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
 

KingCharlemagne

(7,908 posts)
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:38 AM Jun 2017

BOOM! Trump allegedly asked Director of National Intelligence Coats

to intervene with Comey to get the FBI to "back off" the investigation into Flynn. That, ladies and gentlemen, is obstruction of justice, almost exactly what Nixon did by ordering the CIA to obstruct the FBI's Watergate investigation.

"Coats told associates that Trump had asked him whether Coats could intervene with Comey to get the bureau to back off its focus on former national security adviser Michael Flynn in its Russia probe, according to officials. Coats later told lawmakers that he never felt pressured to intervene."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/special-counsel-is-investigating-trump-for-possible-obstruction-of-justice/2017/06/14/9ce02506-5131-11e7-b064-828ba60fbb98_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_no-name%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.9c1c9d4eb740

HOLY SHIT! Trump asked Coats to obstruct justice.

78 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
BOOM! Trump allegedly asked Director of National Intelligence Coats (Original Post) KingCharlemagne Jun 2017 OP
Of course, he did! He asked Rogers as well. Trump knows the deeper they dig, the more he's... writes3000 Jun 2017 #1
Trump couldnt get Coats or Rogers (or Comey) to do his bidding. So KingCharlemagne Jun 2017 #44
But he didn't 'pressure' him. onit2day Jun 2017 #62
which proves he knew what he was asking would be wrong SleeplessinSoCal Jun 2017 #68
I'm sure Trump has extensive experience in making threats and illegal suggestions Nitram Jun 2017 #75
Who can judge what "pressure" is? Pressure in this case is asking while being the POTUS! Maraya1969 Jun 2017 #71
that is why Coats discussed how he "felt".... virtualobserver Jun 2017 #2
What one "feels" is subjective.... Tommy_Carcetti Jun 2017 #12
Good point. - nt KingCharlemagne Jun 2017 #43
Nor does he wish to lose his job Maeve Jun 2017 #17
He wouldn't go to jail Sgent Jun 2017 #18
that was what I meant to imply virtualobserver Jun 2017 #19
has Comey mercuryblues Jun 2017 #3
Yes he did Phoenix61 Jun 2017 #10
They might not have done Trump's bidding, but they were in contempt of WinkyDink Jun 2017 #14
Thank you mercuryblues Jun 2017 #30
From Coats wouldn't answer this in public we knew the answer malaise Jun 2017 #4
Prepare for the now famous "locker room talk" defense Freethinker65 Jun 2017 #5
The spin: DefenseLawyer Jun 2017 #6
he was just asking for his friend. mopinko Jun 2017 #7
Hahaha rusty fender Jun 2017 #48
Say Dan, Bannon and I have a bet, maybe you can settle it for us. n/t DefenseLawyer Jun 2017 #58
hahahahaa Kellyanne's eyeballs might pop right out of her head from the pressure on this one *grin* luvMIdog Jun 2017 #8
That dog won't hunt. Still In Wisconsin Jun 2017 #9
Oh I'm not saying it will hunt DefenseLawyer Jun 2017 #33
It was a hypothetical question. Info for the screenplay he's writing... Shrike47 Jun 2017 #13
And once again, Ryan will probably ask us to believe that Comrade Fatass Buns_of_Fire Jun 2017 #15
Yup. That's already what one of the sons said after Comey's testimony. progressoid Jun 2017 #25
Was that Uday or Qusay? flibbitygiblets Jun 2017 #34
Beats me. I can't tell the difference. progressoid Jun 2017 #38
They always look to me like home invaders with stockings pulled over their head. NBachers Jun 2017 #64
LOL, I never realized that before. flibbitygiblets Jun 2017 #72
RICO! RICO! Eyeball_Kid Jun 2017 #52
Hope they'll be putting copies of Prison Times through cell bars. (n/t) klook Jun 2017 #67
LOL Ah, the infamous "hypothetically speaking" defense! :) -nt KingCharlemagne Jun 2017 #45
