it. Frankly, I'm not interested in who did it. Fact is, Obama said the election cannot be hacked. His words, not mine.

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: introvert

There is no evidence Russia hacked DNC. I don't know who did it. Frankly, I'm not interested in who did it. Fact is, Obama said the election cannot be hacked. His words, not mine.

The IC community and Comey under oath said otherwise.

The Republicans are not even denying it. They were hacked as well, if I am not mistaken.

a reply to: introvert

I'm not interested in their words. I'm interested in evidence. If they have evidence, feel free to share it. I already know Russia tried to rig the election in favor of their darling Hillary Clinton. I don't blame them. But how many times have they succeeded in rigging an election or a referendum? 0

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: introvert

I'm not interested in their words. I'm interested in evidence. If they have evidence, feel free to share it.

That's a very disingenuous position. They cannot release any evidence, as it's still under investigation.

You should know and understand that.

I already know Russia tried to rig the election in favor of their darling Hillary Clinton. I don't blame them. But how many times have they succeeded in rigging an election or a referendum? 0

From Obama to Hillary. Your partisanship is disturbingly obsessive.

a reply to: introvert

Well then come back to me in 10 years once they are done with the investigation. I'm not partisan. I'm not American. Frankly, I don't care about Trump or America. I only care about the Syria war.