Comey Opening Statement

[n david]

PDF of statement

Media working overtime to frame Comey's prepared opening remarks.

What the media is saying:

Comey confirmed Trump asked him to "let go" of the Flynn investigation
Comey says Trump asked him to "lift the cloud" of the investigation
Comey confirmed Trump asked for his loyalty.

Now, what the media is largely ignoring and NOT reporting:

Comey felt the request by Trump to "let go" of the investigation was directed towards the Flynn investigation only, not the investigation of Russian interference.

From Comey's statement:
"""February 14 Oval Office Meeting
I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December. I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign. I could be wrong, but I took him to be focusing on what had just happened with Flynn’s departure and the controversy around his account of his phone calls."""

Comey's statement details four (4) times where Trump is said to not be personally under investigation.

"""prior to the January 6 meeting, I discussed with the FBI’s leadership team whether I should be prepared to assure President-Elect Trump that we were not investigating him personally. That was true; we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him."""

"""January 27 Dinner
I replied that he should give that careful thought because it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally, which we weren’t, and because it was very difficult to prove a negative."""

"""March 30 Phone Call
I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating President Trump."""

"""April 11 Phone Call
On the morning of April 11, the President called me and asked what I had done about his request that I “get out” that he is not personally under investigation. I replied that I had passed his request to the Acting Deputy Attorney General, but I had not heard back."""

[n david]

Libs are NOT having a good day today, and tomorrow isn't looking any better for them.

Trump told the truth! 1/27, 3/30 and 4/11 - three times Comey told him he was not personally under investigation.

[Aquila]

I think you overlooked something...

From Comey's statement:
"""February 14 Oval Office Meeting
I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December. I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign.

So, we know Trump didn't seek to obstruct justice in relation to the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign. However, Comey is essentially testifying that Trump did seek to persuade then FBI Director James Comey to "drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December." Of course, this was followed by then FBI Director James Comey being fired.

If there is reasonable evidence to show that Trump sought to persuade Comey to just drop an open investigation (the investigation into Michael Flynn), there very well might be obstruction of justice charges to follow.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I think you overlooked something...

From Comey's statement:
"""February 14 Oval Office Meeting
I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December. I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign.

So, we know Trump didn't seek to obstruct justice in relation to the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign. However, Comey is essentially testifying that Trump did seek to persuade then FBI Director James Comey to "drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December." Of course, this was followed by then FBI Director James Comey being fired.

If there is reasonable evidence to show that Trump sought to persuade Comey to just drop an open investigation (the investigation into Michael Flynn), there very well might be obstruction of justice charges to follow.

I posted in another thread, but will here as well.

Context.

January 23rd, reports state the FBI investigated Flynn's calls and found nothing criminal in them.

February 14th, Trump asks Comey to "let go" of the Flynn investigation.

My theory: Trump read the January 23rd news, thought it meant the investigation was done and Flynn was cleared. It wasn't that Trump was trying to obstruct any investigation; Trump just thought it was over - and why continue investigating a man who was cleared.

Also, from Dershowitz and others, there's no obstruction for asking (or even demanding) Comey to "let go" of the investigation. The POTUS has legal authority to stop any investigation he so desires.

"""The president is the chief executive of the federal government, and the Constitution vests all executive power in him. Everyone else who works in the executive branch is a subordinate, delegated to exercise the president’s power at the president’s pleasure."""

"""The president is the superior of the attorney general, who in turn is the superior of the FBI director — the FBI is a component of the Justice Department."""

"""A prudent president will not interfere in law-enforcement decisions. But that is because doing so would be counterproductive and politically damaging. It would not be unlawful."""

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...justice-system

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

I posted in another thread, but will here as well.

Context.

January 23rd, reports state the FBI investigated Flynn's calls and found nothing criminal in them.

February 14th, Trump asks Comey to "let go" of the Flynn investigation.

My theory: Trump read the January 23rd news, thought it meant the investigation was done and Flynn was cleared. It wasn't that Trump was trying to obstruct any investigation; Trump just thought it was over - and why continue investigating a man who was cleared.

That's an interesting theory. It makes more sense that others I've heard. We'll have to see what details come to light.

Also, from Dershowitz and others, there's no obstruction for asking (or even demanding) Comey to "let go" of the investigation. The POTUS has legal authority to stop any investigation he so desires.

"""The president is the chief executive of the federal government, and the Constitution vests all executive power in him. Everyone else who works in the executive branch is a subordinate, delegated to exercise the president’s power at the president’s pleasure."""

"""The president is the superior of the attorney general, who in turn is the superior of the FBI director — the FBI is a component of the Justice Department."""

"""A prudent president will not interfere in law-enforcement decisions. But that is because doing so would be counterproductive and politically damaging. It would not be unlawful."""

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...justice-system

If the law is to be interpreted in this manner, then clearly the President didn't commit a crime. But I think it deserves a looking into.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Aquila

If there is reasonable evidence to show that Trump sought to persuade Comey to just drop an open investigation (the investigation into Michael Flynn), there very well might be obstruction of justice charges to follow.

In your dreams liberal boy.

You are salivating with delusions.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

In your dreams liberal boy.

You are salivating with delusions.

Hey, one could only hope. lol

[Esaias]

How many times has a DA told a deputy prosecutor to drop it? Does that count as "obstruction of justice"? Like dropping charges against illegals? Or is it only when the " other team" does it?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Esaias

How many times has a DA told a deputy prosecutor to drop it? Does that count as "obstruction of justice"? Like dropping charges against illegals? Or is it only when the " other team" does it?

That's a good question. How far do we go in allowing individuals to ask investigators or prosecutors to drop an investigation? I think this case is of special interest because it involves a hostile nation engaging in a hostile cyber attack on our democratic processes and the possible connections and collaboration between them and the incoming administration.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by n david

I had understood

ha ha ha, Comey's understanding, not Trumps words.

Comey understands nothing, he is an idiot.