U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions Photo: Reuters
world

U.S. attorney general to face questions on Comey firing, Russia

93 Comments
By Doina Chiacu and Sarah N. Lynch

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

93 Comments
Login to comment

his party who want to put Republican priorities

which are ensuring policies remain in place so the wealthiest remain the wealthiest, and then ensuring new policies are enacted so the wealthiest remain the wealthiest. In that order.

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions will face questions

And will he lie again like he did during his confirmation hearing? Is there anyone in Trump'ss oily swamp capable of honesty?

15 ( +16 / -1 )

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said on Sunday that Trump was getting in the way of his own agenda.

When you elect a clown, don't be surprised when government becomes a circus

18 ( +19 / -1 )

Are they sticking to their story that they fired Comey because of the Clinton investigation? I can't imagine anyone, Democrat or Republican, believes that.

12 ( +13 / -1 )

The problem with this entire administration is that they can only do their jobs when Trump distracts from their activities. 

Look at what they have done so far. They have taken away more of our privacy rights, undone Dodd-Frank and other financial protections, and tried to pass a health care bill that is little but a tax cut for the rich and a death panel for the poor, disabled, and elderly, without any transparency or accountability. They changed the rules of the Senate to put Neil Gorsuch into the SC for life, after having refused to even give Merrick Garland a hearing for almost a full year.  

These men are criminals. We need to use the RICO Laws to indict them, and take away all of their ill-gotten gains. The same goes triple for the Trump Crime Family.

13 ( +14 / -1 )

The problem with this entire administration is that they can only do their jobs when Trump distracts from their activities. 

Or when the MSM and the desperate Dems persist with this yet, another rabbit hole.

Look at what they have done so far. They have taken away more of our privacy rights, undone Dodd-Frank and other financial protections, and tried to pass a health care bill that is little but a tax cut for the rich and a death panel for the poor, disabled, and elderly, without any transparency or accountability.

Didn't Obama spy on more Americans???

http://www.dailywire.com/news/16804/report-obama-illegally-spied-americans-years-ben-shapiro

They changed the rules of the Senate to put Neil Gorsuch into the SC for life, after having refused to even give Merrick Garland a hearing for almost a full year.  

Thank God for that! Best thing they could have done.

These men are criminals. We need to use the RICO Laws to indict them, and take away all of their ill-gotten gains. The same goes triple for the Trump Crime Family.

Wow! ROFL! I know you just didn't say that!

-18 ( +1 / -19 )

Or when the MSM and the desperate Dems persist with this yet, another rabbit hole.

Keep telling yourself that, Bass. Maybe id you say it enough, it'll become true.

16 ( +17 / -1 )

If Trump said Comey was messing up in the F.B.I., and that people in the F.B.I. thought Comey was doing a bad job, and we're trying to see who's lying about things, then let's ask the F.B.I. staff about what they thought of Comey and his handling of the Russian investigation. Simple enough, no? Now if they say they thought he was great, then the burden of proof is on Trump to explain why and how he came up with his statement. Now, if he can't prove, it, then this shows us how much we should believe him or Comey. I welcome the results, and just hope the committee attempts this.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

It's truly heartening to read the exacting standards of proof required by Trump supporters after the sub-tabloid trash conspiracy theories and barking mad gibberish they were throwing at Obama.

They really have cleaned up their act and are now examples to us all.

Bravo!

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Sessions' days are numbered.

Trump will not want him to testify publicly. Sessions will retract the offer once it becomes obvious that the committee wants to have the hearing public. Of course, I want the testimony to be public because I want to see Sessions perjure himself again. Plus, it will be fun to see the keebler elf squirm.

Diane Feinstein will be an attack dog with Sessions if he does show. She has already said that Trump has committed obstruction, wants an investigation into Trump's actions, and subpoenas issued. Feistein is a well respected and reasonable senator who will not act in a partisan manner.

Preet Bharara also said Trump called him three times. The first two were to assure him he wanted him to remain at his job. The last time he didn't return Trump's call because he felt Trump was trying to cultivate him. He consulted with his staff and Sessions before refusing to call him back. The next day he was fired. The pubs will dismiss this as "the president's right" to fire, but it is a pattern of cultivating and firing when one doesn't show loyalty. And yes, these are people who have sworn loyalty to the constitution, not a man.

Donald Jr. also affirmed (on Fox no less) that Trump's "hope" comment was not some whimsical statement but a command. Donald Jr. just provided more evidence as to Trump's intent. The Trump's are so stupid, don't they have attorneys who will tell them to shut up? They think they are untouchable, but they are just stupid not to realize that they are in the big leagues.

How long will the GoP put up with these criminals?

Mueller is creating the most formidable prosecutor's office in history. He hired the best criminal prosecutors in the U.S. and several other leaders from the DOJ internal affairs groups. The world's and history's best prosecutors are after you and your colleagues Mr. Trump.

Trump hired his own bumbling corporate attorney to lead the defense because law firms are turning him down left and right. Because? He doesn't pay his bills and doesn't listen to advice. Good luck going against Mueller. I cannot think of a scenario more scary for a defendant.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

The problem with this entire administration is that they can only do their jobs when Trump distracts from their activities. 

Or when the MSM and the desperate Dems persist with this yet, another rabbit hole.

Gingrich said that these distractions were on purpose so that the extreme right side GoP could pass legislation without the public's knowledge. Nice euphemism and spin by another hypocrite republican.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Schumer invited Trump to testify under oath before the Senate and he urged Trump to produce any tapes of his conversations with Comey. "If there aren’t tapes, he should let that be known. No more game playing," Schumer said on CBS.

Trump alluded to tapes in a May tweet. Comey welcomed any tapes during his hearing, and congressional investigators have asked the White House to produce them if they exist.

These blinking tapes! Come on lads, what's the story here? Either they exist or they don't. Trump said they do. But. If this was true; they would have surfaced by now.

Does this mean Joffrey has lied? Surely not...

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Tapes? Sure, they are in his safe. Next to the evidence of voted fraud, evidence of Obama wiretapping him, his taxes, videos of Muslims cheering on 9/11, his secret plan to defeat ISIS, etc.

When your supporters don't demand any kind of credibility then you're free to make up anything you want. So sure, he has tapes which contradict Comey, which he has, maybe, if he feels like releasing them, maybe in the future.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

The problem with this entire administration is that they can only do their jobs when Trump distracts from their activities. 

Then drop the But Russia nonsense and focus on policy. Dems seem to want it both ways. If they cant win the policy battle, they simply return to Russia fake news. If any negative press comes out about Obama spying or Lynch or Rice lying, back to Russia. Hillary talking nonsense still, back to Russia. Its like a nice snugly safety blanket for liberals.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

As far as the tapes, it sure made Comey say a lot more than he was planning on saying, huh?

Trump never said they existed, just hinted they might. That was enough to make Comey mostly tell the truth. The things he lied about he must be betting those locations were not recorded. I am looking forward to Session's testimony this week so that he can be crossed off the list too.

After that it is time for a Loretta Lynch hearing (thanks Comey!) Or the 3 Obama admin unmaskers. Running out of Trump side people, but alllll the Obama admin and Clinton people still to go.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

I'm no big Hillary fan, but can you imagine what the situation would be like if she were in the same position Trump is in right now. Another thing, a Republican president who's pro-Russian with everything the Russians have done and continue to do in the Balkans and Syria, let alone the election process of other countries  . . . Who'd have ever thunk it? Reagan would be angrily shaking his finger at Trump if he were around today.

Yep. Putin's got something on Trump. Maybe it's personal (like the rumored sex tapes with Russian hookers), or it could be financial. A few years ago, Trump's own son was caught on video saying that the Russians were financing the Trump organization big-time. Maybe it's both . . . personal and financial, which would mean the Russians have really got Trump by the you know whats. And when you have somebody by the you know whats, a man's heart and mind will follow.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

 let's ask the F.B.I. staff about what they thought of Comey and his handling of the Russian investigation. Simple enough, no? 

No - unfortunately for Trump, it is not that simple. Have you read Trump's latest tweet which majorly insults Comey yet again?

I believe the James Comey leaks will be far more prevalent than anyone ever thought possible. Totally illegal? Very 'cowardly!'

He's going for the "Look - squirrel!" gambit, but he has no idea who he is dealing with. Ask the FBI staff for a public comment about anything, and they will be extremely reserved. That does not mean that they are emotionless. Likely, some will extract their revenge - in the name of justice, of course.

You could now lock Comey in a steel box and the leaks would only increase. Trump's astounding foolishness continues to amaze.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

@stormcrow, Trump has you know whats? He'd better if Viking68 is right about the mismatched contest between Mueller's prosecutorial supergroup vs. Trump's lame in- house lawyers.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Even the media knows that Comey proved nothing, forget Comey indeed. The new thing is that even without the collusion that fell apart, Russia is still at war with America. Somehow now the story has changed to we didnt help them at all, so its scary what they can do all by themselves to attack us. Basically now blaming Trump for NOT colluding with them.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/11/forget-comey-the-real-story-is-russias-war-on-america-215245

The war is in the shadows. And, right now, Russia is winning. There is only one question that we should be asking: What are we going to do to protect the American people from Russian acts of war — and why doesn’t the president want to talk about it?

The same reason that Obama didnt want to talk about it until Hillary lost. its made up nonsense.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Each one lying more than the last.  As if they care about "under oath".

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I hope they really grill Elmer Fudd.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Then drop the But Russia nonsense and focus on policy. 

You didn't understand the statement.

The theory is that the distraction is allowed and furthered by the GoP to help them pass laws without being seen. If the public could see what the government is doing, they wouldn't approve.

For example, a law was passed allowing ISPs to market any information obtained from their internet subscribers. If you are looking for an impotency drug online or an abortion clinic, the ISP can now sell this information. It creates real privacy concerns, and the public wouldn't like it if they new the GoP sold them out to ISPs that paid a lot of money to the GoP for this law.

