world

U.S. lawmakers ask Trump to turn over any Comey tapes

88 Comments

U.S. lawmakers on Sunday called on President Donald Trump to turn over any tapes of conversations with fired FBI chief James Comey, potentially setting up a showdown with the White House as Democrats considered a boycott of the vote on Comey's replacement.

In a highly unusual move, Trump last week appeared to suggest on Twitter that he might have tapes of conversations with Comey and warned the former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation against talking to the media. Trump and a White House spokesman declined to confirm or deny whether such tapes exist.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said the White House must "clear the air" about whether there are any taped conversations.

"You can't be cute about tapes. If there are any tapes of this conversation, they need to be turned over," Graham told NBC's "Meet the Press" program.

Trump sparked a political firestorm when he abruptly fired Comey last week. The FBI has been investigating alleged Russian meddling in the U.S. election and possible ties between Moscow and the Trump campaign.

Democrats have accused Trump of attempting to thwart the FBI's probe and have called for some type of independent inquiry into the matter.

Trump has said he removed Comey because he was not doing a good job and that Comey had lost the support of FBI employees.

Trump tweeted on Friday that "James Comey better hope that there are no 'tapes' of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!"

If there are recordings, Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah told the "Fox News Sunday" program it was "inevitable" that they would be subpoenaed and the White House would have to release them.

Lee, who was on Trump's list of potential replacements for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, also said recording conversations in the White House is "not necessarily the best idea."

Trump's threat about tapes has intensified calls from Democrats for an independent probe of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. election.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said Trump must immediately provide Congress with any tapes and warned that destroying existing tapes would violate the law.

Schumer also said Senate Democrats are weighing whether to refuse to vote on a new FBI director until a special prosecutor is named to investigate Trump's potential ties to Russia.

Russia has denied the claims and the White House says there was no collusion.

"To have that special prosecutor, people would breathe a sigh of relief because then there would be a real independent person overlooking the FBI director," Schumer told CNN's "State of the Union" program.

Trump, who has sought better relations with Russia, has continued to question whether it was behind the hacking of email accounts belonging to Democrats involved in Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign.

But Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told NBC's "Meet the Press" program there is no question that "the Russians were playing around in our electoral processes."

He defended Trump's decision to meet with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in the Oval Office last week.

"It's in the interest of the American people, it's in the interest of Russia and the rest of the world that we do something to see if we cannot improve the relationship between the two greatest nuclear powers in the world," Tillerson said.

The Justice Department began interviewing candidates for the FBI director job on Saturday. Some people under consideration include acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas, New York Appeals Court Judge Michael Garcia and former Assistant Attorney General Alice Fisher, according to a White House official.

Meanwhile, a NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released on Sunday found that 29 percent of Americans approve of Trump's decision to fire Comey, while 38 percent disapprove.

If a Senate vote on a new FBI director breaks down along party lines, Democrats would not have the votes to block a nominee because Republicans hold a majority in the chamber.

"The key is getting some of our Republican colleagues to join us," Schumer said.

Republican leaders in the Senate have rebuffed calls for a special prosecutor, saying it would interfere with ongoing congressional probes.

Graham said there may come a time when a special prosecutor is needed but not now.

"Right now, it is a counterintelligence investigation, not a criminal investigation. So you don't need a special prosecutor," Graham said on "Meet the Press."

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

  • Sort by
  • Oldest
  • Latest
  • Popular

88 Comments
Login to comment

Bottom line, Republicans, Russians meddled in our elections. They perpetuated an attack on our very system of Democracy. Yet watching the Russians take a victory lap in the Oval office was met with a yawn.  

What would you have said if Obama invited Bin Laden to the oval office for tea?  

Fake patriots. Shame on you.

16 ( +16 / -0 )

Tapes?

Like a cassette tape?

Is this article from 1983?

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

an independent probe of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. election.

That's an important phrase. The point of the investigations is to see to what extent the Russians interfered. That would including the hacking, Wikileaks, the fake news stories, all that fun stuff. In addition, the FBI (and others) are also looking at Trump to see if there was any collusion. And they're also looking at his associates. And probably quite a few other things.

The distinction is important because there is a very vocal and very determined group of people on the Right who are pushing a false narrative where the point of the investigation is to find evidence linking Trump to Putin, and if there's no evidence of that, then the entire investigation has produced no evidence of any wrongdoing. With that conclusion, they feel justified in pushing to end the investigation immediately.

Why would they do that? Any guesses?