Do we know if Coats or Rogers actually asked Comey to back off? Does that make them guilty as well? writes3000 Jun 2017 #11
I believe Comey. WinkyDink Jun 2017 #16
Did Comey testify that Coats or Rogers told him to back off? writes3000 Jun 2017 #29
I believe Comey testified they did not. Cant swear to it, though - nt KingCharlemagne Jun 2017 #46
so that's the head of the FBI and the head of the DNI are asked to derail an investigation.... spanone Jun 2017 #20
Simply the *appearance* of that happening cost HRC the presidency. JudyM Jun 2017 #74
re: "HOLY SHIT! Trump asked Coats to obstruct justice." thesquanderer Jun 2017 #21
Obstruction does not require that the obstruction was successful, I believe. Honeycombe8 Jun 2017 #23
Is there ambiguity in firing Comey, as being obstruction ? Pluvious Jun 2017 #37
There was ambiguity right up to the point that the idiot told Lester Holt why he fired him. grantcart Jun 2017 #60
This thread is not about Comey. nt Honeycombe8 Jun 2017 #70
This thread is about obstruction, firing Comey was defiantly obstruction of justice Pluvious Jun 2017 #73
Good point. (n/t) thesquanderer Jun 2017 #57
Makes no different if an investigation was actually obstructed Saviolo Jun 2017 #28
Correct. Eyeball_Kid Jun 2017 #54
"therefore no obstruction occurred" alcibiades_mystery Jun 2017 #31
Old news. Coats has already testified about it before Congress. Honeycombe8 Jun 2017 #22
If Trump asked Coats to intervene, Trump was obstructing KingCharlemagne Jun 2017 #47
I doubt if it matters what Coates "felt" or did. Patterson Jun 2017 #59
True enough. But he wouldn't confirm or deny what Trump had said to him. Honeycombe8 Jun 2017 #69
How can the fucking republicans continue to ignore this? liberal N proud Jun 2017 #24
Their Oath Is To Billionaires All-In Jun 2017 #27
Trump probably really didn't understand that he was breaking the law, MGKrebs Jun 2017 #26
He knew exactly what he was doing. It is what he has done Enoki33 Jun 2017 #35
That's what I mean though. In the business world the boss "leaning on" a subordinate MGKrebs Jun 2017 #39
Trumpy's always had enough money to buy off anyone. Except for now. Eyeball_Kid Jun 2017 #56
oh yes he was well aware onetexan Jun 2017 #36
The White House REFUSED ethics briefings. He didn't even give himself the chance to pay attention. Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2017 #41
Oh jeez, that's right. And now he'll claim ignorance MGKrebs Jun 2017 #61
His scamming has gone beyond intuitive. It is now reflexive. He can't help himself. . . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2017 #66
Did Flynn give Trump an ultimatum? procon Jun 2017 #32
Gang members stick together-----until they don't. Doitnow Jun 2017 #40
Coats is not a career Intelligence person he's a career GOPer. FenwayDonkey Jun 2017 #42
Honest question here. Grammy23 Jun 2017 #49
Thinking back to Watergate, once Nixon ordered Haldeman and Ehrlichman to KingCharlemagne Jun 2017 #50
Doesn't it depend on the crime and what was actually done? hughee99 Jun 2017 #53
It seems comparable to when someone tries to hire a "hit man" to commit a murder. Tanuki Jun 2017 #76
And the maggot MFM008 Jun 2017 #51
Mueller allowed Coates & Rogers to GLOMAR to support comey's testimony...but kgop sat on their hands MedusaX Jun 2017 #55
Did he think Trump was joking? Seriously not believable that never felt pressured. Justice Jun 2017 #63
If you start by assuming that every word that leaves a Republican's KingCharlemagne Jun 2017 #65
Coates Catherine Vincent Jun 2017 #77
I agree. - nt KingCharlemagne Jun 2017 #78

SleeplessinSoCal

(9,303 posts)
68. which proves he knew what he was asking would be wrong
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 07:39 PM
Jun 2017

and illegal. Not the neophyte some reps are claiming.

