StrangeSox Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 (edited) Something that I've seen mentioned in recent weeks was that during the Clinton administration, a lot of staffers were wrecked by legal bills because they all had to keep legal counsel through several (faux) scandals. I think Clinton ultimately paid for it, but I really don't see notoriously cheap Trump doing that. The main effect of this might be even fewer people willing to work for an administration that's already critically understaffed. Here's a Politico article on it: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/20/t...ers-fees-238631 Edited June 9, 2017 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 9, 2017 -> 08:29 AM) I haven't really seen anyone make a solid argument or any argument at all that Comey's personal memos would be classified or privileged communication beyond the surface level conflation of "leaks!" It'll be interesting to see how this and the broader defense of "Comey is a lying liar who lies except about the parts that were not-bad for me, those are all 100% true" defense they're running with. So apparently the most that can ultimately result from this is a note in Comey's DoJ personnel file. It's also been pointed out that Trump shared information regarding his private conversations with Comey first in the firing letter, and that he has not actually claimed any executive privilege. I'm not even sure how this is supposed to work as some sort of distraction or delay tactic. I don't think his lawyers do, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 QUOTE (raBBit @ Jun 8, 2017 -> 04:48 PM) 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? You just keep deflecting from the main discussion here - which is why everyone sees that you are really very much a Republican, and will defend your "side" instead of sticking with the subject. Lynch is an aside, and sure, if you want to see it pursued, go ahead. But it's kind of ridiculous that you keep saying things like this... QUOTE (raBBit @ Jun 8, 2017 -> 04:50 PM) What is the big takeaway from this hearing? I don't feel like much of a victory came for either side but at least the Lynch nugget confirmed past suspicions of corruption. ...ignoring the obvious take-aways about a sitting President trying to make an investigation go away by attempting to intimidate the director of the FBI, and instead focusing on something that wasn't a topic of the hearing. People might actually believe you aren't a dyed-in-the-wool GOP'er if you at least acknowledged the obviously huge issue of Trump being pretty clearly guilty of Obstruction of Justice. To wit... QUOTE (raBBit @ Jun 8, 2017 -> 05:17 PM) 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. ...the bolded is why Trump is guilty. Obstruction doesn't require impact, it only requires action, which is why what Trump did clearly falls within that space. Did Lynch too? Maybe, I don't really know, but again it's not the subject at hand. You just keep ignoring the core facts here, focusing on a side note. And if it's he said, he said, really, it's no contest and Trump has already lost. Comey has a career-long reputation for being very honest (even if his methods have been questionable at times), and has a paper trail for his protection on this. Trump has made even the most corrupt politicians look like paragons of honesty, taking lying to a new and amazing height. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 9, 2017 -> 08:17 AM) You just keep deflecting from the main discussion here - which is why everyone sees that you are really very much a Republican, and will defend your "side" instead of sticking with the subject. Lynch is an aside, and sure, if you want to see it pursued, go ahead. But it's kind of ridiculous that you keep saying things like this... ...ignoring the obvious take-aways about a sitting President trying to make an investigation go away by attempting to intimidate the director of the FBI, and instead focusing on something that wasn't a topic of the hearing. People might actually believe you aren't a dyed-in-the-wool GOP'er if you at least acknowledged the obviously huge issue of Trump being pretty clearly guilty of Obstruction of Justice. To wit... ...the bolded is why Trump is guilty. Obstruction doesn't require impact, it only requires action, which is why what Trump did clearly falls within that space. Did Lynch too? Maybe, I don't really know, but again it's not the subject at hand. You just keep ignoring the core facts here, focusing on a side note. And if it's he said, he said, really, it's no contest and Trump has already lost. Comey has a career-long reputation for being very honest (even if his methods have been questionable at times), and has a paper trail for his protection on this. Trump has made even the most corrupt politicians look like paragons of honesty, taking lying to a new and amazing height. I don't recall saying, well...what about Nixon? or Iran-Contra? during the Bill Clinton impeachment trial. Maybe because we had a sense all along he was going to be censured since the economy was going along so well at that time. And the seriousness of that case (more like partisan witch hunt) in terms of national sovereignty, not even the same ballpark as today's situation with at least 7 Trump administration figures/advisors. Clapper said even Watergate pales in comparison. Edited June 9, 2017 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 Interesting how COmey saying he didn't recommend a special prosecutor because the case had nothing to it and it would imply it did. He thought he solved it by being harsher than his own report said, but just created a different scenario where people thought the FBI wanted to prosecute but felt they couldn't to a high profile individual. Unforeseen consequences would be a good title for a Comey book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 8, 2017 -> 10:02 PM) I think I see about 5 people who aren't white in that photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 (edited) http://thefederalist.com/2017/06/09/cnns-w...mingly/?ref=yfp CNN's war against Trump going swimmingly Amazing proof cited!!! James Comey’s testimony shows Hillary Clinton was right (on Trump) all along (but not enough cared) https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/201...ight?yptr=yahoo Edited June 9, 2017 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 (edited) Trump is currently unequivocally accusing Comey of lying under oath right now. That seems like a pretty big deal. Said he'd be 100% willing to go under oath to make these claims about Comey, says he'll tell us about the tapes "shortly" Trump flatly denied ever even saying that he "hoped" the Flynn investigation would go away, while the main GOP/RNC line of defense yesterday was that your boss/the POTUS saying "I hope" isn't an order. video of the exchange: https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/873258253567787010 Edited June 9, 2017 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illinilaw08 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 9, 2017 -> 01:12 PM) Trump is currently unequivocally accusing Comey of lying under oath right now. That seems like a pretty big deal. Said he'd be 100% willing to go under oath to make these claims about Comey, says he'll tell us about the tapes "shortly" Trump flatly denied ever even saying that he "hoped" the Flynn investigation would go away, while the main GOP/RNC line of defense yesterday was that your boss/the POTUS saying "I hope" isn't an order. video of the exchange: https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/873258253567787010 Please have him go under oath. Please have him go under oath... ETA: I know that's never going to happen, but still. Edited June 9, 2017 by illinilaw08 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 Seth Abramson ✔ @SethAbramson BREAKING: Senator Reed of the Senate Intel Committee says Trump *will* be deposed, *under oath*, by Special Counsel Mueller at some point. 12:13 PM - 9 Jun 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 Is everything recorded in the Oval Office? Everyone puts tapes in quotes or asterisks, is there actual tapes of the conversations no matter what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 9, 2017 -> 02:41 PM) Is everything recorded in the Oval Office? Everyone puts tapes in quotes or asterisks, is there actual tapes of the conversations no matter what? No. Trump may record, but if he had a tape of Comey totally contradicting his testimony, I'm pretty sure we would have heard it already. The question is just like when he cleared to room to talk to Comey alone, if he does record, why can't he produce a tape that contradicts Comey? If he did, this whole thing might be over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 9, 2017 -> 02:41 PM) Is everything recorded in the Oval Office? Everyone puts tapes in quotes or asterisks, is there actual tapes of the conversations no matter what? You'd be kind of stupid to record. Basically anything like that is pubic record and subject to laws like archival and such. But then again Donald Trump is a special kind of stupid, soooo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 I'm not asking if Donald recorded, I'm asking if there is an audio system that records everything. If Trump had the option to record himself I don't know that he would be dumb enough to record himself saying dumb s***. But then again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 9, 2017 -> 03:02 PM) I'm not asking if Donald recorded, I'm asking if there is an audio system that records everything. If Trump had the option to record himself I don't know that he would be dumb enough to record himself saying dumb s***. But then again Are you kidding me? He would love to listen to himself during Fox News commercials. His associates said he recorded in his Trump Tower office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 9, 2017 -> 03:02 PM) I'm not asking if Donald recorded, I'm asking if there is an audio system that records everything. If Trump had the option to record himself I don't know that he would be dumb enough to record himself saying dumb s***. But then again Nixon had one, that didn't work out well, I don't know that anyone since has Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 9, 2017 -> 03:52 PM) You'd be kind of stupid to record. Basically anything like that is pubic record and subject to laws like archival and such. But then again Donald Trump is a special kind of stupid, soooo Donald Trump saying he'll go under oath to testify may be the dumbest possible thing he could suggest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 9, 2017 Share Posted June 9, 2017 (edited) http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option...p;jumival=19293 Comey Hearing, Little New, More Doubts About Russia Gate For BB Edited June 10, 2017 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 Senate Intel to get Comey memos http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/28/r...s-russia-240053 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 (edited) WH not complying with House requests for information Edited June 29, 2017 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts