Comey is about to fuck Trump.


WASHINGTON — President Trump asked the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, to shut down the federal investigation into Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, in an Oval Office meeting in February, according to a memo Mr. Comey wrote shortly after the meeting.

“I hope you can let this go,” the president told Mr. Comey, according to the memo.

The existence of Mr. Trump’s request is the clearest evidence that the president has tried to directly influence the Justice Department and F.B.I. investigation into links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia.

Mr. Comey wrote the memo detailing his conversation with the president immediately after the meeting, which took place the day after Mr. Flynn resigned, according to two people who read the memo. The memo was part of a paper trail Mr. Comey created documenting what he perceived as the president’s improper efforts to influence a continuing investigation. An F.B.I. agent’s contemporaneous notes are widely held up in court as credible evidence of conversations.

<snip>

Mr. Comey created similar memos — including some that are classified — about every phone call and meeting he had with the president, the two people said. It is unclear whether Mr. Comey told the Justice Department about the conversation or his memos.

Well, I just hope he stashed copies in a safe place he can still access.
 
Are memos Comey wrote admissible? He could have written anything. His word against Trump's. Probably going to need more than Comey's memos. Actual transcriptions of meetings, recordings. All Trump has to do is lie and claim that the memos are fakes. Third party witnesses to talks? If not than the RWCJ will just go on about fake news, confidential sources and liberal lies.

Here's hoping Comey does have recordings of meetings!
 
Are memos Comey wrote admissible? He could have written anything. His word against Trump's. Probably going to need more than Comey's memos. Actual transcriptions of meetings, recordings. All Trump has to do is lie and claim that the memos are fakes. Third party witnesses to talks? If not than the RWCJ will just go on about fake news, confidential sources and liberal lies.

Here's hoping Comey does have recordings of meetings!



Trump certainly implied he had tapes. This might be a good time to hear them!

Comey walked away from that meeting knowing two things: first, his job was very much in jeopardy; and two, the president was obstructing justice. His decision to leave a paper trail was a wise one.
 
246_1000.gif


247_1000.gif


"Dad, you must have jumped our car over fifty yards!"

Nothing to be proud of Russ. Fifty yards...
 
From the article...

Mr. Comey shared the existence of the memo with senior F.B.I. officials and close associates. The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of the memo to a Times reporter.

An unidentified associate that read an unclassified memo to an unidentified Times reporter?
 
The Post is reporting that DOJ saw the memo. Which means Sessions and Rosenstein signed off on Comey's firing knowing the POTUS interfered with an ongoing FBI investigation.
 
From the article...



An unidentified associate that read an unclassified memo to an unidentified Times reporter?

It's called the news not court room testimony. Unidentified sources have always been around. Lots of court cases involving reporters being cited for contempt when refusing to reveal sources. Old news!

Without Deep Throat Nixon may have kept his position.
 
Are memos Comey wrote admissible? He could have written anything. His word against Trump's. Probably going to need more than Comey's memos. Actual transcriptions of meetings, recordings. All Trump has to do is lie and claim that the memos are fakes. Third party witnesses to talks? If not than the RWCJ will just go on about fake news, confidential sources and liberal lies.

Here's hoping Comey does have recordings of meetings!

From the article
An F.B.I. agent’s contemporaneous notes are widely held up in court as credible evidence of conversations.

So there is legal precedence.
 
In '72 they had tapes. What do they have now?

In 1972 they also had an actual crime -- a break-in where the suspects were caught in the act. Justice was clearly obstructed with regard to an attempt to impede that prosecution.

What do we have now? An active investigation into WHETHER a crime was committed which the President may or may not have requested be terminated PERHAPS under the theory that since Flynn was let go there was nothing left to be gained as a result of continuing it. To whatever degree that request, if made, was a bad idea, it MAY still fall short of a prosecutable crime in the same way that Hillary's bad idea of a private email server ALSO fell short of the same standard.

If you're a Hillary fan and comfortable with the latter rationale, why would you NOT at least entertain the possibility of the former rationale?
 
In 1972 they also had an actual crime -- a break-in where the suspects were caught in the act. Justice was clearly obstructed with regard to an attempt to impede that prosecution.

What do we have now? An active investigation into WHETHER a crime was committed which the President may or may not have requested be terminated PERHAPS under the theory that since Flynn was let go there was nothing left to be gained as a result of continuing it. To whatever degree that request, if made, was a bad idea, it MAY still fall short of a prosecutable crime in the same way that Hillary's bad idea of a private email server ALSO fell short of the same standard.

If you're a Hillary fan and comfortable with the latter rationale, why would you NOT at least entertain the possibility of the former rationale?
Something something crime something something cover-up.
 
I'd better make sure there's enough popcorn in the house for tomorrow morning's Twitter peruse.



Without Deep Throat Nixon may have kept his position.


And with deep throat, Nixon might not have been so uptight all the time.

THANK YOU! Next show starts at 9.


The Post is reporting that DOJ saw the memo. Which means Sessions and Rosenstein signed off on Comey's firing knowing the POTUS interfered with an ongoing FBI investigation.


Comey had already testified that the FBI was looking into the allegation of Russian election tampering, which means it was looking into Flynn. But what this memo shows is just how interested Trump was in making sure that his firing of Flynn ended any further FBI interest in Flynn.
 
Are memos Comey wrote admissible? He could have written anything. His word against Trump's. Probably going to need more than Comey's memos. Actual transcriptions of meetings, recordings. All Trump has to do is lie and claim that the memos are fakes. Third party witnesses to talks? If not than the RWCJ will just go on about fake news, confidential sources and liberal lies.

Here's hoping Comey does have recordings of meetings!

Remember how Scooter Libby went to jail while trying to cover for Dick Cheney who outed an undercover CIA agent? The reason he went to jail was because he lied, and the reason we know he lied is because he had written in his journal/diary certain items which came to light during the trial.

The same here. The burden would be on the con artist to prove a memo produced by Comey was fake. And no, simply saying, "FAKE!" doesn't count.

That Comey showed the memo to multiple other people only strengthens his case and further demolishes the con artist's.
 
Article II of the United States Constitution states in Section 4 that "The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors."

High crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct peculiar to officials, such as perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, conduct unbecoming, and refusal to obey a lawful order.

*abuse of authority, intimidation, failure to supervise with failure to supervise being the one I think would stick best, would appear an actual crime is not required*
 
I'll believe Comey drops the dime on Trump when he does it and I'll believe the Republicans will follow up on that when they do it.

Incidentally, impeachment is a political process. They can pick and choose what leads to it and whether it vacates the office and they can decide just how serious any "proof" is of anything that they want. It's a matter of having the votes and voting them. There are multiple issues that could be jazzed up to get Trump. It's a little naive to either believe or hold that they have to have firm legal foundations based on criminality or anything else. To agonize over criminal charges is just another facet of shilling for Trump.

But I'll believe the Republicans will impeach Trump when they do so. In the meantime I'll just shake my head on why they haven't already cut him out of the herd. Surely Pence is more to their liking (and won't improve the lot of their opponents much at all).
 
There's a thread on the first page of GB about how Comey was incorrect about the Weiner emails.
 
I think Pence is in it just as deep as 'Rump.

A double boot may be in order.
 
Back
Top