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.

 

Watch Live: Mr. Comey Goes To Washington

page: 15
16
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 10:48 PM
link   
Excellent day for Trump. Both the Obstruction of Justice and Russian Collusion hoaxes were all but put to bed. I'm sure Democrats will invent something else to try to bring the President of the United States down, but for now, they have nothing to base their existence on.




posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 11:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler


The problems arise when the particular investigation involves people close to the person that calls for an end to the investigation. That smells of corruption.

Even you can admit that. It's a basic premise.


But it would not be ILLEGAL!

Comey said the President can end any investigation he wants legally. Period. End of story.

So its not a question of legality.





Yes, like I said, a political request. Not a potential illegal request.


Right like at best Trumps comment would be a political request (which I don't believe it was even that).




What is arbitrary about what I said? Lynch made a political request, Trump potentially made a request that was corrupt and unethical considering the circumstances.


Lynch's request was corrupt too. You are just too partisan to see it.

She was the one who had to decide rather or not to prosecute Hillary, and before she had seen the evidence, she was working to convincve the investigator to change his phrasing to not make Hillary look bad.

Comey even admitted this made him uneasy.

You just assert that what Lynch did was not a big deal, when I have explained to you why it was.




No. He was correct in his assessment. There was no legal precedence to recommend charges at that time. As is the case with many investigations, info can become available long after the trail goes cold, look at missing person/mysterious death cases years after they have been set aside for an example.


All the more reason for an INVESTIGATOR (Comey) to not act as prosecutor, and to make sure the prosecutor is not biased, which he admits Lynch was.





Yes, more evidence was presented and he did the right thing by informing the committees. His conclusion remained the same and there is absolutely no reason to suggest he swept anything under the rug.

That's pure conspiracy on your part.


If he didn't tell people about Lynch's request, he did act inappropriately. By adhering to her request that he admitted made him feel uneasy, he acted inappropriately.



It's not problematic. You seem to be misunderstanding the difference between the two cases.

That is not my problem or burden to bear. I cannot hold you, or others, hand through all this.

He never said anything about "the investigation was over because he was concerned she would look bad". That is pure speculation on your part.


Did you watch the testimony?


COMEY: Yes, sir. I ask — after President Clinton, former President Clinton met on the plane with the attorney general, I considered whether I should call for the appointment of a special counsel. And decided that would be an unfair thing to do because I knew there was no case there. We investigated it very, very thoroughly. I know this is a subject of passionate disagreement but I knew there was no case there. And calling for the appointment of special counsel would be brutally unfair because it would send the message, uh-huh, there's something here. That's my judgment. Lots of people have different views about it but that's what I thought about it.


www.politico.com...

Did you get that. He didn't want people to think there was a there there. In other words, it would have made Hillary look bad.

Yet you keep claiming he didn't say this.





Again, there may have been talk of Comey leaking the memos before he actually did it.

We need a lot more context to this before we go too far.


What? So Comey discussed leaking the memmos, and what was in them, before he leaked the memos?

Here you go again. You claim to be non partisan, but you make up absurd theories to avoid the fact that Comey lied about this.





Not my concern about what you think when you fail to present anything that could be considered impartial, reasonable commentary.


Comey says he released the memos after Trump mentioned tapes on a tweet.

NYT is righting what is exactly in the memos day before Comey says he released them.

Only someone of unbelievable denial can argue that this somehow not true.



posted on Jun, 8 2017 @ 11:05 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Fantastic post about what we know. This is exactly right.



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 06:20 AM
link   
No doubt this Comey guy is corrupt. He took no notes from 2013 to 2017 when Obama was in office. He took no notes when he was requested by Lynch to not treat the Hillary case as an investigation. He miraculously started taking notes on every occasion he met Trump starting on January 20. He is biased against Trump. He leaks to sabotage Trump. He was not loyal to his office, to the nation, to the people. He was a traitor. Glad he's gone. Should have happened on January 20. Trump was lenient enough on him. And he kept pushing his luck.
edit on 9-6-2017 by allsee4eye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 06:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

About the timelines of the Comey leak - he clearly lied under oath about the reason he started leaking. That should be enough to charge him.