Nitram

(23,415 posts)
75. I'm sure Trump has extensive experience in making threats and illegal suggestions
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 08:08 AM
Jun 2017

using fairly neutral language.

Maraya1969

(22,704 posts)
71. Who can judge what "pressure" is? Pressure in this case is asking while being the POTUS!
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:52 PM
Jun 2017

That alone is pressure and he knew it! And pressure is asking while everyone knows about all your contacts with the Russians who routinely poison anyone who doesn't do their bidding.

If that scumbag had said those things to me I would have been afraid, to say the least. And that is pressure.

 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
2. that is why Coats discussed how he "felt"....
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:48 AM
Jun 2017

He didn't say that Trump didn't ask him.....just that he never "felt" pressured to intervene.....

He didn't want to go to jail.

 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
19. that was what I meant to imply
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:36 AM
Jun 2017

Coats was trying to thread the needle with his response.

He won't be able to get away with that with the special counsel.

 

WinkyDink

(51,311 posts)
14. They might not have done Trump's bidding, but they were in contempt of
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:30 AM
Jun 2017

Congress, and Trump obstructed justice.

mercuryblues

(14,615 posts)
30. Thank you
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:28 AM
Jun 2017

I tried googling it, but could not come up with the answer. All the hits were about trump asking Coats, Rogers and Comey.

 

DefenseLawyer

(11,101 posts)
6. The spin:
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:56 AM
Jun 2017

When he asked if he "could" intervene, he wasn't suggesting that he should intervene. No, he was literally just asking, in the abstract, if he "could". Because you know, he's a novice and doesn't really understand what everyone in the government actually does. Insert eye roll here.

Buns_of_Fire

(17,307 posts)
15. And once again, Ryan will probably ask us to believe that Comrade Fatass
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:30 AM
Jun 2017

isn't really malicious or evil or crooked -- he's just STUPID!

What a glowing endorsement!

progressoid

(50,128 posts)
38. Beats me. I can't tell the difference.
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:46 AM
Jun 2017

They both have that blank, lack of emotion, look. Kind of creeps me out.

NBachers

(17,326 posts)
64. They always look to me like home invaders with stockings pulled over their head.
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 06:14 PM
Jun 2017

Last edited Fri Jun 16, 2017, 02:42 AM - Edit history (1)

flibbitygiblets

(7,220 posts)
72. LOL, I never realized that before.
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:15 PM
Jun 2017

Like Nick Cage in Raising Arizona: "Son, you got a panty on your head"



Eyeball_Kid

(7,467 posts)
52. RICO! RICO!
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:35 PM
Jun 2017

Oh.. and let's not forget emoluments. The kiddies are caught up in both. They'll need to get newspaper routes after the feds are done with them.

writes3000

(4,734 posts)
29. Did Comey testify that Coats or Rogers told him to back off?
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:27 AM
Jun 2017

I'm trying to assess whether they followed through with Trump's request.

If so, they could be in legal jeopardy.

spanone

(136,226 posts)
20. so that's the head of the FBI and the head of the DNI are asked to derail an investigation....
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:39 AM
Jun 2017

i wonder what would ensue had a democrat done the same?

well, i really don't wonder.

