• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 15:28
CEST 21:28
KST 04:28
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S RO8 Preview: herO, Zoun, Bunny, Classic2Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47
Community News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack2Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0
StarCraft 2
General
Code S RO8 Preview: herO, Zoun, Bunny, Classic The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing DreamHack Dallas 2025 - Official Replay Pack BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack
Tourneys
[GSL 2025] Code S:Season 2 - RO8 - Group A RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond)
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET NA Team League 6/8/2025 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Armies of Exigo - YesYes?
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine UK Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 28737 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7817

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 7815 7816 7817 7818 7819 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
Danglars
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States12133 Posts
June 08 2017 21:19 GMT
#156321
On June 09 2017 02:26 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 09 2017 02:19 Ragnarork wrote:
On June 09 2017 02:16 xDaunt wrote:
On June 09 2017 02:12 Ragnarork wrote:
On June 09 2017 02:11 Plansix wrote:
On June 09 2017 02:07 xDaunt wrote:
On June 09 2017 02:06 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On June 09 2017 02:02 xDaunt wrote:
On June 09 2017 01:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On June 09 2017 01:12 xDaunt wrote:
Here's the moneyshot on the "I hope" nonsense in case anyone missed it:
[quote]


It's always been "I hope" rather than "I order", which means semantically, without context, it's unclear but the intention in context is clear, which may not be enough to legally convict Trump of obstruction of justice. When your boss asks you to see him privately in his office and he says "I hope you can do X for me and I demand loyalty from you", I think it's pretty clear that he's giving you a specific direction and objective that he wants you to follow, which is what Comey's understanding of the situation was as well. And then afterwards, if your boss fires you and tells everyone that he fired you because you didn't do X, that sounds pretty straightforward that the "hope" was an implied "do this or else", with the "or else" being "You're fired".

Of course, while "obstruction of justice" is a well-defined legal term, impeachment is completely political. I wouldn't be surprised if this potential obstruction of justice isn't a smoking gun for impeachment; Republicans would have to dislike Trump even more than they/ Americans do now.

I really like this breakdown of obstruction of justice: https://mobile.twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/872532952055513088
"(13) If the words Comey CONTEMPORANEOUSLY RECORDED as having been said by Trump were indeed said, Trump IS guilty of Obstruction of Justice." That's referencing the "I hope" part.

Like I pointed out last night, Seth Abramson is full of shit. He either doesn't understand the statute that he cites in those tweets, or he is a hack and is intentionally misrepresenting what it says. My bet is on the latter.


What does he say that's incorrect? What makes you think he doesn't understand the statute?

He turned "corruptly persuade" into "persuade." The statute that he cites in those tweets clearly says "corruptly persuade." There's a huge difference between the terms.

I asked last night, but is “corruptly persuade” one of the required prongs? Is the implied threat of losing his job not enough to meet the prong of “threatening”?

Because I believe Abramson left “corruptly persuade” out of his tweets specifically because we have zero evidence of bribery or quid pro quo. It just isn’t a factor and he is explaining law to the public.


I see that the same way. This was less about persuasion rather than veiled threat behind the "I hope you do X" and the fact he had everyone else leave, and can decide to actually put an end to his tenure as FBI's director.

Also, the text


(18) And under "Obstruction by Intimidation, Threats, Persuasion, or Deception (18 U.S.C. 1512), Trump DID "attempt to persuade" Comey.


Would not fit in a tweet with the word "corruptly". Which is 99% more probable to be the reason it was left out lol.

Go read the text of the statute and not the title, which has no meaning whatsoever.


I actually read it and checked the actual text, so dunno what you're asking exactly. And I stand by my opinion.

Well, if you read the text, then I'm sure that you saw this:


EDIT: Sorry, I misunderstood what you were saying about the tweet length. Here's the problem with that explanation: Abramson didn't post a clarification anywhere else, and he clearly argues straight up persuasion throughout his tweet chain.