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 06:46 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

The Trump tweet was on May 12. When was the leak? Anyone know?
edit on 9-6-2017 by allsee4eye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck



That's no reason to make an assumption that Trump collided with anyone.


I didn't make any such assumption and I am not responsible for such a claim.



Then there is no crime. It is not 'illegal' for foreign governments to want to influence an election... it is not 'illegal' for them to do anything. Illegality indicates subservience to the law, and foreign governments are not subject to US law.


Again, I did not make any such claim. Please try to stick to what I've said.



No, it would not. Comey has no power to investigate Trump. The fact he gave his memos to Mueller means only that he gave his memos to Mueller... nothing more. If Mueller says Trump is under investigation, then we can say Trump is under investigation. Mueller has not said that, and the NSA, DoJ, DHS, CIA, and FBI have all stated he is not and has not been under investigation.


That does not mean there will not be. In fact, I think Mueller would now be ethically bound to investigate the matter.

Also, members of the committee asked for Comey's memos. If he complies, this issue has now become part of their congressional investigations.



Donald Trump is not under investigation and has not been under investigation before Comey was fired. There is no indication Donald Trump is under investigation now.


But there is indication that he very well may be.



Donald Trump never demanded Comey stop any investigation.


True. He did not demand. He said he hoped it would go away. I'll leave it to the legal experts to decide what it all means.



Comey told Donald Trump he was not under investigation, but refused to admit that publicly.


Ok. So?



Comey intentionally leaked his memos to the press via an anonymous source.


His personal, unclassified memos as a private citizen. He addressed that issue.



Comey's concern over Trump's statement was based on personal feelings towards Trump.


His personal interpretation of Trump's words and actions. He didn't just make things up. Trump said and did very specific things that Comey is not responsible for.



Loretta Lynch issued an order that also caused Comey discomfort, but he took no action and acquiesced.


She did not issue and order. She made a request about the term he used. That request is not comparable to what Trump requested, but still worthy of discussion.



No investigation was halted or delayed by Donald Trump.


That doesn't matter, actually. For example, you don't have to be successful in obstructing justice for one to be guilty of trying.



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 08:05 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert



True. He did not demand. He said he hoped it would go away. I'll leave it to the legal experts to decide what it all means.


What are legal experts going to do?

Are they going to grab a time machine, zip back to the exact moment President Trump said it? Are those legal experts going to understand tone, inflection, rate, volume, context, and the such?

Where is this time machine, because no amount of memos is going to reveal anything in text.

Tell me, can you tell the difference in text of: 'I hate you.' and 'I hate you.'

One is filled with animosity, can 'legal experts' tell which one?



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: GodEmperor



What are legal experts going to do?


They are going to assess the situation based on what we know and give us a better idea of what we are dealing with.

Comey opened a huge can of worms yesterday and this is not over by a long shot.



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert


I didn't make any such assumption and I am not responsible for such a claim.


Again, I did not make any such claim. Please try to stick to what I've said.

Then why even debate it? If there was no investigation, no crime, then what is the point of debating them?


True. He did not demand. He said he hoped it would go away. I'll leave it to the legal experts to decide what it all means.

Fair enough. I hope legal precedence is followed, wherein stating one 'hopes' something is not the same as ordering something.

I really hope so, or I just demanded legal precedence holds!

Damn, I did it again!

Getting the idea, yet?


Ok. So?

So, Comey demonstrated political bias in performing his duties. That's OK with you?


His personal, unclassified memos as a private citizen. He addressed that issue.

Comey does not have the power to classify or declassify documents. The memos were taken in performance of his duties, concerning an official meeting, using a classified FBI laptop. No, sir, they were not his personal anything.


His personal interpretation of Trump's words and actions. He didn't just make things up. Trump said and did very specific things that Comey is not responsible for.

Trump is responsible for his words, but not for Comey's personal interpretation of those words.


She did not issue and order. She made a request about the term he used. That request is not comparable to what Trump requested, but still worthy of discussion.

Lynch instructed Comey to drop the word "investigation" and use the word "matter" specifically to have the FBI official statements coincide with the narrative desired by Hillary's campaign.

