Comey to testify before Senate as soon as next week

a reply to: Indigo5

But a month ago, he said this to the Senate Judiciary Committee: "I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience."

www.npr.org...

It's not happened in my experience........

I would bet he will not purger himself.

Oh and I am not a liar. That was uncalled for.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Indigo5


So you LIED? haven't we been through this before?


Can you tell the difference here...

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Indigo5

So is comey going to lie now? He already told congress UNDER OATH he was not pressured by anyone in any investigation.

But a month ago, he said this to the Senate Judiciary Committee: "I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience."

www.npr.org...

Your lie comes fully into focus when you include the question he was asked..Which you edited from your quote.

HIRONO: So if the attorney general or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation?

COMEY: In theory, yes.

HIRONO: Has it happened?

COMEY: Not in my experience. Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that — without an appropriate purpose. I mean where oftentimes they give us opinions that "we don't see a case there and so you ought to stop investing resources in it." But I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience.

www.npr.org...

He NEVER said what you repeatedly claimed...

He said the DOJ has never "halted" an FBI investigation for political purposes in his experience.

You claimed this lie from the above

"He already told congress UNDER OATH he was not pressured by anyone in any investigation."

Never happened..

Pressure? Obstruction of Justice?....that is NOT HALTING and investigation.

The Question also referred to the DOJ ordering an investigation stopped..
Not the President attempting to influence an investigation and obstruct justice.

a reply to: Indigo5

you can highlight whatever you choose
you can interpret it how you choose
i have not lied
But I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience. 

Congress gets to ask what "a situation " means
Congress gets to ask what "a political reason" means

what i posted is true

you dont like it thats too bad
it is not a lie
you are garbage for reaching there

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Indigo5

you can highlight whatever you choose

Angry that I literally quoted you and the hearing transcript?

i have not lied

yes you have. Repeatedly...and continue to do so.

Congress gets to ask what "a situation " means

And they did...

HIRONO: So if the attorney general or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation?


AG..DOJ...HALTING and Investigation.

You claimed that Comey said..

"told congress UNDER OATH he was not pressured by anyone in any investigation."

The President pressuring Comey aka Obstructing Justice...is not the AG or DOJ ordering an investigation halted.


And you continue to claim that LIE..

you are garbage for reaching there

Hmmm...Garbage for quoting you or the actual transcript of what was said?

You seem awfully angry for being called on your repeated lie. Do you need a safe space? Maybe take shelter on the briebart forums or somewhere that is peacefully fact-free?

a reply to: Indigo5

HIRONO: So if the attorney general or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation? COMEY: In theory, yes. HIRONO: Has it happened? COMEY: Not in my experience. Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that — without an appropriate purpose. I mean where oftentimes they give us opinions that "we don't see a case there and so you ought to stop investing resources in it." But I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience.

Hirono asked has it happened
Comey replied not in my experience BUT
funny that you miss the BUT

but
conjunction
1.
used to introduce something contrasting with what has already been mentioned.

Comey clearly answered that the doj did not tell him to shut the investigation down
then he ADDS to that answer

The "but" shows he is talking about a "situation" other than what was asked.
He ADDs he has not experienced being shut down for "political reasons".

Trump shutting down the investigation would be for political reasons ?

Good to know that when someone disagrees with you "it is a lie".

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Indigo5

Trump shutting down the investigation would be for political reasons ?

Can't believe you are hanging on to your blatant lie.

Comey and no one else said Trump shut down the investigation?

The question is if he (as President/Comey's Boss and Subject of an investigation) tried to influence Comey, discourage him from pursuing the investigation, asked him to "let it go"...aka Obstruct Justice.

a reply to: Indigo5

It may not be interpreted as obstruction of justice. Trump has the right to express his personal opinions. If he encouraged Comey to lay off Flynn, that is not necessarily obstruction of justice. Flynn had already been investigated and FBI had already cleared him, suggesting another investigation is not worth it.

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Indigo5

It may not be interpreted as obstruction of justice.

More to the point....Whether Trump meets the criteria of Obstruction of Justice is irrelevant as a President can not be charged with that crime. He would need to be impeached, and there are very little limitations on what constitutes grounds for impeachment, congress just needs to decide to do it.

If Congress wanted to, they could impeach the President tomorrow, or alternatively, they could let him get away with anything they wanted.

So the actual pivot is how much political risk is congress willing to take. The more they turn a blind eye, the greater risk they will pay for it in future elections.

a reply to: Indigo5

Obstruction of justice is a major issue. It's what got Bill Clinton impeached and plays a key factor in Hillary losing the 2016 election when Bill Clinton asked Loretta Lynch not to persecute Hillary. Everyone is entitled to speak their minds. Hillary was under investigation. Flynn was not. Trump telling Comey to go easy on Flynn is not widely considered obstruction to justice, because Flynn was not under investigation in the first place. If Flynn was under investigation when Trump said this to Comey, then yes it would have been obstruction of justice and an impeachable offense.

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Indigo5

Obstruction of justice is a major issue.

Yes...but in the context of a President "Obstruction of Justice" is subjective as he is immune from prosecution, but not immune to impeachment. Nothing obligates Congress to impeach.

Hillary was under investigation. Flynn was not.
Trump telling Comey to go easy on Flynn is not widely considered obstruction to justice, because Flynn was not under investigation in the first place.
If Flynn was under investigation when Trump said this to Comey, then yes it would have been obstruction of justice and an impeachable offense. .

The above bizarrely not factual.

Flynn was then and remains now "Under Investigation"

He was interviewed by the FBI on Jan. 24th
Resigned on Feb 13th.
Trump asked Comey to "Let this go" shortly there after..
Flynn requested Immunity from Congress March 30th and was denied because it would interfere with open FBI investigations.

The other basic question is...If Flynn wasn't being investigated, why did Trump ask Comey to "let this go?"
Your logic is self-contradictory?

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Indigo5

when Bill Clinton asked Loretta Lynch not to persecute Hillary.

There is zero evidence they discussed anything but golf in between flights.

There is strong evidence Trump asked Comey to drop the Flynn Investigation.

Not just that BTW...

Trump made separate appeals to the director of national intelligence, Daniel Coats, and to Adm. Michael Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency, urging them to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election.

Coats and Rogers refused to comply with the requests, which they both deemed to be inappropriate, according to two current and two former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private communications with the president.

Trump's conversation with Rogers was documented contemporaneously in an internal memo written by a senior NSA official, according to the officials. It is unclear if a similar memo was prepared by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to document Trump's conversation with Coats. Officials said such memos could be made available to both the special counsel now overseeing the Russia investigation and congressional investigators, who might explore whether Trump sought to impede the FBI's work.

www.oregonlive.com...

a reply to: allsee4eye

AND THIS...

And White House officials asked for help from the two top intelligence officials to pressure Comey to close the Russia probe.

“Can we ask him to shut down the investigation? Are you able to assist in this matter?” one official said of the line of questioning from the White House, the Post reported.

www.vox.com...

a reply to: Indigo5

I can't believe your comprehension is so poor you do not understand how the word "but" is used.

Comey stated he has never experienced ANYONE telling him to shut down an investigation for political reasons.

Also if trump attempted to "obstruct justice" comey would be bound by law to report it. Comey has not.

www.washingtonpost.com... er-acting-fbi-director-said-no-effort-to-impede-fbi-investigation/?utm_term=.0511bbe055c1

At a hearing on May 11 before the Senate Intelligence Committee, McCabe was asked by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) whether “the dismissal of Mr. Comey in any way impeded, interrupted, stopped or negatively impacted any of the work, any investigation, or any ongoing projects at the Federal Bureau of Investigations?” McCabe replied that “the work of the men and women of the FBI continues despite any changes in circumstance, any decisions. There has been no effort to impede our investigation to date.

"There has been no effort to impede our investigation to date". Gee wouldn't the acting director know about an obstrution investigation?
Unless acting director McCabe is also lying?

lol
you may want to research what "obstruction of justice" actually is
"influence" "discourage" "let it go" none of that matters legally

Breaking now:
Exclusive: Comey will stop short of saying Trump obstructed justice in Flynn probe, source says.

