- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: BREAKING: Mueller Prepares Comey, McCabe To Testify AGAINST POTUS
Posted on 8/3/17 at 11:22 am to Hawkeye95
Posted on 8/3/17 at 11:22 am to Hawkeye95
I'd question Comey's motives, and his truthfulness given his prior testimony. I've also never been comfortable with his relationship with Mueller.
It also seems fraudulent to attack this weak case while ignoring the laughably obvious evidence of obstruction perpetrated by Lynch and, surprise surprise, Comey himself.
I have no problem with legitimate investigation into legitimate obstruction, but this just smells like a farce.
It also seems fraudulent to attack this weak case while ignoring the laughably obvious evidence of obstruction perpetrated by Lynch and, surprise surprise, Comey himself.
I have no problem with legitimate investigation into legitimate obstruction, but this just smells like a farce.
0
Posted on 8/3/17 at 11:22 am to Jjdoc
isn't this kind of null and void, considering we, and the rest of america, have already heard Comey's testimony MULTIPLE times?
Posted on 8/3/17 at 11:23 am to Hawkeye95
Right. In addition to the memos Comey wrote, Comey testified that he spoke to about 5 people within the FBI about his meetings with Trump, roughly contemporaneously with their meetings and phone calls. All of that is grist for an obstruction investigation.
Posted on 8/3/17 at 11:39 am to Hawkeye95
quote:
WHy exactly do yall have a problem with investigating obstruction of justice?
Who does; as long as the Investigation covers ALL instances of overt Obstruction. If Meuller tries to deep six Lynch/Comey's OVERT (Election collusion) Obstruction, and gives Dems a pass, then Trump's assertion of "wiretapping" and "witchhunt" are spot on. And Meuller himself should be investigated as Obstruction, Collusion (per Ukrainian/Russian Dossier, et al) such.
Posted on 8/3/17 at 11:40 am to Jjdoc
Time for TRUMP to shutdown this witchhunt.
Posted on 8/3/17 at 11:41 am to BBONDS25
quote:
FBI investigations are not included under the obstruction statute they claim was violated. This is fake news.
I'm thinking that Mueller, et al are trying to pull up a process prosecution. Here is Mueller's problem. If all Trump requested was that Comey come out and state that Trump was not under investigation....and Comey has said that,albeit in committee hearings, then Trump repeatedly asking him to state that is not a violation of any law that I know of. Actually, Comey saying that he would not because this is still an open investigation could be construed as a form of prosecutorial misconduct.
Mueller and Comey do not have a case even for obstruction due to the act that Comey as an Executive employee can be fired. Last I checked, Comey is not protected under any civil service protection, nor is he protected under any Constitutional statute or article that would mandate his term is sacrosanct ....like a federal judge. In the end he is an at will employee, an Trump has a reason for firing him.....whether you agree with it is a matter of debate.
Trump has never been accused of lying by the FBI.....has the FBI even interviewed him? If not, I cannot even see the case for a process crime. Mueller would be grasping at straws and in the end could have his arse handed to him....but that won't happen of course, because Robert Mueller is Mr. Straight Arrow.....yes beyond reproach. You know he was head of the criminal division......
Comey had better watch his arse as well, because if they succeed in making Trump a target or trying to bring an indictment on him, then Trump's lawyers are entitled to depose him. They are going to ask him questions about Lorreta Lynch. They are going to ask him about how the info of "collusion " or rather coordination was obtained. If I were the President's lawyer, I would make it known that if an indictment were in the works not only would I subpoena James Comey and Loretta Lynch and McCabe , but I would subpoena Mueller himself due to his longstanding personal relationship with Comey.
Posted on 8/3/17 at 11:42 am to Jjdoc
Gateway Pundit article: "revealed Reince Priebus pushed for . . . Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to appoint Robert Mueller as special counsel."
“InfoWars Exclusive : Reince Priebus pushed the appointment of Bush/Clinton operative Rod Rosenstein who appointed Robert Mueller,” tweeted Stone.
