FBI used Comey firing as excuse to investigate Trump on claim he was working for Russia

a reply to: Grambler

F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia

The investigation the F.B.I. opened into Mr. Trump also had a criminal aspect, which has long been publicly known: whether his firing of Mr. Comey constituted obstruction of justice.

Agents and senior F.B.I. officials had grown suspicious of Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia during the 2016 campaign but held off on opening an investigation into him, the people said, in part because they were uncertain how to proceed with an inquiry of such sensitivity and magnitude.

But the president’s activities before and after Mr. Comey’s firing in May 2017, particularly two instances in which Mr. Trump tied the Comey dismissal to the Russia investigation, helped prompt the counterintelligence aspect of the inquiry, the people said.

... big snip ...
If the president had fired Mr. Comey to stop the Russia investigation, the action would have been a national security issue because it naturally would have hurt the bureau’s effort to learn how Moscow interfered in the 2016 election and whether any Americans were involved, according to James A. Baker, who served as F.B.I. general counsel until late 2017.

He privately testified in October before House investigators who were examining the F.B.I.’s handling of the full Russia inquiry.

“Not only would it be an issue of obstructing an investigation, but the obstruction itself would hurt our ability to figure out what the Russians had done, and that is what would be the threat to national security,” Mr. Baker said in his testimony, portions of which were read to The New York Times.

Mr. Baker did not explicitly acknowledge the existence of the investigation of Mr. Trump to congressional investigators.

This is the crux of Trump's problems

If he'd just have let things be ...
If he hadn't insisted on a 'kiss my ring, pledge of loyalty' from Comey
or to 'go easy' on Flynn, 'cos he's a good guy lock him up, lock him up !
... Trump could've had 2yrs of plain sailing

Instead, he opened his yap
and thats why we are where we are today

Y'know, i'm starting to warm to Trump
he's pure comedy

Golden comedy !

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Grambler

POST REMOVED BY STAFF

Then Why hasn’t Rosenstein testified that none of it was true and trumo forced him?

Another reason why Rod Rosenstein is bailing out, before he can be fired and his pension forfeited...like what happened to Andy McCabe.

Serious analysis of the NYT article : Lawfare link

James Baker:

The FBI’s counterintelligence investigation regarding the 2016 campaign fundamentally was not about Donald Trump but was about Russia. Full stop.

It was always about Russia. It was about what Russia was, and is, doing and planning. Of course, if that investigation revealed that anyone—Russian or American—committed crimes in connection with Russian intelligence activities or unlawfully interfered with the investigation, the FBI has an obligation under the law to investigate such crimes and to seek to bring those responsible to justice.

The FBI’s enduring counterintelligence mission is the reason the Russia investigation will, and should, continue—no matter who is fired, pardoned or impeached.

Read it if you dare. I don’t know if it will matter at this point, but at least you will have some background of the reality of the situation.

a reply to: carewemust

McCabe will be reinstated to his former seniority as far as his retirement benefits go.
As soon as trump out of there.

a reply to: carewemust

McCabe will be reinstated to his former seniority as far as his retirement benefits go.
As soon as trump out of there. Hes not going to win....not even in this effort...

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

McCabe will be reinstated to his former seniority as far as his retirement benefits go.
As soon as trump out of there.

Wow, you've genuinely reached new levels of delusion now...

a reply to: TheWhiteKnight

No, you're not the only one who remembers this:

Oct. 30, 2016: Then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, accused the FBI director of breaking the Hatch Act, a federal law, by publicly disclosing new information about the Clinton investigation 11 days ahead of the presidential election.

“I am writing to inform you that my office has determined that these actions may violate the Hatch Act, which bars FBI officials from using their official authority to influence an election,” Reid wrote in the letter. “Through your partisan actions, you may have broken the law.”

Oct. 31, 2016: The next day, Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tennessee, echoed concerns similar to Reid’s and called for Comey to resign his FBI post. Cohen reiterated that call in a Nov. 3 opinion column published in The Hill.

Nov. 2, 2016: Days later, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, told Bloomberg News that he had lost confidence in Comey for his handling of Clinton’s email investigation.

“I do not have confidence in him any longer,” Schumer said at the time. “To restore my faith, I am going to have to sit down and talk to him and get an explanation for why he did this.”

That same day, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, shared similar feelings with CNN and suggested Comey may lose his job.

"Maybe he's not in the right job," Pelosi said. "I think that we have to just get through this election and just see what the casualties are along the way."

Jan. 13, 2017: Two months after Clinton lost to Trump, Democrats blasted Comey after a briefing on the agency’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the election.

One of them was Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Georgia, who at the time said, “My confidence in the FBI director’s ability to lead this agency has been shaken.”

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles, put it more bluntly: “The FBI director has no credibility.”

Jan. 24, 2017: The fading confidence in Comey continued toward the end of January when Rep. G.K. Butterfield, D-North Carolina, said “I think that James Comey needs to fade away into oblivion.”

“He embarrassed this nation, he possibly influenced the outcome of a presidential election, and he should not hold any position of trust, whatsoever, in our government.”

And that’s just a list of Democratic lawmakers who spoke up about Comey. Others made similar calls for the FBI director to step down last year.

On Oct. 30, 2016, the New York Daily News editorial board called on Comey to resign:

FBI Director James Comey’s democracy-bending decision to inform America, 11 days before its presidential election, that the bureau is digging into a trove of additional emails demands the highest condemnation. And he must resign.

On Oct. 31, 2016, ThinkProgress justice editor Ian Millhiser wrote a post making “the case for firing James Comey”:

We also know that Comey violated longstanding Justice Department protocol when he decided to disclose the very few facts that he actually did disclose in his letter to the Republican chairs. And we know that he wrote the letter over the explicit objections of Attorney General Loretta Lynch.Taken together, these actions constitute a fireable offense.

On Nov. 7, 2016, Newsweek columnist Kurt Eichenwald didn’t just call for the FBI director’s firing — he said Comey was unfit for public service:

James Comey should not simply be fired as director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He must be barred forever from any form of public service.

Before Trump fired Comey, these Democrats wanted him out



a reply to: Sillyolme

You wouldn't happen to have a link supporting this statement, would you?

Oh, who am I kidding?

Here is the video I did on this.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

McCabe will be reinstated to his former seniority as far as his retirement benefits go.
As soon as trump out of there. Hes not going to win....not even in this effort...

I think Mueller will be done with this investigation sometime before 2020.
I feel like 4 years is a sufficient amount of time to conduct an investigation.
By that time Trump will have only been able to get away with 1 full term as President and no more damage will be done.
Do you think the investigation should be concluded sooner?

originally posted by: Grambler
Here is the video I did on this.

Now that Warren has entered the Presidential race for 2020 would you agree that anything Mueller releases would be considered politically motivated at this point?
He has to wait to impeach until Trump is reelected, no?

a reply to: Grambler

Ya lost me at "merely because he fired Comey" (1:51).

The rough timeline I posted on page 2 highlights that there were multiple factors which would reasonably raise concerns culminating with his actions from 5/09/17 through 5/11/17.

As of yet, not all the facts are public and the investigation could actually clear Trump, but he keeps getting in the way of himself with actions that look to be more and more suspect.

He really needs to just let the investigation run its course, and focus on getting the government out of this absurd shutdown.

originally posted by: redmage
a reply to: Grambler

Ya lost me at "merely because he fired Comey" (1:51).

The rough timeline I posted on page 2 highlights that there were multiple factors which would reasonably raise concerns.

As of yet, not all the facts are public and the investigation could actually clear Trump, but he keeps getting in the way of himself with actions that look look to be more and more suspect.

He really needs to just let the investigation run its course, and focus on getting the government out of this absurd shutdown.

This!
Mueller has all the time in the world on this one.
Normal investigations are wrapped up very quickly. There is even a tv show named the first 48 because after that amount of time it is very hard to solve most crimes.
This one is way different though. The crimes committed by trump are very complex and we are not even sure what exactly he did or didnt do so this should take the multiple years and the millions of dollars that Mueller has been allocated.
Get over it already!

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust
McCabe will be reinstated to his former seniority as far as his retirement benefits go.
As soon as trump out of there. Hes not going to win....not even in this effort...

Will Omarosa be brought back too? She deserves some kind of reward for secretly recording our President, as Rod Rosenstein urged everyone to do.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust
McCabe will be reinstated to his former seniority as far as his retirement benefits go.
As soon as trump out of there. Hes not going to win....not even in this effort...

Will Omarosa be brought back too? She deserves some kind of reward for secretly recording our President, as Rod Rosenstein urged everyone to do.

Omarosa will go down as a hero! I bet Mueller has all of the recordings and is just waiting for the right moment to pounce.

a reply to: carewemust

Rosenstein didn't urge everyone to record the President.

He asked/quipped about he himself wearing a wire.

originally posted by: redmage
a reply to: Grambler

Ya lost me at "merely because he fired Comey" (1:51).

The rough timeline I posted on page 2 highlights that there were multiple factors which would reasonably raise concerns.

As of yet, not all the facts are public and the investigation could actually clear Trump, but he keeps getting in the way of himself with actions that look look to be more and more suspect.

He really needs to just let the investigation run its course, and focus on getting the government out of this absurd shutdown.

I explained in the video they were chomping at the bit to investigate tyrump for other fumb reasons, and used the filming as the silver bullet to launch the investigation.

I will answer your timeline one by one.

1. Yes they fbi investigated Russia, but couldnt be bothered to look at the single most important piece of evidnce, the physical DNC servers, because the DNC wouldnt let them.


2. There is no reason the invetsigation led to trump circle. The reason it did was based on meeting a russian who had nothing to do with hacks (who was let into the country by lynch and was a client of fusion gps, who met with her the day beforer and after the trump tower meeting, but claims to have no knowledge of it. Funny, why wasnt fuson and hillarys team investigated for these connections to that same russian)

The papadopolous story is a joke as I have already made a thread about.

Flynn did nothing expect call the russian ambassodar, something which many incoming admins do. Is that now a reason to launch fbi investigations?

manfort had dealings with some of the very same russians the piodesta group did, and that the fbi such as mueller worked with before, like deripaska.

3. Yes trump fired comey his letter that was never sent wasnt sent. HE sought ocunsel as to why to fire him, thats not a reason to investigate.

4. Yep rosenstein recomneds the firing, as did democrats and republicans up to that point.

5. Yes trump thanked Comey for telling him he wasnt under investigation, SO thats trump saying russia was the reason for the firning? Thats laufghable.

6. Trump policies toward rissia should nopt be a reason to investigate. Is that the new precedent? So where is the investigation into Obama sending money to iran? NOt to mention trump has been fra tougher on russia than Obama and others.

7. I showed how in the hlt interview Trump admits this will makle the investigation go longer probably. And I showed how cmey admits the investigation wasnt impeded, and trump told comey to go after anyone in his campaign that borke the law with russia.

8 and 9. Yes, I know the establishment on both sides like mueller appointment, I have at the establishment level the two parties are the same since before trumps election


In addition, things like trumps joke about russians having hillarys deleted subpeonaed emails and the dossier were used by the fbi to want to investigate.

As I said, looking more and more like a wtitchhunt from the beginning.

originally posted by: redmage
a reply to: carewemust

Rosenstein didn't urge everyone to record the President.

He asked/quipped about he himself wearing a wire.

If trumps joke about Russia having hillary emails was enough tfor the fbi to take serious, why isnt rosensteins joke?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: redmage
a reply to: carewemust

Rosenstein didn't urge everyone to record the President.

He asked/quipped about he himself wearing a wire.

If trumps joke about Russia having hillary emails was enough tfor the fbi to take serious, why isnt rosensteins joke?

You think you, or any of us in the public, have all the intel? Do you have intercepts from US and allied sources regarding the election or the Trump campaign, for example? I don’t. I don’t even know if they have them or not, but if you think the FBI, bastion of mostly conservative white men, is going to authorize an investigation of a PRESIDENT without dotting “i’s” and crossing “t’s” and having the letter of the law followed with precision and exactitude, you are living in a realm of “alternative reality.”

We don’t know the conclusion of the investigation yet. It might exonerate Trump for all you or I know! I doubt it, but honestly, I’m not privy to their data, their methods or their conclusions, and neither are you.

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: redmage
a reply to: carewemust

Rosenstein didn't urge everyone to record the President.

He asked/quipped about he himself wearing a wire.

If trumps joke about Russia having hillary emails was enough tfor the fbi to take serious, why isnt rosensteins joke?

You think you, or any of us in the public, have all the intel? Do you have intercepts from US and allied sources regarding the election or the Trump campaign, for example? I don’t. I don’t even know if they have them or not, but if you think the FBI, bastion of mostly conservative white men, is going to authorize an investigation of a PRESIDENT without dotting “i’s” and crossing “t’s” and having the letter of the law followed with precision and exactitude, you are living in a realm of “alternative reality.”

We don’t know the conclusion of the investigation yet. It might exonerate Trump for all you or I know! I doubt it, but honestly, I’m not privy to their data, their methods or their conclusions, and neither are you.

I am sorry I dont have such an appeal to authority that I can always trust the intel community when clear evidence of corruption or bias is right in front of me.

For example, they didnt charge anyone for destroying subpoenaed evidence they requested from hillarys campaign. We are supposed tyo overlook that because well, they are pros they must have dotted their i's and crossed their t's? Nope sorry.

Or how about Muellers team deleting texts from strzok and page he knew the IG would want to look at?

Or how about the IG report into the hillary investigations that showed a bunch of irregularities and problems in that investigation?

To me, having ablind appeal to authority is very dangerous.

a reply to: Rewey

Wanna bet on it
Loser has to star every post of the winner for a month.