Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

mreilly

(2,120 posts)
5. They're going to hammer on any straw man or lie they can concoct...
Wed Jun 7, 2017, 03:37 PM
Jun 2017

... and what does it matter? He's under investigation NOW.

YCHDT

(962 posts)
8. Right, I hope Comey has more... this can't be the end of the matter, looks like Pence canceled 2nite
Wed Jun 7, 2017, 03:41 PM
Jun 2017

anneboleyn

(5,611 posts)
6. We already knew this to be the case. It also has nothing to do with the obstruction charge, which is
Wed Jun 7, 2017, 03:38 PM
Jun 2017

the issue here with Comey. This is NOT a new revelation, so the GOP can hammer it all they want to as it is a pointless red herring.

bigtree

(85,991 posts)
9. most of the obstruction followed the dinner
Wed Jun 7, 2017, 03:42 PM
Jun 2017

...a major part occurring at the dinner.

Considering most of the jeopardy Trump's in today is over obstruction, it's a thin reed to argue he wasn't under investigation at the time of the dinner.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,681 posts)
10. Which was true, *at the time.*
Wed Jun 7, 2017, 03:44 PM
Jun 2017

But one reason Comey told Trump he was not at that time being personally investigated is that the FBI wouldn't want to have to change that statement later if the situation changed. Context is everything. Here's what he said:

"When the FBI develops reason to believe an American has been targeted for recruitment by a foreign power or is covertly acting as an agent of the foreign power, the FBI will "open an investigation" on that American and use legal authorities to try to learn more about the nature of any relationship with the foreign power so it can be disrupted.
In that context, 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. We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted. During our one-on-one meeting at Trump Tower, based on President Elect Trump's reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, I offered that assurance.

During the dinner, the President returned to the salacious material I had briefed him about on January 6, and, as he had done previously, expressed his disgust for the allegations and strongly denied them. He said he was considering
ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn't happen. 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. He said he would think about it and asked me to think about it.

I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told thoseCongressional leaders that we were not personally investigating President Trump. I reminded him I had previously told him that. He repeatedly told me, "We need to get that fact out." (I did not tell the President that the FBI and the Department of Justice had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an open case on President Trump for a number of reasons, most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change.)"

Xolodno

(6,390 posts)
12. I suspect one question will be....
Wed Jun 7, 2017, 03:50 PM
Jun 2017

...Is the President under investigation currently? And his response will be they have to refer to the special investigator. Thus leaving the cloud up there.

procon

(15,805 posts)
15. If Trump was innocent, he wouldn't be worried about any investigation, yeah?
Wed Jun 7, 2017, 04:06 PM
Jun 2017

Don't believe the propaganda. Republicans cherry picked the parts the liked and omitted the rest. Comey was careful to say that Trump was not a subject of an open investigation at that time. That's not to say he wasn't a person of interest or there were suspicious activities where he was named. As Comey remarked:

(I did not tell the President that the FBI and the Department
of Justice had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an
open case on President Trump for a number of reasons, most importantly because
it would create a duty to correct, should that change.)


Given the speed of how things are unfolding, what might have been true back a few months ago, is very likely quite different today.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Shit, the GOP is hammerin...