“InfoWars Exclusive : Reince Priebus pushed the appointment of Bush/Clinton operative Rod Rosenstein who appointed Robert Mueller,” tweeted Stone.
Posted on 8/3/17 at 11:46 am to TigerDoc
quote:
Right. In addition to the memos Comey wrote, Comey testified that he spoke to about 5 people within the FBI about his meetings with Trump, roughly contemporaneously with their meetings and phone calls. All of that is grist for an obstruction investigation.
I think trumpkins don't realize how slow these investigations go.
It is the federal gov't, they don't do anything fast.
Posted on 8/3/17 at 11:48 am to TigerDoc
quote:
In addition to the memos Comey wrote,
Do we know for sure this exists? No one has actually seen it yet.
Posted on 8/3/17 at 11:50 am to Brosef Stalin
quote:
Do we know for sure this exists? No one has actually seen it yet.
I'm sure he can produce it with enough notice. Hell, I bet McCabe has his own memos that match exactly what Comey's say.
Don't mind that wet ink.
Posted on 8/3/17 at 12:00 pm to Brosef Stalin
Comey testified that the originals are with Mueller. Comey sent (dictated?) a copy to Daniel Richman, a law professor at Columbia who read excerpts to the New York Times.
This post was edited on 8/3/17 at 12:01 pm
Posted on 8/3/17 at 12:02 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
Shortly after the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller in May, Acting Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe told several of the highest-ranking managers of the bureau they should consider themselves possible witnesses in any investigation into whether President Donald Trump engaged in obstruction of justice, according to two senior federal law enforcement officials.
Why is this breaking if it happened in May right after Mueller Wass appointed. RAd for morning misleading title
Posted on 8/3/17 at 12:06 pm to narddogg81
McCabe's private comments to FBI staff happened in May. They're just now being reported on.
Posted on 8/3/17 at 12:30 pm to TigerDoc
If they want a pitchfork and torch wielding army to show up in Washington they can try this. I'll personally bring the tar and feathers.
If they cannot bring a conspiracy case over the alleged Russian connection with the Trump campaign Mueller should shut it down.
Creating something to try and get at The President cannot be tolerated.
If they cannot bring a conspiracy case over the alleged Russian connection with the Trump campaign Mueller should shut it down.
Creating something to try and get at The President cannot be tolerated.
This post was edited on 8/3/17 at 12:35 pm
Posted on 8/3/17 at 12:38 pm to antibarner
quote:
If they want a pitchfork and torch wielding army to show up in Washington they can try this. I'll personally bring the tar and feathers.
Beck got a half million up there; I watched. The roads would be essentially shut down. Mueller lives in a Power Bubble; he really ought to get out into the Hinterland and see how the working people feel. Before he blows it.
Posted on 8/3/17 at 12:40 pm to Old Hellen Yeller
quote:Does it?
Sounds pretty dire.
What is the ""justice"" that was obstructed?
Posted on 8/3/17 at 12:43 pm to Seldom Seen
quote:
Time for TRUMP to shutdown this witchhunt.
please let this happen
Posted on 8/3/17 at 12:48 pm to Bunyan
quote:
Why should TWO illegal leakers be able to testify?
Because of Magna Carta.
Posted on 8/3/17 at 1:05 pm to antibarner
It's not likely. Investigators tend to investigate to the limits of their authority. He's not the judge of the case, though, of course. If he thinks Trump obstructed, he'll refer it to Congress who will be the ones to determine if it's obstruction that's impeachable. Congress has found it has been before (with Clinton and would have been with Nixon had he not resigned). Whether obstruction would be enough to remove would be a tough sell without evidence of participating in the Russian attack on the election. But with this composition of Congress, anything would be a tough sell. Public opinion matters, though. If R's see sticking with Trump harms their electoral prospects they could turn on him.
This post was edited on 8/3/17 at 1:09 pm
Posted on 8/3/17 at 1:08 pm to GRTiger
quote:
Scanning the article, I didn't see what it is they obstructed. Is it the Russia investigation that has a special counsel?
So, was it a "Russia investigation" or a "Russia matter"? Screw comey.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News