However, this gives too much credit to Trump and the GoP for being intelligent and coordinated.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

The theory is that the distraction is allowed and furthered by the GoP to help them pass laws without being seen. If the public could see what the government is doing, they wouldn't approve.

The Dems control the Russia narrative, not the Repubs. Dems can stop pushing it anytime they want and put the focus back on the policies where it should be. For example, the Paris Climate accord and why it was good or bad to leave it could have used all the media time that was given to the But Russia! nonsense.

However, this gives too much credit to Trump and the GoP for being intelligent and coordinated.

Yet according to you guys, its working. So someone has to be credited and its not the Dems so.......

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Dems just dont want to talk about policy, except gloating about the ones they can block in court. If they do talk policy then they also have to discuss that the economy is doing great, jobs creation is up, unemployment is down, stock market is up, business and consumer confidence is up, etc etc

So its better to just keep attacking Trump/Sessions/Kushner around in a circle throwing accusations and other things until something hopefully sticks.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Keep telling yourself that, Bass. Maybe id you say it enough, it'll become true.

No, I'm just laughing my butt off, ok, so this is the last stand for the desperate and now seriously pathetic Democrats to hopefully find something, anything that could get Trump out of office and it just keep failing, even "IF" there were a remote possibility that Trump could be kicked out, having president Pence would be equally satisfying and then I'm sure many Democrats would start to check themselves in at that point.

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

Even the media knows that Comey proved nothing, forget Comey indeed.

Precisely why we should ignore his statements on Lynch.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/donald-trump-administration-cabinet-line-of-succession-white-house-vice-president-take-over-speaker-secretary-names-list/

Funny, I dont see any Hillary Clinton on this list. No Chuck Schumer or Nancy Pelosi either? Maxine Waters? Nope! So whats the point of all these attacks on the President again? I have been saying for months it is a waste of time and that Congress should be focusing on policy. Finally some people are starting to realize that while they have distracted themselves with Russia, they are losing when the new policies to Make America Great Again are being adopted every day.

I have a feeling any of these 15 people on the list would be unacceptable, but thats too bad as elections have consequences (thanks Obama!)

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Precisely why we should ignore his statements on Lynch.

Not a chance, that's not about Comey and his feelings, that actually happened in real life. If we are still looking into potential Trump obstruction of justice, then we need to look into potential Lynch obstruction of justice too. Even Democratic Senator Diane Feinstein says so.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/11/feinstein-lynch-clinton-emails-239391

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Precisely why we should ignore his statements on Lynch.

In other words, Comey perjured himself and his testimony is not true and therefore cannot be trusted.

Desperstion really makes libs say very strange things.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

But you've clearly said Comey is a liar, and now you want to start an investigation on what a liar has said?

8 ( +8 / -0 )

One of those talking head ladies on CNN actually said that if we take the statement that Trump was never under investigation to be true, then we MUST take everything else written in the the entire 7 page statement to be also true. It never crossed into her thought pattern that people can tell the truth about some things while lying about others. The Lynch part, I take it to be true because it was in fact called a matter publicly, there is evidence of that.

This is the level of journalism we are stuck with thanks to the media having Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS).

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

But you've clearly said Comey is a liar, and now you want to start an investigation on what a liar has said?

yep, because he testified under oath. Either what he said is true and it deserves to be investigated independently of Russia investigation or what he said was false and he lied under oath. If he lied, this should also call into question the truthfulness of any other testimony that is not in agreement with what Trump said (the only other person in the room who would know).

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

So then you feel that Comey's statements under oath were truthful?

7 ( +7 / -0 )

yep, because he testified under oath. Either what he said is true and it deserves to be investigated independently of Russia investigation or what he said was false and he lied under oath. 

You seem to have a strange fascination, Blacklabel, of the Russian investigation. It is under investigation by several parties. Trump tweeted that he fired Comey due to the Russian investigation (and while a tweet may be a juvenile form of communication, nothing a president utters can be ignored). Thus, the two are now intractably intertwined - and that is all due to Trump's diarrhea mouth.

Also, the President suggesting that the AG he had fired perjured himself in testimony before Congress brings quite serious legal ramifications. The hole Trump has dug for himself he continues to deepen.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

For the most part, yes I do believe they were truthful. Much more truthful than I expected, as he mentioned several things extremely negative about himself (leaking/personal weakness/Lynch matter). But there is the issue of where his testimony conflicts with what Trump said. Based on his own testimony and previous public announcements about Hillary emails, the way he conducts himself is very self serving and cowardly (I wasnt strong enough, I should have said something but I didnt, dont leave me alone with him....blah blah).

So for what he says on his own without prompting, I can believe it. I just cant determine for certain that he is telling the truth in any case when someone else says something different than what he says.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Also, the President suggesting that the AG he had fired perjured himself in testimony before Congress brings quite serious legal ramifications.

