Marc Kasowitz's Public Statement for Mr. Trump After the Comey Testimony.

Captain Adverse · Jun 9, 2017

Here is Mr. Trump's lawyer, Marc Kasowitz's statement about the Comey testimony for your edification:

Key points:

1. Comey confirms publicly Mr. Trump was never under investigation for any probe into Russian interference.
2. Comey confirms publicly that there is no evidence a single vote changed as a result of any Russian interference.
3. Comey's testimony shows Mr. Trump never sought to impede any investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
4. Comey admits the President told him it would be good to find out if some members of his "satellite associates" did something wrong.
5. Admiral Rogers stated the President never directed him to do anything illegal, immoral, unethical, or inappropriate, or pressured him to do so.
6. Director Coates said the same as Admiral Rogers.
7. That there are people in government actively attempting to undermine the Administration.
8. Comey admitted he was a leaker himself.
9. That Comey's justification he leaked privileged information in response to a negative Trump tweet was belied by the publication in the NY Times of the information the day before the tweet.

Redress · Jun 9, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
9. That Comey's justification he leaked privileged information in response to a negative Trump tweet was belied by the publication in the NY Times of the information the day before the tweet.

Here is how far you can trust the lawyer claiming his client is innocent: Here is the Trump tweet:

James Comey better hope that there are no "tapes" of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!
8:26 AM - 12 May 2017

And the first Times story to use the Comey notes: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/politics/james-comey-trump-flynn-russia-investigation.html

Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation

By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT MAY 16, 2017

Now, is May 16th "the day before" May 12th? Gotta learn the critically think and check facts, instead of just mindlessly parroting what you want to believe is true.

Moot · Jun 9, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
Here is Mr. Trump's lawyer, Marc Kasowitz's statement about the Comey testimony for your edification:

Key points:

2. Comey confirms publicly that there is no evidence a single vote changed as a result of any Russian interference.

No, he didn't. He said investigating the results of the election was not part of the FBI probe into Trump's campaign collusion with the Russians.

3. Comey's testimony shows Mr. Trump never sought to impede any investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

No. Comey said he wasn't sure...but he thought Trump fired him because he wouldn't end the case against Flynn. Firing Comey for that reason would imply that Trump was trying to interfere in the investigation. However, there's more evidence that Trump fired him because he wouldn't say publicly that Trump wasn't under investigation. But that wasn't mentioned by Trump's personal lawyer...so who knows, really?

5. Admiral Rogers stated the President never directed him to do anything illegal, immoral, unethical, or inappropriate, or pressured him to do so.
6. Director Coates said the same as Admiral Rogers.

Coats said that he never "felt" pressured...but his feelings are irrelevant and doesn't mean or prove that he wasn't asked. His answers were vague because he probably didn't want to perjure himself for Trump.

7. That there are people in government actively attempting to undermine the Administration.

None more so than Trump himself.

9. That Comey's justification he leaked privileged information in response to a negative Trump tweet was belied by the publication in the NY Times of the information the day before the tweet.

See post #2

Absentglare · Jun 9, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
Here is Mr. Trump's lawyer, Marc Kasowitz's statement about the Comey testimony for your edification:

Key points:

1. Comey confirms publicly Mr. Trump was never under investigation for any probe into Russian interference.

False. Comey confirmed that he told President Trump that President Trump was not personally the subject of a counterintelligence investigation. President Trump begged him to say this publicly, but Comey refused because it would create a duty to correct if that were to change.

Captain Adverse said:
2. Comey confirms publicly that there is no evidence a single vote changed as a result of any Russian interference.

False, i don't know where you pulled that from, but it wasn't any part of Comey's testimony that i observed.

Captain Adverse said:
3. Comey's testimony shows Mr. Trump never sought to impede any investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

False, Comey's testimony simply shows that Comey felt that President Trump attempted to impede the investigation into Flynn. Comey did not claim to have an exhaustive understanding of every activity President Trump had necessary to make the wild claim indicated by the motivated reasoning you cite.

Captain Adverse said:
4. Comey admits the President told him it would be good to find out if some members of his "satellite associates" did something wrong.

First mostly true claim here. Well done.

Captain Adverse said:
5. Admiral Rogers stated the President never directed him to do anything illegal, immoral, unethical, or inappropriate, or pressured him to do so.

Mary Poppins could make the same claim. Why do you think this is relevant?

