LIVE BLOG: Ex-FBI director Comey set to talk Trump, Russia..

[kmillard]

Jun 8, 2017 17:00:28 GMT -6 OkieDokie said:

www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-0...-senator-risch

While this is not a highlight you'll ever see replayed on any MSM outlet throughout the day, Senator Jim Risch just completely dismantled any 'hopes' of an obstruction of justice case against President Trump with the following exchange:

Risch: "Boy you nailed this down on page 5 paragraph 3, you put this in quotes, words matter, you wrote down the words so we could all have the words in front of us now. There are 28 words there that are in quotes and it says, 'I hope', this is the President speaking, 'I hope you can see your way claer to letting this go, to letting Flynn go...I hope you can let this go.'"

"Now those are his exact words, is that correct"

Comey: "Correct."

Risch: "And you wrote them here and you put them in quotes?"

Comey: "Correct."

Risch: "Thank you for that. He did not direct you to let it go."

Comey: "Not in his words, no."

Risch: "He did not order you to let it go."

Comey: "Again, those words are not an order."

Risch: "He said 'I hope'. Now, like me you probably did 100's of cases, maybe 1,000s of cases charging people with criminal offenses. And, of course, you have knowlege of the 1,000s of cases out there where people have been charged. Do you know of any case where a person has been charged for obstruction of justice, for that matter of any other criminal offense, where they said or thought they hoped for an outcome?"

Comey: "I don't know well enough to answer. And the reason I keep saying 'his words' is I took it as a direction..."

Risch: "You may have taken it as a direction but that is not what he said. He said, 'I hope.' You don't know of anyone who has ever been charged for hoping something, is that a fair statement?"

Comey: "I don't as I sit here."

And we pay these morons to have this banter while the country falls apart.Unreal.

[Bezerker88]

While watching the MSM this morning I'm fairly sure there were two separate public testimonies. CBS is still highlighting Russia and Trump connection. Still highlighting Trump wanting to halt Russia investigation.

[Purp1eOne]

Leakers.....

[SmokedPears]

Jun 8, 2017 21:24:56 GMT -6 nodakviking said:

Comey is a total fraud, he might be the weakest and least worthy FBI director ever-and the only 6-8 snowflake I've ever heard of.

He supposedly had so much integrity but each passing day we see that is what he lacks most besides a spine. Total loser-how do they end up in such powerful positions? Is that what being a boot licker/nut hugger gets you nowadays?

Obama

[Uncle]

Given Comey's demeanor and actions since he first stepped into the mainstream public-eye in July 2016 with the announcement that Hillary will not be prosecuted for her e-mail server investigation until yesterday, I'm not sure how much credence people can give him.

The NYT is reporting that Comey is "veteran public servant" with "impeccable integrity", and by Comey's own testimony yesterday he started documenting conversations between himself and President Trump partly because he wanted to "protect the FBI". That's all well and dandy, but did Comey start having "impeccable integrity" just recently and did he just now starting having a deep love for the US Constitution and the FBI? Because I don't know how you explain his actions from July 2016 until now if that's the case.

He testified that former Attorney General Loretta Lynch basically told him to do something that made him feel "queasy", but yet he folded like a cheap suit. If he knew something was amiss and he wanted to protect the FBI, why did he caveto the DOJ? And further, if he felt "disturbed" enough by his conversation with the President to start documenting his conversations, why didn't he do it back then?

Then later in July 2016, when the DNC server was hacked, he didn't allow the FBI to even examine the server or perform any sort of forensic analysis; instead, the FBI relied on a DNC-funded 3rd party, Crowdstrike, even when tech industry experts revealed they had a history of questionable accusations against them. How is allowing a questionable 3rd party tech firm to perform a forensic analysis of a potential intrusion of American politics wanting to protect the FBI?