Show nested quote +
(b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to—


And here's the other thing that bothered me about this statute when I looked at it last night. We're focusing on the act, but the the statute itself only prohibits certain ends. In short, I don't even think that this statute really applies to this situation. Take a look at the following from Alan Dershowitz:

Show nested quote +
In 1992, then-President George H.W. Bush pardoned Caspar Weinberger and five other individuals who had been indicted or convicted in connection with the Iran-Contra arms deal. The special prosecutor, Lawrence Walsh, was furious, accusing Bush of stifling his ongoing investigation and suggesting that he may have done it to prevent Weinberger or the others from pointing the finger of blame at Bush himself. The New York Times also reported that the investigation might have pointed to Bush himself.

This is what Walsh said: "The Iran-contra cover-up, which has continued for more than six years, has now been completed with the pardon of Caspar Weinberger. We will make a full report on our findings to Congress and the public describing the details and extent of this cover-up."

Yet Bush was neither charged with obstruction of justice nor impeached. Nor have other presidents who interfered with ongoing investigations or prosecutions been charged with obstruction.

It is true that among the impeachment charges leveled against President Richard Nixon was one for obstructing justice, but Nixon committed the independent crime of instructing his aides to lie to the FBI, which is a violation of section 1001 of the federal criminal code.

It is against the background of this history and precedent that former FBI Director James Comey's opening statement to the Senate Intelligence Committee must be considered.

Comey himself acknowledged that: "throughout history, some presidents have decided that because ‘problems' come from Justice, they should try to hold the Department close. But blurring those boundaries ultimately makes the problems worse by undermining public trust in the institutions and their work." Comey has also acknowledged that the president had the constitutional authority to fire him for any or no cause.

President Trump also had the constitutional authority to order Comey to end the investigation of former national security adviser Mike Flynn. He could have pardoned Flynn, as Bush pardoned Weinberger, thus ending the Flynn investigation, as Bush ended the Iran-Contra investigation. What Trump could not do is what Nixon did: direct his aides to lie to the FBI, or commit other independent crimes. There is no evidence that Trump did that.

With these factors in mind, let's turn to the Comey statement.

Comey's written statement, which was released in advance of his Thursday testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, does not provide evidence that Trump committed obstruction of justice or any other crime. Indeed it strongly suggests that even under the broadest reasonable definition of obstruction, no such crime was committed.

The crucial conversation occurred in the Oval Office on Feb. 14 between the president and then-Director Comey. According to Comey's contemporaneous memo, the president expressed his opinion that retired Gen. Flynn "is a good guy."

Comey replied, "He is a good guy."

The president said, "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this thing go."

Comey understood that to be a reference only to the Flynn investigation and not "the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to the campaign." Comey had already told the president that "we were not investigating him personally."

Comey 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."

Comey did not say he would "let this go," and indeed he did not grant the president's request to do so. Nor did Comey report this conversation to the attorney general or any other prosecutor. He was troubled by what he regarded as a breach of recent traditions of FBI independence from the White House, though he recognized that "throughout history, some presidents have decided that because ‘problems' come from the Department of Justice, they should try to hold the Department close."

That is an understatement.

Throughout United States history — from Presidents Adams to Jefferson to Lincoln to Roosevelt to Kennedy to Obama — presidents have directed (not merely requested) the Justice Department to investigate, prosecute (or not prosecute) specific individuals or categories of individuals.

It is only recently that the tradition of an independent Justice Department and FBI has emerged. But traditions, even salutary ones, cannot form the basis of a criminal charge. It would be far better if our constitution provided for prosecutors who were not part of the executive branch, which is under the direction of the president.

In Great Britain, Israel and other democracies that respect the rule of law, the director of public prosecution or the attorney general are law enforcement officials who, by law, are independent of the prime minister.

But our constitution makes the attorney general both the chief prosecutor and the chief political adviser to the president on matters of justice and law enforcement.

The president can, as a matter of constitutional law, direct the attorney general, and his subordinate, the director of the FBI, tell them what to do, whom to prosecute and whom not to prosecute. Indeed, the president has the constitutional authority to stop the investigation of any person by simply pardoning that person.