JudyM

(29,402 posts)
74. Simply the *appearance* of that happening cost HRC the presidency.
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 07:59 AM
Jun 2017

If in fact Comey's announcement of taking up the case again is what threw the election to tRump... seeing as Comey essentially stated that Bill's tarmac meeting with Lynch was the turning point for his decision to make that announcement.

thesquanderer

(12,051 posts)
21. re: "HOLY SHIT! Trump asked Coats to obstruct justice."
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:42 AM
Jun 2017

It sounds like he asked, but they did not comply... therefore no obstruction occurred (in this particular case). I think maybe the most important part of this is that it is further evidence of Trump's state of mind, helping to prove the intent behind telling Comey he "hoped" he could let the Flynn thing go. As if that weren't obvious enough already.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
23. Obstruction does not require that the obstruction was successful, I believe.
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:46 AM
Jun 2017

It's just that the head honcho did actions TO obstruct justice. The fact that the underling he was pressuring didn't succumb, or didn't catch on, or didn't get an opportunity to follow the "suggestions" of the head honcho is immaterial, I believe.

Pluvious

(4,417 posts)
37. Is there ambiguity in firing Comey, as being obstruction ?
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:44 AM
Jun 2017

And all the "could" questions just put the act of firing in context ?

grantcart

(53,061 posts)
60. There was ambiguity right up to the point that the idiot told Lester Holt why he fired him.
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 02:16 PM
Jun 2017

That kind of settled it but if you were in doubt he confirmed it to the Russians in the WH the next day.

The only thing we are missing is "Of course I fired him, I didn't want to get caught".

Saviolo

(3,295 posts)
28. Makes no different if an investigation was actually obstructed
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:26 AM
Jun 2017

Here's some information from a lawyer on the meaning of the term:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029175368

It doesn't matter if Coats "felt" pressured or if there was anything actually obstructed. If Trump asked them to intervene, it is obstruction of justice.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
22. Old news. Coats has already testified about it before Congress.
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:44 AM
Jun 2017

He takes the position that he was not pressured to do anything, and he didn't feel pressured, and he did in fact not do anything.

The other intel officer or advisor who also testified at the same time about the same thing, also said what Coats said.

As I recall, they wouldn't confirm or deny or talk about what Trump had said to them. Same thing Sessions did.

 

KingCharlemagne

(7,908 posts)
47. If Trump asked Coats to intervene, Trump was obstructing
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:04 PM
Jun 2017

justice. Whether that is old news lies, I suppose, in the eye of the beholder. The WaPo story is dated yesterday, though.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
69. True enough. But he wouldn't confirm or deny what Trump had said to him.
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 08:46 PM
Jun 2017

Neither would the other guy.

The point being...they don't want to get involved in an obstruction of justice issue. Also, they were not fired when they didn't do whatever it was that Trump asked them to do, like Comey was.

Odd...that they don't want to call Trump on trying to influence the investigation.

liberal N proud

(60,420 posts)
24. How can the fucking republicans continue to ignore this?
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:09 AM
Jun 2017

Not without being in violation of their oath to the constitution.

 

All-In

(312 posts)
27. Their Oath Is To Billionaires
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:24 AM
Jun 2017

Who write them checks.

And fund the 100 conservative organizations that push them forward.

All the way to hell.

MGKrebs

(8,138 posts)
26. Trump probably really didn't understand that he was breaking the law,
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:23 AM
Jun 2017

BECAUSE HE DIDN'T PAY ATTENTION IN HIS ETHICS BRIEFINGS.
Dumbass.

Enoki33

(1,594 posts)
35. He knew exactly what he was doing. It is what he has done
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:40 AM
Jun 2017

his entire life. His miscalculation was based on the fact that he has always dealt with less principled individuals.

MGKrebs

(8,138 posts)
39. That's what I mean though. In the business world the boss "leaning on" a subordinate
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:52 AM
Jun 2017

is normal day to day behavior. An idiot who wasn't prepared to operate in this arena just wouldn't understand it was wrong. Or at least no wrong enough to warrant more than a warning from somebody.
In the business world you do something wrong and you usually get a letter first, and then a fine and then you move on.