Flash forward to October 2016 when it was discovered the Hillary aide, Huma Abedin, had potential classified e-mails forwarded to a laptop that she shared with her husband Anthony Weiner, who himself was under investigation for "sexting" with an underage woman. It was also revealed during that week that the wife of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe - who played a significant role in the review of the Hillary e-mail investigation - had received campaign contributions from PACs close to Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a longtime Clinton fundraiser. Comey had to have known this as it was made public at the same time and if he was so concerned about the integrity of the FBI, he would have asked McCabe to recuse himself from that investigation, but he allowed McCabe to continue and public trust in the FBI took a hit, IMO.

And now we come to the months during the Trump Administration where Comey stated in his testimony that he felt uncomfortable speaking with the President alone and thought it was unusual to have so many conversations with the President - some in person and some over the phone - and not once did he alert his superiors at the DOJ or ask the President that they shouldn't be having that kind of conversation or anything of the like, which would have preserved the independent integrity of that office. Instead, Comey took notes of those meetings and stuffed them in a drawer...for what purpose? So he could protect the FBI later on? What about protecting the FBI right then and there?

Finally, if Comey was so concerned over the integrity of the FBI, why did he not turn over the memos of his meetings to Congressional Committees rather than leaking to the media via a friend? Would an acting FBI Director, with alleged "impeccable integrity" let a cloud hang over President Trump for 5 months when he knew for certain Trump wasn't under investigation (and reportedly told him so three times)?

I think most people realized that President Trump isn't exactly the most "professional" or "tactful" individual, especially considering some of the allegations that surfaced during the 2016 General Election...but when it comes to former FBI Director James Comey, and his "impeccable integrity" and "protection for the FBI", IMO, I certainly think he's come off as more of a Washington Political "insider" and member of the so-called "Swamp" rather that someone who values upholding the Rule of Law of the USA, and whose words and actions are certainly cause for question.

As some people took bars in Washington DC (in the morning, no less) to tune-in and as many more watched on ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX and CNN, I think many may have anticipated a big bombshell to drop that could turn into this generations "Watergate" scandal...but were disappointed as instead, they saw and listened man who, by his own words stated that he was "stunned", "should have been stronger" and stated that "it kind of a cowardly way of trying to avoid telling him" when faced with someone who he thought was somewhat unethical. 

[vikeshrink]

Jun 8, 2017 16:24:58 GMT -6 Uncle said:

I'm sure Dershowitz is right that the President is in his full right to do certain things when it comes to the FBI and investigations. There was no big "bombshell" in Comey's testimony to start any impeachment proceedings - nothing like the Nixon tapes. Comey couldn't make a direct statement that Trump didn't obstruct, but in so many other words, I think it's reasonable to assume that Trump didn't obstruct and there's no evidence of Trump/Russian collusion.

The thing about Trump that Comey gave to the mainstream media to continue to chew-on is Trump's "temperment" - something that Hillary and the mainstream media hit him on during the Election, and it's something that Trump himself continues to feed through his actions and some of his Tweets. He seemingly continues to try and bully people around and possibly use strong-arm style tactics, and while some in his base of supporters love that, it doesn't lend itself to governing when you need to work with others. The US isn't a monarchy or dictatorship, and people in the US don't want to be pushed around by a single, authoritarian figure like Trump has seemingly done. So it's in his best interest to not do as much.

But his bullish attitude actually does bring out some of his best attributes, too, which are a demand to actually get things done. I think it's true that many people want the politically-correct nonsense to stop...to have the usual Washington swamp politics stop...and for everyone in government to roll-up their sleeves and get to work on getting some important and meaningful legislation passed. And there is a solid agenda in front of everyone to follow: jobs, tax reform, infrastructure, health care, immigration reform, possible term limits in Congress, etc, etc. Trump and his team just need to learn how to demand that people work towards these goals and tweet about these things that are important to the American people, instead of tweeting about how much of a "nut job" Comey is or how bad Rosie's rating's are. His personal response to Kathy Griffin's disgusting display was fine - because I think most agree that it was disgusting - but the other stuff he should cut out and just tweet about productivity and how he's going to get stuff done.

He's an unconventional President, no doubt, and he can continue to be somewhat unconventional in a way that he expects Washington to deliver results to the American people vs. political-correctness...but as Comey pointed out today, Trump "the bully" - while perhaps not criminal or impeachable - isn't someone that people want to work with, which will lead to no results and lead to people not voting for him in 2020.

I’m not a lawyer but I’m pretty sure the President does not have the right to simply call off an investigation—especially when it's looking into things that his presidential campaign may or not have done. The judicial branch is a distinct entity and the reason for that is to ensure that power is shared among branches of government.

What I saw when Comey was asked about obstruction is that he gave two different but consistent responses, saying that 1) he could not answer the question in an open forum and 2) whether or not the President obstructed justice would have to be determined by Mueller.

Yes, President is unconventional but the problem is that he really does not understand the concept that 1) we have three separate branches of government, 2) our government is set up this way to provide checks and balances (particularly on the executive branch) and 3) that he has to work within the limits of those constraints.

Furthermore, a “my way or the highway” type of leader may be effective in a corporate setting but to be able to run the US government you have to be able to listen to and trust the advice of your subordinates. This whole mess is a perfect example of him being unable to do that. Furthermore, that plays into another problem with Trump in that he is unaware of his own ignorance and unable to accept that limits should be placed on him.

[VikingBob]

Jun 9, 2017 13:26:31 GMT -6 vikeshrink said:

Jun 8, 2017 16:24:58 GMT -6 Uncle said:

I'm sure Dershowitz is right that the President is in his full right to do certain things when it comes to the FBI and investigations. There was no big "bombshell" in Comey's testimony to start any impeachment proceedings - nothing like the Nixon tapes. Comey couldn't make a direct statement that Trump didn't obstruct, but in so many other words, I think it's reasonable to assume that Trump didn't obstruct and there's no evidence of Trump/Russian collusion.

The thing about Trump that Comey gave to the mainstream media to continue to chew-on is Trump's "temperment" - something that Hillary and the mainstream media hit him on during the Election, and it's something that Trump himself continues to feed through his actions and some of his Tweets. He seemingly continues to try and bully people around and possibly use strong-arm style tactics, and while some in his base of supporters love that, it doesn't lend itself to governing when you need to work with others. The US isn't a monarchy or dictatorship, and people in the US don't want to be pushed around by a single, authoritarian figure like Trump has seemingly done. So it's in his best interest to not do as much.

But his bullish attitude actually does bring out some of his best attributes, too, which are a demand to actually get things done. I think it's true that many people want the politically-correct nonsense to stop...to have the usual Washington swamp politics stop...and for everyone in government to roll-up their sleeves and get to work on getting some important and meaningful legislation passed. And there is a solid agenda in front of everyone to follow: jobs, tax reform, infrastructure, health care, immigration reform, possible term limits in Congress, etc, etc. Trump and his team just need to learn how to demand that people work towards these goals and tweet about these things that are important to the American people, instead of tweeting about how much of a "nut job" Comey is or how bad Rosie's rating's are. His personal response to Kathy Griffin's disgusting display was fine - because I think most agree that it was disgusting - but the other stuff he should cut out and just tweet about productivity and how he's going to get stuff done.

He's an unconventional President, no doubt, and he can continue to be somewhat unconventional in a way that he expects Washington to deliver results to the American people vs. political-correctness...but as Comey pointed out today, Trump "the bully" - while perhaps not criminal or impeachable - isn't someone that people want to work with, which will lead to no results and lead to people not voting for him in 2020.

I’m not a lawyer but I’m pretty sure the President does not have the right to simply call off an investigation—especially when it's looking into things that his presidential campaign may or not have done. The judicial branch is a distinct entity and the reason for that is to ensure that power is shared among branches of government.

What I saw when Comey was asked about obstruction is that he gave two different but consistent responses, saying that 1) he could not answer the question in an open forum and 2) whether or not the President obstructed justice would have to be determined by Mueller.