8 ( +8 / -0 )

This is an interesting development. This basically negates any 'tapes' Trump may have. He either turns them over, or he says they don't actually exist. If he says they don't exist, then trying to use them in the future would be grounds for impeachment due to his lying to the FBI, and if he refuses to turn them over now, it would be grounds for impeachment for obstructing an FBI investigation.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

@burning bush yes like cassette tapes from the 80s very simple to use and easy for Trump supporters to understand..You see cant use tech terms it would be too much for them to take in..

9 ( +9 / -0 )

@Burning:

The word "tapes" was used because your baby in the White House used it when he was was preoccupied with Twitter instead of running the country and leading the free world. Re-read paragraph nine.

It's beyond the pale that the president believes a platform limited to 140 characters is appropriate for accomplishing anything the president should be attempting. (I know that most of what Donny does on Twitter isn't presidential, but my point still stands.)

We have never had such a publicly petty, vindictive president. If he had the discipline to keep his big mouth shut, he may be able to salvage an iota of his presidency as he would actually be working instead of creating one cluster after another. Unfortunately, the odds are much better that pigs will start flying.

Thanks again, Trump supporters.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Bottom line, Republicans, Russians meddled in our elections.

Don't forget to add the Dems in as well, by the way, where is Susan Rice these days?

They perpetuated an attack on our very system of Democracy. Yet watching the Russians take a victory lap in the Oval office was met with a yawn.  

Democracy came to a crashing halt in January of 2008.

What would you have said if Obama invited Bin Laden to the oval office for tea? 

Hmmmm...very bad comparison should be like having Fidel come to the WH.

-21 ( +0 / -21 )

Democracy came to a crashing halt in January of 2008.

Fake news.

13 ( +13 / -0 )

Trump had to meet Lavrov so soon in order to thank him for the Russians' help in winning the election.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

@bass Don't forget to add the Dems in as well, by the way, where is Susan Rice these days?

Interesting to read posters equate Russian, i.e. foreign involvement, in the election with American, i.e. 'Dems', involvement. Curious that these same posters constantly moaned that Obama had stomped on democracy by using his executive powers. Now they're suddenly in favor of stomping on democracy, pushing for more powers for the executive and reductions in any checks on him.

These same partisan extremists now want a one-party state led by a 'strong leader', someone like Putin, a tyrant they've long praised. Curious, too that these same posters attack a free press, the judiciary, the intelligence agencies and other US institutions, but not the oligarchs running big energy, big military, big banking and other 'bigs', those oligarchs who are working with the White House to further expand their fortunes at the expense of the 99%.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

make that 'winning'.......

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Whether or not tapes exist is less important than Trump's implicit threat:

James Comey better hope that there are no 'tapes' of our conversations 

Threatening a witness is a crime.

Are Trump supporters OK with this?

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Are Trump supporters OK with this?

They are as long as it's their Dear Leader.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

@plasticmonkey Threatening a witness is a crime.

Are Trump supporters OK with this?

Of course they are the lame ones will just throw everything back on the previous admin bit like a broken record..The others well anything goes they really dont think too much in the first place..

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Democracy came to a crashing halt in January of 2008.

"Fake News"

Over on the lunatic fringe the fear was the Bolshevik, atheist and possible Muslim was going to declare martial law and cancel the election.

I think there are still some hiding in the forests with firearms and a supply of junk food who haven't heard it didn't happen.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Trump won't even turn over his tax forms; there's no way he'd turn over anything like this.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

The tapes comment was just a reminder to Mr. Comey to speak the truth once he starts trying to leak to the media things that were not said. Its a sad day when public officials like the FBI Director have to be threatened in order to not lie. I dont see where threatening someone in order to make them speak the TRUTH is an issue. It would be if they were threatened to make them lie.

Also, if what Trump said that Comey told him is in fact untrue, why hasnt Comey himself publicly refuted it? Seems he is still thinking how many lies he can get away with before he speaks, so Trump reminded him lying isnt such a good idea.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

Either the "tapes" (digital recording) exist and those would be the property of the US government

or

Trump would be caught in a lie, and his bluff would be called out

Those are the only 2 ways this could go: after the Nixon scandal, White House "tapes" have become not something to be used as a bluff or reminder

Its a sad day when public officials like the FBI Director have to be threatened in order to not lie. I dont see where threatening someone in order to make them speak the TRUTH is an issue.

That's what they're doing to Trump all the time

6 ( +6 / -0 )

North Korea has really stepped up the missile testing since Trump became President, and Russia is buzzing Alaska with jets and bombers.

Does anyone else get the impression that the promise of our enemies fearing Trump hasn't really panned out? The seem to be more provocative under Trump than Obama.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

That's what they're doing to Trump all the time

Sure, so why cant he do the same? Funny how Comey is so quiet until Congress tries to force Trump to say if he has any tapes or not. That tells me he is planning on lying once they find out there are no tapes and will only tell the truth if there are.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Sure, so why cant he do the same? Funny how Comey is so quiet until Congress tries to force Trump to say if he has any tapes or not. That tells me he is planning on lying once they find out there are no tapes and will only tell the truth if there are.

