• 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!

Trump accuses Comey of lying to Congress

Grand Mal said:
He stood up to the President, refused to go along to get along, and got fired for it.
Click to expand...

Why didnt he stand up to Obama and Lynch ?

Also when Comey was fired Trump wasnt under investigation, the fact that he was never under investigation was never leaked.
So whats Trumps motive to fire Comey other than Comey being a dishonest hack ?
 
Fenton Lum said:
Yes, your entire system is corrupt and this whole "yeah but your guys are more corrupt than my guys" shtye has worn a bit thin.
Click to expand...

Quite honestly, I agree. Which is why it is funny to me that Clinton seems to think that those voters who believed Trumps lies over hers are deplorable.

But forgive me for this McCain moment. Hillary, her comments, nor her emails should be a part of this thread.
 
reinoe said:
Mueller and Comey are close personal friends. I have no doubt he'll do everything in his power to save Comey. I hate to say it but Mueller is a swamp dweller and Trump is not draining the swamp at all.
Click to expand...

I think you're being unfair here. If they're close personal friends, I'm sure he will be motivated to save Comey, but this doesn't mean that he will ignore the law or cut corners.
 
Fenton said:
Why didnt he stand up to Obama and Lynch ?

Also when Comey was fired Trump wasnt under investigation, the fact that he was never under investigation was never leaked.
So whats Trumps motive to fire Comey other than Comey being a dishonest hack ?
Click to expand...

Flynn, remember? Comey defied Trump on the Flynn matter, and Trump's obsession with loyalty from his underlings is well-known. You have a better explanation for firing the guy he heaped praise on several times just recently?
 
Absentglare said:
Umm, because it obviously wasn't political naïvety, that's why President Trump made sure to usher everyone else our of the room first.

What's "chicken****" about leaking a memo to the press...?
Click to expand...

With all due respect, if I have to explain this to you, I'm pretty sure that you aren't going to appreciate my point of view.
 
Grand Mal said:
I don't know. He worked for the AG, who answers to the President. Maybe he thought it wasn't his place to correct the President, it was the AG's job.
Click to expand...

That is still a cop out. He is responsible for making decisions that affect 300+ million Americans and yet he is trying to tell me he can't tell the President that meeting alone is inappropriate?
 
Chaddelamancha said:
That is still a cop out. He is responsible for making decisions that affect 300+ million Americans and yet he is trying to tell me he can't tell the President that meeting alone is inappropriate?
Click to expand...

He's a cop. Was a cop. He's best off staying as out of politics as he can. Whether you think he should have refused the President's request for a meeting is pretty much moot. He did what he thought was right and got fired for it.
Doesn't seem to matter much, unless we're trying to belittle him to make a point about something that does matter.
 
Grand Mal said:
He's a cop. Was a cop. He's best off staying as out of politics as he can. Whether you think he should have refused the President's request for a meeting is pretty much moot. He did what he thought was right and got fired for it.
Doesn't seem to matter much, unless we're trying to belittle him to make a point about something that does matter.
Click to expand...

One thing that seems pretty clear to me after watching the hearing yesterday is that Comey, at the least, didn't do enough to remain apolitical.
 
I find it fascinating that Comey, as the investigator, was able to bring to an end the whole Clinton email issue, where there was factual evidence (classified information leaked from a private server) stating that there was nothing for the AG to prosecute. But, for several months as the investigator regarding the Trump/Russia issue he hasn't found a shred of evidence of collusion but nonetheless has no objection with this going on through the special prosecutor. He is sounding like a bitter ex employee who might have allowed all of this to pass until Trump maligned him and the FBI. He seems to like keeping the "cloud" hanging over the administration, but even he knows that there is nothing there re Trump and Russia with regards to collusion. That being said, the whole Russian hacking issue is worthy of looking into. Remember, this didn't start during the Trump administration. The inept Obama administration knew this was going on yet was unable or unwilling to do anything about it.
 
Grand Mal said:
Flynn, remember? Comey defied Trump on the Flynn matter, and Trump's obsession with loyalty from his underlings is well-known. You have a better explanation for firing the guy he heaped praise on several times just recently?
Click to expand...

We learned yesterday that Flynn wasnt even a central part of the investigation and that Trump asked Comey to crhck out people around him

Lol....you know what yesterday reminded me of ? The night of the election.
It was that crushing to all the news media outlets and angry dejected Libs everywhere
 
nota bene said:
With all due respect, if I have to explain this to you, I'm pretty sure that you aren't going to appreciate my point of view.
Click to expand...

Please explain to me what is "chicken****" about providing information to the press.
 
