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.

 

Trump: "I did not make, and do not have, any such recordings." of Comey Conversation

page: 16
18
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: havanaja

Very true, as has been mentioned by both myself and others in this thread.

There is speculation that it was specifically worded (and possibly "approved") as it was with the "help" of White House and counsel.




posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Close of business today is the deadline for Comey FBI to turn over his memos to the committee.



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Byrd

which then brings up the question of "is this attempted intimidation?"



haha is that really a question? Of course it's attempted intimidation, but Jim Comey knew full well that there was no fear of being intimidated...hence the "Lordy" chronicles.


law professor says No this wasnt intimidation.



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 07:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Byrd

which then brings up the question of "is this attempted intimidation?"



haha is that really a question? Of course it's attempted intimidation, but Jim Comey knew full well that there was no fear of being intimidated...hence the "Lordy" chronicles.


law professor says No this wasnt intimidation.


Other law professors and lawyers say "yes it was." Let's settle this in court, shall we? What does Trump have to fear?



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Byrd

which then brings up the question of "is this attempted intimidation?"



haha is that really a question? Of course it's attempted intimidation, but Jim Comey knew full well that there was no fear of being intimidated...hence the "Lordy" chronicles.


law professor says No this wasnt intimidation.


No one said it was, anyway. It was an attempt at it though.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Byrd

which then brings up the question of "is this attempted intimidation?"



haha is that really a question? Of course it's attempted intimidation, but Jim Comey knew full well that there was no fear of being intimidated...hence the "Lordy" chronicles.


law professor says No this wasnt intimidation.


No one said it was, anyway. It was an attempt at it though.


Police and prosecutors do this legally all the time. IF the president who is the head of it all is charged for it.. it destroys the ability of the police and prosecutors to use the same tactic.

@DJW001. See above. Police and those in justice are legally allowed to lie to get a result such as getting a witness to tell the truth by suggesting something to them. Trump did the same thing. And COmey was truthful because he thought there might be evidence if he lied.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: yuppa


Police and prosecutors do this legally all the time.


Difference:

The police and prosecutors are the ones conducting the (an) investigation. Trump isn't, he's party to the investigation; therefore, intimidation, regardless if he's president.


And COmey was truthful because he thought there might be evidence if he lied.


Trump said Comey was untruthful.

If Comey did tell the truth, tapes would prove Trump is a liar; if Comey lied, tapes would prove Trump correct, and if that were the case you damn well believe Trump would have those tapes first thing to show Comey lied.


edit on 24-6-2017 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: yuppa


Police and prosecutors do this legally all the time.


Difference:

The police and prosecutors are the ones conducting the (an) investigation. Trump isn't, he's party to the investigation; therefore, intimidation, regardless if he's president.


And COmey was truthful because he thought there might be evidence if he lied.


Trump said Comey was untruthful.

If Comey did tell the truth, tapes would prove Trump is a liar; if Comey lied, tapes would prove Trump correct, and if that were the case you damn well believe Trump would have those tapes first thing to show Comey lied.



COmeys memos are also in question as possible fabrications too since there was no one there to hear what was actually said. Ive done this myself to previous bosses after being fired.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: yuppa


Police and prosecutors do this legally all the time.


Difference:

The police and prosecutors are the ones conducting the (an) investigation. Trump isn't, he's party to the investigation; therefore, intimidation, regardless if he's president.


And COmey was truthful because he thought there might be evidence if he lied.


Trump said Comey was untruthful.

If Comey did tell the truth, tapes would prove Trump is a liar; if Comey lied, tapes would prove Trump correct, and if that were the case you damn well believe Trump would have those tapes first thing to show Comey lied.



COmeys memos are also in question as possible fabrications too since there was no one there to hear what was actually said. Ive done this myself to previous bosses after being fired.


Comey is the only party to the conversation thus far who has testified under oath; therefore, that testimony is to be believed unless proved otherwise.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 08:02 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa


COmeys memos are also in question as possible fabrications too since there was no one there to hear what was actually said. Ive done this myself to previous bosses after being fired.


Has Trump called what Comey said under oath "perjury" yet? Of course not. He doesn't dare... because for all he knows, Comey really did record the conversations. Another Trump gambit blows up in his face.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 08:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: yuppa


COmeys memos are also in question as possible fabrications too since there was no one there to hear what was actually said. Ive done this myself to previous bosses after being fired.


Has Trump called what Comey said under oath "perjury" yet? Of course not. He doesn't dare... because for all he knows, Comey really did record the conversations. Another Trump gambit blows up in his face.



So the head of the FBI can essentially bug the white house for the potus's conversation with him legally?

If legal, why doesn't he release the recording?








posted on Jun, 25 2017 @ 07:33 AM
link   
Trump thinks this is a game with the tweeting, and the press conferences, and these antics with the tapes. Eventually, he's gonna find out it's not.



posted on Jun, 25 2017 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: yuppa


COmeys memos are also in question as possible fabrications too since there was no one there to hear what was actually said. Ive done this myself to previous bosses after being fired.


Has Trump called what Comey said under oath "perjury" yet? Of course not. He doesn't dare... because for all he knows, Comey really did record the conversations. Another Trump gambit blows up in his face.



So the head of the FBI can essentially bug the white house for the potus's conversation with him legally?

If legal, why doesn't he release the recording?



Let's suppose Comey did record the conversation (I don't think he did, but let's entertain that scenario).

A) DC is a one-party consent state/district. He could *personally* record the conversation w/o a warrant and it be legal ("bugging" the White House would require a warrant, else it would be illegal).

B) If he did record it, and if no one suspects *he* has tapes, he could be sitting on them in the hopes Trump gets under oath, lies, and then boom, Comey has tapes to prove Trump perjured himself.

I don't think that is the case, but just a thought in regards the questions you posed in your post.



posted on Jun, 25 2017 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Thats the thing Comey didnt record anything. its his recollections on paper. Which opens it up to just being made up and a lie.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join