Comey testifies

[Rukh O'Rorke]

"High stakes. Major revelations. Wall-to-wall TV coverage. And a president ready to blow. Add it all up and Thursday is shaping up to be the single biggest day in Washington in decades."

CNN predicting a humdinger.....
www.cnn.com/2017/06/06/politics/donald-trump-james-comey/index.html

Big deal or flop?

We shall see 🤓

[emma1420]

Well CNN makes everything breaking news, so I take them with a grain of salt.

I think Comey's testimony is a big deal, but I would be very surprised if there it results in some sort of smoking gun that the media is desperate for it to be.  I think his testimony is just one more piece of the puzzle.  

Besides, rather than spending even more time rehashing Russia, I'd like them to spend a little more time on the secret healthcare bill the 13 male senators are developing.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

Jun 6, 2017 12:31:10 GMT -5 emma1420 said:

Well CNN makes everything breaking news, so I take them with a grain of salt.

I think Comey's testimony is a big deal, but I would be very surprised if there it results in some sort of smoking gun that the media is desperate for it to be.  I think his testimony is just one more piece of the puzzle.  

Besides, rather than spending even more time rehashing Russia, I'd like them to spend a little more time on the secret healthcare bill the 13 male senators are developing.

I agree.  If there is something there then fine prosecute it.   However I would really like the endless coverage to stop because I am worried about what these people are doing behind the scenes while we're all busy focused on what the left hand is doing.

[dondub]

They'd be doing it anyway.

[ken a.k.a OMK]

IMO Comey is a truthful guy and bipartisan. Trump won't like what he says but it will be his word against Trump's. I'd believe Comey over Trump. Just a bit more evidence piling up on Trump. Soon he won't be able to buy, lie or threaten people to lie for him.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

Jun 6, 2017 12:39:44 GMT -5 dondub said:

They'd be doing it anyway.

I'm sure they would. I wish the spotlight was being shone on their antics rather than trump. There is some serious stuff that will affect all of us that need attention more than the Russia crap.

Even if he's impeached it changes nothing. Now pence is in charge and the republicans still control all three branches.

The stuff Congress is trying to roll out while we're distracted will have repercussions for decades. That should be our focus

[dondub]

What is 'the stuff'?

[Gardening Grandma]

Jun 6, 2017 13:13:25 GMT -5 alwaysbeoptimizing said:

i like all the news being "created" by the media.


OOOH, trump asked comey to stop the investigation.... well, not really, he asked him to stop it if there's nothing there and to just come out and say if there's no evidence instead of dragging it on forever.


OOOOH, trump is going to stop comey from testifying... well, except he didn't try to stop him from testifying, but it sure scares our viewers and helps keep up the perception that the president is all bad

Only trump FIRED Comey when Comey did not drop the investigation
But keep claiming the nasty media is making stuff up

Trump still has not named a new FBI director, nor has he replaced a single US Attorney after firing them all and the DOJ is a shambles . But he tound time to play golf and lecture the London mayor

[ken a.k.a OMK]

Jun 6, 2017 13:13:25 GMT -5 alwaysbeoptimizing said:

i like all the news being "created" by the media.


OOOH, trump asked comey to stop the investigation.... well, not really, he asked him to stop it if there's nothing there and to just come out and say if there's no evidence instead of dragging it on forever.


OOOOH, trump is going to stop comey from testifying... well, except he didn't try to stop him from testifying, but it sure scares our viewers and helps keep up the perception that the president is all bad

He threatened Comey with the suggestion he had tapes of their meeting. It's in his tweets for all to read. So Comey asks for more money and people to continue the investigation and Trump fires him and tweets that.  Then he tells the Russians that "firing that nut job eased pressure from the investigation. 

He didn't invoke executive privilege because Comey doesn't fall under it as a citizen. He wisely listened to his advisers on this issue.

[ken a.k.a OMK]

Firing someone who serves at your pleasure is within the rights of the executive. Stopping an investigation of yourself is obstruction. there is a big difference. and there is no evidence he's done anything to hamper/stop any investigation

You might want to see how that worked out for Nixon. 

[b2r]

  Say kids, what time is it?

SPOILER: Click to show

It's Howdy Doody time!

[Deleted]

Trump didn't say IF there is nothing there... he said There IS nothing there... he was trying to dictate outcomes. What the hell are you reading? 

[Opti]

Here's the prepared testimony I just read. I wonder how much the actual testimony will add to it?

www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/politics/james-comey-memos-testimony/

January 27 Dinner

My instincts told me that the one-on-one setting, and the pretense that this was our first discussion about my position, meant the dinner was, at least in part, an effort to have me ask for my job and create some sort of patronage relationship. That concerned me greatly, given the FBI's traditionally independent status in the executive branch.