AG? Sessions is the AG and he didnt fire him. You mean Flynn? Flynn was fired/allowed to resign for misleading the Vice President and he was also cleared already by the FBI as it relates to his conversation with the Russians. That is the only part of Flynn that could have realistically involved Trump. Everything else is what Flynn did as a private citizen or as part of Obama administration.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Do you feel Trump is more truthful and credible than Comey?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Do you feel Trump is more truthful and credible than Comey?

Based on the things that Comey admitted to doing in his own testimony, yes I find Trump to be more truthful and credible between the two. The leaked story for weeks was that Comey and his buddies all said he didnt tell Trump he was not under investigation and that Trump was a liar. Yet, Trump was proven correct, Comey did tell him that- even before Trump even he asked. Trump 1, Comey 0.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/336871-cnn-issues-correction-after-comey-statement-contradicts-reporting

What kind of a man leaks his own document through a friend? Not a credible one. What kind of man gives his memos to same friend yet wont give it to the FBI or Congress? not credible. What kind of man does something wrong when ordered by Obama administration but doesnt make a memo about that? shady. All of that, he loses another point. Credibility in Trump vs Comey is now Trump 2, Comey 0 in my opinion.

Trump having everyone leave the room when he talked to Comey was suspicious and quite stupid. The 1 on 1 dinner thing kinda strange too. He had to have known Comey isnt loyal to anyone but himself. Trump 2, Comey 1. That's the score as I see it so far.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

I see. So in the credibility department, the score is 2 to 1 in favor of Trump.

Fairenough.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

But you've clearly said Comey is a liar, and now you want to start an investigation on what a liar has said?

I most definitely think he's a political hack and not to be trusted (ask Hillary) but I do believe him when he said that Trump wasn't the target of an investigation. Comey said that Trump made him nauseous, so then why would he lie to protect him. So yes, on this issue, I think he's totally honest.

By the way, we don't know if Mueller is investigating Lynch since there was a special prosecutor appointed to the case.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Why would you believe a political hack who cannot be trusted?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Yeah, im just concerned by the weakness. Every time he should have said something to Trump about how what Trump supposedly said, he didnt. Even said himself he should have been stronger, etc. So now that I know he is that weak, I can easily believe he did what Loretta Lynch told him to do too. Seems like he will do or say anything to keep his job.

It also concerns me because I am pretty sure that she told him to do many more things than just call the Hillary email investigation a matter. So what else did his self described weakness allow him to do? Leaked even more documents than we know about? Protected Hillary from prosecution as told rather than it being his own decision? He could have said Trump wasnt under investigation, but he purposely leaked his memos instead to cause a Special Counsel. Now his potential lies about Jeff Sessions has him testifying too. This one man and his inability to do his job has had so many negative impacts on a lot of people on both sides.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

So he was weak for not calling out Trump for the inappropriate things Trump said during the meetings?

8 ( +8 / -0 )

What kind of a man leaks his own document through a friend? 

A man frustrated by a lying coward of a president who defamed him and the FBI. The friend is not some bar room bozo. He is a Columbia law professor.

Comey is not some two bit flim-flam man like the president. Comey is a man rightfully respected for his life of service to the country. Trump only knows how to serve himself and puts himself before the country and its people.

By the way, we don't know if Mueller is investigating Lynch since there was a special prosecutor appointed to the case.

Very true, I would agree that there is a possibility only because Mueller's missive is broad. Still, it is still a red herring. There isn't anything at this point based on the information we have seen. Still, we may get a look at the conversation that went on on the tarmac. It could have been as simple as change "investigation" to "matter".

However, the obstruction (if any) with Lynch was a mere change in language from "investigation" to "matter". Comey didn't like it, but he agreed to the change because it didn't amount to anything. The FBI doesn't conduct matters, it conducts investigations. The public wasn't swayed by the language change, and the request had no effect on the investigation. Stupid, but not obstruction.

Lynch is a diversion from the real issue.

The elephant in the room is Trump's obstruction of justice and his associations with Russia.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Also, dont forget he allowed Obama to block (obstruct?) him from making public information about Russian interference as far back as last June/July. Another example of weakness. I find it strange he seems to do what he is told in every situation but then suddenly decides he is independent when Trump gets elected.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/report-obama-officials-blocked-comey-from-going-public-about-russian-interference-last-summer/article/2618831

So he was weak for not calling out Trump for the inappropriate things Trump said during the meetings?

Correct, he was pitifully weak, he testified such in his answer of why didnt he say anything at the time. It is part of his job to notify the President of anything inappropriate that is said or suggested. He is a law enforcement official, isnt he? But he didnt do that with Trump, or Lynch, or Obama. Especially if he feels it is a crime or even a potential crime. That is why he wouldnt answer the question at his hearing if it is the duty of an FBI agent to report a crime. He said legally, no in order to protect himself.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

What inappropriate things did Trump say?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

but I do believe him when he said that Trump wasn't the target of an investigation. Comey said that Trump made him nauseous, so then why would he lie to protect him. So yes, on this issue, I think he's totally honest.

It also fits your narrative. Comey's testimony was very believable.

I haven't formed an opinion on whether Trump was a target yet.

First of all, the FBI has a history of lying, blackmailing, and deceit. The FBI will do nearly anything to include lying if it will further the investigation.

Secondly, it is the FBI's policy is not to inform a target he is under investigation because it may result in the destruction of evidence.

Trump as a target may or may not be true. Also, if not a target today, he could be a target in the near future.

Trump is certainly a target now for an obstruction of justice charge.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

He is a Columbia law professor.

Who should not have a government document that neither Comey, the FBI or Congress currently has.

Comey is a man rightfully respected for his life of service to the country.

Who both sides wanted fired until Trump actually did it. His reputation has been in tatters since last July. General Flynn had nearly 40 years of honorable military service to his country, what did that get him?

It could have been as simple as change "investigation" to "matter".

And Trump could have simply been hoping that Flynn could be let go, just what he said. He had already lost his job over this and had been cleared by the FBI of anything criminal in his phone calls, so isnt that enough?

The FBI doesn't conduct matters, it conducts investigations. The public wasn't swayed by the language change, and the request had no effect on the investigation. Stupid, but not obstruction.

So no chance that the guy who has no problem doing what he is told didnt close the investigation prematurely because he was told? Strange he announced Hillary was cleared and avoided opening a special counsel but wouldnt give Trump the same courtesy.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

What inappropriate things did Trump say?

Whatever things that you guys are trying to use to prove obstruction of justice. I see nothing inappropriate with what Trump said based on Comey's testimony. No problem with his statement of hoping and no problem with the honest loyalty conversation that Comey said he agreed to give. Even if those even happened, which Trump is saying they didnt, I dont see any issue.

If Comey thought ANYthing was inappropriate he had a duty to say so at the time if it was questionable and report it if it was criminal. He did not. So either nothing inappropriate was said to begin with OR Comey didnt do his job as legally required due to his weakness and should be under investigation himself. Pick one.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

There's nothing inappropriate about a President asking to speak alone with the head of the FBI and saying he hopes the Comey will "let this thing go"?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Why would you believe a political hack who cannot be trusted?

The man hates Trump to his inner core, doesn't trust him, Trump humiliated him, there is absolutely NO reason for Comey to protect Trump, he gave a little nudge revenge by calling him a liar, but in order to hold onto what little reputation he has left, he needed to uphold at least that part to show he's the man with integrity and Trump is the pathological liar. So yes, I do believe his crooked, sneaky rear.

A man frustrated by a lying coward of a president who defamed him and the FBI. The friend is not some bar room bozo. He is a Columbia law professor.

And look where that got him.....fired and rightfully so.

Comey is not some two bit flim-flam man like the president. Comey is a man rightfully respected for his life of service to the country. Trump only knows how to serve himself and puts himself before the country and its people.

He's respected??? Ask Hillary, I'm sure she would vehemently disagree with you and by the way, how can anyone claim integrity that becomes a political hack, plays both parties and tries to come out looking and smelling like a rose? The only thing I fault Trump on was for keeping this opportunist and NOT firing him sooner!

Good riddance!

However, the obstruction (if any) with Lynch was a mere change in language from "investigation" to "matter". Comey didn't like it, but he agreed to the change because it didn't amount to anything.

That's a huge deal, you have an acting head of the DOJ asking the head of the FBI to change the wording of an "investigation" to a "matter" so if they can dive deep on Trump for asking Comey to drop the Flynn investigation, then we should be fair and equally scrutinize Lynch's motives which were equally revolting to Comey.

The FBI doesn't conduct matters, it conducts investigations. The public wasn't swayed by the language change, and the request had no effect on the investigation. Stupid, but not obstruction.

Exactly! All the more reason for Trump to claim vindication

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

So, wait, why was Comey fired?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Sorry, Black - miswrote: It was the FBI director he accused of perjury, not the AG. He'll probably do that on Wednesday.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Exactly! All the more reason for Trump to claim vindication

Trump was "vindicated" on one very cherry picked statement, i.e., he is not personally under investigation . . . At The Time.

"Hope" was destroyed by Donald Trump JR's admission that his father wanted Comey to drop the investigation by the use of the word "hope".

The public isn't swayed by "hope" not being a directive from the president.

So, wait, why was Comey fired?

I know it is hard, but it depends on who at the WH you are asking and when? The AG? Trump? Trump's people? Russians?

AG = Because of the handling of Clinton email "Matter"

Trump = Because of this "Russia Investigation"

Russians = Because of this "Russia Investigation"

Trump's People = Because of this "Russia Investigation"

Maybe the AG will have another reason in Tuesday's testimony that will further infuriate the FBI.

The real reason appears to be (1) an attempt to stop or impede the Russia investigation, and (2) retaliation for issuing subpoenas for Flynn (happened just before the firing).

5 ( +5 / -0 )

There's nothing inappropriate about a President asking to speak alone with the head of the FBI and saying he hopes the Comey will "let this thing go"?

