The fact that Comey said that he told Trump that he wasn't under investigation only vindicates Trump's statement that Comey said that. There is an investigation into his campaign and close associates. That could implicate Trump in a heartbeat, and then he would be under investigation.
Comey cleared Trump and implicated Clinton.
- Thread starter musterion
- Start date
Keep dreaming :rotfl:
That's all he admitted to today. I don't know that's all he leaked, but that's all be claimed. You think he leaked other things?
One of the things Comey let credence to today was the suspicion of Jeff Sessions. Put that on a pile with Mike Flynn, and you have two direct, very important, early supporters of Trump in legal jeopardy. What more that's been leaked will be confirmed? Kushner? Page? Manafort? Stone? How many first order connections do you need before Trump becomes the only possible lynchpin?
Comey is a liar from way back, he got caught in his own web in the process. His open admission to breaking the law concerning his leaking of a memo, a government document, did not escape lawmakers or the DOJ... Comey better get a lawyer, and I will bet you Comey's won't be the only head to fly ...maybe Lynch?, Rice? Clinton(s)? Yep, it is open season again, off with their heads!
:execute:
On another note how does it feel knowing that you libs & your fake news surrogates have been propping up a lie for six months now? I told you you were drilling a dry hole with this Russia nonsense, drilling for six months and never found water, hate to say I told you so but...:rotfl:
Well, that's one of the things you can believe. I think it's a crazy conclusion to reach.
I don't see how it broke the law.
1. It's not clear that it's a government document.
2. It's not classified.
3. It's not subject to privilege.
I don't see why he didn't have every right to give it to anyone he likes.
I would agree that Comet's testimony reflected poorly on Lunch. But I still don't see the crime. Can you explain that?
Did I miss something?
You make the same error Trump does. It means next to nothing that Trump personally wasn't formally under investigation. His campaign and his close associates definitely are, perhaps including Jeff Sessions. That could come down on Trump's head in a moment. The well is far from dry. On the contrary, there was much to suggest that it's a gusher today.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Comey didn't break the law, plain and simple.
He does, and that's an inconvenient truth to Trump and his base.
:up:
Trump didn't break the law, plain and simple. Move on
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Trump's own lawyers wouldn't meet alone with him, going by "the extraordinary steps Trump’s lawyers took to deal with his tenuous relationship with the truth."
In one document, bankruptcy attorney George Miller reveals that when meeting with Trump, “it’s always been our practice to make sure that two people are present, and we don’t have a problem with people lying.”
Miller calls Trump “an expert at interpreting things. Let’s put it that way.”
“We tried to [meet in pairs] with Donald always if we could because Donald says certain things and then has a lack of memory,” he says in the deposition.
Miller calls Trump “an expert at interpreting things. Let’s put it that way.”
“We tried to [meet in pairs] with Donald always if we could because Donald says certain things and then has a lack of memory,” he says in the deposition.
No crime
That is why Mueller was assigned to the case ... and will make the determination.
He wasn't "cleared". In fact, the appointment of a special council could imply that he came under investigation after Comey was fired, and Comey wouldn't know about that.
drbrumley
Well-known member
But you guys have already convicted Trump of a crime, hence the reason yall want him impeached...
I can't see how any other conclusion based on fact can be reached, unless of course you are still subscribing to the fictional narratives of the left & their surrogate media. They have been positing this Russia collusion nonsense for six moths and had it deep sixed in a matter of minutes...:chuckle:
Well he doesn't have the right to disclose anything, nor does any federal employee, whether it was classified or not. There is no such thing as personal property including memos that are private when created in an official capacity and to disclose any of it especially to people outside of the government is a crime... he did, and yes it very well may become a problem for him. 18 U.S. Code § 641 read it!
I just did but, this legal publication explains it better...http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/james-comey-admitted-to-leaking-trump-memo-that-could-be-a-problem/
The fact remains that Comey was charged with finding leakers, and ironically we find he is one of them, I am sure that people in the DOJ want to know if this was a pattern with him, what else he may have leaked, Comey's problems may have just started though admittedly the punishment has already been served, the man was fired and now publicly shamed.
None of these cases has been adjudicated, especially Clinton, their foundation, the ties to the Obama administration, domestic spying & unmasking of American citizens all of which are still investigations in play. I am sure they are being reviewed by the DOJ & reinvestigated by FBI as required...it aint a settled matter. Comey's admissions of the goings on with Lynch just made him look more dubious...like I said it aint over.
Yet, Comey said the rabbit hole that you lefties are going down with this separate Russian collusion investigation is based in fallacy. I say let the investigation continue so, their will be more egg on the face of the left & their media mouthpieces, along with more wasted time, proving that the left is bankrupt in the arena of ideas, and have no solutions to the problems facing the nation but, the same old, same old.
The sooner that left wing liberal is gone, the better.
It's never been "deep-sixed", and the indications only get stronger.
You might want to reread that statute a bit, because it doesn't say what you think it does. Here it is, in relevant part:
| Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to his use or the use of another, or without authority, sells, conveys or disposes of any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof, or any property made or being made under contract for the United States or any department or agency thereof; ... Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; but if the value of such property in the aggregate, combining amounts from all the counts for which the defendant is convicted in a single case, does not exceed the sum of $1,000, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. |
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/641, emphasis added.
I think even you would agree that the memos weren't stolen, as they were created by Comey.
So, assuming that it is a public record, which is a big assumption (see below, no need to raise your objection at this point), you have to show that the release was unauthorized. See, federal departments give out records all the time, but they do have the right to establish rules for how that can occur. Various agencies and departments generally establish their own guidelines for how this can be done, but in general, especially with an organization as independent as the FBI, this happens under the general direction of the head of the department, i.e., James Comey. And given that he seems to have created these memos for the express purpose of being released to the public, I see no reason following through on that intent would be illegal.
It's broadly true that documents created as part of the government's business are official records, {and I'm guessing that's where you'll stop reading...} although it's possible that a department could create a policy to carve out a niche for reasonable exceptions. What constitutes a public record actually involves a fair amount of judgement on the part of the public servant, and it's not out of the question that a government lawyer could be given the right to keep private personal notes to protect their own legal interests as they perform their jobs. And what's legal to disclose publicly, privately, or in some other form depends entirely on department policies unless some classification applies to it.
Except that it points out that it "could" be a government record, not that it is, and it says that it could be considered evidence, which is also true, but since he hasn't been subpoenaed for it as far as we know, so he isn't obligated to retain it, and since he seems to have coordinated with Robert Mueller prior to testifying and handed over the memos he still has, there's no legitimate complaint that he's mishandled it. Maybe you could complain that he should have handed the memo he leaked over, I would assume that he and Mueller have talked about that and Comey has satisfied any demands Mueller might have made.
It's also irrelevant to this case.
No, he didn't. As I pointed out, the fact that Trump wasn't personally being investigated while Comey was at the FBI means next to nothing given the fires burning around him, and his dismissal of Comey could well have triggered an investigation that Comey couldn't have testified to since he was out of office.
Great. We'll take that risk.
Last edited:
Well considering the that one whopper that Comey put out there .... you know the birtherism lie ... oh wait, that was Donald.
WizardofOz
New member
Mueller's lawyer build-up raises flags for Trump allies
| Special counsel Robert Mueller is said to be building out his investigative team with some of the country’s best legal minds, in a development that speaks to the seriousness of the Russia probe but also is raising red flags on the pro-Trump side... ...recent hires show Mueller is building a formidable team, poised to either root out wrongdoing or prove the Trump team’s claims that there’s no ‘there there.’ |