Eyeball_Kid

(7,467 posts)
56. Trumpy's always had enough money to buy off anyone. Except for now.
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:41 PM
Jun 2017

America's Grifters. The best of the best, in the White House.

onetexan

(13,142 posts)
36. oh yes he was well aware
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:41 AM
Jun 2017

and deliberately did so thinking because he is so bold GOPs will leave him alone and what he did won't have any consequences.

Bernardo de La Paz

(49,321 posts)
41. The White House REFUSED ethics briefings. He didn't even give himself the chance to pay attention.
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 12:31 PM
Jun 2017

Willful carelessness.

Rank amateurishness.

Arrogant ignorance.

Republican President Trump.

MGKrebs

(8,138 posts)
61. Oh jeez, that's right. And now he'll claim ignorance
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 02:20 PM
Jun 2017

since he didn't get the briefings.
He's a slippery one, that Trumpy.
A life of scamming and eventually it just becomes intuitive.

procon

(15,805 posts)
32. Did Flynn give Trump an ultimatum?
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:35 AM
Jun 2017

Picture something like this: "You better get me outta this, Donald, or I'm gonna tell all and take you down with me!"

That would sure explain why Trump is so frantic to quash the investigation.

Grammy23

(5,820 posts)
49. Honest question here.
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:12 PM
Jun 2017

If tRump asked any of them (Coats, Comey, etc) to make the investigation go away, even if he asked nicely/sweetly, isn't that still an attempt at obstruction of justice? If a guy goes in a bank, attempts a robbery but ultimately leaves empty handed, isn't he still guilty of attempted bank robbery? Success at the crime is not a prerequisite to being charged with a crime.

Is my logic flawed?

 

KingCharlemagne

(7,908 posts)
50. Thinking back to Watergate, once Nixon ordered Haldeman and Ehrlichman to
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:18 PM
Jun 2017

tell the CIA to obstruct the FBI, obstruction occurred whether the CIA actually obstructed the FBI or refused to obey. John Dean made the allegation, Nixon denied it, but the tapes corroborated Dean's allegations and were the final evidentiary nail in Tricky Dick's coffin.

IANAL, though.

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
53. Doesn't it depend on the crime and what was actually done?
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:36 PM
Jun 2017

You don't get charged with Murder if no one died, but there are other charges you may be subject to. If you walk into the bank with the intention to rob it, chicken out, and leave, are you still guilty of attempted bank robbery? If Trump had asked a Mall Santa to make the investigation go away, would that be obstruction of justice?

Tanuki

(14,957 posts)
76. It seems comparable to when someone tries to hire a "hit man" to commit a murder.
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 08:45 AM
Jun 2017

It's still a serious crime, even if the presumed hit man is an undercover FBI agent and nobody got killed. Interesting discussion here:

https://www.quora.com/If-someone-hired-a-hitman-to-kill-someone-who-goes-to-prison-the-hitman-or-the-person-who-hired-them

MFM008

(19,863 posts)
51. And the maggot
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:28 PM
Jun 2017

And his minions are busy undermining the special council so when they release their finding his idiot supporters will ignore it.

MedusaX

(1,129 posts)
55. Mueller allowed Coates & Rogers to GLOMAR to support comey's testimony...but kgop sat on their hands
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:39 PM
Jun 2017

And played tiddlywinks instead of taking action to impeach
So now we have the drip drip of more supporting evidence -
clearly stated
rather than implied...

Telling house KGOP to wake the fuck up & do their job!

Justice

(7,188 posts)
63. Did he think Trump was joking? Seriously not believable that never felt pressured.
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 05:00 PM
Jun 2017


Why would you tell associates about it if it were no big deal.
 

KingCharlemagne

(7,908 posts)
65. If you start by assuming that every word that leaves a Republican's
Thu Jun 15, 2017, 06:16 PM
Jun 2017

lips is a flat-out lie, things that don't make sense at first quickly snap into focus. To wit, Coats actually DID feel pressured. Survival in Trumpland means you lie to protect your boss.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»BOOM! Trump allegedly ask...