RenoCon said:
I find it fascinating that Comey, as the investigator, was able to bring to an end the whole Clinton email issue, where there was factual evidence (classified information leaked from a private server) stating that there was nothing for the AG to prosecute. But, for several months as the investigator regarding the Trump/Russia issue he hasn't found a shred of evidence of collusion but nonetheless has no objection with this going on through the special prosecutor. He is sounding like a bitter ex employee who might have allowed all of this to pass until Trump maligned him and the FBI. He seems to like keeping the "cloud" hanging over the administration, but even he knows that there is nothing there re Trump and Russia with regards to collusion. That being said, the whole Russian hacking issue is worthy of looking into. Remember, this didn't start during the Trump administration. The inept Obama administration knew this was going on yet was unable or unwilling to do anything about it.
Click to expand...

I think you're confusing "factual evidence" with "motivated belief of factual evidence". Both investigations involve information that we simply don't have access to.
 
Grand Mal said:
He's a cop. Was a cop. He's best off staying as out of politics as he can. Whether you think he should have refused the President's request for a meeting is pretty much moot. He did what he thought was right and got fired for it.
Doesn't seem to matter much, unless we're trying to belittle him to make a point about something that does matter.
Click to expand...

His behavior isn't moot at all. His actions need to be scrutinized. He starting documenting each meeting with Trump from the very first meeting. That's strange and he doesn't give a really good answer as to why. Surely he is used to people lying, whether to him or to the press. Yet he had never written memos detailing any other conversation. I think that needs to be questioned a little more. Saying Trump is a liar isn't good enough.

Repeatedly meeting with the President alone when you feel it is inappropriate is strange and needs to be questioned.

I agree that what Comey was standing up for was the correct thing to do. It's inappropriate for the President to ask the FBI Director to end an investigation. But Comeys behavior seems like a man hoping that he could catch Trump doing something illegal and not just a man trying to not let the President influence his investigation.
 
Fenton said:
We learned yesterday that Flynn wasnt even a central part of the investigation and that Trump asked Comey to crhck out people around him

Lol....you know what yesterday reminded me of ? The night of the election.
It was that crushing to all the news media outlets and angry dejected Libs everywhere
Click to expand...

Difference is, election night had a definite numerical result. Yesterday is being spun in all directions by everybody, according to how they want it to be.
You conservatives need to be reminded that, in the real world, (if politics is 'in the real world') just saying something doesn't make it so. All this is a loong way from being resolved.
 
Absentglare said:
I think you're confusing "factual evidence" with "motivated belief of factual evidence". Both investigations involve information that we simply don't have access to.
Click to expand...

Shhhh!!!!! Don't go against the talking points and spoil the false narrative!!!

NO EVIDENCE!! WITCH HUNT!!!!
 
Comey problems with Trump started when he said--- "It makes me mildly nauseous to think that we might have had some impact on the election,”

That was a direct slap and insult at Trump winning the presidency. And as we know Trump does NOT take insults well. So Trump has now declared war on Comey. If Trump has tapes that Comey is lying, then Trump should release those tapes. But he won't because he don't need to release them.

Trump knows all he has to do is lie, deflect and minimize Comey and most of his supporters will defend him. It's a tactic Trump uses against the media, he flat out lies, the media reports it, Trump screams 'fake news' and his gullible Trumpsters believe him.

Expect the same in Trump's war with Comey.
 
beefheart said:
So...Trump can prove his statements by releasing the tapes that he lied about having, or taking the stand and testifying under oath.

Neither will happen because he is a liar, and a coward.
Click to expand...

Trump would know if there were tapes. I suspect he was just bloviating. Comey's explanation that he leaked the memos through a third party (that is cowardly) in order to get a special counsel involved lacks credibility. Think about it. He has a contemporaneous written account of his interactions with Trump. What is the legal advantage of releasing these to the NYT? If there were tapes they might contradict his recollection of events. It seems from a legal standpoint it would be best to hang onto these and avoid any potential conflict with recorded discussions. If there are no tapes, why not just hang onto the memos in case they are needed to defend Comey's actions at some point in the future? Sending the memos to the NYT was purely political, just like stating that there was nothing to prosecute in the Clinton email investigation. Comey needed to be fired. He is a political hack.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
I do wonder what his motives were. He would willing go along with Lynch and call it a matter, but he wouldn't acquiesce to the Presidents request to tell the press that he wasn't under investigation? Comey did say that he expected the press to call the "matter" involving Clinton an "investigation", but it still sways the narrative in a more positive direction for Clinton. He won't afford the same courtesy to the President?
Click to expand...

I'm surprised you don't see the clear different between someone who pressures the FBI director to refer to an investigation in a certain way (Lynch) and someone who pressures the FBI director to end an investigation into one of his associates (Trump).
 
Napoleon said:
I'm surprised you don't see the clear different between someone who pressures the FBI director to refer to an investigation in a certain way (Lynch) and someone who pressures the FBI director to end an investigation into one of his associates (Trump).
Click to expand...

I am talking about Comeys reluctance to tell the press that President Trump wasn't under investigation. Why wouldn't he say that? Yet he would follow Lynchs lead and call Clintons investigation a "matter". Why afford Hillary Clinton a courtesy that he wouldn't for the President?
 
Absentglare said:
I think you're confusing "factual evidence" with "motivated belief of factual evidence". Both investigations involve information that we simply don't have access to.
Click to expand...

Yet one was abruptly terminated by the "investigator" Comey and there other goes on because the "investigator" has an ax to grind in the absence of any proof.
 
RenoCon said:
Trump would know if there were tapes. I suspect he was just bloviating. Comey's explanation that he leaked the memos through a third party (that is cowardly) in order to get a special counsel involved lacks credibility. Think about it. He has a contemporaneous written account of his interactions with Trump. What is the legal advantage of releasing these to the NYT? If there were tapes they might contradict his recollection of events. It seems from a legal standpoint it would be best to hang onto these and avoid any potential conflict with recorded discussions. If there are no tapes, why not just hang onto the memos in case they are needed to defend Comey's actions at some point in the future? Sending the memos to the NYT was purely political, just like stating that there was nothing to prosecute in the Clinton email investigation. Comey needed to be fired. He is a political hack.
Click to expand...

I would wager that there are tapes and that President Trump saw their dinner meeting in a different light than Comey did. President Trump probably thought that he got his message across to Comey and feels the tapes would vindicate him. Now that he knows Comey wrote memos with a different interpretation of the meeting(s), he will never release the tapes.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
I am talking about Comeys reluctance to tell the press that President Trump wasn't under investigation. Why wouldn't he say that? Yet he would follow Lynchs lead and call Clintons investigation a "matter". Why afford Hillary Clinton a courtesy that he wouldn't for the President?
Click to expand...

They're two different requests. One is to refer to an investigation that the whole world knows is ongoing as a "matter." The other is a request to imply that the President was cleared of any wrongdoing in an ongoing investigation that hasn't reached any definitive conclusion on that matter.
 
j-mac said:
In over 2.5 hours of testimony yesterday there were many things that both sides can cling to in forming their talking points going forward, however this part disturbed me the moment it was said, and was a complete lie by Comey....

When asked he said that he woke up after Trump tweets about him in the middle of the night and then told his friend to get out this information...Which may be a violation of law, and should have prompted the panel yesterday to read him his rights, but he couldn't have leaked after the tweet in question, because the story outlining his memo hit before that tweet....

Bottom line, at best Comey was a vindictive disgruntled fired employee, and is dishonest, or he has been one of the leakers all along, and should be prosecuted....

Now, will anything happen? probably not, after all, his buddy Muller is now in charge of this ridiculous waste of time and money.....
Click to expand...

The tweet was on May 12th. The NYT memo story was May 16th. Unless I have been using calendars wrong my whole life...
 
Grand Mal said:
Difference is, election night had a definite numerical result. Yesterday is being spun in all directions by everybody, according to how they want it to be.
You conservatives need to be reminded that, in the real world, (if politics is 'in the real world') just saying something doesn't make it so. All this is a loong way from being resolved.
Click to expand...

We leared Trump was never under investigtion, and that Trump even asked Comey to look into his associates

Theres a meme going around of milleniums sitting in bars with long faces watching Comey's testimony. Bars that opened up at 9 am in the hopes that his testimony would spell the end for Trumps Presidency

There's no way for the left to spin this in their favor, it was a disaster.
 
nota bene said:
I wonder about that too and also why he didn't just tell his politically naïve boss that talking privately was inappropriate. This just doesn't make sense to me. His answer to Senator Feinstein's question was inadequate.

His leaking through his law school buddy was really chicken****, I think. I was pretty conflicted about his firing until yesterday. Now I'm not.
Click to expand...

I think Comey was/is a victim of intimidation.....perhaps that makes him weak....bottom line he was fired for not bowing down to Trump - pledging loyalty or ending an investigation that Trump made verbally clear he "hoped" would end....that should bother the people of this country!!....yet they are more bothered by Comey making sure his memos got in front of the right people after his unwarranted firing. But that's how America now rolls...we would rather keep giving Trump a free pass than expect or demand accountability/honesty from our president.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom