**ComeyMania! Thread**

[StrangeSox]

The statement by Trump's lawyer in response to Comey's testimony is... amazing. It's got misspellings, inconsistent and weird spacing, and grammatical errors. It looks like it was written by a college freshman with dreams of going to law school.

 

It's like that thing with his "doctor" during the campaign again.

 

The major factual errors, to put it nicely, coupled with essentially accusing Comey of committing perjury is pretty striking.

 

Julie Davis

@juliehdavis

Kasowitz is mistaken re NYT stories on Comey memos. We never quoted memos prior to Trump's 5/12 tweet re tapes; 1st story doing so was 5/16

1:16pm · 8 Jun 2017

 

 

[Middle Buffalo]

The major factual errors, to put it nicely, coupled with essentially accusing Comey of committing perjury is pretty striking.

Facts don't matter. Sadly, I'm not even kidding. It's out there, and the Fox News types will run with it and keep repeating it. But, decidedly not "fake news."

[Dick Allen]

Facts don't matter. Sadly, I'm not even kidding. It's out there, and the Fox News types will run with it and keep repeating it. But, decidedly not "fake news."

Alternative facts are still facts. They just aren't true.

[StrangeSox]

The "he only said 'I hope'!" defense won't hold up

 

https://twitter.com/adamliptak/status/872835418194157568

For instance: Eighth Circuit affirmed an obstruction of justice enhancement based partly on an “I hope” statement

 

https://twitter.com/victoriakwan_/status/872852857132916736

Here's another: 5th Circuit affirms obstruction of justice conviction based in part on "I'm just hoping" comment (US v. Bedoy, 827 F.3d 495)

 

[StrangeSox]

It was actually mentioned at least twice.

[NorthSideSox72]

Lynch's behavior was out of line, though clearly, asking to call something a "matter" isn't at nearly the level as asking to have an investigation go away entirely.

 

That said, it wasn't the subject of the hearing really, and only came up as a topic because some Republicans were defending the "team" by trying to distract.

 

[illinilaw08]

I'm not sure if it matters how the revelation came about. Everyone is so concerned with election interfence and the hearing provided us with a bonafide instance of election interference. 99% of things done in congress are dont to support the team. All of a sudden that is an issue when deciding what is permissible or important?

 

Rabbit, you are a guy who consistently states that he has no political affiliation. But everything that you post in here is critical of the Democrats. And when you do criticize Trump or the Republicans, you seem to do it with a "but" and then downplay (see, the great "President's words don't matter" discussion). So, rather than talk about Loretta Lynch - who clearly is not relevant to the Russia investigation which was the point of the Comey testimony - I am genuinely curious to hear how you feel about Comey's testimony as it applies to Donald Trump. Not how it applies to the Democrats, not how Russia is a red herring and has been debunked. How do you feel about sworn testimony that Donald Trump asked Comey to drop the investigation into Flynn?*

 

* Note just for the sake of making sure this is out there. Lynch asked Comey to downplay the investigation into Clinton's e-mails by referring to it as a matter instead of an investigation. This is bad! But Comey did NOT testify that Lynch asked Comey to make the investigation go away. That's worse behavior! And Lynch asking Comey to downplay the investigation blew up in the Democrats' face since that led to all of Comey's actions regarding the e-mails during the campaign.

[caulfield12]

I would think the consistent forceful way that a sitting president was accused of lying over and over again and/or being completely ignorant or obtuse about how government works would be somewhat salient points.

 

But Trump lies so much it doesn't matter because everything is fake news. Oh, and the Russians beyond a doubt tried to interfere with our sacred Democratic process.

 

It's impossible from listening to both men not to side with Comey's version of events. Comey showed his human side in admitting that shock/surprise and "job security" played a bigger role in his non-reaction (directly) to Trump ("honest loyalty" and then the idea of letting good guy Flynn go) when he had the best opportunity to push back. And then the fact that there were no witnessses.

 

Watchers of Homeland, House of Cards and Scandal know how that usually works out for those on the wrong side of the president. Look what happened to Sally Yates, for example. And will soon happen to Jeff Sessions, despite being one of Trump's biggest earliest supporters.

 

[StrangeSox]

From the closed session today, sessions had a third undisclosed contact with Russians.

 

https://twitter.com/PeterAlexander/status/8...src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

Comey hinted at this during open testimony when he implied that the FBI worried sessions was compromised prior to his recusal.

[caulfield12]

I don't think it's a important whether Lynch's corrupt behavior ended up hurting the left or not. If you would, since I appreciate your level headedness around here, speak to my post that precedes yours. What is the takeaway today? To me it's Loretta Lynch is as corrupt as I said she was when she had the tarmac meeting last year and John McCain needs to disappear from the public eye for good.

 

I don't think we learned all that much today otherwise . I'd like to hear your take and I'm open to admitting otherwise, but it's a lot of he said, he said. Trump's side says this and Comey says that.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40205461

There's your BBC headline. This is the way it's playing outside the US.

 

 

Then we have the two main Trump stories at Fox News. Lynch is not one of the featured talking points there, either.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/06/08/...bstruction.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/08...x-fbi-boss.html

 

 

Wall Street Journal

https://www.wsj.com/articles/comey-says-tru...-fbi-1496932512

"Trump admin defamed him and the FBI"

 

NY Daily News (very conservative paper)

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/c...ticle-1.3231773

Comey throws Jeff Sessions under the bus

 

Sessions is going to be THE big story when he testifies next week if he doesn't get fired or resign...but still probably can't avoid it.

Edited June 8, 2017 by caulfield12

[StrangeSox]

Comey stating forcefully that he viewed Trump's "I hope" statements as a directive and Trump's lawyer laying out a defense that's basically accusing Comey of perjury and illegally leaking information seem to be the major takeaways. Also Comey openly calling POTUS a liar.

 

The Lynch thing was apparently already reported on back in April, and while it was certainly dumb and scummy, it doesn't seem to have had any impact or been an attempt to stop investigation rather than euphemising it.

Edited June 8, 2017 by StrangeSox

[illinilaw08]

I don't think it's a important whether Lynch's corrupt behavior ended up hurting the left or not. If you would, since I appreciate your level headedness around here, speak to my post that precedes yours. What is the takeaway today? To me it's Loretta Lynch is as corrupt as I said she was when she had the tarmac meeting last year and John McCain needs to disappear from the public eye for good.

 

I don't think we learned all that much today otherwise . I'd like to hear your take and I'm open to admitting otherwise, but it's a lot of he said, he said. Trump's side says this and Comey says that.

 

Honestly, Comey came off as extremely credible today. And he reaffirmed several times that he thinks Trump is a liar. Based on the way Comey has carried himself over the last several months, and the way that Trump has carried himself over the last several months, I don't think there's any doubt that Comey's testimony is more credible than Trump.* I don't think that there is any reasonable doubt after today that Trump told Comey that he "hoped" the investigation into Flynn went away, and I don't think there's any doubt that Comey interpreted that as a directive from the President to end the investigation into Flynn. That testimony, combined with what followed - Trump firing Comey because the Russia investigation wouldn't go away (Trump's own words) - makes this look really, really bad for Trump.

 

Thanks for the compliment. I try to come off as level headed. Sometimes that doesn't happen though.

 

* Per Politifact, 69% of Trump's statements qualify as Mostly False, False, or Pants on Fire. http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

[illinilaw08]

I don't think it's a important whether Lynch's corrupt behavior ended up hurting the left or not. If you would, since I appreciate your level headedness around here, speak to my post that precedes yours. What is the takeaway today? To me it's Loretta Lynch is as corrupt as I said she was when she had the tarmac meeting last year and John McCain needs to disappear from the public eye for good.

 

I don't think we learned all that much today otherwise . I'd like to hear your take and I'm open to admitting otherwise, but it's a lot of he said, he said. Trump's side says this and Comey says that.

 

Now, why do you think that Comey's testimony on Lynch ranks as very credible, and his testimony on Trump ranks as "he said, he said."

[StrangeSox]

From the closed session today, sessions had a third undisclosed contact with Russians.

 

https://twitter.com/PeterAlexander/status/8...src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

Comey hinted at this during open testimony when he implied that the FBI worried sessions was compromised prior to his recusal.

 

If the only thing that happens out of all of this chaos is sessions being forced out, I'll take it.

 

[caulfield12]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/08/politics/com...sers/index.html

Winners/Losers from today's testimony

[Middle Buffalo]

Rabbit, you are a guy who consistently states that he has no political affiliation. I am genuinely curious to hear how you feel about Comey's testimony as it applies to Donald Trump.

Agreed. It would be interesting and informative to hear how someone who is independent viewed the testimony. I don't think raBBit addressed il08's request above.

[RockRaines]

Lynch's behavior was out of line, though clearly, asking to call something a "matter" isn't at nearly the level as asking to have an investigation go away entirely.

 

That said, it wasn't the subject of the hearing really, and only came up as a topic because some Republicans were defending the "team" by trying to distract.

Calling something a matter instead of an investigation doesnt change what it was and what it is. And what it was today was an attempt by the republican shills to try and distract from the fact the sitting president committed a felony while in offce.

[illinilaw08]

I typically think Comey does come off as credible because both sides can't decide whether they like him. I don't think whether Trump is a liar is really up for debate and I agree at face value that I'd take Comey's word over Trump's. Hoping an investigation would go away isn't really a crime. I think it's disputable whether that's a directive. He didn't qualify that Trump's words nauseated him or left him rogue on the matter like he did with Lynch. It seems like Lynch's directive, as he put it, had more of an effect on him than Trump's yearning. Now people will say that's not the point of the investigation but I don't see how that matters.

 

I do see how you could look at Trump's firing of Comey and say it looks very bad for Trump but if you're Trump and you know you didn't collude with Russia to interfere with the election do you keep giving validity to that conspiracy? The investigation on Russia has been going on since before the election with two different administrations and a full-fledged effort from the majority of the media and they still can't find a smoking gun.

 

The people in Congress who investigate it - Waters - "There's no evidence of collusion." Feinstein - "I haven't seen any evidence." Comey on the NYT piece that started the conspiracy - "almost entirely wrong."

 

At some point, whether people like Trump or not, they're going to have to let him go on with his administration.

 

See SS's post earlier in the thread. Both the 5th and the 8th Circuit have found that "hoping" someone will do something can uphold an obstruction of justice conviction. The President clearing the room and telling the guy investigating Flynn that he "hopes" the investigation will go away sounds a lot like the depiction of Don Corleone in the Godfather "hoping" that someone will do what he wants before a horse head ends up in the guy's bed.

 

And you keep misconstruing people's quotes on Russia. Flynn resigned because of his undisclosed contacts. Kushner didn't disclose trying to create a backchannel to Russia before Trump was inaugurated (something the WH hasn't denied). Sessions allegedly failed to disclose 3 separate contacts with Russia prior to Trump's inauguration. The Russia investigation might not reach Trump, and to date, there's no evidence that it does, but a lot of his associates are still under investigation.

 

Last point here, investigations like this take a long time - Watergate was at least 2 years long and that didn't involve a foreign power. Drawing conclusions on the investigation is ridiculous. It might all come to nothing, but we're not even close to being able to draw the conclusion that Trump and his administration are clean.

 

 

[RockRaines]

The people in Congress who investigate it - Waters - "There's no evidence of collusion." Feinstein - "I haven't seen any evidence." Comey on the NYT piece that started the conspiracy - "almost entirely wrong."

Thats a nice way for Fox news to put it, however he called the article wrong but confirmed that Russia actively influenced the election, confirmed directly that two people associated with Trump and his team were personally in contact with Russia and also that his team was under investigation. He also had MORE information on that subject that could not be discussed in the open hearing.

 

Thats several pieces of direct evidence pointing at the Trump team and at Trump himself. He also revealed MORE than enough direct evidence of obstruction of justice which an amateaur prosecutor could bring to trial.

[StrangeSox]

Comey went to sessions and told him to never leave him alone with Trump again after the "I hope" meeting. I don't know how you walk away from 2 1/2 hours of testimony about Trump's inappropriate behavior with maybe two minutes spent on Lynch with the idea that Comey wasn't really bothered by Trump and the whole infestation is bs and should be ended anyway but Lynch is the big story here.

