Jump to content

U.S. Politics: Comey, Comey, Comey, Comey, Comey Chameleon


Recommended Posts

One specifically great news about Mueller is that Mueller used memos to essentially end the NSA's warrantless wiretap quest when then DAG Gonzales went to Ashcroft in the hospital and tried to get him to sign off. Mueller specifically took careful notes (along with Comey, hah) and used those notes to show others that he had the receipts.

Comey's notes would be almost certainly considered perfectly acceptable and useful evidence in any wrongdoings, based on that, given that Mueller essentially taught Comey to do it and why. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

One specifically great news about Mueller is that Mueller used memos to essentially end the NSA's warrantless wiretap quest when then DAG Gonzales went to Ashcroft in the hospital and tried to get him to sign off. Mueller specifically took careful notes (along with Comey, hah) and used those notes to show others that he had the receipts.

Comey's notes would be almost certainly considered perfectly acceptable and useful evidence in any wrongdoings, based on that, given that Mueller essentially taught Comey to do it and why. 

Not incidentally, this story built up the the Comey legend and is the main reason Obama appointed him FBI director in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mueller seems like a good choice.  I hope he's able to take down at least someone from this mess.  Seems likely that at least Flynn is guilty of collusion.  As Flynn himself has previously stated, only a guilty person asks for immunity.  A lot of Trump's crazy and/or idiotic behavior would actually make more sense if he was guilty of collusion and trying to cover things up out of desperation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mudguard said:

Mueller seems like a good choice.  I hope he's able to take down at least someone from this mess.  Seems likely that at least Flynn is guilty of collusion.  As Flynn himself has previously stated, only a guilty person asks for immunity.  A lot of Trump's crazy and/or idiotic behavior would actually make more sense if he was guilty of collusion and trying to cover things up out of desperation.  

Well, Flynn is possibly not guilty of collusion. He's certainly guilty - likely of taking the Russian job after he was told not to and that it'd be bad, and lying on his security clearance form, and then lying again to FBI. I'm not sure that makes him guilty overall of collusion though.

Manafort is the more interesting one to me, in that he was in a much stronger position to influence the campaign and has much more nefarious-looking economics and bizarre behaviors. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Well, Flynn is possibly not guilty of collusion. He's certainly guilty - likely of taking the Russian job after he was told not to and that it'd be bad, and lying on his security clearance form, and then lying again to FBI. I'm not sure that makes him guilty overall of collusion though.

Manafort is the more interesting one to me, in that he was in a much stronger position to influence the campaign and has much more nefarious-looking economics and bizarre behaviors. 

Trump asking Comey to let Flynn go make more sense if there was a bigger problem than Flynn lying about accepting payments from Russia for a speech he did and from Turkey for work he did.  At most, Flynn is just going to get a slap on the wrist for those things.  Trump really stuck his neck out for Flynn.  The whole Trump/Comey timeline looks really, really bad for Trump, so I'm leaning to there being something Trump is seriously worried about.  I think there was more to it than Trump simply helping out a friend or loyal member of his team.

I wouldn't be surprised if Manafort was working for Russia.  

So many of Trump's surrogates had contacts with the Russian ambassador.  It seems unusual to me, but I really have no idea how common this behavior is.  It seems smart for Kislyak to talk to everyone if possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it's not that hard for me to believe that Trump simply wanted Flynn cool because Flynn had been super loyal to Trump. He's like that. He said how great a guy Bill O'Reilly was, and had no specific reason to. 

But yeah, it looks real bad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely impressed with Crystal Ball. She was just a guest on Tucker Carleson (don't judge, I wanted to see what Fox was saying). He was being his normal asshole, gotcha, distracting self and she calmly and firmly expressed her opinion and answered his questions. She was even able to somewhat turn it back on him at a few points. God what a slimy little asshole he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gertrude said:

Completely impressed with Crystal Ball. She was just a guest on Tucker Carleson (don't judge, I wanted to see what Fox was saying). He was being his normal asshole, gotcha, distracting self and she calmly and firmly expressed her opinion and answered his questions. She was even able to somewhat turn it back on him at a few points. God what a slimy little asshole he is.

It's always good to flip around and observe the agenda. I regularly click back and forth, though I can only tolerate FOX for about 2-3 minutes. And yeah, TC is just loathsome, particularly as he's trying to "make his mark" now that he's finally in the Big Time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I do agree that it's possible that a lot of his strongest supporters might approve, or at least be indifferent about it. But that said, it's important to remember that a majority of Republican primary voters rejected Trump. I strongly suspect that an overwhelming majority of them would dump Trump in a heart beat if he killed someone. And moreover, just about every Democrat and Independent would vote against him for it. 

Plus ya know, the cops might not approve. ;)

Also of note, one of his strongest supporters is starting to bail on him:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/coulter-disappointment-donald-trump_us_591a4014e4b07d5f6ba578e4

 

Is it specifically against the law for the president to kill someone?  Because if he can technically do that and it's legal because he's the president, then I imagine his current supporters will defend it based on technical legality, same as we saw those types defend his leaking of intel because it was legal for him to do so.  People who voted for Trump stand for nothing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

Is it specifically against the law for the president to kill someone?  Because if he can technically do that and it's legal because he's the president, then I imagine his current supporters will defend it based on technical legality, same as we saw those types defend his leaking of intel because it was legal for him to do so.  People who voted for Trump stand for nothing.  

There is nothing that POTUS can do which can be prosecuted normally. The only way he can be accused of a crime and actually charged for it is the process of impeachment. Now, he can be impeached for things other than crimes - but he cannot be indicted for crimes outside of congress. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

There is nothing that POTUS can do which can be prosecuted normally. The only way he can be accused of a crime and actually charged for it is the process of impeachment. Now, he can be impeached for things other than crimes - but he cannot be indicted for crimes outside of congress. 

So basically expect people like @Free Northman Reborn to defend Trump when he murders someone because it's his right to do so.  

It's not like Trump didn't warn us this would happen.  "I could shoot someone in times square and you idiots would still support me."  Paraphrase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dr. Pepper said:

So basically expect people like @Free Northman Reborn to defend Trump when he murders someone because it's his right to do so.  

It's not like Trump didn't warn us this would happen.  "I could shoot someone in times square and you idiots would still support me."  Paraphrase.

That's basically correct - things aren't a crime until POTUS is actually impeached for it. POTUS doesn't have a right, but legality is a weird thing with the POTUS power. Same goes for things like his conflicts of interest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Trump might be on Putin's payroll, but it's all good, cause he's gonna give us tax cuts.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/05/mccarthy-trump-russia-payroll

Quote

The Washington Post revealed Wednesday evening that in June 2016, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) was secretly recorded telling other top Republicans that he believed Russian President Vladimir Putin "pays" Trump. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.), who was in the room at the time, apparently ended the exchange moments later by telling those present not to leak what was said.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

I think Trump might be on Putin's payroll, but it's all good, cause he's gonna give us tax cuts.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/05/mccarthy-trump-russia-payroll

 

The transcript looks terrible but it's sheer terribleness and how much it sounds like a bad movie makes me think it was in jest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...