Trump asked if Comey would drop a specific investigation into a specific person.

You're right. Lynch instructed; Trump asked. Lynch did so for purely political reasons; Trump did so out of loyalty to an acquaintance he had already punished.

Lynch certainly issued a direct order. Comey already admitted that, and that following it made him "uncomfortable." You're right the two instances are not comparable... Lynch was absolutely in the wrong.


That doesn't matter, actually. For example, you don't have to be successful in obstructing justice for one to be guilty of trying.

Where is the evidence Trump even tried? Hoping that an acquaintance is not further punished? Again, Trump had every right as President to demand the investigation be stopped or to pardon Flynn and render the investigation moot. He did neither.

Lynch had no right as Attorney General to control the wording of the FBI. The method in which she controlled that wording indicates collusion at best, obstruction of justice at worst. Irony?

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert


Comey opened a huge can of worms yesterday and this is not over by a long shot.

Agreed. The swamp is full of muck and mire; it could take a very long time to drain and even longer to flush clean.

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck



Then why even debate it? If there was no investigation, no crime, then what is the point of debating them?


I'm not debating. I did not say Trump colluded with anyone and I've never said the Russia hacking is a "crime". I've only said the Russia hack happened, it is serious for national security and the narrative that the hacks never happened is squashed.

That's it.



Fair enough. I hope legal precedence is followed, wherein stating one 'hopes' something is not the same as ordering something.


We have to get a lot more information and context before we simply attach our argument to the word "hope". Let's not get ahead of ourselves.



So, Comey demonstrated political bias in performing his duties. That's OK with you?


His actions in this entire ordeal could be interpreted as having ramifications against both sides of the political spectrum. To say he is biased may be true in regards to his personal political beliefs (I believe he is a Republican), but his actions affected both sides.



Comey does not have the power to classify or declassify documents. The memos were taken in performance of his duties, concerning an official meeting, using a classified FBI laptop. No, sir, they were not his personal anything.


Do politicians and heads of departments not talk about their experiences in public after they leave office? Hell, most of them write books.

Comey released his personal accounts and experiences in this matter to the public after he was fired. It contained no classified info and it was his right to do so.



Lynch certainly issued a direct order. Comey already admitted that, and that following it made him "uncomfortable." You're right the two instances are not comparable... Lynch was absolutely in the wrong.


Correct. It was purely wrong. I agree.

But it was not illegal. What Trump has done may encroach on that line of legality.



Where is the evidence Trump even tried? Hoping that an acquaintance is not further punished? Again, Trump had every right as President to demand the investigation be stopped or to pardon Flynn and render the investigation moot. He did neither.


As I said in another thread, if Trump would have stopped the investigation, it would have been a clear violation of his powers.



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: introvert


Comey opened a huge can of worms yesterday and this is not over by a long shot.

Agreed. The swamp is full of muck and mire; it could take a very long time to drain and even longer to flush clean.

TheRedneck


The swamp just got muddier. Hope you brought some boots.



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Another great post.

I would add that the big difference between what Trump said with Comey about hope and what Lynch did is the following.

Trump had noting to do at all with the investigation of Flynn. However, because Lynch did not recuse herself, she was the person that ultimately controlled rather or not HIllary would be charged. Therefore, her apparent bias and request to help Hillary is far more troubling.

This is supported by the fact that even if Comey did think Trump made a request, he told him to kick rocks and denied his request. However, he did acquiesce to Lynch, despite knowing what she asked was inappropriate.



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: UKTruth

The Trump tweet was on May 12. When was the leak? Anyone know?


The first details of the leak were on the 11th May.. including specific language used in the so called memo's.

Comey lied under oath about his reasons for leaking.

edit on 9/6/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

What do you think was potentially illegal about Trump saying he hoped Comey could see his way to letting Flynn go?



posted on Jun, 9 2017 @ 10:51 AM
link   
I don't believe Russia hacked DNC. There is no evidence. But more importantly, Russia has no history of doing that. Russia never hacked anyone in election time. Not Brexit. Not France. It would be highly unusual if the only time Russia did that was in 2016 with DNC. I still think Podesta is the one who sent his own emails to wikileaks to frame Trump.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join