No, as Comey himself testified no one has ever been convicted of obstruction of justice based on their hopes. Nothing wrong with speaking with your employee 1 on 1. But with an employee that is kind of shady already and who makes notes and leaks them, instead of telling you to your face, you probably shouldnt. But thats hindsight, we didnt really know that at the time.

So I guess I will have to wait for the historic day when Trump is the first person ever convicted of the crime of meeting 1 on 1 with an employee and hoping for something to happen. Find any 'no reasonable prosecutor' who Comey said wouldnt charge Hillary, Im sure most of them cant wait to take this case.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

@Laguna: Got it, I think maybe the FBI Director did perjure himself related to the leaking timeline. There seems to be a lot of discussion about how the NY Times already knew the contents of his memos before he said he had his friend leak them. He testified he leaked only in response to Trump tweet but there was already a story out there with similar information before the Trump tweet.

It might have been from a verbal conversation with his friend before he gave him the actual documents, but not sure. I would think that ANY conversation with the President would not be something you should be detailing to your friends to leak to a newspaper. But others feel differently it seems, especially when that President is named Trump.

Also the loyalty pledge and letting it go conversations. Either someone is lying or there was a huge misunderstanding. Based on how Comey acts based mostly on emotions, that is also possible. He actually testified that if someone hopes something as his boss, they are directing him. Maybe Trump didnt know he was such an emotional guy that he would think hope=order. Should have avoided that conversation all together, that was a mistake on Trump's part knowing who he was talking to.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

I think maybe the FBI Director did perjure himself related to the leaking timeline.

Now you're playing with the same fire, Black. The first question regards what Trump has refers to as "leaks". The vast majority of legal opinions I have read regarding this hold that there are now legal problems with Comey as a private citizen releasing handwritten notes of his conversation with POTUS, particularly as the latter had already tweeted in reference to them (another example of Trump stepping in it).

Second, accusing a former FBI director of perjury is taking things up several knots - particularly after you've just fired him for what you've publicly stated was his role in a scandal you're involved in (another example of Trump stepping in it).

These are issues that cause elected officials to be summoned for testimony under oath. Trump does not want to be in that situation - but he'll likely find himself in it soon, and all due to his own actions.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Sorry "no legal problems." Damn tablet - and I've gotta cut my nails.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

@Laguna Yeah tablets are a pain.

What I would like to see from this is a legal determination if Comey could leak these documents or not.

I dont like how he went about it, the process, so it makes me think he has done this before. But separate of that, were the documents governmental or not? Can he legally leak them as a private citizen when they describe conversations when he was a government employee? Was it ok simply because his friend read the documents out loud rather than giving a copy?

Why every time these things happen we never get answers to the actual questions of legality? Clinton was found not guilty I know, but of the things she did which were legal and which were not? Same for this Trump thing, is hoping for something obstruction of justice or not?

All the answers are always only related to who did them, cant we ever get a legal opinion on the action itself? Travel ban within powers of the President or not? Can fire the FBI Director for any reason or no reason, unless you actually state a reason and that reason is illegal? etc

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

I most definitely think he's a political hack and not to be trusted (ask Hillary) but I do believe him when he said that Trump wasn't the target of an investigation.

Oh, I get it so, Comey testimony regarding Trump not being under investigation is credible, but the rest is not. In other words, you agree with only the parts that align validate your opinion. Its good to see you don't let facts or logic get in the way of your bias.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

See - you're yelling "squirrel!" again, Black. Can you give me some guidance as to what Comey is alleged to have leaked?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

So, black, why was Comey fired?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

See - you're yelling "squirrel!" again, Black. Can you give me some guidance as to what Comey is alleged to have leaked?

Who knows? Right now its total speculation but I think it is worth looking into. A LOT of things have leaked, most of which involved the FBI or its investigation. The leakers of those details have yet to be identified. Comey seems to have a leaking structure already in place based on the detailed process of how he leaked his memo (the timing, verbal only, friends did it not him to avoid detection).

MSM has accused Trump people of much worse and started speculations based entirely on rumors with little to no actual proof, havent they? Dems wanted Trump impeached and Sessions fired entirely on speculation, so that's our reality now I guess.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

So, black, why was Comey fired?

From what Trump said, to remove the cloud of the Russia investigation from the President so that he can focus on implementing his agenda. So that Dems couldnt keep running around screaming impeachment and obstructing with their reasoning being that Trump was an illegitimately elected criminal so they must #resist. Trump wanted that reasoning eliminated.

Because after all, he was NOT under investigation as media and Dems were hinting at and Trump and Comey and some of Congress knew so. Comey was kind enough to lift the cloud from Hillary all by himself but would not do it (nor allow anyone else to do it either) for Trump. So Trump had enough and removed him.

But actually no reason for firing was even necessary. So unless the law says FBI Director can be fired for any reason or no reason unless people dont like the reason for political purposes, it doesnt matter. FBI officials and Comey all testified the investigation continued, and was impeded in no way by his firing.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Comey was kind enough to lift the cloud from Hillary all by himself but would not do it (nor allow anyone else to do it either) for Trump. So Trump had enough and removed him.

But the investigation into Clinton was done, but the Russia investigation is not. Duhh

8 ( +8 / -0 )

No, as Comey himself testified no one has ever been convicted of obstruction of justice based on their hopes. 

Nice way to ignore the rest of the testimony and fixate on the shiny things.

Comey was answering a narrow question from a GoP senator literally asking about the word "hope". No context, nothing.

Context of what is said is important. You can ask Donald Jr. what he thought his father meant.

Another senator asked a question in terms of a person pointing a gun to you and asking "I hope you give me your money". Hope is not some wishful thinking, it is a demand in that case.

Both are extreme examples of context of what was meant by "hope".

The most reasonable conclusion was what Comey actually interpreted the meaning to be: a demand by the president. The context also lends itself to the interpretation.

Trump is a demanding person who tells people what to do. If you do not agree, you are fired. Donald Jr. knows this very well and so does everyone else, except the apologists.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

But the investigation into Clinton was done

The Russia investigation as it relates to Trump himself never even started. So why not mention that? You dont have to wait until an investigation is done if one was never even opened.

Hillary's emails were directly related to the Russian interference in the 2016 election which IS the Russia investigation. So how is her part of an open Russia investigation done and she is totally cleared, yet Trump's is not? Could the Russia investigation not find something Clinton did wrong and have to be corrected later, as Comey said? But nope, totally cleared by one man, not even a Special Counsel needed.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

The Russia investigation as it relates to Trump himself never even started. So why not mention that?

How many times do we have to go over this? How many different ways can I say it? The investigation was not finished, Comey specifically said that did not clear Trump publicly for several reasons. For example, publicly stating Trump was not the subject of an investigation at an early stage in the investigation would require Comey to announce an investigation specifically into Trump if that happened later on in the investigation.

That Trump is not under investigation in no way means Trump will not be under investigation, so you're twisting words to say it "never even started."

6 ( +6 / -0 )

From what Trump said, to remove the cloud of the Russia investigation from the President so that he can focus on implementing his agenda.

Thanks for finally admitting obstruction.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Who both sides wanted fired until Trump actually did it. His reputation has been in tatters since last July. General Flynn had nearly 40 years of honorable military service to his country, what did that get him?

Wow, comparing a boy scout doing what he thought was right with a general doing what he knew was wrong (accepting money from a foreign government and lying to an FBI agent).

I'm somewhat glad Comey is gone, but at least I could trust the boy scout to tell the truth.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Trump is a demanding person who tells people what to do. If you do not agree, you are fired. Donald Jr. knows this very well and so does everyone else, except the apologists.

Exactly, very demanding and has no issue telling people what to do. So I find the fact that Trump would have even told Comey I hope to be dubious, he isnt that kind of guy. Like Donald Jr said, if his Dad is ordering something it will be very clear what he wants, it would not be said as a hopeful statement.

But Comey said he did say that. So to give him the benefit of the doubt, I was discussing that even if Trump did say that, I still dont have a problem with it. But, the idea that Trump even made this statement at all is still under dispute, as far as Trump says anyway.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

That Trump is not under investigation in no way means Trump will not be under investigation, so you're twisting words to say it "never even started."

So who is to say that Hillary will not be under investigation someday as it relates to Russian interference in the 2016 election, which she was the losing party of? Is it impossible that she wont be, and if so why? Its not over...YET.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Thanks for finally admitting obstruction.

That isnt obstruction, it is just truth. The President was wrongly being treated as being under investigation when he was not. He simply wanted to be treated as someone not under investigation, how is that obstruction of the investigation into OTHERS?

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

From what Trump said, to remove the cloud of the Russia investigation from the President.

Agree with Strangerland, Trump's own words admitting obstruction.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

You don't think Trump would use the phrase 'I hope' in hopes that it would give him a fallback so he could say he didn't actually order it, thereby giving the Trumpets a talking point?

Because that's exactly what's happening. And as stupid as Trump is, coming out with a direct order is probably even stupider that Trump is.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

He simply wanted to be treated as someone not under investigation, how is that obstruction of the investigation into OTHERS?

What? He was pushing the head of the FBI to end an investigation. That's how. And your comment is gibberish insofar as that the investigation wasn't even into Trump (though his actions have probably created one now).

6 ( +7 / -1 )

comparing a boy scout doing what he thought was right 

Then why did he give us a 10 minute speech about all the reasons why Hillary should have been investigated before closing her investigation? He even admitted he knew that what Lynch asked him to do was wrong, but did it anyway wasnt worth dying on that hill he said. He also testified that he knew what he did was wrong, but he wasnt strong enough, was shocked, was stunned, was confused, etc. But ok, I can accept Flynn as the villiam in this story, but the illegal things he allegedly did were unrelated to Trump so its not relevant.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

If I were under the cloud of an investigation and knew I wasnt being investigated, I would want that cloud removed too. Wouldnt you? Because it is an unfair and incorrect accusation. The cloud comment had nothing to do with stopping an active investigation into me, because there wasnt one to stop.

But ok, just going in circles. You guys think its obstruction, I think its not. Fair enough.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

If I were under the cloud of an investigation and knew I wasnt being investigated, I would want that cloud removed too. Wouldnt you?

Yep - and so did Nixon.

it is an unfair and incorrect accusation.

No one knows whether it is nor not yet - that's why they have this thing called an investigation. They investigate the circumstances, and from there determine whether it was incorrect or not.

Shutting it down because it makes you look bad is obstructing an investigation.

Or do you believe Nixon to have been innocent?

5 ( +6 / -1 )

As far as the tapes, it sure made Comey say a lot more than he was planning on saying, huh?

Trump never said they existed, just hinted they might.

He lied. Again. Lying comes naturally to him, just like breathing. And despicable as it may be in the business world (not paying smaller businesses when he said he would etc) it is truly despicable that he lies, as President.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

At least Lindsey Graham knows what he's talking about.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

From what Trump said, to remove the cloud of the Russia investigation from the President so that he can focus on implementing his agenda.

So he wanted to end an investigation because he thought it was unfair to him, so Trump fired the head of the FBI?

7 ( +7 / -0 )

A reminder; "I'm not hinting anything".

Release the tapes. Now.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

So he wanted to end an investigation because he thought it was unfair to him, so Trump fired the head of the FBI?

And somehow he thinks this isn't obstruction.

Imagine of Obama, or worse, Hillary, were to do something like that?

There would be rednecks with guns surrounding the whitehouse as we type.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Still can't get over Grima Wormtongue's defence of his master. "He's just new to this". Ridiculous argument.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

This whole "Trump is/isn't under investigation" thing has really taken on a life on it's own, hasn't it?

It was my understanding that the FBI was tasked with investigating Russia meddling into the elections. Part of that was investigating Trump's team, several of whom have had to resign over it. At the time Trump himself wasn't being investigated, but the FBI didn't want to say that during an active investigation because that could change at any moment.

Or do I have it wrong?

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Blacklabel: From what Trump said, to remove the cloud of the Russia investigation from the President so that he can focus on implementing his agenda.

Trump sent a letter to Comey regarding the dismissal, saying he was taking the recommendation of the AG and the Deputy AG, attaching both letters. The entire focus was the Clinton investigation with no mention of Russia. But you are saying Trump fired Comey because of the Russia investigation? May I ask why the actual letter firing Comey didn't reference that?

So I guess I will have to wait for the historic day when Trump is the first person ever convicted of the crime of meeting 1 on 1 with an employee and hoping for something to happen.

Isn't context important here? From what I've been reading, and correct me if I'm wrong, but the President and the head of the FBI don't meet on a regular basis. They want to have a separation of powers. So asking others to leave the room, and then talking directly about an investigation into one of Trump's associates (Flynn) and expressing his desire for Comey to drop the investigation ("let this thing go"), is appropriate in your eyes given what we know about the history of the FBI and the White House, in addition to the position of Trump as the employer (i.e. person in power)?

Now that it's been settled that Trump isn't under investigation at this point in time, do you expect the new head of the FBI to continue to investigation Russia's meddling into the elections, or do you think it should end?

8 ( +8 / -0 )

At this point I'm almost feeling sorry for the paid Russian contributors. Living in a steam room in St Petersburg getting paid less than a grand a month attempting to defend the screaming orange mythomane from his latest scandal....

This circus is an outrage, it makes te US look weak and broken. The last Republican train-wreck was similar, only somehow here in 2017 even W Bush looks presidential.

Oh, and Sessions was definitely created by JRR Tolkien. No doubt about it. How much does it cost the taxpayer to fly him in from Middle Earth for testimony?

7 ( +7 / -0 )

The Russian propaganda methods aren't really getting much in terms of responses except for a few high 5s from conservatives every now and then.

It is strange to watch the GOP and the Russians team up, tho. More evidence that the "Party of Reagan" isn't what it used to be, especially when they were encouraging Putin to hack fellow Americans and then leak the information.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

TToday's GOP are insane, Super. We've documented their descent into madness for many years now. Hopefully sanity will return and all these power and money whores in the Republican party will have their tramp stamp "Trump" tattoos in evidence when it's all gone tits-up.

IIt's the lasting damage this idiot will do that concerns us all....who really cares about the Russians and their brief moment of meddling ?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Totally illegal? Very 'cowardly!'" Trump tweeted on Sunday.

did he get mix up himself with comey? exactly how he is.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

If any negative press comes out about Obama spying or Lynch or Rice lying, back to Russia. Hillary talking nonsense still, so what if they find any dirt on Obama, Lynch, Hillary, one crime doesnt suddenly clear another of guilt, US legal system doesn't work like that. Also Obama, Lynch , Hillary arnt running the US .

3 ( +3 / -0 )

You guys think its obstruction, I think its not. Fair enough.

100% agreed!

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Well, at least Joffrey won't be firing Robert Mueller. Oh, wait...

2 ( +2 / -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