March 30 Phone Call

On the morning of March 30, the President called me at the FBI. He described the Russia investigation as "a cloud" that was impairing his ability to act on behalf of the country. He said he had nothing to do with Russia, had not been involved with hookers in Russia, and had always assumed he was being recorded when in Russia. He asked what we could do to "lift the cloud." I responded that we were investigating the matter as quickly as we could, and that there would be great benefit, if we didn't find anything, to our having done the work well. He agreed, but then re-emphasized the problems this was causing him.

April 11 Phone Call

On the morning of April 11, the President called me and asked what I had done about his request that I "get out" that he is not personally under investigation. I replied that I had passed his request to the Acting Deputy Attorney General, but I had not heard back. He replied that "the cloud" was getting in the way of his ability to do his job.

[Opti]

I'm wondering if the WH is leaky in part because Trump wants some of those leaks. It appears reading the CNN link above that Trump was almost begging for a leak from the FBI to the press saying he wasn't under investigation.

[Opti]

www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/poll-61percent-of-americans-think-president-trump-fired-james-comey-to-protect-himself/ar-BBCgEC9?li=BBnb7Kz

More than 60% of Americans think that President Donald Trump fired FBI Director James Comey in order to protect himself rather than to help the country, according to a new poll.

Seven in 10 (72%) Americans don’t trust Trump’s word on Russia, but 55% also don’t buy Comey’s - likely a reflection of his own past controversies such as Hillary Clinton’s email scandal and an overall distrust of the federal government, according to results from an ABC News and Washington Post survey.

Only 27% felt that Trump dismissed Comey for the good of country. A majority of respondents (56%) believe the President is trying to interfere with the Russia probe Comey was supervising prior to his firing.

[swamp]

Jun 6, 2017 14:01:59 GMT -5 alwaysbeoptimizing said:

Jun 6, 2017 13:27:18 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Only trump FIRED Comey when Comey did not drop the investigation
But keep claiming the nasty media is making stuff up

Trump still has not named a new FBI director, nor has he replaced a single US Attorney after firing them all and the DOJ is a shambles . But he tound time to play golf and lecture the London mayor

Firing someone who serves at your pleasure is within the rights of the executive.  Stopping an investigation of yourself is obstruction.  there is a big difference.  and there is no evidence he's done anything to hamper/stop any investigation

Not correct.

If one has the power to interfere in an investigation and one chooses to do so, that is obstruction.

[Deleted]

Done nothing?

Swamp, where does intent come into this. Trump thinks he had the power, he acted on that power... it didn't have the impact he wanted (and it pisses him off)... but he had the intent and belief and acted upon it... how does that factor?

Just because Comey and Coates, etc are too honest and have integrity not to be influenced, just because sessions recused himself and a special prosecutor was hired...

Is obstruction that doesn't achieve your ultimate goal still obstruction? 

[swamp]

Jun 8, 2017 8:47:43 GMT -5 oped said:

Done nothing?

Swamp, where does intent come into this. Trump thinks he had the power, he acted on that power... it didn't have the impact he wanted (and it pisses him off)... but he had the intent and belief and acted upon it... how does that factor?

Just because Comey and Coates, etc are too honest and have integrity not to be influenced, just because sessions recused himself and a special prosecutor was hired...

Is obstruction that doesn't achieve your ultimate goal still obstruction? 

Yes. 

A crime requires intent and action to further that intent.

Example: I can daydream all I want about killing people, but until I do something about it, it's not a crime.

Or, I mistakenly pick up your jacket at  a party. When I get home, I realize it is not mine and I do everything I can to get it back to you.  There was no intent to deprive you of your property.

In Trumps case, If he intends to stop the investigation (intent can be inferred from actions, he doesn't have to say "I intended it", he has that power, he does something to further his intent by telling Comey to stop the investigation) there is a crime. If it didn't work, it's an Attempted Obstruction. If he engaged with another person, it becomes a conspiracy to obstruct.

[b2r]

  Has he fired all of the FBI?

[Deleted]

The point being b2r just because it didn't have the effect he wanted, doesn't mean he wasn't intending to obstruct.

He believed he could obstruct. It's pissing him off pretty badly that he hasn't managed to do so. His actions, his statements, support this.

Thanks swamp. I think he attempted obstruction. I guess I'm kind of heartened that it didn't fully work. I guess we'll see if the special prosecutor agrees. 

[b2r]

[Opti]

Jun 8, 2017 8:58:44 GMT -5 swamp said:

Jun 8, 2017 8:47:43 GMT -5 oped said:

Done nothing?

Swamp, where does intent come into this. Trump thinks he had the power, he acted on that power... it didn't have the impact he wanted (and it pisses him off)... but he had the intent and belief and acted upon it... how does that factor?