Captain Adverse said:
6. Director Coates said the same as Admiral Rogers.

Same.

Captain Adverse said:
7. That there are people in government actively attempting to undermine the Administration.

Yes, they're called the presidents advisors and they're leaking like a rusty sieve because of his rank incompetence.

Captain Adverse said:
8. Comey admitted he was a leaker himself.

"Leaking" unclassified information isn't a crime.

Captain Adverse said:
9. That Comey's justification he leaked privileged information in response to a negative Trump tweet was belied by the publication in the NY Times of the information the day before the tweet.

It is obvious from this point that you are not well-informed on this issue. You are taking the incompetent presidents lawyer of last resort at his word, and that is the issue. You see, the NYT did not report the information specified until after the tweet. Your source is confusing a different report.

Captain Adverse · Jun 9, 2017

Moot said:
No. Comey said he wasn't sure...but he thought Trump fired him because he wouldn't end the case against Flynn. Firing Comey for that reason would imply that Trump was trying to interfere in the investigation. However, there's more evidence that Trump fired him because he wouldn't say publicly that Trump wasn't under investigation. But that wasn't mentioned by Trump's personal lawyer...so who knows, really?

Actually what he said was that the President never told him to stop investigating, that the President also said he would be happy to see the investigation complete to show he was innocent. That the President also told him he would be happy to find out if any of his people were involved.

Moot said:
Coats said that he never "felt" pressured...but his feelings are irrelevant and doesn't mean or prove that he wasn't asked. His answers were vague because he probably didn't want to perjure himself for Trump.

If he said he never felt pressured, then there is no reason to believe he lied unless you are biased and want to believe otherwise.

Moot said:
None more so than Trump himself.

That is merely your opinion. The facts are there have been both numerous leaks and a couple of direct acts of disobedience since he took office.

Moot said:
See post #2

This is believable simply because you wish to right? As opposed to the fact that Comey stated that he "feared" to respond in the negative to what he "believed" Trump was saying by the Flynn "Hope" comment...because why? He thought if he were honest he would be fired? :roll:

Taylor · Jun 9, 2017

Redress said:
And the first Times story to use the Comey notes: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/politics/james-comey-trump-flynn-russia-investigation.html

Unless this was the first time:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/...omey-warns-he-may-cancel-press-briefings.html

Captain Adverse · Jun 9, 2017

Absentglare said:
False. Comey confirmed that he told President Trump that President Trump was not personally the subject of a counterintelligence investigation. President Trump begged him to say this publicly, but Comey refused because it would create a duty to correct if that were to change.

So instead of a false "False," it was in fact true. Dude, you are clearly unclear here. Trump was not under investigation. Comey stated the only reason he refused to say so publicly was because he had gotten burnt by the Hillary second investigation announcement thanks to Wieners computer history.

Absentglare said:
False, i don't know where you pulled that from, but it wasn't any part of Comey's testimony that i observed.

I pulled that from the video I provided. Didn't you bother to watch it?

Absentglare said:
False, Comey's testimony simply shows that Comey felt that President Trump attempted to impede the investigation into Flynn. Comey did not claim to have an exhaustive understanding of every activity President Trump had necessary to make the wild claim indicated by the motivated reasoning you cite.

Actually it remains True, simply because the Flynn investigation is not about "impeding the election" it was about failing to report contacts with foreign agents during the campaign when he filled out his SF86.

Absentglare said:
First mostly true claim here. Well done.

Thanks, but it was a quote from the video, no credit due to me.

Absentglare said:
Mary Poppins could make the same claim. Why do you think this is relevant? Same. (Referencing Coates)

Again, you apparently didn't look at the video. It was a point made to show that other "intelligence leaders" did not think there was any effort to obstruct investigations.

Absentglare said:
Yes, they're called the presidents advisors and they're leaking like a rusty sieve because of his rank incompetence.

NO. :no: They are called Deputy FBI chiefs, Acting Attorney Generals, NSA "Independent Contractors," and all those "current and former officials" of a prior administration, the current ones having yet to be replaced.

Absentglare said:
"Leaking" unclassified information isn't a crime.

Leaking one-sided "government" memo-for-records created and designed as retaliation in case one is discharged? That may need some investigation as...treason? Who knows. :shrug:

Absentglare said:
It is obvious from this point that you are not well-informed on this issue. You are taking the incompetent presidents lawyer of last resort at his word, and that is the issue. You see, the NYT did not report the information specified until after the tweet. Your source is confusing a different report.

