Comey to testify that Trump obstructed

[QMany]

Read something today about how Comey didn't want to say that Trump wasn't being investigated for connections to Russia because he did not want to come back later and say that he was now being investigated for connections to Russia. If you say the first, you would then have a "Duty to Correct" if Trump came under investigation for the same thing at a later date. Early in the year the investigation was only beginning and they had no clue what would turn up. This is what happened with Clinton and the Comey note right before the election. Because Comey said in July that the email investigation with Clinton was done, he had a "Duty to Correct" that the investigation was reopened when more emails were found on Weiner's computer.

 

Comey said that in his Opening Statement:

 

 

 

(I did not tell the President that the FBI and the Department of Justice had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an open case on President Trump for a number of reasons, most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change.)

[Moiraine]

Did I miss his testament? I know I was tired last night. But, did I sleep through a whole day?

 

https://twitter.com/ap_politics/status/872574044280848388

 

The vindicated part was because Comey said (in the memo - not to Trump) there wasn't an investigation into him. But that isn't even what Comey's testimony is about. It's about Trump asking him to stop investigating anything to do with Russia (e.g. Flynn).

[BigRedBuster]

 

Did I miss his testament? I know I was tired last night. But, did I sleep through a whole day?

 

https://twitter.com/ap_politics/status/872574044280848388

The vindicated part was because Comey said (in the memo - not to Trump) there wasn't an investigation into him. But that isn't even what Comey's testimony is about. It's about Trump asking him to stop investigating anything to do with Russia (e.g. Flynn).

That's my point.

[ZRod]

Lindsey Graham, now Chris Christie.https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/6/7/15759692/chris-christie-comey-normal-new-york-city-conversation

Demanding pledges of loyalty at a one-on-one dinner? Asking the FBI director to drop an investigation into one of your associates? That’s just “normal New York City conversation” to President Trump, according to New Jersey governor and onetime member of Trump’s inner circle Chris Christie.Shortly after fired FBI Director James Comey’s prepared testimony was released Wednesday afternoon, Chris Christie appeared on MSNBC to offer a defense of Trump’s interactions with Comey, which Comey himself called “inappropriate.”

Craven.

It might be normal New York conversation, but it's highly unethical anywhere.

[zoogs]

Chri s Christie of course is not one to respect rule of law.

 

Why do w tolerate such power abusive pols?

[knapplc]

 

[QMany]

[knapplc]

Comey, under oath:

 

 

That would be obstruction, kids.

[QMany]

And that was poor cross-examination by Risch; he was trying so hard to spin "hope" and Comey was having none of it.

[knapplc]

 

 

 

 

Trump really wants to stress this point, but it's a worthless assurance by Comey for several reasons:

 

1) He's not going to tell the focus of an investigation that he's under investigation

2) AN investigation was underway, which COULD still lead to Trump. Comey could have answered truthfully at that moment and there would still be an investigation

3) Comey's statement would have come, at most recent, a month ago. An ongoing investigation could have gotten to Trump's doorstep by now, or six months from now.

 

 

The gulls will take this as vindication for Trump. Discerning minds know this means nothing.

[QMany]

[knapplc]

And people are going to freak out about that, but here's the context:

 

[Enhance]

 

This sounds familiar...

 

[zoogs]

I take umbrage at your salacious aspersions!

[knapplc]

This is the spin from the Republicans. They're going to try and paint Comey as an untrustworthy leaker, and it'll get good play with the base.