[RockRaines]

Comey went to sessions and told him to never leave him alone with Trump again after the "I hope" meeting. I don't know how you walk away from 2 1/2 hours of testimony about Trump's inappropriate behavior with maybe two minutes spent on Lynch with the idea that Comey wasn't really bothered by Trump and the whole infestation is bs and should be ended anyway but Lynch is the big story here.

Also Sessions was implicated in having inappropriate contact with the Russians.

 

but yeah, someone who isnt in their job in the government is the big story. Fox News spins again

[caulfield12]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40206241

 

Unanswered questions remaining...

[Jerksticks]

I typically think Comey does come off as credible because both sides can't decide whether they like him. I don't think whether Trump is a liar is really up for debate and I agree at face value that I'd take Comey's word over Trump's. Hoping an investigation would go away isn't really a crime. I think it's disputable whether that's a directive. He didn't qualify that Trump's words nauseated him or left him rogue on the matter like he did with Lynch. It seems like Lynch's directive, as he put it, had more of an effect on him than Trump's yearning. Now people will say that's not the point of the investigation but I don't see how that matters.

 

I do see how you could look at Trump's firing of Comey and say it looks very bad for Trump but if you're Trump and you know you didn't collude with Russia to interfere with the election do you keep giving validity to that conspiracy? The investigation on Russia has been going on since before the election with two different administrations and a full-fledged effort from the majority of the media and they still can't find a smoking gun.

 

The people in Congress who investigate it - Waters - "There's no evidence of collusion." Feinstein - "I haven't seen any evidence." Comey on the NYT piece that started the conspiracy - "almost entirely wrong."

 

At some point, whether people like Trump or not, they're going to have to let him go on with his administration.

 

Well said. I'm very very independent myself. I know this isn't a popular opinion on here but I still maintain that the Clinton campaign used the Russia hacking situation as a distraction from the somehow ignored conspiracy against Sanders. That deflection has become this huge thing and I would bet my house that nobody on Trump's team including Trump is/was acting as some kind of Agent for Russia. A lot of people have already suffered and been smeared because of this.

 

I don't like Trump but I want him to be able to get to work being President without all this baggage. Some of his ideas are bold and I'd like to see him get his shot. But it's not a good thing for America if the deck is stacked against the President, no matter who it is. Trump's gotta do his part and shut up about it too.

 

Like you said, at some point let's get back to working on America. A whole ton of people didn't like Obama's lack of any leadership position prior to becoming President but he still got his shot. His legacy is Donald Trump like it or not.

 

[The Beast]

Well said. I'm very very independent myself. I know this isn't a popular opinion on here but I still maintain that the Clinton campaign used the Russia hacking situation as a distraction from the somehow ignored conspiracy against Sanders. That deflection has become this huge thing and I would bet my house that nobody on Trump's team including Trump is/was acting as some kind of Agent for Russia. A lot of people have already suffered and been smeared because of this.

 

I don't like Trump but I want him to be able to get to work being President without all this baggage. Some of his ideas are bold and I'd like to see him get his shot. But it's not a good thing for America if the deck is stacked against the President, no matter who it is. Trump's gotta do his part and shut up about it too.

 

Like you said, at some point let's get back to working on America. A whole ton of people didn't like Obama's lack of any leadership position prior to becoming President but he still got his shot. His legacy is Donald Trump like it or not.

As an independent myself, sure, I'll let him get to work, even if I don't like him. But his policies and agenda aren't working for all Americans, like he had promised he would work for everyone on election night. I doubt he gets impeached, but I would like to see things get done in congress that aren't just a republican agenda. I wish there were more independents and moderates that worked together and everything wasn't so partisan, but I am probably in the minority here.

[caulfield12]

Well said. I'm very very independent myself. I know this isn't a popular opinion on here but I still maintain that the Clinton campaign used the Russia hacking situation as a distraction from the somehow ignored conspiracy against Sanders. That deflection has become this huge thing and I would bet my house that nobody on Trump's team including Trump is/was acting as some kind of Agent for Russia. A lot of people have already suffered and been smeared because of this.

 

I don't like Trump but I want him to be able to get to work being President without all this baggage. Some of his ideas are bold and I'd like to see him get his shot. But it's not a good thing for America if the deck is stacked against the President, no matter who it is. Trump's gotta do his part and shut up about it too.

 

Like you said, at some point let's get back to working on America. A whole ton of people didn't like Obama's lack of any leadership position prior to becoming President but he still got his shot. His legacy is Donald Trump like it or not.

 

Then Trump shouldn't have surrounded himself with characters like Roger Stone, Carter Page, Flynn, Cohen, Manafort, Jeff Sessions, empowering Jared Kushner to feel like he was the 2nd coming of Camelot along with Ivanka, etc.

 

Hubris run amok.

 

You're probably right, it's going to be a situation where "obstruction of justice/treason/high crimes and misdeanors" as a standard of impeachment is not QUITE met, certainly not with a GOP Congress.

 

The best thing Trump can hope for right now is that he can move on...but that's going to prove impossible while the likes of Sessions and Kushner are still serving in his administration. As we heard over and over again, there's a "cloud" hanging over Washington.

 

Jamming through legislation like getting rid of Dodd/Frank or the health care of millions of Americans while everyone is distracted by gossip doesn't do the American people any good, either. Let's not forget that Trump's tweets (the Saturday morning one about Obama wiretapping him, bad bad guy....this time about having "tapes" of the conversations) have led to MANY of the problems currently plaguing his administration. Take Twitter away from him, and his golf clubs, and MAYBE the country would actually be able to move forward instead of whipsawing back and forth everyday with the latest bombshell. Alienating the entire media and declaring war on them hasn't exactly helped matters, has it?

 

 

 

But yeah, as a Democrat, I'd be MORE THAN HAPPY to move on (barring criminal charges against any of the names above) as long as Kushner and Sessions were GONE GONE GONE.

 

I think most Republicans would agree with that as well....but would Trump? Sure, with Sessions, he wants/ed to fire him for months now since his recusal (which he blames for starting the chain of events leading directly to the independent prosectur)...but will he do that to his own family?

 

And Eric Trump is not exactly contributing to a sense of bipartisanship questioning whether Democrats are people...Donald Trump, Jr's. idiotic tweets (reminiscent of Ozzie's kids on social media) and this:

 

In the mid 1980s, Chawla's father, Dr. V.K. Chawla, wrote a letter to Trump, asking for his financial help in opening his first hotel.

 

In response, Trump called Dr. Chawla at his Greenwood convenience store. Trump declined to help Chawla secure the necessary capital but suggested he apply for a Small Business Administration minority loan. Chawla opened his first hotel, a Comfort Inn, in 1989, according to the family's business website.

 

...

 

Originally slated as Lyric Hotel and Spa, with an estimated cost of $8 million, the Cleveland project turned into the SCION at West End with a projected cost of $15 million after Suresh Chawla met with then presidential candidate Donald Trump, according to the Mississippi Business Journal.

 

In December 2016, Chawla told The Journal he met with Trump on a campaign stop in Jackson at Gov. Phil Bryant's request.

 

Trump and Chawla reportedly talked about the Mississippi company's Cleveland hotel that was under construction at the time. Trump told Chawla to "think grand," The Journal reported.After their conversation, Chawla said plans changed and the vision for the hotel expanded.

 

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/local/2017/06/05/hotelier-partners-trump-family/371309001/

 

 

It seems insane to me with all the problems in the US today that the Mississippi delta needs a $15 million dollar luxury hotel...and that Eric Trump can't run a charity event without most of the proceeds going back to his own family. Regardless of what you think about their politics, they're all very self-centered people who care more about themselves than the good of the country. Or care more about "branding" and "Q ratings" and being liked/adored/admired.

 

 

They don't realize that if they actually ACCOMPLISHED things while in government to really help the middle class and lower middle class (many of their voters), then they would be re-elected, because the Dem's sure can't get their act together, either.

I mean, they're turning their backs on the environment, on most of our historical allies since World War II in Europe, on the TPP, on pretty much everything that Obama fought for, and he's STILL at 35-40% approval numbers.

Edited June 9, 2017 by caulfield12