Actually (here we go with your typical personal attacks) I posted a video of the statement of the President's lawyer. I listed the main points because most people don't watch. So in the first place I am not responsible for what HE states.

In the second place, I am responsible for my own position posts and for pointing out/arguing about things I agree with as I did just now.

You're welcome. :2bow:

Redress · Jun 9, 2017

Taylor said:
Unless this was the first time:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/...omey-warns-he-may-cancel-press-briefings.html

Comey's words:

My judgment was I needed to get that out into the public square. So I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. I didn't do it myself for a variety of reasons, but I asked him to because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel

From your source:

Mr. Comey declined to make that pledge. Instead, Mr. Comey has recounted to others, he told Mr. Trump that he would always be honest with him, but that he was not “reliable” in the conventional political sense

Your source is based on statements he made to others, not the memo.

Captain Adverse · Jun 9, 2017

Taylor said:
Unless this was the first time:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/...omey-warns-he-may-cancel-press-briefings.html

Thank you! :applaud

I was trying to find that myself.

Captain Adverse · Jun 9, 2017

Redress said:
Comey's words:

From your source:

Your source is based on statements he made to others, not the memo.

...and your assumption is that Kasowitz was talking about the memo.

Napoleon · Jun 9, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
So instead of a false "False," it was in fact true. Dude, you are clearly unclear here. Trump was not under investigation. Comey stated the only reason he refused to say so publicly was because he had gotten burnt by the Hillary second investigation announcement thanks to Wieners computer history.

What he said is being deliberately misrepresented. He said that Trump was not personally under investigation at the time he was asked. Comey did not want to publicly state that at the time because there was/is a distinct possibility that Trump could become a person of interest at any time thereafter in the course of the investigation - and he was right.

Captain Adverse said:
Actually it remains True, simply because the Flynn investigation is not about "impeding the election" it was about failing to report contacts with foreign agents during the campaign when he filled out his SF86.

No, it's false because the investigation of Flynn was about his perjured statements to the FBI about undisclosed contacts and the nature of those conversations and relationships with Russian government officials. The investigation of Flynn rolls up under the the larger investigation of collusion with the Russian government.

Captain Adverse said:
It was a point made to show that other "intelligence leaders" did not think there was any effort to obstruct investigations.

And that point is wrong because that wasn't their testimony.

Captain Adverse said:
Leaking one-sided "government" memo-for-records created and designed as retaliation in case one is discharged? That may need some investigation as...treason? Who knows. :shrug:

Lol. He was a private citizen who released his own notes about conversations he had with the President.

Taylor · Jun 9, 2017

Redress said:
Comey's words:

From your source:

Your source is based on statements he made to others, not the memo.

What do you mean by "the" memo? There are many.

Redress · Jun 9, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
...and your assumption is that Kasowitz was talking about the memo.

No, I do not assume that, he explicitly states that. Here, so you do not get confused again, here is his actual comments, and not what some one told you to think about what he said READ: Trump's lawyer's statement on Comey hearing - CNNPolitics.com:

Although Mr. Comey testified he only leaked the memos in response to a tweet, the public record reveals that the New York Times was quoting from these memos the day before the referenced tweet, which belies Mr. Comey's excuse for this unauthorized disclosure of privileged information and appears to entirely retaliatory

ajn678 · Jun 9, 2017

Absentglare said:
False. Comey confirmed that he told President Trump that President Trump was not personally the subject of a counterintelligence investigation. President Trump begged him to say this publicly, but Comey refused because it would create a duty to correct if that were to change.

False, i don't know where you pulled that from, but it wasn't any part of Comey's testimony that i observed.

False, Comey's testimony simply shows that Comey felt that President Trump attempted to impede the investigation into Flynn. Comey did not claim to have an exhaustive understanding of every activity President Trump had necessary to make the wild claim indicated by the motivated reasoning you cite.

First mostly true claim here. Well done.

Mary Poppins could make the same claim. Why do you think this is relevant?

Same.

Yes, they're called the presidents advisors and they're leaking like a rusty sieve because of his rank incompetence.

"Leaking" unclassified information isn't a crime.

It is obvious from this point that you are not well-informed on this issue. You are taking the incompetent presidents lawyer of last resort at his word, and that is the issue. You see, the NYT did not report the information specified until after the tweet. Your source is confusing a different report.

Its 100% clear that you didn't listen to the testimony based on your responses.

Captain Adverse · Jun 9, 2017

Napoleon said:
What he said is being deliberately misrepresented. He said that Trump was not personally under investigation at the time he was asked. Comey did not want to publicly state that at the time because there was/is a distinct possibility that Trump could become a person of interest at any time thereafter in the course of the investigation - and he was right.

(Sigh) He could honestly say without threat to his integrity that the President was not currently under investigation at this time. Then say "no comment" if asked about the future possibility. That is what an honest and supportive member of a President's Administration would do. Tell the truth, then withhold comment until the situation changes. Then be honest again with the new information. He was trying to be a politician instead of a government agent.

Napoleon said:
No, it's false because the investigation of Flynn was about his perjured statements to the FBI about undisclosed contacts and the nature of those conversations and relationships with Russian government officials. The investigation of Flynn rolls up under the the larger investigation of collusion with the Russian government.

The original investigation of Flynn was about failing to report foreign contacts when asked in testimony and when filling out his clearance request forms. There are many reasons why he might have done this without it being a link to any collusion. There is still no evidence as far as being reported that his dishonesty had anything to do with foreign collusion to undermine the election.

Napoleon said:
And that point is wrong because that wasn't their testimony.

That actually was the tenor of their testimony. They were supportive and refused to answer any questions they deemed might serve to undermine the President...or did you miss those "complaints" about refusal to respond to certain questions?

Napoleon said:
Lol. He was a private citizen who released his own notes about conversations he had with the President.

Actually, at the time he wrote those memos, he was still the Head of the FBI.

Is it not true that Comey testified that after a dinner conversation, and again after a one-on-one conversation after a staff meeting he met and talked with Trump privately? That he "felt" he was being pressured by conversations about loyalty, and a "hope" he could "let Flynn go?"

That unlike his conversation with then Attorney General Lynch, who he states clearly tried to interfere with his investigation of Hillary's emails as a direct result of a meeting with President Clinton, he felt no need to create such a memo?

IMO the man knew his days were numbered. That he was "memorializing" things to cover his ass and undermine the President if and only if he thought he was going to be fired.

There was no "honorable" desire to preserve "obstruction" for the record, or he would have done the same for Ms. Lynch.

Captain Adverse · Jun 9, 2017

Redress said:
No, I do not assume that, he explicitly states that. Here, so you do not get confused again, here is his actual comments, and not what some one told you to think about what he said READ: Trump's lawyer's statement on Comey hearing - CNNPolitics.com:

Stop quoting CNN and listen to the direct statements of the man in the video I provided, starting at 4:30.

Then read the QUOTES provided in the article by the New York Times on MAY 11, 2017.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/...omey-warns-he-may-cancel-press-briefings.html

Are they or are they not quotes which seem to be from the Comey memos?

Redress · Jun 9, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
Stop quoting CNN and listen to the direct statements of the man in the video I provided, starting at 4:30.

Then read the QUOTES provided in the article by the New York Times om MAY 11, 2017.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/...omey-warns-he-may-cancel-press-briefings.html

Those are quotes which seem to be from the memos.

OK, this is a big ****ing word, so you might have to use a dictionary...what I linked is what is called a "transcript". What I quoted where his exact words. Do try and fail less miserably...

Captain Adverse · Jun 9, 2017

Redress said:
OK, this is a big ****ing word, so you might have to use a dictionary...what I linked is what is called a "transcript". What I quoted where his exact words. Do try and fail less miserably...

Fine, from YOUR citation then:

Although Mr. Comey testified he only leaked the memos in response to a tweet, the public record reveals that the New York Times was quoting from these memos the day before the referenced tweet, which belies Mr. Comey's excuse for this unauthorized disclosure of privileged information and appears to entirely retaliatory.

Now...go to the May 11, 2017 article and READ the alleged quotes of sources close to Comey.

Redress · Jun 9, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
Fine, from YOUR citation then:

Now...go to the May 11, 2017 article and READ the alleged quotes of sources close to Comey.

Been there, done that,quoted from the article in this very thread.

Moot · Jun 9, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
Actually what he said was that the President never told him to stop investigating, that the President also said he would be happy to see the investigation complete to show he was innocent. That the President also told him he would be happy to find out if any of his people were involved.

Well...

On March 22, less than a week after being confirmed by the Senate, Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats attended a briefing at the White House together with officials from several government agencies. As the briefing was wrapping up, Trump asked everyone to leave the room except for Coats and CIA Director Mike Pompeo.

The president then started complaining about the FBI investigation and Comey’s handling of it, said officials familiar with the account Coats gave to associates. Two days earlier, Comey had confirmed in a congressional hearing that the bureau was probing whether Trump’s campaign coordinated with Russia during the 2016 race.

After the encounter, Coats discussed the conversation with other officials and decided that intervening with Comey as Trump had suggested would be inappropriate, according to officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal matters.

The events involving Coats show the president went further than just asking intelligence officials to deny publicly the existence of any evidence showing collusion during the 2016 election, as The Washington Post reported in May. The interaction with Coats indicates that Trump aimed to enlist top officials to have Comey curtail the bureau’s probe...."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...a-810pm:homepage/story&utm_term=.9e42b28e6cc8

No wonder Coats refused to answer. The next day, Comey testified that he thinks Trump fired him because he wouldn't curtail the investigation on Flynn or the Russians. Looks like there might be some truth to it after all.

If he said he never felt pressured, then there is no reason to believe he lied unless you are biased and want to believe otherwise.

Thats a logical fallacy. No one said he lied only that they wouldn't answer the questions. And one does not have to be biased to think otherwise or different than you...especially when you're wrong most of the time. :roll:

This is believable simply because you wish to right? As opposed to the fact that Comey stated that he "feared" to respond in the negative to what he "believed" Trump was saying by the Flynn "Hope" comment...because why? He thought if he were honest he would be fired? :roll:

No...this is believable because of the evidence showing that the date of the NYT article doesn't match what Trump's lawyer said about Trump's tweet...from your OP (see bolded)

9. That Comey's justification he leaked privileged information in response to a negative Trump tweet was belied by the publication in the NY Times of the information the day before the tweet.

The NYT article wasn't published the day before Trump's tweet....it was actually published four days after. That's what Redress was trying to tell you...but you failed to comprehend. :roll:

Trump's tweet....

James Comey better hope that there are no "tapes" of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!
8:26 AM - 12 May 2017

NYT article...

Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation

By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT MAY 16, 2017

Got it? :roll:

Absentglare · Jun 9, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
So instead of a false "False," it was in fact true. Dude, you are clearly unclear here. Trump was not under investigation. Comey stated the only reason he refused to say so publicly was because he had gotten burnt by the Hillary second investigation announcement thanks to Wieners computer history.

You claimed that Comey argued President Trump has never been under investigation. He is not in a position to know that.

That's, of course, discounting the portion of his testimony where he acknowledged that some of the FBI senior leadership disagreed with him in that inso far President Trump's campaign, of which he is a necessary part, was under investigation.

Captain Adverse said:
I pulled that from the video I provided. Didn't you bother to watch it?

You and the lawyer who wasn't under oath. Comey didn't claim that.

Captain Adverse said:
Actually it remains True, simply because the Flynn investigation is not about "impeding the election" it was about failing to report contacts with foreign agents during the campaign when he filled out his SF86.

No. Comey did not attempt to claim that he was in a position to guarantee that President Trump never tried to influence the investigation into Russia.

In fact, Comey explicitly said the opposite during his testimony, claiming that he was taking the president at his word when the president claimed Comey was fired to interfere with the Russia investigation.

Captain Adverse said:
Thanks, but it was a quote from the video, no credit due to me.

Again, you apparently didn't look at the video. It was a point made to show that other "intelligence leaders" did not think there was any effort to obstruct investigations.

That wasn't what they claimed, and even then, it's irrelevant. You can't very well defend a rapist by appealing to the fact that the rapist didn't also rape two other women.

Captain Adverse said:
NO. :no: They are called Deputy FBI chiefs, Acting Attorney Generals, NSA "Independent Contractors," and all those "current and former officials" of a prior administration, the current ones having yet to be replaced.

That sounds like speculation, though mine was, too.

Captain Adverse said:
Leaking one-sided "government" memo-for-records created and designed as retaliation in case one is discharged? That may need some investigation as...treason? Who knows. :shrug:

He claimed that, after his first conversation with President Trump, he was concerned that the president would then lie about the conversation. That's why he wrote it down; to safeguard the truth from the president.

Captain Adverse said:
Actually (here we go with your typical personal attacks) I posted a video of the statement of the President's lawyer. I listed the main points because most people don't watch. So in the first place I am not responsible for what HE states.

In the second place, I am responsible for my own position posts and for pointing out/arguing about things I agree with as I did just now.

You're welcome. :2bow:

Okay.

Captain Adverse · Jun 9, 2017

Moot said:
On March 22, less than a week after being confirmed by the Senate, Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats attended a briefing at the White House...As the briefing was wrapping up, Trump asked everyone to leave the room except for Coats...

From the same Article:

The nation’s top intelligence official told associates in March that President Trump asked him if he could intervene with then-FBI Director James B. Comey...according to officials.

Whoever those "officials" were, from your own article they were not present when whatever the President and Mr. Coates talked about occurred. Just more "unnamed current and former government officials" reporting what they claim someone else said to someone else.

Quoting a second-hand story is called "Hearsay" and hearsay is not admissible as evidence of fact.

Moot said:
No wonder Coats refused to answer. The next day, Comey testified that he thinks Trump fired him because he wouldn't curtail the investigation on Flynn or the Russians. Looks like there might be some truth to it after all.

Only in the minds of conspiracy theorists, who accept anything however unsupported except by hearsay "reports" from clearly "trustworthy" anonymous sources. :roll:

Moot said:
No...this is believable because of the evidence showing that the date of the NYT article doesn't match what Trump's lawyer said about Trump's tweet...from your OP (see bolded). Got it? :roll:

From the evidence presented, Comey memorialized two incidents, the dinner meeting and a private conversation after a staff meeting.

On May 11, 2017, the day prior to Mr. Trump's Tweet, the NYT published this article referring to "associates" Mr. Comey allegedly told about the discussion that occurred during the dinner meeting.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/...omey-warns-he-may-cancel-press-briefings.html

A review of that story clearly shows it is THIS "memo" that Mr. Kasowitz was talking about when he spoke at the press conference.

Redress said:
Been there, done that,quoted from the article in this very thread.

Then, just as with Moot in regards to this point, you promptly ignored the facts in favor of your own narrative. :shrug:

Absentglare said:
You claimed that Comey argued President Trump has never been under investigation. He is not in a position to know that.

The actual quote from the video:

President was not under investigation as part of any probe into Russian interference.

READ: Trump's lawyer's statement on Comey hearing - CNNPolitics.com

I was paraphrasing. But truth to tell, at the time there were no Congressional Investigations, and there was no FBI or Justice Dept. Investigations involving Mr. Trump. No other Agency is empowered to conduct the kinds of investigations being discussed. :shrug:

Absentglare said:
No. Comey did not attempt to claim that he was in a position to guarantee that President Trump never tried to influence the investigation into Russia.

Not argued. The point was that he did state that the President had no problem with the investigation, that he would be happy to know if any of his "satellites" had done anything wrong. That does not indicate that Mr. Trump was attempting in any way to impede the investigation into Russian collusion. In fact, the only Comey testimony that indicates even the shadow of "obstruction" was the "hope you can let Flynn go" comment. Which at the time seems more likely than not to refer to the failure to report contacts rather than concerns about Russian collusion.

Absentglare said:
That wasn't what they claimed, and even then, it's irrelevant. You can't very well defend a rapist by appealing to the fact that the rapist didn't also rape two other women.

It is relevant to the issue of not trying to impede any investigation. If you can't see that...fine.

Absentglare said:
He claimed that, after his first conversation with President Trump, he was concerned that the president would then lie about the conversation. That's why he wrote it down; to safeguard the truth from the president.

Yes, the FIRST conversation at the dinner. The one that was reported in the NYT article on May 11, 2017. The article people keep claiming has nothing to do with Comey memos.

I answered all three of you in one reply, because it is clear I am arguing the same points over and over with three people who fail to see the whole picture.

Now I don't think I have anything more to add. I think I have made the points as clearly as possible. What you take away is up to you. :coffeepap:

JackA · Jun 9, 2017

Napoleon said:
Lol. He was a private citizen who released his own notes about conversations he had with the President.

True. You can't leak if you're no longer part of the plumbing.

Napoleon · Jun 9, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
(Sigh) He could honestly say without threat to his integrity that the President was not currently under investigation at this time. Then say "no comment" if asked about the future possibility. That is what an honest and supportive member of a President's Administration would do. Tell the truth, then withhold comment until the situation changes. Then be honest again with the new information. He was trying to be a politician instead of a government agent.

A politician? No, he just did not want the investigation to appear peacemeal and unorganized and have to reverse or correct a public statement later.

Captain Adverse said:
The original investigation of Flynn was about failing to report foreign contacts when asked in testimony and when filling out his clearance request forms. There are many reasons why he might have done this without it being a link to any collusion. There is still no evidence as far as being reported that his dishonesty had anything to do with foreign collusion to undermine the election.

Publicly available direct evidence? No, but what is publicly known is that Flynn asked for immunity in exchange for testimony not about his failure to report contacts but regarding the Trump campaign's ties and interactions with the Russian government. Flynn clearly believes that these ties and interactions were criminal in nature and that he was a part of it otherwise he wouldn't have made his testimony contingent upon an immunity package.

Captain Adverse said:
That actually was the tenor of their testimony. They were supportive and refused to answer any questions they deemed might serve to undermine the President...or did you miss those "complaints" about refusal to respond to certain questions?

The tenor of the conversation was that there were things they weren't willing to say in a public hearing.

Absentglare · Jun 9, 2017

Captain Adverse said:
The actual quote from the video:

READ: Trump's lawyer's statement on Comey hearing - CNNPolitics.com

I was paraphrasing. But truth to tell, at the time there were no Congressional Investigations, and there was no FBI or Justice Dept. Investigations involving Mr. Trump. No other Agency is empowered to conduct the kinds of investigations being discussed. :shrug:

Again, false. The investigations DO, in fact, very much involve President Trump. You are confusing the fact that, before Comey's firing, President Trump, himself, was not personally a suspect in that investigation.

You are so sloppy with the language, it's hard to tell if it's dishonest or just careless. Do you realize there are real investigations into President Trump's campaign? Do you understand that the special prosecutor specifically responded to the firing of Comey- a signal that President Trump himself is now part of Mueller's investigation?

Captain Adverse said:
Not argued. The point was that he did state that the President had no problem with the investigation, that he would be happy to know if any of his "satellites" had done anything wrong.

Again, false! You are taking this out of context in a way that changes its meaning. President Trump asked Comey to "lift the cloud" of the Russian investigation. Comey insisted that it was important to complete the investigation, and that's when President Trump tried to push all the blame onto some satellite scapegoat like the coward he is.

Captain Adverse said:
That does not indicate that Mr. Trump was attempting in any way to impede the investigation into Russian collusion.

This is just a bald faced lie. He told Comey he wanted loyalty. He told Comey to make the investigation go away. Then he fired Comey when Comey neglected to do so. Then he admitted on TV that he fired Comey to make it go away.

Your sentence above is so completely wrong, i feel like you could not have possibly payed any real attention to this issue.

Captain Adverse said:
In fact, the only Comey testimony that indicates even the shadow of "obstruction" was the "hope you can let Flynn go" comment. Which at the time seems more likely than not to refer to the failure to report contacts rather than concerns about Russian collusion.

That's not true, either. And no, it wasn't about the failure to report contacts or the merits of the case, it was President Trump asking for a personal favor to stop digging.

Captain Adverse said:
It is relevant to the issue of not trying to impede any investigation. If you can't see that...fine.

No it isn't. It's actively misleading. Go read my example again until you understand why that is.

Captain Adverse said:
Yes, the FIRST conversation at the dinner. The one that was reported in the NYT article on May 11, 2017. The article people keep claiming has nothing to do with Comey memos.

Yes, that's because details from that dinner were reported from another source. You do realize that juicy details are leaking out of this administration like mad? Comey's memo wasn't leaked until the day after the tweet. The fact that you'd trust the lawyer who isn't under oath to describe the events that Comey, himself, responded to is shocking. It is truly a case of you choosing to believe something in defiant opposition to the overwhelming unanimity of evidence.

Captain Adverse said:
I answered all three of you in one reply, because it is clear I am arguing the same points over and over with three people who fail to see the whole picture.

Ironic.

Captain Adverse said:
Now I don't think I have anything more to add. I think I have made the points as clearly as possible. What you take away is up to you. :coffeepap:

Your pre-emptive surrender is most appreciated.

Marc Kasowitz's Public Statement for Mr. Trump After the Comey Testimony.

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!

Moot

Absentglare

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage

Taylor

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage

Napoleon

Taylor

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!

ajn678

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!

Moot

Absentglare

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage

JackA

Napoleon

Absentglare