Yes, President is unconventional but the problem is that he really does not understand the concept that 1) we have three separate branches of government, 2) our government is set up this way to provide checks and balances (particularly on the executive branch) and 3) that he has to work within the limits of those constraints.

Furthermore, a “my way or the highway” type of leader may be effective in a corporate setting but to be able to run the US government you have to be able to listen to and trust the advice of your subordinates. This whole mess is a perfect example of him being unable to do that. Furthermore, that plays into another problem with Trump in that he is unaware of his own ignorance and unable to accept that limits should be placed on him.

Sounds like you are talking about Obama and Hillary.  Obama always had a "my way or the highway" regime.  And with Trump not being a career politician. He may not know some things.  Explain Hillary and her emails then.... 

[A1Janitor]

I'm not a lawyer, but telling Comey he hopes the Flynn case is ended after he was fired doesn't reach the level of the president ending an open investigation.

For instance, Obama and Loretta Lynch directing Comey to back off Hillary.

And don't think Trump's contact with russia, if any, goes to the level of Obama telling Russia to wait until he is reelected where he can offer more to Russia.

I guess it depends on which side you are on.

[tempevike]

The DOJ (40 organizations including DEA and FBI) is part of the Executive Branch, which is headed by our President.

www.whitehouse.gov/1600/executive-branch


vikeshrink wrote:

I’m not a lawyer but I’m pretty sure the President does not have the right to simply call off an investigation—especially when it's looking into things that his presidential campaign may or not have done. The judicial branch is a distinct entity and the reason for that is to ensure that power is shared among branches of government.

What I saw when Comey was asked about obstruction is that he gave two different but consistent responses, saying that 1) he could not answer the question in an open forum and 2) whether or not the President obstructed justice would have to be determined by Mueller.

Yes, President is unconventional but the problem is that he really does not understand the concept that 1) we have three separate branches of government, 2) our government is set up this way to provide checks and balances (particularly on the executive branch) and 3) that he has to work within the limits of those constraints.

Furthermore, a “my way or the highway” type of leader may be effective in a corporate setting but to be able to run the US government you have to be able to listen to and trust the advice of your subordinates. This whole mess is a perfect example of him being unable to do that. Furthermore, that plays into another problem with Trump in that he is unaware of his own ignorance and unable to accept that limits should be placed on him.

[SmokedPears]

Isn't it funny that last week, obstruction of justice was the worst crime known to man. Today it's no big deal.

[tempevike]

Where was the outrage when SCOTUS (judicial branch) legislated a new right called gay marriage?

[Purp1eOne]

Jun 9, 2017 13:26:31 GMT -6 vikeshrink said:

Jun 8, 2017 16:24:58 GMT -6 Uncle said:

I'm sure Dershowitz is right that the President is in his full right to do certain things when it comes to the FBI and investigations. There was no big "bombshell" in Comey's testimony to start any impeachment proceedings - nothing like the Nixon tapes. Comey couldn't make a direct statement that Trump didn't obstruct, but in so many other words, I think it's reasonable to assume that Trump didn't obstruct and there's no evidence of Trump/Russian collusion.

The thing about Trump that Comey gave to the mainstream media to continue to chew-on is Trump's "temperment" - something that Hillary and the mainstream media hit him on during the Election, and it's something that Trump himself continues to feed through his actions and some of his Tweets. He seemingly continues to try and bully people around and possibly use strong-arm style tactics, and while some in his base of supporters love that, it doesn't lend itself to governing when you need to work with others. The US isn't a monarchy or dictatorship, and people in the US don't want to be pushed around by a single, authoritarian figure like Trump has seemingly done. So it's in his best interest to not do as much.

But his bullish attitude actually does bring out some of his best attributes, too, which are a demand to actually get things done. I think it's true that many people want the politically-correct nonsense to stop...to have the usual Washington swamp politics stop...and for everyone in government to roll-up their sleeves and get to work on getting some important and meaningful legislation passed. And there is a solid agenda in front of everyone to follow: jobs, tax reform, infrastructure, health care, immigration reform, possible term limits in Congress, etc, etc. Trump and his team just need to learn how to demand that people work towards these goals and tweet about these things that are important to the American people, instead of tweeting about how much of a "nut job" Comey is or how bad Rosie's rating's are. His personal response to Kathy Griffin's disgusting display was fine - because I think most agree that it was disgusting - but the other stuff he should cut out and just tweet about productivity and how he's going to get stuff done.