Oh, is that what it tells you? This tells me you've got an overly active imagination. Donny has a knack for lying. Nearly every statement he makes is either incorrect or just an outright lie. There is no reason to think Don is now telling the truth.

In case you didn't know, Comey has offered to testify before congress, but only at a public hearing. Lying under oath would be perjury. Do you think Comey would volunteer to testify under oath, knowing that lying would be perjury? Likewise, Trump has made these claims. Why wouldn't Trump be willing to testify under oath?

Trump is the little boy who cried wolf. When are you going to stop falling for it?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

That tells me he is planning on lying once they find out there are no tapes and will only tell the truth if there are.

Planning on lying? What does Trump lying (present tense) tell you? He lied about his reason for firing Comey, he's probably lying about the tapes, and there's PROOF that he lied countless other times. To repeat takeda.shungen's question to you, when are you going to stop falling for it?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Of course investigation into Russian meddling in the election is crucial to the future of American democracy. Involvement by Trump and/or people close to him is simply a component of this.

In the shorter term, though, the stunning ineptitude Trump has displayed is perhaps more important. Whenever faced with a choice - even simply to shut up for a bit - Trump has not only chosen wrongly, he's done so bigly.

As such, he's on the verge of demolishing the GOP agenda. Not only will compounding investigations suck up time and attention - how many vulnerable congresspeople will stick out their necks for a man like this? Best to hunker down and protect one's own interests.

Re: new FBI director, it will be interesting to see who will actually take this poisoned chalice.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

The GOP must be tearing their collective hair out over all the second guessing whenever Trump claims something.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said the White House must "clear the air" about whether there are any taped conversations.

"You can't be cute about tapes. If there are any tapes of this conversation, they need to be turned over," Graham told NBC's "Meet the Press" program.

I couldn't agree more. It's not going to happen though, is it?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

You people must be horrible negotiators. Its not lying, its called bluffing for leverage to ensure you get what you want.

In this case, Trump wants to ensure that Comey tells the truth. By claiming there might be a tape, that gets Comey to carefully consider the risk of lying because he doesnt know if one exists or not. If he is planning on being truthful, the existence of a tape doesnt matter right? It only matters if he was planning to lie.

I am not talking about his testimony to Congress, I am talking about Trump's version of his meetings with Comey. They met once and talked on the phone twice. 3 times Comey told Trump he is not under investigation. If this is NOT true, where is Comey's version. Oh, he wont talk until he knows if there are tapes or not.....why would that be?

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

The smearing of Comey by Trump fans:

"Its a sad day when public officials like the FBI Director have to be threatened in order to not lie. Seems he is still thinking how many lies he can get away with before he speaks, so Trump reminded him lying isnt such a good idea.

Funny how Comey is so quiet until Congress tries to force Trump to say if he has any tapes or not. That tells me he is planning on lying once they find out there are no tapes and will only tell the truth if there are.

Oh, he wont talk until he knows if there are tapes or not.....why would that be?"

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Oh so now Comey did such a great job and is such an honorable and outstanding public servant? Yes, been hearing that a lot from the same Dems who wanted him fired right before Trump did it.

Seeing as the whole Russia collision thing in still in speculation phase in Month 11, I have some speculation.

Trump meets with Comey about keeping his job. Trump asks if he is personally under investigation. Wanting to keep his job, Comey says no. Trump knows that answer should have been 'sorry I cant talk about that'. Trump calls him 2 more times and the question that shouldnt be answered is answered again as 'no'. Trump fires Comey for not doing a good job (i.e. telling people things he shouldnt, so he isnt trustworthy and comes off as weak, who else is he telling things he shouldnt? etc) Sounds more plausible than that Russian collusion does.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

bass4funk Today  08:08 am JST

Democracy came to a crashing halt in January of 2008.

Oh? What happened in January 2008, then?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Seeing as the whole Russia collision thing in still in speculation phase

Above you can see an example of what I was talking about in my first post. Blacklabel has been duped by the false narrative that the investigation is about collusion. That's one of many parts of it, with the overall focus being on Russia meddling in the election.

Black, has the investigation turned up any evidence of wrongdoing? Should the investigation continue?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

bass4funk

Democracy came to a crashing halt in January of 2008

what a very undemocratic statement, just because you lost? More of a cry baby kind of thing.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Ok, so educate me here. The investigation is Russia meddling in the election. Meddling has been accepted as having happened, so that part of the investigation should be complete. No one is disputing that Russia at least tried to interfere with the election. But it didnt work as the vote was not impacted in any way.