Just because Comey and Coates, etc are too honest and have integrity not to be influenced, just because sessions recused himself and a special prosecutor was hired...

Is obstruction that doesn't achieve your ultimate goal still obstruction? 

Yes. 

A crime requires intent and action to further that intent.

Example: I can daydream all I want about killing people, but until I do something about it, it's not a crime.

Or, I mistakenly pick up your jacket at  a party. When I get home, I realize it is not mine and I do everything I can to get it back to you.  There was no intent to deprive you of your property.

In Trumps case, If he intends to stop the investigation (intent can be inferred from actions, he doesn't have to say "I intended it", he has that power, he does something to further his intent by telling Comey to stop the investigation) there is a crime. If it didn't work, it's an Attempted Obstruction. If he engaged with another person, it becomes a conspiracy to obstruct.

In your opinion, what does the Comey testimony show? Attempted obstruction or ?

[hoops902]

Jun 8, 2017 8:28:19 GMT -5 swamp said:

Jun 6, 2017 14:01:59 GMT -5 alwaysbeoptimizing said:

Firing someone who serves at your pleasure is within the rights of the executive.  Stopping an investigation of yourself is obstruction.  there is a big difference.  and there is no evidence he's done anything to hamper/stop any investigation

Not correct.

If one has the power to interfere in an investigation and one chooses to do so, that is obstruction.

How do you/the law define "interfere" though then?  Because at a high level, anytime the FBI director is fired...that's conceivably interfering with every ongoing investigation.  Anytime a superior removes someone from a case, that's conceivably interfering with that investigation. 

What I'm asking is...what's ok and what's not?  Is it ok to fire him in HOPES that firing him interferes with the investigation, as long as you don't do something directly associated with the investigation?  How is every person in the FBI not obstructing nearly every case simply by the decisions they make in the process of doing their jobs?

[Deleted]

When you ask him first many times to leave it alone and he doesn't? When you ask others to intervene? When you say on live tv the reason you fired him was the Russia thing? When you tell Russians in the Oval Office that you took the pressure off by firing Comey? 

[swamp]

Jun 8, 2017 9:06:47 GMT -5 Opti said:

Jun 8, 2017 8:58:44 GMT -5 swamp said:

Yes. 

A crime requires intent and action to further that intent.

Example: I can daydream all I want about killing people, but until I do something about it, it's not a crime.

Or, I mistakenly pick up your jacket at  a party. When I get home, I realize it is not mine and I do everything I can to get it back to you.  There was no intent to deprive you of your property.

In Trumps case, If he intends to stop the investigation (intent can be inferred from actions, he doesn't have to say "I intended it", he has that power, he does something to further his intent by telling Comey to stop the investigation) there is a crime. If it didn't work, it's an Attempted Obstruction. If he engaged with another person, it becomes a conspiracy to obstruct.

In your opinion, what does the Comey testimony show? Attempted obstruction or ?

I am not familiar enough with the testimony to give an opinion.     From what I've heard I lean towards it is obstruction, but I also have not heard everything and could very well have a different opinion after hearing everything.

[swamp]

Jun 8, 2017 9:18:46 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

Jun 8, 2017 8:28:19 GMT -5 swamp said:

Not correct.

If one has the power to interfere in an investigation and one chooses to do so, that is obstruction.

How do you/the law define "interfere" though then?  Because at a high level, anytime the FBI director is fired...that's conceivably interfering with every ongoing investigation.  Anytime a superior removes someone from a case, that's conceivably interfering with that investigation. 

What I'm asking is...what's ok and what's not?  Is it ok to fire him in HOPES that firing him interferes with the investigation, as long as you don't do something directly associated with the investigation?  How is every person in the FBI not obstructing nearly every case simply by the decisions they make in the process of doing their jobs?

That is an answer for someone at a higher pay grade than me.

[thyme4change]

I'm at work. Has Comey said anything yet, or are the senators just listening to themselves blather on and on?

[swamp]

Jun 8, 2017 9:49:56 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I'm at work. Has Comey said anything yet, or are the senators just listening to themselves blather on and on?

Me too, but I'm guessing the blathering is happening.

For a bunch of lawyers, they suck at cross examination.

[Rob Base 2.0]

Jun 8, 2017 8:19:07 GMT -5 Opti said:

I'm wondering if the WH is leaky in part because Trump wants some of those leaks. It appears reading the CNN link above that Trump was almost begging for a leak from the FBI to the press saying he wasn't under investigation.

Asking the people in charge (FBI Director, etc.) "if it is a true statement, can you say to the public that you are not investigating me?"

equals wanting leaks??

[Deleted]

Oh. Its so much better than i hoped. I'm not watching, just reading the live blogs.  He said outright he had to memo because he was afraid Trump would lie, and that he took 'I hope' to be a direction from the president...