|
|
Post by Angie on Jun 7, 2017 13:40:23 GMT -5
I haven't had a chance to read the whole thing, but CNN is all abuzz about it. |
|
|
|
Post by haggis on Jun 7, 2017 17:19:04 GMT -5
As they should be. I'm so looking forward to tomorrow.
Today's testimony was interesting in terms of what wasn't said. I think they're waiting for the Special Counsel to do his magic. I know I am.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Jun 7, 2017 18:36:34 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm sure tomorrow will be fascinating. I'm popping all the corn now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2017 18:53:48 GMT -5
I'm thinking maybe it's time to invest in popcorn stock.
|
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jun 7, 2017 19:00:04 GMT -5
From the major coverage that I've seen thus far, it seems that most of the outlets (admittedly, I haven't watched or read anything from Fox) are totally ignoring the fact that the smoking gun many liberals might have been hoping for isn't there and is nipped in the bud by Comey early on in his opening statement:
Bolding mine.
Granted, this is just his opening statement and there's likely a lot more he's going to say tomorrow when questioned. But, I've yet to see one liberal MSM outlet so much as acknowledge that Trump wasn't being investigated (directly) by the FBI. They're all focusing on the dinner meeting, from what I've seen.
It also doesn't mean there aren't criminal investigations ongoing, but I'm not gonna hold my breath.
|
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Jun 7, 2017 19:27:51 GMT -5
Yeah, but Comey's statement still looks pretty bad for Trump, IMO.
And it's pretty consistent w/ what I think we already knew about Trump: that he's clueless about what's appropriate to say when you're the president.
|
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jun 8, 2017 7:41:02 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2017 8:00:32 GMT -5
No time right now to elaborate, unfortunately (meetings and conf. calls stuffing my day), but I don't agree with this take, either on Comey or on the gravity of Trump's behavior here. More later.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Jun 8, 2017 9:20:43 GMT -5
I don't honestly know what to think. I'll be interested to see what new information, if any, comes up in today's testimony.
|
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Jun 8, 2017 10:18:07 GMT -5
I just cannot take the hysteria of CNN over the last 2 days. Could they try any harder to find the one or two lines out of Comey's statement that sound the most damaging out of context and then splash them across the headlines in the largest font I have ever seen? This is ridiculous. I used to read CNN every morning to make sure I got "balance". (At least comparing it to the other stuff I read including Fox). But this is seriously beyond the pale. I'm done with them.
And I don't see anything egregious about Trump wanting to let the public know he wasn't being investigated. It might be bad form. It might be something a POTUS shouldn't do. But illegal, obstructive behavior? Doubt it. But Trump is still acting like a businessman who wields a lot of power. He needs to learn to act like the POTUS. It's a painful learning curve but what do you expect when you elect a non-politician? Breaches of protocol will be made, especially if the person is hard-headed like Trump. Too bad for the anti-Trump crowd things don't look as bad as they've been hoping. Though they will take anything they can, exaggerate, and run with it. (And make the font huge)
|
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jun 8, 2017 13:14:30 GMT -5
And I don't see anything egregious about Trump wanting to let the public know he wasn't being investigated. It might be bad form. It might be something a POTUS shouldn't do. But illegal, obstructive behavior? I do not believe for one hot microsecond that if it came out that Hillary Clinton had asked Comey to let the public know that she wasn't being investigated that you wouldn't be demanding to know why she isn't in jail. |
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Jun 8, 2017 15:44:34 GMT -5
Go ahead and don't believe for one cold microsecond, too. If I demanded that about Clinton in your hypothetical that has no basis in reality, then I'd have to give good reasons why that behavior is illegal. All he was asking is that Comey let out the truth - Trump was not being investigated. Heck, experts are saying even the Flynn comments aren't obstruction. If Alan Dershowitz can't demonstrate obstruction, I doubt I could. www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/06/07/dershowitz-comeys-statement-fails-to-deliver-smoking-gun-democrats-craved.htmlGiven the concern in a democracy that law enforcement could abuse power, it makes sense that our highest elected official would have power over law enforcement. Once again, as I've been saying for a while, this hysteria is a concerted effort to bring down a democratically elected POTUS that some people aren't happy with. Methinks they're going to have to do better than that. |
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jun 8, 2017 16:14:34 GMT -5
To clarify, I don't think Trump necessarily did break the law here. I just think "He didn't technically break the law (he was just really shady and inappropriate), so what's the big deal?" is a lot more charity than you'd extend to a Clinton.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jun 8, 2017 16:28:28 GMT -5
I don't see anything nefarious in the letter or the testimony to date. Trump is (still) a liar, a grandstander, and mind-numbingly self-centered (quite possibly to the detriment of the U.S., imo), but there's no evidence of anything criminal here that I can see. And yeah, all the media can do (still) is speculate. It's getting really, really old.
I'm not impressed with Comey, even less so after today. Too much emotion and "flair" for the situation. He's human and I don't want to judge too harshly, especially now that he's been fired, but all the drama doesn't sit well with me coming from someone who was the director of the FBI. I don't think he's a "nutjob" but I wish he would have been more steadfast and principled both in his interactions with Trump and afterward.
I think the continuing investigation into any links between Russia and Trump campaign is critically important. It needs to be determined whether or not Trump himself knew about or participated in any collusion there. But so far, meh. Nada.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2017 16:48:14 GMT -5
Well. I might be in the position of disagreeing with pretty much everyone.
I found Comey impressive and credible. Far from having too much emotion or being a grandstander I think exactly the opposite.
And I find the outsized focus on whether Trump behaved "illegally" (implying that if it doesn't fall squarely under a criminal statute, it's fine?) fucking bizarre. Our president is an untrustworthy liar who inappropriately tries to lean on people who are supposed to be independent. He either doesn't know or doesn't care that it's inappropriate. That should bother us. It should bother us a lot.
Trump behaved inappropriately and dishonestly (granted, that's nothing new). He attempted to pressure the head of the FBI to express "loyalty" to him personally and to end an investigation. Both are incredibly inappropriate, and moreover Trump clearly knew it, which is why he got Comey alone to do it. And when Comey failed to come through, Trump fired him.
That, right there, is a fucking problem.
Trump didn't succeed in obstructing the investigation. But whether he succeeded is actually not relevant -- what is relevant is that he tried. If you go into a convenience store and try to rob it, you are not off the hook because you didn't get away with the cash.
And there's going to be more, even from Comey, that happens behind closed doors.
Dersh aside, a ton of legal experts of equal expertise think this is obstruction and Trump should be impeached. (I should note here that I am no Dersh fan -- if ever there was a grandstander who is indifferent to wrongdoing, it's him.)
Whether he will be or not will likely depend on the 2018 elections. But I move my needle much closer to impeachment. And I am certain that Meuller found Comey much more impressive than many of you did.
|
|
