Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to Kill Flynn Investigation

a reply to: Grambler

Obama said that when?

James Rosen made a good point. Historically, Comey has threatened to resign when asked to do something he considered immoral or unethical (the Ashcroft incident).

So, if Comey thought Trump was asking him to do something unethical, he would have threatened to resign at the time.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Indigo5

What memo? Has it actually been provided to anyone?

That BS will last 24 hours.

Congress will request the Memos...Plural..

The WH is interestingly not disputing the existence of the Memos, meetings, times, dates...only saying that Comey's accounting of the conversations are not accurate.

They have no choice but to go up against the beloved former head of the FBI that they just canned.

Meanwhile...Senate Intelligence Committee is figuring how best to request the "Tapes" Trump claims to have in the Oval Office (Where this particular meeting took place)..

Given this story...it looks like the Senate Intelligence Committee is going to be forced to demand the tapes now, via supeona if necessary..

Where-upon I have no doubt Trump will do what Nixon did and edit the tapes...Cuz for some strange reason he is like a theater actor reliving Nixons scandal..but without the intelligence of Nixon.

a reply to: ketsuko

Twenty bucks says it's written in a moleskine notebook.

a reply to: queenofswords

No I think it was filed in February.
Any paperwork should be able to be dated anyway through forensics, so I doubt anyone could pass off new ink as 6 months old.

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: whywhynot

In this case, the ultimate source is identified as Comey himself which makes it substantially different from other articles citing leaks from anonymous sources.

Comey can kill this straight away by saying it's false if he chooses. Furthermore, according to reports from a few days ago, Comey has expressed a willingness to testify before Congress but only in a public. You can imagine that this will be one of the very first questions asked by a Democrat if it hasn't been shot down by Comey before that time.

Comey lost all credibility when he didn't report it in writing when/if it happened.

If it did happen, he may not have reported it immediately because it could be just a smaller part of a much bigger issue/case.

I find the way many are approaching these issues to be highly concerning. We are being told about many problems occurring within the Trump administration regarding the investigations, etc, and far too many people are jumping in to discredit the reports as a knee-jerk reaction.

At what point do the defenders stop with the partisan hackery, take notice of what is going on and wait for the smoke to clear before they jump to conclusions?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Grambler

Saying that you think someone is innocent is not the same thing as saying drop the investigation. If I knew someone was innocent, I would welcome an investigation - it will officially show that nothing wrong was done.

The law that people are citing says attempting to influence an investigation. If Trump saying I think hes innocent I hope you will drop the investigation is influence, then so is Obama saying he felt Hillary was innocent.

Now if Trump threatened comey or told him he had to drop the investigation, then I am totaally for investigating him for that. But that doesn't seem to be the claim that is being made.

We have no idea how often Presidents recommend suggestions about cases to the FBI director, because we have never had the deep state declare war on a President like they are now, and releasing every detail of every classified conversation.

But anti trump people will cheer this on.

Do you now think their might be a special investigation might be in order. It's comming....

forget Comey, bring in Flynn, Stone and Bannon...

originally posted by: queenofswords
James Rosen made a good point. Historically, Comey has threatened to resign when asked to do something he considered immoral or unethical (the Ashcroft incident).

So, if Comey thought Trump was asking him to do something unethical, he would have threatened to resign at the time.

Trump asked for his loyalty...he did not pledge it.

Trump asked him to drop the Flynn Investigation. He did not.

What was he supposed to resign for? To let Trump replace him with puppet?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Grambler

Obama said that when?

4-10-2016

Why is that relevant?

a reply to: Indigo5

If there are memos, then what are two anonymous sources doing running around with them and how do we know they are reporting them accurately?

Again, none of this was verified by the Times before they ran off to report it blindly. Even Dan Rather produced source docs, albeit forged ones.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Indigo5

What memo? Has it actually been provided to anyone?

They have no choice but to go up against the beloved former head of the FBI that they just canned.

Beloved!!!!

Hahahaha!

Yep the guy that almost everyone on all sides wanted canned at one point is now beloved!

originally posted by: olaru12
Do you now think their might be a special investigation might be in order. It's comming....

forget Comey, bring in Flynn, Stone and Bannon...

Any special investigation needs to be appointed to get to the bottom of the leaks and that will uncover it all on all sides.

The leakers need to be brought in too. They are not following the procedure and don't tell me the Democrats wouldn't love to help a whistleblower.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: whywhynot

In this case, the ultimate source is identified as Comey himself which makes it substantially different from other articles citing leaks from anonymous sources.

Comey can kill this straight away by saying it's false if he chooses. Furthermore, according to reports from a few days ago, Comey has expressed a willingness to testify before Congress but only in a public. You can imagine that this will be one of the very first questions asked by a Democrat if it hasn't been shot down by Comey before that time.

Comey lost all credibility when he didn't report it in writing when/if it happened.

If it did happen, he may not have reported it immediately because it could be just a smaller part of a much bigger issue/case.

I find the way many are approaching these issues to be highly concerning. We are being told about many problems occurring within the Trump administration regarding the investigations, etc, and far too many people are jumping in to discredit the reports as a knee-jerk reaction.

At what point do the defenders stop with the partisan hackery, take notice of what is going on and wait for the smoke to clear before they jump to conclusions?

At what point will anti trumpers acknowledge an unprecedented attack on the president by the intelligence community and their press allies?

Haha most of you believe all this bs. Wow. Well i get back at you after the next bombshell has been dropped and blown the russian narrative right out of the water. Get comfy and prepare yourselves. Fair warning i'm going to make a i told you so thread in the near future.

a reply to: Grambler

Agree. This is spot on.
The intent is massively important in any determination of obstruction of justice and it has to be clear that the President tried to use his authority to stop the investigation into Flynn.... If all he said was 'I hope', then democrats are going to be disappointed again. Certainly the hysterical types who are already spitting out the verdict of obstruction of justice don't know what they are taking about.

We need a lot more information.

a reply to: Indigo5

Over 6 million dollars made Comey working for Clintons associates before he became FBI director tells me that he was already a puppet.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Indigo5

What memo? Has it actually been provided to anyone?

They have no choice but to go up against the beloved former head of the FBI that they just canned.

Beloved!!!!

Hahahaha!

Yep the guy that almost everyone on all sides wanted canned at one point is now beloved!

That's the problem. Both sides, Left and Right, wanted to can the guy for simply doing his job in a manner that benefited the truth...not the politics or agendas each side had.

The Right is no different than the Left here, except they had the power and the president to follow-through with the firing.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Grambler

Saying that you think someone is innocent is not the same thing as saying drop the investigation. If I knew someone was innocent, I would welcome an investigation - it will officially show that nothing wrong was done.

The law that people are citing says attempting to influence an investigation. If Trump saying I think hes innocent I hope you will drop the investigation is influence, then so is Obama saying he felt Hillary was innocent.

NOPE...

What did Obama say again? And to which reporter?

Cuz Trump said "Drop this" to the Director of the FBI that reported to him in a private Oval Office meeting after dismissing everyone else.

a reply to: Indigo5

Wait, wait, wait ...

We went from "I hope you can let this go." to "Drop this."

That's a pretty big difference.