Giuliani: Trump fired Comey because he wouldn't say he wasn't a target in investigation

a reply to: soberbacchus

"most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change."

It's ok to let everyone think your under investigation without correction, but god forbid the status change to which we will have to make a statement. Does that really resonate with you?

Why did he make the determination months prior in the Hillary "matter"? Why does no one care that he didn't trust the DOJ's impartiality? Why did he lie and say nobody else had anything to do with his written statement? Why did they work so fervently to change Hillary's status when she was ACTUALLY under active investigation.

Why does he suggest the actions he took were to protect the image of himself and the FBI? Just do your job as it's meant to be.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

Not quite that simple either. Because trump admitted he did it to stop the investigation.
If he had kept his mouth shut...but his intent is pretty plain.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Not quite that simple either. Because trump admitted he did it to stop the investigation.
If he had kept his mouth shut...but his intent is pretty plain.

No, he didn't.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: IAMTAT
I thought Rosenstein recommended Trump fire Comey.

Right.

Now the story has changed.

That is what this OP is about.

Sidenote: Rosenstein had no authority or decision making ability to fire Comey.

Rosenstein did write a letter recommending Comey be fired. Unless you want to change reality, then that stands.

And Trump has said publicly he had made the decision to fire Comey before he asked for that letter and the reason was the Russia Investigation.

Trump's Attorney just said he fired Comey for not making a public declaration that Trump was not a target of the investigation.

Incorrect. At no point did he say he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: IAMTAT
I thought Rosenstein recommended Trump fire Comey.

Right.

Now the story has changed.

That is what this OP is about.

Sidenote: Rosenstein had no authority or decision making ability to fire Comey.

Rosenstein did write a letter recommending Comey be fired. Unless you want to change reality, then that stands.

And Trump has said publicly he had made the decision to fire Comey before he asked for that letter and the reason was the Russia Investigation.

Trump's Attorney just said he fired Comey for not making a public declaration that Trump was not a target of the investigation.

Incorrect. At no point did he say he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation.

Flat earth argument you are making.

originally posted by: soberbacchus
Giuliani: Trump fired Comey because former FBI director wouldn't say he wasn't a target in investigation

“He fired Comey because Comey would not, among other things, say that he wasn’t a target of the investigation,” the former New York mayor, who recently joined Trump’s legal team, told Fox News’ Sean Hannity.

www.politico.com...

On the heels of Giuliani admitting Trump knew about the Stormy Daniels payment and reimbursed Cohen, this looks like a new legal strategy, but I haven't heard anyone who understands what it is.

of course you will demonstrate how this obstructs justice or is evidence of some other alleged crime?

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: soberbacchus
Giuliani: Trump fired Comey because former FBI director wouldn't say he wasn't a target in investigation

“He fired Comey because Comey would not, among other things, say that he wasn’t a target of the investigation,” the former New York mayor, who recently joined Trump’s legal team, told Fox News’ Sean Hannity.

www.politico.com...

On the heels of Giuliani admitting Trump knew about the Stormy Daniels payment and reimbursed Cohen, this looks like a new legal strategy, but I haven't heard anyone who understands what it is.

of course you will demonstrate how this obstructs justice

The charge of obstructing justice is premised on the attempt.
If the standard was that Justice had to be successfully "Obstructed" to charge someone, then no one would ever be charged as they would have successfully hidden the crime, ended the investigation etc.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Your attempted explanation is not the demonstration requested.

Doing his job is not obstructing justice.