He's an unconventional President, no doubt, and he can continue to be somewhat unconventional in a way that he expects Washington to deliver results to the American people vs. political-correctness...but as Comey pointed out today, Trump "the bully" - while perhaps not criminal or impeachable - isn't someone that people want to work with, which will lead to no results and lead to people not voting for him in 2020.

I’m not a lawyer but I’m pretty sure the President does not have the right to simply call off an investigation—especially when it's looking into things that his presidential campaign may or not have done. The judicial branch is a distinct entity and the reason for that is to ensure that power is shared among branches of government.

What I saw when Comey was asked about obstruction is that he gave two different but consistent responses, saying that 1) he could not answer the question in an open forum and 2) whether or not the President obstructed justice would have to be determined by Mueller.

Yes, President is unconventional but the problem is that he really does not understand the concept that 1) we have three separate branches of government, 2) our government is set up this way to provide checks and balances (particularly on the executive branch) and 3) that he has to work within the limits of those constraints.

Furthermore, a “my way or the highway” type of leader may be effective in a corporate setting but to be able to run the US government you have to be able to listen to and trust the advice of your subordinates. This whole mess is a perfect example of him being unable to do that. Furthermore, that plays into another problem with Trump in that he is unaware of his own ignorance and unable to accept that limits should be placed on him.

Just search through this document for President and directives  link

I could be misinterpreting but it sure seems like.....

I know you are smart and all but I will just help you out with this one

di·rec·tive
dəˈrektiv/
noun
plural noun: directives

an official or authoritative instruction.

[Purp1eOne]

And what is worse Trump hoping or Obama thinking.... (you probably know my opinion

“I don’t think it posed a national security problem,” Mr. Obama said Sunday on CBS’s “60 Minutes.”

FBI Agents Angered By Obama’s Attempt to Influence Hillary Clinton Investigation link

[tempevike]

Comey had no problem with Whitewater or Bill Clinton giving a pardon to Mark Rich on his last day in office (probably for money) but Trump "hoping" that he let the Flynn thing go is now a crime? LOL. Trump should just tweet "I am going to give Flynn the Whitewater-Mark-Rich-Comey pass."

[OkieDokie]

uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170609/d047900c9e82e034457edac042cf00bb.jpg

www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/...are-wrong.html

Dershowitz: Comey confirms that I'm right - and all the Democratic commentators are wrong
......

In his testimony former FBI director James Comey echoed a view that I alone have been expressing for several weeks, and that has been attacked by nearly every Democratic pundit.

Comey confirmed that under our Constitution, the president has the authority to direct the FBI to stop investigating any individual. I paraphrase, because the transcript is not yet available: the president can, in theory, decide who to investigate, who to stop investigating, who to prosecute and who not to prosecute. The president is the head of the unified executive branch of government, and the Justice Department and the FBI work under him and he may order them to do what he wishes.

As a matter of law, Comey is 100 percent correct. As I have long argued, and as Comey confirmed in his written statement, our history shows that many presidents—from Adams to Jefferson, to Lincoln, to Roosevelt, to Kennedy, to Bush 1, and to Obama – have directed the Justice Department with regard to ongoing investigations. The history is clear, the precedents are clear, the constitutional structure is clear, and common sense is clear.

Yet virtually every Democratic pundit, in their haste to “get” President Trump, has willfully ignored these realities. In doing so they have endangered our civil liberties and constitutional rights.

Now that even former Director Comey has acknowledged that the Constitution would permit the president to direct the Justice Department and the FBI in this matter, let us put the issue of obstruction of justice behind us once and for all and focus on the political, moral, and other non-criminal aspects of President Trump’s conduct.