The infamous anonymous sources are back. Supposedly, Comey has told associates that he will testify that Trump's request made him uncomfortable, but he will not accuse Trump of obstructing justice. He will also dispute Trump's claim that he (Comey) told Trump 3 times that he wasn't under investigation.

I've also heard a Fox News analyst, who was making the same points we've been here: if Comey did accuse Trump of obstructing justice, he would open himself up to charges because he didn't act on the alleged event. That guy was also saying he doesn't expect Comey to accuse Trump of obstructing justice.

originally posted by: [post=22322025]shooterbrody

"There has been no effort to impede our investigation to date". Gee wouldn't the acting director know about an obstrution investigation?

Keyword "acting"...

he was just stepping into the role after the man leading the investigation was Fired by Trump.

I am sure he has been made aware since then of the Documented Obstruction of Justice by Trump and Associates via the directors of CIA, NSA and Comey.

Good luck with your BS...cuz reality is on the way. Comey's testimony this week is only a small piece of the Obstruction of Justice that occurred..CIA and NSA directors will be sharing similar stories in coming weeks.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
Breaking now:
Exclusive: Comey will stop short of saying Trump obstructed justice in Flynn probe, source says.

The infamous anonymous sources are back. Supposedly, Comey has told associates that he will testify that Trump's request made him uncomfortable, but he will not accuse Trump of obstructing justice. He will also dispute Trump's claim that he (Comey) told Trump 3 times that he wasn't under investigation.

I've also heard a Fox News analyst, who was making the same points we've been here: if Comey did accuse Trump of obstructing justice, he would open himself up to charges because he didn't act on the alleged event. That guy was also saying he doesn't expect Comey to accuse Trump of obstructing justice.

I don't see that as news?

Comey was never going to testify as a prosecutor..Not his job to be judge, jury or otherwise?

He is going to recount what happened and leave conclusions to other people..

Special Counsel and or Senate or Congressional Committees are the ones who will decide what to do with the facts..

a reply to: Indigo5

lol
so you are also calling McCabe a liar?
nice

sources for any of the crap you are "sure" of?
of course not
you don't provide sources just asinine speculations based on what you wish to happen

originally posted by: [post=22322049]AndyFromMichigan

I've also heard a Fox News analyst, who was making the same points we've been here: if Comey did accuse Trump of obstructing justice, he would open himself up to charges because he didn't act on the alleged event.

And that makes no sense either...

It was an evidentiary event..

He did "act"..in clearly documenting it..

As did NSA Director Rogers and possible CIA Director Coates in similar conversions with Trump.

Evidence is not conclusion..Evidence is evidence..Comey did the right thing..

He documented it...so it would be documented ...if a pattern of obstruction emerged..

Asking intelligence heads if there was a way to stop the investigation? Refused..(Trump staff)
Asking the FBI Director for a loyalty pledge? Refused and documented.
Asking the CIA and NSA directors to announce there is no collusion...Refused/Documented
Asking the FBI Director to cease investigating Flynn? Refused and documented.
Then firing the FBI Director?

I'd say a pattern is emerging..

But hey..that is for the special counsel, public and congress to decide..
Not Comey..

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Indigo5

lol
so you are also calling McCabe a liar?
nice

sources for any of the crap you are "sure" of?
of course not
you don't provide sources just asinine speculations based on what you wish to happen

You seem to just say stuff...Mostly angry and mostly utter contrived BS..

What information would you like a source on?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Indigo5

lol
so you are also calling McCabe a liar?

Nothing personal, but this seems stupid logic..though maybe you are not stupid, but just dishonest.

McCabe is not James Comey.

McCabe was not leading the Russian Investigation prior to Comey's firing.

The expectation that he would know exactly what Comey knows and has documented.. just days after Comey was fired and he was thrown into the big seat seems an irrational and dishonest expectation.

Citing McCabe's words as if they are James Comey's own makes no sense...Pssst...they are two different people.