Assume, for argument's sake, that Trump had said the following to Comey: "You are no longer authorized to investigate Flynn because I have decided to pardon him." Would that exercise of the president's constitutional power to pardon constitute a criminal obstruction of justice? Of course not. Presidents do that all the time.

Bush pardoned Caspar Weinberger, his secretary of defense, in the middle of an investigation that could have incriminated Bush. That was not an obstruction and neither would a pardon of Flynn have been a crime. A president cannot be charged with a crime for properly exercising his constitutional authority

[b]For the same reason, Trump cannot be charged with obstruction for firing Comey, which he had the constitutional authority to do.

The Comey statement suggests that one reason Trump fired him was because of his refusal or failure to publicly announce that the FBI was not investigating Trump personally. Trump "repeatedly" told Comey to "get that fact out," and he did not.

If that is true, it is certainly not an obstruction of justice.

Nor is it an obstruction of justice to ask for loyalty from the director of the FBI, who responded "you will get that [‘honest loyalty'] from me."

Comey understood that he and Trump may have understood that vague phrase "honest loyalty" differently. But no reasonable interpretation of those ambiguous words would give rise to a crime. Many Trump opponents were hoping that the Comey statement would provide smoking guns.

It has not.

Instead it has weakened an already weak case for obstruction of justice.

The statement may provide political ammunition to Trump opponents, but unless they are willing to stretch Comey's words and take Trump's out of context, and unless they are prepared to abandon important constitutional principles and civil liberties that protect us all, they should not be searching for ways to expand already elastic criminal statutes and shrink enduring constitutional safeguard in a dangerous and futile effort to criminalize political disagreements.

The first casualty of partisan efforts to "get" a political opponent — whether Republicans going after Clinton or Democrats going after Trump — is often civil liberties. Everyone who cares about the Constitution and civil liberties must join together to protest efforts to expand existing criminal law to get political opponents.

Today it's Trump. Yesterday it was Clinton. Tomorrow it could be you.

Source.

All of this goes to the point that I repeatedly stated since yesterday: by definition, can Trump do something illegal (and impeachable) if he is acting within his constitutional authority? Dersh's explanation is the best that I have seen yet.

Good writeup by Dershowitz. I had totally forgotten about Iran-Contra's special prosecutor and how HWBush handled things.
Great armies come from happy zealots, and happy zealots come from California!
TL+ Member
Doodsmack
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States7224 Posts
June 08 2017 21:27 GMT
#156322
Danglars
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States12133 Posts
June 08 2017 21:35 GMT
#156323
I liked Ben Domenech's pre-speech writeup of the affair:
Depending on who you talk to in Washington, James Comey is a grandstanding fraud or a man who represents the height of personal principle. He will take the stand today in front of all the cameras and send a message about who he is and who the president is. But the message will not be enough, it already seems, to achieve what his advocates these past several weeks would like. They would like him to set the stage to bring down the president. Instead, rather than high crimes and misdemeanors, he will outline activity that we have already come to expect from a commander in chief with no filter and no regard for political norms. Rude and inappropriate? Yes. Obstruction of justice? It seems not. Impeachable offenses? Definitely not, unless you’re a crazy person. But many people these days are crazy, and they will call for exactly that.


Or on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360
I think it is clear to me that the president is a person who acts inappropriately at times ... who lies at times. I think many people actually voted for him already knowing that. An exit poll said 'Yeah we know he does those things.' So that's like a baseline. When you say it's a fairly low bar to have this part confirmed, I'm a Trump critic, so I'm like actually sorta surprised at that. I think the question is not whether he acted inappropriately, but whether that amounts to an obstruction of justice. And frankly, on a panel sometimes, it feels like reporters have already come to a conclusion about that before they've even heard him speak."
CNN qtd in Mediaite
Great armies come from happy zealots, and happy zealots come from California!
TL+ Member
Danglars
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States12133 Posts
June 08 2017 21:39 GMT
#156324
On June 09 2017 06:04 KwarK wrote:
There is no way Flynn isn't fucked for something. It goes beyond Russia with him.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/18/report-flynn-blocked-us-military-operation-that-turkey-opposed.html

I think Flynn personally falls on not registering as a foreign agent after having lobbied on behalf of the Turkish government. It might be that the unleaked portions of his conversation with Kislyak don't amount to successful Russian intelligence efforts, but we'll see.
Great armies come from happy zealots, and happy zealots come from California!
TL+ Member
Adreme
Profile Joined June 2011
United States5574 Posts
June 08 2017 21:41 GMT
#156325
I know thats a cute justification but the people who voted for him DO trust him and DO believe in him and every poll backs that up. Even when you can prove he is lying his supporters will still think he is telling the truth and while a small subset may see him for what he is the majority of his supporters just do not see it.
Karis Vas Ryaar
Profile Blog Joined July 2011
United States4396 Posts
June 08 2017 21:47 GMT
#156326
Ben Cardin might be my favorite Senator.

"I'm not agreeing with a lot of Virus's decisions but they are working" Tasteless. Ipl4 Losers Bracket Virus 2-1 Maru
Biff The Understudy
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
France7877 Posts
June 08 2017 21:59 GMT
#156327
On June 09 2017 06:47 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
Ben Cardin might be my favorite Senator.

https://twitter.com/benyc/status/872878742250672128

Yeah well, but apparently it's not contradictory anymore.
The fellow who is out to burn things up is the counterpart of the fool who thinks he can save the world. The world needs neither to be burned up nor to be saved. The world is, we are. Transients, if we buck it; here to stay if we accept it. ~H.Miller
ShoCkeyy
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
7815 Posts
June 08 2017 22:12 GMT
#156328
This is the kind of shit that makes a person want to get into politics and have their chance at trying to become a rep. The issue is, I have to pay over $10k to try and become a representative in my state, and that's just getting my name on the ballot. What kind of crap is that?

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/legislature/being-a-florida-lawmaker-a-path-to-wealth-for-many/2239528
Life?
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
June 08 2017 22:14 GMT
#156329
Even Chris Matthews gets it:
Liberal MSNBC host Chris Matthews said Thursday the accusation that President Trump directly colluded with Russia to interfere in the U.S. election "came apart" following former FBI Director James Comey's testimony in front of Congress.

In his written and spoken testimony on Thursday, Comey said that he never felt that Trump had tried to impede the FBI's investigation into Russia, even that the president had encouraged it and he suggested that former national security adviser Mike Flynn wasn't at the heart of the investigation.

"The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers, you might say, is that somewhere along the line in the last year is the president had something to do with colluding with the Russians … to affect the election in some way," Matthews said on MSNBC, following the testimony.

"And yet what came apart this morning was that theory," Matthews said, listing two reasons why. First, he said Comey revealed that "Flynn wasn't central to the Russian investigation," and secondly, he said that kills the idea that Flynn might have been in a position to testify against Trump.

"And if that's not the case, where's the there-there?" Matthews said.
Source.

At most, Flynn might be in trouble for failing to properly disclose his ties and register as a foreign agent. But even if he does get in trouble for those things, it's becoming abundantly apparent that this Comey thing is an overblown sideshow where Trump terminated Comey merely to try to get this Russia bullshit out of the headlines, not because the investigation threatened Trump and Trump wanted to impede the investigation.
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18821 Posts
June 08 2017 22:15 GMT
#156330
Ballot access should become an item of increasing importance as gerrymandering reform becomes better known. In any states, getting one's name to the voters is made practically impossible via partisan gatekeeping functions like high filing fees and the like. Shit like that must end, and as folks are encouraged to look to local politics more and more, there's a good chance that it will. At least in some places.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
RealityIsKing
Profile Joined August 2016
613 Posts
June 08 2017 22:19 GMT
#156331
Looks like Trump is innocent, gg.
biology]major
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States2253 Posts
June 08 2017 22:21 GMT
#156332
On June 09 2017 07:14 xDaunt wrote:
Even Chris Matthews gets it:
Show nested quote +
Liberal MSNBC host Chris Matthews said Thursday the accusation that President Trump directly colluded with Russia to interfere in the U.S. election "came apart" following former FBI Director James Comey's testimony in front of Congress.

In his written and spoken testimony on Thursday, Comey said that he never felt that Trump had tried to impede the FBI's investigation into Russia, even that the president had encouraged it and he suggested that former national security adviser Mike Flynn wasn't at the heart of the investigation.

"The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers, you might say, is that somewhere along the line in the last year is the president had something to do with colluding with the Russians … to affect the election in some way," Matthews said on MSNBC, following the testimony.

"And yet what came apart this morning was that theory," Matthews said, listing two reasons why. First, he said Comey revealed that "Flynn wasn't central to the Russian investigation," and secondly, he said that kills the idea that Flynn might have been in a position to testify against Trump.

"And if that's not the case, where's the there-there?" Matthews said.
Source.

At most, Flynn might be in trouble for failing to properly disclose his ties and register as a foreign agent. But even if he does get in trouble for those things, it's becoming abundantly apparent that this Comey thing is an overblown sideshow where Trump terminated Comey merely to try to get this Russia bullshit out of the headlines, not because the investigation threatened Trump and Trump wanted to impede the investigation.


There's still a lot we don't know, including things about Kushner and Sessions ties to Russia. Also I think your interpretation is a good one, Trump inappropriately fired a fbi director because he wasn't willing to publicly admit that he wasn't under investigation. That's within his constitutional right, I can see this being argued both ways. This clown could have actually worked on his agenda instead he had to tweet, fire an FBI director, and anger him by defaming him.

Mueller was orchestrated by Comey, they are bros and now Trump has to deal with consequences of his idiotic actions.
Question.?
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands21586 Posts
June 08 2017 22:25 GMT
#156333
On June 09 2017 07:21 biology]major wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 09 2017 07:14 xDaunt wrote:
Even Chris Matthews gets it:
Liberal MSNBC host Chris Matthews said Thursday the accusation that President Trump directly colluded with Russia to interfere in the U.S. election "came apart" following former FBI Director James Comey's testimony in front of Congress.

In his written and spoken testimony on Thursday, Comey said that he never felt that Trump had tried to impede the FBI's investigation into Russia, even that the president had encouraged it and he suggested that former national security adviser Mike Flynn wasn't at the heart of the investigation.

"The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers, you might say, is that somewhere along the line in the last year is the president had something to do with colluding with the Russians … to affect the election in some way," Matthews said on MSNBC, following the testimony.

"And yet what came apart this morning was that theory," Matthews said, listing two reasons why. First, he said Comey revealed that "Flynn wasn't central to the Russian investigation," and secondly, he said that kills the idea that Flynn might have been in a position to testify against Trump.

"And if that's not the case, where's the there-there?" Matthews said.
Source.

At most, Flynn might be in trouble for failing to properly disclose his ties and register as a foreign agent. But even if he does get in trouble for those things, it's becoming abundantly apparent that this Comey thing is an overblown sideshow where Trump terminated Comey merely to try to get this Russia bullshit out of the headlines, not because the investigation threatened Trump and Trump wanted to impede the investigation.


There's still a lot we don't know, including things about Kushner and Sessions ties to Russia. Also I think your interpretation is a good one, Trump inappropriately fired a fbi director because he wasn't willing to publicly admit that he wasn't under investigation. That's within his constitutional right, I can see this being argued both ways. This clown could have actually worked on his agenda instead he had to tweet, fire an FBI director, and anger him by defaming him.

Mueller was orchestrated by Comey, they are bros and now Trump has to deal with consequences of his idiotic actions.

How exactly did Comey convince Rosenstein to appoint his 'bro' in this conspiracy?
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Profile Blog Joined March 2013
Netherlands30548 Posts
June 08 2017 22:28 GMT
#156334
On June 09 2017 07:14 xDaunt wrote:
Even Chris Matthews gets it:
Show nested quote +
Liberal MSNBC host Chris Matthews said Thursday the accusation that President Trump directly colluded with Russia to interfere in the U.S. election "came apart" following former FBI Director James Comey's testimony in front of Congress.

In his written and spoken testimony on Thursday, Comey said that he never felt that Trump had tried to impede the FBI's investigation into Russia, even that the president had encouraged it and he suggested that former national security adviser Mike Flynn wasn't at the heart of the investigation.

"The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers, you might say, is that somewhere along the line in the last year is the president had something to do with colluding with the Russians … to affect the election in some way," Matthews said on MSNBC, following the testimony.

"And yet what came apart this morning was that theory," Matthews said, listing two reasons why. First, he said Comey revealed that "Flynn wasn't central to the Russian investigation," and secondly, he said that kills the idea that Flynn might have been in a position to testify against Trump.

"And if that's not the case, where's the there-there?" Matthews said.
Source.

At most, Flynn might be in trouble for failing to properly disclose his ties and register as a foreign agent. But even if he does get in trouble for those things, it's becoming abundantly apparent that this Comey thing is an overblown sideshow where Trump terminated Comey merely to try to get this Russia bullshit out of the headlines, not because the investigation threatened Trump and Trump wanted to impede the investigation.

If it's an overblown sideshow why did Trump lie about the firing reason first?
Neosteel Enthusiast
biology]major
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States2253 Posts
June 08 2017 22:31 GMT
#156335
On June 09 2017 07:25 Gorsameth wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 09 2017 07:21 biology]major wrote:
On June 09 2017 07:14 xDaunt wrote:
Even Chris Matthews gets it:
Liberal MSNBC host Chris Matthews said Thursday the accusation that President Trump directly colluded with Russia to interfere in the U.S. election "came apart" following former FBI Director James Comey's testimony in front of Congress.

In his written and spoken testimony on Thursday, Comey said that he never felt that Trump had tried to impede the FBI's investigation into Russia, even that the president had encouraged it and he suggested that former national security adviser Mike Flynn wasn't at the heart of the investigation.

"The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers, you might say, is that somewhere along the line in the last year is the president had something to do with colluding with the Russians … to affect the election in some way," Matthews said on MSNBC, following the testimony.

"And yet what came apart this morning was that theory," Matthews said, listing two reasons why. First, he said Comey revealed that "Flynn wasn't central to the Russian investigation," and secondly, he said that kills the idea that Flynn might have been in a position to testify against Trump.

"And if that's not the case, where's the there-there?" Matthews said.
Source.

At most, Flynn might be in trouble for failing to properly disclose his ties and register as a foreign agent. But even if he does get in trouble for those things, it's becoming abundantly apparent that this Comey thing is an overblown sideshow where Trump terminated Comey merely to try to get this Russia bullshit out of the headlines, not because the investigation threatened Trump and Trump wanted to impede the investigation.


There's still a lot we don't know, including things about Kushner and Sessions ties to Russia. Also I think your interpretation is a good one, Trump inappropriately fired a fbi director because he wasn't willing to publicly admit that he wasn't under investigation. That's within his constitutional right, I can see this being argued both ways. This clown could have actually worked on his agenda instead he had to tweet, fire an FBI director, and anger him by defaming him.

Mueller was orchestrated by Comey, they are bros and now Trump has to deal with consequences of his idiotic actions.

How exactly did Comey convince Rosenstein to appoint his 'bro' in this conspiracy?


No idea
Question.?
Nevuk
Profile Blog Joined March 2009
United States16280 Posts
June 08 2017 22:36 GMT
#156336
The Republican Steering Committee on Thursday backed Rep. Trey Gowdy to become the next chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The move — if confirmed by the full Republican Conference — would put the South Carolina Republican at the helm of a contentious probe into President Donald Trump's decision to fire FBI Director James Comey. Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor, is known for chairing the House Benghazi investigation and has also been a leading member of the Intelligence Committee’s probe of Moscow’s interference in the 2016 election.

Gowdy would replace outgoing Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who will resign at the end of June. Rep. Steve Russell (R-Okla.) had also put his name in for consideration to replace Chaffetz.

House GOP leaders encouraged Gowdy to run upon learning of Chaffetz’s looming departure. He is a close ally of Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on a panel composed of unpredictable Freedom Caucus conservatives with rocky relationships with leadership.

"Trey Gowdy possesses the experience and deep commitment to transparency and accountability necessary to be the House’s next Oversight chairman," Ryan said in a statement. "He has proven that he will always look out for taxpayers and seek answers from the bureaucracy."

Gowdy has also clashed with Trump, although he later served on Trump’s transition team. Trump once retweeted someone calling Rep. Trey Gowdy a “Benghazi loser” after Gowdy backed Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) in the GOP presidential primary. Trump also accused Gowdy of being soft on Hillary Clinton over her use of an unauthorized email server.

[snip]

www.politico.com
Danglars
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States12133 Posts
June 08 2017 22:41 GMT
#156337
On June 09 2017 07:14 xDaunt wrote:
Even Chris Matthews gets it:
Show nested quote +
Liberal MSNBC host Chris Matthews said Thursday the accusation that President Trump directly colluded with Russia to interfere in the U.S. election "came apart" following former FBI Director James Comey's testimony in front of Congress.

In his written and spoken testimony on Thursday, Comey said that he never felt that Trump had tried to impede the FBI's investigation into Russia, even that the president had encouraged it and he suggested that former national security adviser Mike Flynn wasn't at the heart of the investigation.

"The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers, you might say, is that somewhere along the line in the last year is the president had something to do with colluding with the Russians … to affect the election in some way," Matthews said on MSNBC, following the testimony.

"And yet what came apart this morning was that theory," Matthews said, listing two reasons why. First, he said Comey revealed that "Flynn wasn't central to the Russian investigation," and secondly, he said that kills the idea that Flynn might have been in a position to testify against Trump.

"And if that's not the case, where's the there-there?" Matthews said.
Source.

At most, Flynn might be in trouble for failing to properly disclose his ties and register as a foreign agent. But even if he does get in trouble for those things, it's becoming abundantly apparent that this Comey thing is an overblown sideshow where Trump terminated Comey merely to try to get this Russia bullshit out of the headlines, not because the investigation threatened Trump and Trump wanted to impede the investigation.

Matthews leading the charge to bring liberals away from this myopic campaign strategy? Collusion's dead except for bitter clingers, obstruction is just politicking for 2018, Trump getting pissed and sinking his own agenda through tweets/interviews is the big prize.
Great armies come from happy zealots, and happy zealots come from California!
TL+ Member
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands21586 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-06-08 22:46:18
June 08 2017 22:46 GMT
#156338
On June 09 2017 07:31 biology]major wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 09 2017 07:25 Gorsameth wrote:
On June 09 2017 07:21 biology]major wrote:
On June 09 2017 07:14 xDaunt wrote:
Even Chris Matthews gets it:
Liberal MSNBC host Chris Matthews said Thursday the accusation that President Trump directly colluded with Russia to interfere in the U.S. election "came apart" following former FBI Director James Comey's testimony in front of Congress.

In his written and spoken testimony on Thursday, Comey said that he never felt that Trump had tried to impede the FBI's investigation into Russia, even that the president had encouraged it and he suggested that former national security adviser Mike Flynn wasn't at the heart of the investigation.

"The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers, you might say, is that somewhere along the line in the last year is the president had something to do with colluding with the Russians … to affect the election in some way," Matthews said on MSNBC, following the testimony.

"And yet what came apart this morning was that theory," Matthews said, listing two reasons why. First, he said Comey revealed that "Flynn wasn't central to the Russian investigation," and secondly, he said that kills the idea that Flynn might have been in a position to testify against Trump.

"And if that's not the case, where's the there-there?" Matthews said.
Source.

At most, Flynn might be in trouble for failing to properly disclose his ties and register as a foreign agent. But even if he does get in trouble for those things, it's becoming abundantly apparent that this Comey thing is an overblown sideshow where Trump terminated Comey merely to try to get this Russia bullshit out of the headlines, not because the investigation threatened Trump and Trump wanted to impede the investigation.


There's still a lot we don't know, including things about Kushner and Sessions ties to Russia. Also I think your interpretation is a good one, Trump inappropriately fired a fbi director because he wasn't willing to publicly admit that he wasn't under investigation. That's within his constitutional right, I can see this being argued both ways. This clown could have actually worked on his agenda instead he had to tweet, fire an FBI director, and anger him by defaming him.

Mueller was orchestrated by Comey, they are bros and now Trump has to deal with consequences of his idiotic actions.

How exactly did Comey convince Rosenstein to appoint his 'bro' in this conspiracy?


No idea

Doesn't the premise that Comey somehow orchestrated this (including his own firing?) require him to be able to have his 'bro' Mueller appointed? Something he has no power to do and that those with the power would seek to avoid (if such a 'bro' mance existed)
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
NewSunshine
Profile Joined July 2011
United States5938 Posts
June 08 2017 22:50 GMT
#156339
So nothing explosive happened or was revealed here - except maybe John McCain's unexpected episode, but it shouldn't be too surprising. Even if Trump ends up taking the fall it wasn't gonna happen today, or soon even. The best case scenario still isn't encouraging though: that Trump's handling of all this exhibited such ineptitude, that his innocent dealings were made to look highly suspicious, almost criminal, and as such attracted this much attention.

This testimony is by no means some kind of anvil that divines his guilt or innocence, or even competence as a leader. Even if it does nothing to damage him, he's still a certifiably terrible leader who's damaging alliances worldwide, and isn't doing much better domestically.
"If you find yourself feeling lost, take pride in the accuracy of your feelings." - Night Vale
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
June 08 2017 22:51 GMT
#156340
On June 09 2017 07:19 RealityIsKing wrote:
Looks like Trump is innocent, gg.

innocent of what? there's a great many possible charges one might consider; you'd need to be more specific on which ones to be innocent of; otherwise the meaning of the phrase would be innocent in general, which would not be applicable.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
Prev 1 7815 7816 7817 7818 7819 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 4h 33m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
mouzHeroMarine 684
IndyStarCraft 266
UpATreeSC 136
BRAT_OK 75
ZombieGrub46
ForJumy 45
MindelVK 24
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 3055
Calm 2955
Rain 1505
Mini 329
Dewaltoss 81
Aegong 40
sSak 29
Movie 4
Dota 2
Dendi2033
capcasts100
Counter-Strike
flusha390
byalli248
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu536
Khaldor199
Other Games
tarik_tv50912
gofns29881
Grubby2604
FrodaN1311
B2W.Neo529
shahzam404
markeloff140
Trikslyr79
Sick24
Organizations
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Main Stream3362
Other Games
BasetradeTV61
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 22 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Adnapsc2 16
• musti20045 10
• Reevou 4
• intothetv
• Kozan
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• IndyKCrew
StarCraft: Brood War
• blackmanpl 35
• FirePhoenix5
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 3597
• masondota21258
League of Legends
• Nemesis5689
• Jankos2043
• TFBlade1542
Other Games
• imaqtpie1238
• Shiphtur400
Upcoming Events
Online Event
4h 33m
Replay Cast
6h 33m
GSL Code S
14h 3m
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
14h 33m
Replay Cast
1d 4h
WardiTV Invitational
1d 15h
OSC
1d 17h
Korean StarCraft League
2 days
SOOP
2 days
sOs vs Percival
CranKy Ducklings
2 days
[ Show More ]
WardiTV Invitational
2 days
Cheesadelphia
2 days
CSO Cup
2 days
GSL Code S
3 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Wardi Open
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
RSL Revival
6 days
herO vs sOs
Zoun vs Clem
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.