Russian meddling also has nothing to do with Trump and his people UNLESS they requested or supported this interference to help Trump win. Didnt the Russians do this on their own for their own benefit, same as French election? The AG and Kushner talking with ambassadors, Flynn getting paid to speak, etc had nothing to with Trump winning the election with requested Russian assistance, right?

Yet, all of the liberal comments are negative and angry toward Trump personally: impeach him for collusion, Putin's puppet, release your taxes to show you get money from Russia, etc. Fire anyone from his team who ever talked with a Russian, etc.

So that would be the collusion part where Trump or his team actively worked with and encouraged the meddling in the election. So where is any proof at all that Trump/Flynn/everyone else did that? No transcripts of calls, no emails, no meetings where it was discussed, nothing....

So yes the investigation has turned up wrong doing. But none of it by Trump and none of it related to meddling/interference in the election. What am I missing except pure hatred of Trump?

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

@Bass:

Democracy came to a crashing halt in January of 2008.

President Obama not only won the electoral college twice, but he also won the popular vote twice. This is about 2.8 million times more than your baby in the White House has done.

@Bass and Black:

You two constantly claiming that there was no Trump/Russian collusion during the election because there hasn't been any evidence released from the multiple investigations into the suspected collusion despite those investigations having been underway for so long is extremely flawed logic and intellectually dishonest. It is akin to saying that if a crime isn't solved within 48 hours, there was no crime.

You see, it takes a lot of time to sort out complex issues and to build a solid case against the perpetrators. That the investigative bodies are not rushing to conclusions means they are being careful, which is what the American people deserve.

(Yes, I did simply cut and paste this from one of my comments from another article. It is relevant anywhere Bass and Black start in on the "there was no collusion" line.)

7 ( +7 / -0 )

@Blacklabel What are you missing...not much just something that comes after H and P.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Trumpgate happened so quick

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I'm truly enjoying the schadenfreude watching the republicans freak out because people won't drop the trump thing, after having watched them put Hillary under a witch hunt for years. Some of them are still claiming she was guilty, even after having been exonerated by their own party. Unlike trump who has not only not been cleared, but repeatedly makes statements that point at his guilt in certain issues.

If he ends up in jail I'm going to laugh to hard to post.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

There is no evidence on the collusion to even OPEN an investigation in the first place. The investigation is about Russian meddling in the election, which did happen. That happened during the OBAMA presidency yet he ignored it until Hillary lost.

If people are mad about the lack of a response to meddling, well they are mad at the wrong people. Did I miss where the Dems were hacked and Wikileaks did dumps during the Trump presidency? Nope, thanks Obama. Yet when Dems are confronted and asked for proof of Trump/Russia collusion they all say there is currently no proof of collusion. But then they say but there is also no proof it didnt happen either and right back out to the media screaming about Russian collusion. Maxine Waters for example:

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/maxine-waters-admits-zero-evidence-collusion-trump-russia/

Instead of having proof something happened, it suits the narrative to just say no proof it didnt happen and try to repeat it as truth because it could have happened. Thats the flawed logic and intellectually dishonesty. You dont disrepect and accuse people, call for impeachments and firings, and put a full stop to the business for the people on a 'could have'.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Some of them are still claiming she was guilty,

Hillary WAS guilty, she was just allowed to not be prosecuted with the help of James Comey. She violated at least 4 federal laws related to mishandling of classified information. Many other people were prosecuted and and sentenced to jail for less. Comey had a choice to keep her out of jail or maybe cost her the election. He chose to keep her out of jail by his intentional incompetence in the handling of her case not knowing that would cost her the election.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

If he ends up in jail I'm going to laugh to hard to post.

I imagine levity would soon be restored if we were staring at President Pence. Shudder. Incompetent and an ideological cipher competent and evil. I still say Trump is preferable to the havoc that zealot Cruz was capable of doing.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Blacklable, Trump adviser and confidant Roger Stone hinted days before the DNC email leak that it would occur. Maybe that was just a lucky guess. But to simply declare "Nothing to see here! Move along!" is the height of irresponsibility.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Hillary WAS guilty

Republicans: Innocent until proven guilty, unless we decide otherwise.

She violated at least 4 federal laws related to mishandling of classified information.

Republican: Complains that people are condemning Trump without evidence in one post, goes on to condemn Hillary in another, even after the Republican party cleared her.

No hypocrisy here. Carry on.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Odd, guess the greater than symbol doesn't show up. Was supposed to say "Incompetent ... is greater than competent ...."

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Classified emails were found on her personal server and another computer that her aide and her husband shared. Even 1 classified email on an unclassified system or private device= 'Guilty'. Its really that easy if existing law is followed.

According to Director James Comey (disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it,

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook

Hey there's that COMEY guy again. I would like to say she is innocent but the evidence proves otherwise. What does the evidence about Trump collusion with Russia say? Oh yeah...there isnt any yet he is already being treated as guilty. Find some evidence of Trump personally colluding with Russia to influence the election in his favor and I am all ears.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

You people must be horrible negotiators. Its not lying, its called bluffing for leverage to ensure you get what you want.

Any statement that isn't true is a lie. If you have to lie or bluff to get results, FFS don't do it in public on Twitter. It erodes trust in the office of the President. Do you like having a President whose words you can't take at face value?

That happened during the OBAMA presidency yet he ignored it until Hillary lost.

Obama didn't ignore it, he just didn't make as big a deal of it as he should have. He knew it was happening but not to what extent and how much of an impact it would have, so he didn't want to appear to be playing favorites or appear to be making excuses. And honestly, he probably overestimated Americans in thinking they'd never elect an obvious con-artist. He was wrong, and this in addition to not pushing his Supreme Couurt pick were massive mistakes on his part.

Instead of having proof something happened, it suits the narrative to just say no proof it didnt happen and try to repeat it as truth because it could have happened.

Proof is discovered during investigations. The Russian investigation is ongoing, and Trump fired the person in charge of the investigation and LIED initially about the grounds for firing. Now he's "bluffing" in attempt to keep Comey quiet.

As for complaints from Trump and the right about how long the investigation is taking, let me remind you that the right demanded a dozen separate Benghazi investigations. We haven't even finished one for the Russians.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

@Blacklabel Instead of having proof something happened...hahaha everything that Trump has claimed himself has been baseless no evidence Trump is the furtherest thing from the truth...Hilary was not found guilty so yes that does not make her guilty...you put a better spin on things than bass and he does an amazing job..

6 ( +6 / -0 )

You people must be horrible negotiators. Its not lying, its called bluffing for leverage to ensure you get what you want.

Yes, but he chose the wrong item to do it with - White House "tapes" are very sensitive subject (due to Nixon) and not something to be used for that unless ya wanna get in trouble from both sides

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Look, President Trump have no tapes but did said sometime to Comey during a private meeting. After this meeting he council his advisers. They found out that the President have said sometime during this meeting and a good chance Comey would have tape this meeting. So his advisers who have no political experience, tried some counter intelligence with putting out the tweet. Comey has not even committed on his firing and it been a week. Like a very good intelligent gatherer, He will wait until he has indisputable evidence until he replies. Mean while President Trump was all over NK missile topic but has not display the same keenness with the latest. Maybe because he very busy trying to save his political life from impeachment.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

So why wont Comey talk until the existence/non-existence of any tapes is confirmed? he is not bluffing to keep Comey quiet, he is bluffing to make Comey tell the truth when/if he does talk. Which should be unnecessary as the truth shouldnt change based on if someone has a tape of what you said or not. Oh well, like everything else will just wait and see how it turns out. Guess this will be week 1 of the years long 'but tapes!' investigation?

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

Fake news.

His policies are going up in smoke, his legend a fleeing memory, that's very real.

Interesting to read posters equate Russian, i.e. foreign involvement, in the election with American, i.e. 'Dems', involvement.

So then how did the leaks come about? The GOP decided to do Trump dirty? Come on, whisky down, it's Monday my liberal friends.

Curious that these same posters constantly moaned that Obama had stomped on democracy by using his executive powers.

He did. Remember when he threatened to block federal funding if the bathroom and shower rooms didn't accommodate the transgender community?

Now they're suddenly in favor of stomping on democracy, pushing for more powers for the executive and reductions in any checks on him. 

Now all of a sudden the left is outraged, wow!

These same partisan extremists now want a one-party state led by a 'strong leader', someone like Putin, a tyrant they've long praised.

Question, when Dems were in complete control back in 2009 did you the same concerns, I really want to know.

Curious, too that these same posters attack a free press, the judiciary, the intelligence agencies and other US institutions, but not the oligarchs running big energy, big military, big banking and other 'bigs', those oligarchs who are working with the White House to further expand their fortunes at the expense of the 99%.

We do, but the left in their wasteful haste, put and focus too much on the Russian debacle.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

Ltapes? Like a cassette tape? Is this article from 1983 yrefering to tape which also means recording whether it be digital or analog, love how certain people like to play with words to make it seem that theyre illegitamate or fake. LOL

4 ( +4 / -0 )

and coal to Newcastle

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So why wont Comey talk until the existence/non-existence of any tapes is confirmed?

I'd put my money on it being because he's not an idiot.

You know, like the president.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

@Blaclk:

So why wont Comey talk until the existence/non-existence of any tapes is confirmed?

Not surprisingly, this is more conjecture on your part. Did Comey send you an email saying this? There are zero reports of him taking this stance.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

So Comey wants to lie, and really wants to see how many lies he can get away with, but Trump, like a fox, has outsmarted him by threatening that he must tell the truth, and because of that, Comey, who was just fired, hasn't leaked his lies yet until he can confirm it is safe.

Alrighty.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

So Comey wants to lie, and really wants to see how many lies he can get away with, but Trump, like a fox, has outsmarted him by threatening that he must tell the truth, and because of that, Comey, who was just fired, hasn't leaked his lies yet until he can confirm it is safe.

Can you prove that Trump is the one that is lying? Can you prove that Comey is telling the truth?

Sadly, NONE of us can.

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

Can you prove Trump is the one that is lying? Can you prove that Comey is telling the truth?

No, but that didn't stop you from opining didn't it?

While we may not be able to prove who is lying for now, it seems quite obvious who is lying. That would be the president. Comey isn't known as a liar, but Trump is.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

No.

Exactly, my point.

While we may not be able to prove who is lying for now, it seems quite obvious who is lying.

But there's still no proof.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

@bass

Question, when Dems were in complete control back in 2009 did you the same concerns, I really want to know.

Simple answer: nobody did. Obama's campaign team was not under investigation for possible interference by / collusion with foreign agents. And Obama hadn't fired his FBI chief with the stated reason that the president wasn't happy with said investigation. Please tell me if my account is "fake history".

Can you prove that Trump is the one that is lying? Can you prove that Comey is telling the truth? 

Sadly, NONE of us can.

That's right. So since this is such a epistemic mystery, let's get on with a special independent investigation. Sounds fair to me. How about to you?

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Exactly, my point.

Quote everything I said there, Bass. The "lack of proof" didn't stop you from opining, did it?

But there's still no proof

So what? Are we not allowed to comment unless there is absolute, irrefutable proof?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

You people must be horrible negotiators. Its not lying, its called bluffing for leverage to ensure you get what you want.

Also known as "alternative facts".

5 ( +5 / -0 )

@Bass:

His policies are going up in smoke, his legend a fleeing memory, that's very real

Like Obamacare? Yes, some of Obama's policies are being overturned but his legacy/legend is secure, unlike Trump's. Trump's legacy/legend is going up like a mushroom cloud because he is incapable of self restraint and thinking before he speaks/tweets.

Also, neither of those two points means that "democracy came to a crashing halt in January of 2008."

7 ( +7 / -0 )

His policies are going up in smoke, his legend a fleeing memory, that's very real

Obama went out with very handy approval ratings and his dignity and standing increases by the day with this circus in full swing.

Oh, I forgot. You don't trust polls like this and prefer the views of non-partisan historians. I suppose we'll have to wait for the non-partisan historians to assess the Obama years. Do you think they'll come to the same conclusion you reached - the worst president in history presiding over an administration more corrupt than Nixon's? I'm sure you don't think non-partisan historians will reach the same conclusion your non-partisan historians reached about the Bush years- a real success.

I suppose we'll just have to wait and see what the non-partisans think and watch the thrashings in the swamp in the meantime.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Burning Bush Today  07:17 am JST

Tapes?

Like a cassette tape?

Is this article from 1983?

Well, Trump is a pop-culture reference from that era. And you're only giving the big 'un since CD's were introduced in Russia last year.... ;)

If only we could send him back to 1983 - has anyone got Doc Brown on speedial?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Donald Trump - Fast becoming a lame duck president, and in record time!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Democracy came to a crashing halt in January of 2008.

Perhaps you are referring to President Bush's State of the Union Address?

Is this what you mean?

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/01/20080128-13.html

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Threatening a witness is a crime.

A witness to what? No one has been charged with a crime.

Regardless I think Trump should turn over all of the "tapes" immediately. He should look through all of the White House and turn over every cassette, reel-to-reel, and eight track tape recordings he can find. To be through he should also include all cellophane, masking, electrical, and duct tape on hand as well.

Although there are no criminal proceedings, I would highly recommend that Trump check Hillary's old closest anyway - next to where the Rose Law Firm records sat for years. That is a place where things under criminal subpoena often end up. You can never be too thorough.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

@plastic

And Obama hadn't fired his FBI chief with the stated reason that the president wasn't happy with said investigation. Please tell me if my account is "fake history".

No, he did not fire him, but that's not the issue. Back in 2009, the Dems felt that they God-like and nothing could stand in their way or even Kryptonite couldn't touch them until 2010. Besides, had Hillary won (thank god she didn't) there is NO doubt in my mind Comey would have been fired-None. And I don't have any problem with an already ongoing investigation, good luck with that. 2 years and still nothing. Keep turning them rocks over, you might find a starfish.....maybe...

Like Obamacare? Yes, some of Obama's policies are being overturned but his legacy/legend is secure,

Yeah, such as?

Also, neither of those two points means that "democracy came to a crashing halt in January of 2008."

Ahhh, so what you're saying that Dems losing over 1000 legislative seats, the House, the Senate is a result of great progressive policy? Slow economy, slow growth, slow employment in the private sector?

Obama went out with very handy approval ratings and his dignity and standing increases by the day with this circus in full swing.

That's fine, as long as he's gone, I could care less.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Bill Clinton fired an FBI Director - what's the big deal? What's the crime? At least with Hillary the FBI found files more sensitive than secret on Hillary's server. There is only the alleged "collusion" between Trump and Russia from Democrats.

Quote everything I said there, Bass. The "lack of proof" didn't stop you from opining, did it?

Yes - but Dems keep saying there was no proof (although in fact there is proof that Hillary committed crimes). There is only smoke so far when it comes to Trump. There is no "there" there. But keep trying something might come up. Maybe you can send Scooter Libby to jail again.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Bill Clinton fired an FBI Director - what's the big deal? What's the crime? At least with Hillary the FBI found files more sensitive than secret on Hillary's server. There is only the alleged "collusion" between Trump and Russia from Democrats.

That is the one and only time its ever happened. And the FBI director Clinton fired was NOT investigating Clinton for collusion with a foreign government. Absolutely, unequivocally different circumstances. And no, its not "from the Democrats," the Congressional committee investigating is non-partisan.

Yes - but Dems keep saying there was no proof (although in fact there is proof that Hillary committed crimes). There is only smoke so far when it comes to Trump. There is no "there" there. But keep trying something might come up.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Back in 2009, the Dems felt that they God-like and nothing could stand in their way or even Kryptonite couldn't touch them until 2010.

"Prove it."

1 ( +2 / -1 )

That is the one and only time its ever happened. And the FBI director Clinton fired was NOT investigating Clinton for collusion with a foreign government. Absolutely, unequivocally different circumstances. 

Bill Clinton was suspected of illegal activity for his Whitewater land deal from before he was elected. So that excuse doesn't fly either. There is no information coming from any leaks anywhere that states that President Trump himself is under investigation for any wrongdoing. There is a counter-espionage investigation going on - not a criminal investigation of the President. If you know otherwise be sure to point us to the evidence. And sure - no two situations are exactly the same but the analogy still holds.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Whitewater was a Senate investigation. The investigation into Russia's meddling, which Trump is a part of, is an active investigation by the FBI.

Try a different approach.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@Black:

There is no evidence on the collusion to even OPEN an investigation in the first place. The investigation is about Russian meddling in the election

"Trump conceded that the ongoing investigation into Russian influence on the 2016 election, which includes a probe into the possibility that Moscow was coordinating with the Trump campaign, was one of the factors Trump considered before firing Comey."

Haha. What this means is there was/is enough evidence of meddling to open an investigation. Isn't cut and paste wonderful?

@Bass:

And I don't have any problem with an already ongoing investigation, good luck with that. 2 years and still nothing. Keep turning them rocks over, you might find a starfish.....maybe...

Apparently you do have a problem with an ongoing investigation given you are constantly claiming there has been no evidence because it is taking longer than three hours. Have you ever considered that no evidence has been released because the investigatory bodies aren't leaking like the Trump administration?

Also, neither of those two points means that "democracy came to a crashing halt in January of 2008."

Ahhh, so what you're saying that Dems losing over 1000 legislative seats, the House, the Senate is a result of great progressive policy? Slow economy, slow growth, slow employment in the private sector?

No, what I am saying is you made a claim that "democracy came to a crashing halt in January of 2008," then obfuscated when pressed for evidence to back up that claim, and your obfuscation did zero to support your claim. I could have sworn I wrote all that in plain, simple English.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@Bass:

Obama went out with very handy approval ratings and his dignity and standing increases by the day with this circus in full swing.

That's fine, as long as he's gone, I could care less.

.

Apparently you could care:

His policies are going up in smoke, his legend a fleeing memory, that's very real.

Cut and paste is quite handy to remind people of there positions from a day ago. Anyone think that it will help bring Trump down given he forgets a position every 3.14159 seconds?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

It fact Russian have trump in their pocket. Yes Dog Trump gave the Russian Classify Information. What a Dog. Dog trump Trump the Dog give s Russians serect Information.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@Black:

Because I don't want you to get confused by my typo:

Haha. What this means is there was/is enough evidence of meddling to open an investigation. Isn't cut and paste wonderful?

The meddling in that first sentence should be collusion, which is another word for coordinating.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@John: I do not think any facts have been proven yet. That is what investigations are for. Let the investigation move forward and let's see what the outcome is. It is tiresome hearing people say they are "sure that Trump is in Russia's pockets". I do not know whether this is true or not but I certainly hope a non-partisan investigation occurs to find out what happened.

Watching current events it does not appear Trump is in the pocket of the Russians but I guess (hope) we will get to the bottom of this and find out.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

No The mud as dry form the FBI sacking and this is just there same. It not illegal what he did but if anyone else would in Gaol for treason. A good mate of USA gave some very important info and ask not pass on the info because it would expose the source. So the first thing Trump the Dog does is go and tells a non Allie in Russia.That is what is called a DOG act. A dog of a act. Dog Trump, Trump Dog, Trump the Dog. You don't treat Mates like that. The great people of the USA, good heart American don't act like Trump the Dog. In the pass I given this bloke the respect and President of the USA demands. Sorry mate i don't respect Dogs.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Even if the multiple investigations turn up no evidence of collision during the campaign, Trump still has a dangerous fascination with Russia. He's also more incompetent than my chihuahua to be president:

http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2017/05/trump_revealed_highly_classifi.html#incart_std

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"Prove it."

Dems-2010 lost the House

Dems-2014 lost the Senate

Dems-2016 lost the Presidency

Dems-2017 lost over 1000 legislative seats

Apparently you do have a problem with an ongoing investigation given you are constantly claiming there has been no evidence because it is taking longer than three hours. Have you ever considered that no evidence has been released because the investigatory bodies aren't leaking like the Trump administration?

No, because the hate for Trump from the desperate left is so massive, if there was a smoking gun, it would have already been revealed.

I could have sworn I wrote all that in plain, simple English.

It pretty much did, that's why we are where we are today. Hillary isn't here, right?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Dems-2010 lost the House

Dems-2014 lost the Senate

Dems-2016 lost the Presidency

Dems-2017 lost over 1000 legislative seats

I guess we'll never really know.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

No, because the hate for Trump from the desperate left is so massive, if there was a smoking gun, it would have already been revealed.

There's a time limit on such things, is there?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

First it was coordination, then it was collusion, then it was interference, then it was meddling, now its a 'dangerous fascination'? You guys are gonna get Trump for SOMEthing, no matter how ridiculous it ends up being. Why dont you go back and investigate the beauty pageant in Russia? Im sure an unnamed source can say Trump ordered a Russian waiter to bring him something, the waiter did, and in return Trump left him money on the table after the meal.

I cant keep up with the liberals on this, each word that they try to prove happened gets less and less serious and they still cant prove anything. Only thing for sure is that Russia ATTEMPTED to influence the election but as no votes were affected, they failed.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Only thing for sure is that Russia ATTEMPTED to influence the election but as no votes were affected, they failed.

If I recall correctly, you yourself have said that people didn't like what they read in the emails, and therefore voted Trump. So you're contradicting yourself.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Well, technically we are debating of Trump lost by 3,000,000 votes or if he lost by more.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Well, technically we are debating of Trump lost by 3,000,000 votes or if he lost by more.

But he's president, that's the ONLY thing that matters, thank you college electoral system!

I guess we'll never really know.

Where are the Dems? I don't see them anywhere? Oops, there goes a tumbleweed.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Were are the Dems? We are off discussing issues with normal people who are not obvious hypocrites.It is silly to discuss things with republicans because they can only defend their side no matter what. I think we are tired of the "two wrongs DO make a right" nonsense that the reps come out with when their politicians do something majorly suspicious or stupid. . We all get it. You guys are not open minded. You look at things in an extremely biased light. Can't have a discussion with someone who is closed off to and has an aversion to truth and being open minded.

You would never put up with the nonsense that this clown does if he were a democrat. Never. The hypocrisy is too obvious and nobody is buying it but you guys. . You would never put up with the nonsense that this clown does if he were a democrat. Never. I learned a long time ago that it useless to debate with you guys. You can never accept the truth and constantly have to point the finger at others. This is my one and only post on the subject. It was a waste of time to write this much.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

***You guys are not open minded. You look at things in an extremely biased light. Can't have a discussion with someone who is closed off to and has an aversion to truth and being open minded.*

I feel the opposite about liberals. Remember, that sentiment feeling goes both ways.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

You would never put up with the nonsense that this clown does if he were a democrat. Never. 

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites