• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

READ: Comey Opening Statement To Recount Private Talks With Trump

Redress said:
Working from memory, he said "Russia was on his mind" when he decided to fire Comey. That, like what is contained in the document, is not enough to hang him high, but it is somewhat troubling, and as this is early in the investigation, could be part of a case brought against Trump, if they find enough other stuff to go with it. What the outcome will be, I have no clue and do not want to speculate, but saying this "is not obstruction" is just as wrong as saying "this shows obstruction".

If people continue to be this rabid about every revelation(not meaning you, but in general), this investigation is going to be a long, painful process for all of us...
Click to expand...

I provided quotes from the transcript that Tanngrisnir gave a link to that indicate that while the Russian investigation was on his mind it wasn't the way so many are portraying it as.

I admittedly can't speak to a legal perspective on this. I'm not one to try and twist words like lawyers are. But from the parts that I quoted of that interview I see nothing in it that indicates he did it to try and stop the investigation into the Russians involvement with the election.
 
Ben Shapiro, a never Trumper, gave his take on Comey's statement.

He points out

1. That Comey indeed told Trump he was not under investigation, something he was willing to tell Trump in private but refused to verify it in a public hearing.

2. Trump didn't pressure Comey to kill Russian Campaign Collusion Investigation.

I'd say that pretty much destroys the Democrats and the media's narrative.

What does look bad for Trump is that business of asking Comey for a loyalty oath.

But then Comey though he mentioned how that made him feel awkward didn't take it as something criminal.

I think Shapiro has a good take on it.

Democrat Narrative DESTROYED: Comey Opening Statement Says Trump Isn't Under Personal Investigation, Didn't Pressure Comey To Kill Russian Campaign Collusion Investigation | Daily Wire
 
Re: The actual Comey opening statement.

haymarket said:
Here it is

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-jcomey-060817.pdf

This is the complete opening statement from James Comey. Read it.

Experts on TV have said that this is a definitive case for obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...

Yes. I had read that and found it much less positive than Trump would probably like. I will have to reread it, but I am not totally sure that it is enough to proceed with an impeachment either. But that likely isn't what The Democrats want right now, anyway.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Second link is nothing more than hearsay. So it's going to be ignored by me.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. It's part of the what the WH recorded as notes from the meeting: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html?mcubz=0&_r=0
First link has a transcript. Where exactly did he say that he was going to stop the investigation? Parts that I read shows me that he wanted to maybe even extend the investigation in order to make sure it was done properly. Which is why he fired Comey, to make sure it was done properly.
Click to expand...

He said he fired him because of the investigation: "“[W]hen I decided to just do it [fire Comey], I said to myself, I said you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story.”
What in that shows that he was trying to obstruct justice? It's fun to take things out of context, but thankfully people are not convicted on such.
Click to expand...

I haven't taken anything out of context.

TRUMP: What I did is I was going to fire Comey. My decision. It was not...

HOLT: You had made the decision before they came into your office (ph).

TRUMP: I -- I was going to fire Comey. I -- there's no good time to do it, by the way.

They...

HOLT: Because in your letter, you said...

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: They -- they were...

HOLT: ...I -- I accepted -- accepted their recommendations.

TRUMP: Yeah, well, they also...

HOLT: So, you had already made the decision.

TRUMP: Oh, I was going to fire regardless of recommendation.

Thankfully most people can read that in the context of his actions and other statements and see the screamingly obvious: he fired Trump to end the Russia probe.
 
beefheart said:
Uh.....Comey's opening statement has been released, do you not believe that fact? You can read it, its all over teh interwebz.
Click to expand...

Sure. We all believe that Comey's opening statement has been released. It's right here in this thread.
 
apdst said:
Sure. We all believe that Comey's opening statement has been released. It's right here in this thread.
Click to expand...

You are late to the conversation.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
He said he fired him because of the investigation: "“[W]hen I decided to just do it [fire Comey], I said to myself, I said you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story.”

I haven't taken anything out of context.
Click to expand...

Yes, you have taking things out of context. Even here where you copy/paste the trasncript you leave part of it out in order to spin the narrative to your liking.

Tanngrisnir said:
TRUMP: What I did is I was going to fire Comey. My decision. It was not...

HOLT: You had made the decision before they came into your office (ph).

TRUMP: I -- I was going to fire Comey. I -- there's no good time to do it, by the way.

They...

HOLT: Because in your letter, you said...

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: They -- they were...

HOLT: ...I -- I accepted -- accepted their recommendations.

TRUMP: Yeah, well, they also...

HOLT: So, you had already made the decision.

TRUMP: Oh, I was going to fire regardless of recommendation.
Click to expand...

Here's more of it:

LESTER HOLT: [OVER TALK] Okay, are you angry with, angry with Mr. Comey
because of his Russia investigation?

DONALD TRUMP: I just want somebody that's competent. I am a big fan of
the FBI, I love the FBI. [OVER TALK]

LESTER HOLT: But were you a fan of him taking up that investigation?

DONALD TRUMP: I think that--about the Hillary Clinton investigation?

LESTER HOLT: About the Russia investigation and possible links [OVER TALK]

DONALD TRUMP: Look, look, let me tell you. As far as I'm concerned, I want
that thing to be absolutely done properly. When I did this now I said, I
probably, maybe will confuse people, maybe I'll expand that, you know,
lengthen the time because it should be over with, in my opinion, should have
been over with a long time ago. Cause all it is, is an excuse but I said to
myself, I might even lengthen out the investigation but I have to do the right
thing for the American people. He's the wrong man for that position.

Now, considering everything that was said, not JUST the part that you quote, where in there is Trump indicating that he is going to stop the investigation? That firing Comey means he wanted the investigation to stop?

Like I said, it's fun to take things out of context, but thankfully people are not convicted on such.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Yes, you have taking things out of context. Even here where you copy/paste the trasncript you leave part of it out in order to spin the narrative to your liking.
Click to expand...

Except, course, that I didn't actually do that.
Here's more of it:

LESTER HOLT: [OVER TALK] Okay, are you angry with, angry with Mr. Comey
because of his Russia investigation?

DONALD TRUMP: I just want somebody that's competent. I am a big fan of
the FBI, I love the FBI. [OVER TALK]

LESTER HOLT: But were you a fan of him taking up that investigation?

DONALD TRUMP: I think that--about the Hillary Clinton investigation?

LESTER HOLT: About the Russia investigation and possible links [OVER TALK]

DONALD TRUMP: Look, look, let me tell you. As far as I'm concerned, I want
that thing to be absolutely done properly. When I did this now I said, I
probably, maybe will confuse people, maybe I'll expand that, you know,
lengthen the time because it should be over with, in my opinion, should have
been over with a long time ago. Cause all it is, is an excuse but I said to
myself, I might even lengthen out the investigation but I have to do the right
thing for the American people. He's the wrong man for that position.

Now, considering everything that was said, not JUST the part that you quote, where in there is Trump indicating that he is going to stop the investigation? That firing Comey means he wanted the investigation to stop?

Like I said, it's fun to take things out of context, but thankfully people are not convicted on such.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's called a 'distraction'. He also claimed that he fired Comey because he treated Clinton so poorly, but then flatly contradicts that in the links I gave. And his actions clearly show that he had no intention of lengthen the investigation. His words show the exact same thing, including what he told the Russians, which I notice you're ignoring.

Like I said, thankfully most people can read that in the context of his actions and other statements and see the screamingly obvious: he fired Comey to end the Russia probe.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Yes, it does. Perhaps if you were familiar with the actual law, you'd know that.
Click to expand...

LOL, like you are. Obstruction has a much higher level of proof than that. Good Lord.

He asked for "honest loyalty" according to Comey.It only became an issue for Comey once he got fired.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Except, course, that I didn't actually do that.

Yes, that's called a 'distraction'. He also claimed that he fired Comey because he treated Clinton so poorly, but then flatly contradicts that in the links I gave. And his actions clearly show that he had no intention of lengthen the investigation. His words show the exact same thing, including what he told the Russians, which I notice you're ignoring.

Like I said, thankfully most people can read that in the context of his actions and other statements and see the screamingly obvious: he fired Comey to end the Russia probe.
Click to expand...

And exactly how did firing Comey end the Russian probe? LOL
 
Erod said:
LOL, like you are. Obstruction has a much higher level of proof than that. Good Lord.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am. I've read the actual statute. You, quite clearly, have not and have no idea what you're talking about.
He asked for "honest loyalty" according to Comey.It only became an issue for Comey once he got fired.
Click to expand...

Keep pretending that's what actually happened, it's no skin off my teeth.
 
vesper said:
Ben Shapiro, a never Trumper, gave his take on Comey's statement.

He points out

1. That Comey indeed told Trump he was not under investigation, something he was willing to tell Trump in private but refused to verify it in a public hearing.

2. Trump didn't pressure Comey to kill Russian Campaign Collusion Investigation.

I'd say that pretty much destroys the Democrats and the media's narrative.

What does look bad for Trump is that business of asking Comey for a loyalty oath.

But then Comey though he mentioned how that made him feel awkward didn't take it as something criminal.

I think Shapiro has a good take on it.

Democrat Narrative DESTROYED: Comey Opening Statement Says Trump Isn't Under Personal Investigation, Didn't Pressure Comey To Kill Russian Campaign Collusion Investigation | Daily Wire
Click to expand...

Yep. That's the whole thing in a nutshell.
 
Erod said:
And exactly how did firing Comey end the Russian probe? LOL
Click to expand...

Quite clearly it didn't, but it didn't have to to have all the elements necessary to meet obstruction of justice. He only had to try to reach that level, not actually stop it.

Again, if you knew what you were talking about, you'd already have known that.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Yes, I am. I've read the actual statute. You, quite clearly, have not and have no idea what you're talking about.

Keep pretending that's what actually happened, it's no skin off my teeth.
Click to expand...

Uh, those are Comey's words, not mine.

I have this vision of you running around destroying everything in your apartment right now. Sorry, bud, this isn't turning out the way you want. Just isn't.

I'm waiting. Somebody please tell me the big thing we're actually investigating. No crimes, no named sources, nothing unusual for state business with the Russians for decades.

If there's something there, I'm all for it. WHAT?
 
Erod said:
And exactly how did firing Comey end the Russian probe? LOL
Click to expand...

It didn't, but think about how this works in Trump's head:
1. Fire Comey
2. Appoint loyal FBI director
3. Russia probe gets stonewalled at the administrative level of the bureau.

Not hard to deduce his reasoning.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Except, course, that I didn't actually do that.

Yes, that's called a 'distraction'. He also claimed that he fired Comey because he treated Clinton so poorly, but then flatly contradicts that in the links I gave. And his actions clearly show that he had no intention of lengthen the investigation. His words show the exact same thing, including what he told the Russians, which I notice you're ignoring.

Like I said, thankfully most people can read that in the context of his actions and other statements and see the screamingly obvious: he fired Comey to end the Russia probe.
Click to expand...

What action has he taken to stop the investigations? Aside from your belief that he fired Comey to stop the investigations into Russia...what actions has he actually taken to stop the investigations? Any what so ever?

You can call what he said a "distraction", but if it is a "distraction" then so is everything else he said. Sorry Tanngrisnir, you don't get to decide whether something is a distraction or not just because it may or may not fit a narrative that you want. It's either all of it, or none of it.

And like I said, I'm ignoring that other article because its based on hearsay. Unless you can provide links to actual documentation outside of "official said". IE: Anonymous sources.
 
Kobie said:
It didn't, but think about how this works in Trump's head:
1. Fire Comey
2. Appoint loyal FBI director
3. Russia probe gets stonewalled at the administrative level of the bureau.

Not hard to deduce his reasoning.
Click to expand...

Fine. Trump is an odd duck. Knew that.

But that doesn't constitute obstruction.
 
Erod said:
Uh, those are Comey's words, not mine.
Click to expand...

Yes, and you're trying to portray them as something other than they are.
I have this vision of you running around destroying everything in your apartment right now. Sorry, bud, this isn't turning out the way you want. Just isn't.
Click to expand...

You must have a lot of time to dream at the shelter.
I'm waiting. Somebody please tell me the big thing we're actually investigating. No crimes, no a named sources, nothing unusual for state business with the Russians for decades.
Click to expand...

You've been told countless times here what this is about, what's in play, who the players are and you simply stick your fingers in your ears and say, "Nyah, nyah, nyah, I can't hear you".
If there's something there, I'm all for it. WHAT?
Click to expand...

LOL! No, you're not. You're completely and totally emotionally invested in Trump. He's become your life.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Quite clearly it didn't, but it didn't have to to have all the elements necessary to meet obstruction of justice. He only had to try to reach that level, not actually stop it.

Again, if you knew what you were talking about, you'd already have known that.
Click to expand...

These kinds of things happen all the time in Washington. It happened 100 times during the campaign.

It's obstructed nothing. These mysterious investigations continue.

This is just a two-year diversion leading to the midterms. Nothing more.
 
vesper said:
Did you know that Zero Hedge is a Russian run outfit?
Click to expand...

No I did not. Thank you for letting me know. Seems Russians are everywhere on the net
 
Erod said:
It doesn't matter. Liberal outrage is already predetermined and orchestrated. So it carries no weight or relevance.

Obstruction is a big deal that requires significant proving grounds.
Click to expand...

Ah blaming Liberals again. Surprised Obama was not mentioned
The same can be said about Trump loyalists.
Me I like facts and the truth.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Yes, and you're trying to portray them as something other than they are.

You must have a lot of time to dream at the shelter.

You've been told countless times here what this is about, what's in play, who the players are and you simply stick your fingers in your ears and say, "Nyah, nyah, nyah, I can't hear you".

LOL! No, you're not. You're completely and totally emotionally invested in Trump. He's become your life.
Click to expand...

Trump is a sloppy tool of a man. I'm not invested in him. I just smell a coup when there is one.

What crime has been committed? Tell me. What did Trump do to instruct, aid, direct, or whatever, with the Russians?

He wasn't even in Washington. What access did Trump have to do anything? He didn't have the keys to do anything, let alone the voting infrastructure.

The whole thing is a concocted mess. And this is not obstruction of justice. If it is, every president in history should have been impeached and jailed.
 
JANFU said:
Ah blaming Liberals again. Surprised Obama was not mentioned
The same can be said about Trump loyalists.
Me I like facts and the truth.
Click to expand...

You have no facts and no truth. Just your wishful SJW conspiracy theories.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom