James Comey testimony: Trump asked me to let Flynn investigation go

[CaliCat 3,957]

 

oh. oh.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/politics/james-comey-testimony-released/index.html

 

(CNN)Former FBI Director James Comey will say Thursday that President Donald Trump asked him about the former national security adviser Michael Flynn and to "see your way clear to letting this go," according to a copy of his opening remarks posted online.

"He then said, 'I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go,'" Comey said in remarks posted on the website of the Senate intelligence committee. "I replied only that 'he is a good guy.' (In fact, I had a positive experience dealing with Mike Flynn when he was a colleague as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency at the beginning of my term at FBI.) I did not say I would 'let this go.'"

Comey's testimony was publicly released intentionally Wednesday by the Senate intelligence committee at Comey's request, a Senate intelligence committee source said. He is scheduled to give his testimony before the committee Thursday.

Comey, in his testimony, said that he spoke privately with Trump nine times -- including three one-on-one meetings -- and took detailed notes of his encounters in declassified memos.

In his written testimony, Comey described a March 30 phone call where he said that Trump stressed "the cloud" of the Russia investigations was "interfering with his ability to make deals for the country and said he hoped I could find a way to get out that he wasn't being investigated."

But Comey determined it would be bad to publicly state Trump was not under investigation because if that changed and Trump became a subject of the probe, he would have to say so in public.

"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," Comey wrote in his testimony.

Comey said Trump told him, "I need loyalty, I expect loyalty" during their first dinner in January. Comey said in the statement "I didn't move, speak or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed." Comey said he told Trump "you will always get honesty from me." He said the President responded, "that's what I want. Honest loyalty."

Comey states that Trump asked him on several occasions to publicly state that he was not under investigation.

At their January 27 dinner, Trump floated directing Comey to announce he was investigating Trump personally -- so he could then prove nothing happened with Trump and Russian officials.

"He said he was considering ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn't happen," Comey wrote. "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."

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Wow how many times the MDL gonna post the same thing. He must be in your head bad 

[CaliCat 3,957]

Just now, Nature Boy Flair said:

Wow how many times the MDL gonna post the same thing. He must be in your head bad 

 

 

It's in the heads of all Americans. Obstruction of justice is a serious issue in this country. 

[JimandChristy 1,689]

22 minutes ago, CaliCat said:

 

 

It's in the heads of all Americans. Obstruction of justice is a serious issue in this country. 

When you put everything together it's looking more like obstruction of Justice. Telling Comey to stop the Russia investigation into Flynn and then firing him because he wasn't going to pretty much is the textbook definition of obstruction of Justice.

[Dashinka 25,887]

38 minutes ago, CaliCat said:

 

 

It's in the heads of all Americans. Obstruction of justice is a serious issue in this country. 

Comey already said it didn't rise to the level of OoJ.  Keep trying.

 

[CaliCat 3,957]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

Comey already said it didn't rise to the level of OoJ.  Keep trying.

 

 

Aren't those decisions left to a grand jury though? I am not sure, but I don't think he can testify and act as grand juror at the same time. Can he?

 

[Dashinka 25,887]

Just now, CaliCat said:

 

Aren't those decisions left to a grand jury though? I am not sure, but I don't think he can testify and act as grand juror at the same time. Can he?

 

Then why didn't Comey immediately bring those allegations to a federal prosecutor?

[CaliCat 3,957]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

Then why didn't Comey immediately bring those allegations to a federal prosecutor?

 

I don't know. Ask him tomorrow during his testimony. I tried calling him but he isn't picking up.

[Teddy B 17,252]

42 minutes ago, CaliCat said:

 

 

It's in the heads of all Americans. Obstruction of justice is a serious issue in this country. 

Nothing to see here. #fakenews #anonymoussources #looneyliberals #winning

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Then why didn't Comey immediately bring those allegations to a federal prosecutor?

Do we know for sure that he didn't?

[CaliCat 3,957]

Just now, Teddy B said:

Nothing to see here. #fakenews #anonymoussources #looneyliberals #winning

 

you missed a few:

 

#hillarydidit # shedoneit #makeherstop #imscaredofher

[Dashinka 25,887]

2 minutes ago, Teddy B said:

Nothing to see here. #fakenews #anonymoussources #looneyliberals #winning

Do we know for sure that he didn't?

Didn't he all, but say that in his opening statement?  I know each side will spin it to their narrative, but nothing in his opening statement seems to indicate he thought it was OoJ in need of pursuing with federal prosecutors.  Besides, has the investigation stopped?  Didn't the DNC get exactly what they wanted, Sessions recusing himself, Comey fired, and a special prosecutor/investigator?

 

"I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign."

 

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-jcomey-060817.pdf

[Teddy B 17,252]

5 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Didn't he all, but say that in his opening statement?  I know each side will spin it to their narrative, but nothing in his opening statement seems to indicate he thought it was OoJ in need of pursuing with federal prosecutors.  Besides, has the investigation stopped?  Didn't the DNC get exactly what they wanted, Sessions recusing himself, Comey fired, and a special prosecutor/investigator?

 

"I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign."

 

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-jcomey-060817.pdf

I'm not attempting to spin anything, I'm just saying I don't think anyone but Comey knows for sure if he took this info to a federal prosecutor or not. Perhaps it was a federal prosecutor that suggested to Comey that the allegations did not amount to obstruction of justice?

[yuna628 9,873]

Here is how I see his statement.

 

1) The contact he had between himself and the President was inappropriate. He did not wish to take part in any of the contact but was seemingly ordered or even obligated to?

Is the head of the FBI able to refuse to pick up the President's phone calls, his dinner invites, or interrupt him when he starts yammering on subjects that border into inappropriate and potentially unethical territory?

2) This report perhaps is further confirmation of Jeffy and several within the DOJ's inability to direct or correct a President who seemingly has no knowledge or little care to the law when it involves the FBI.

3)It is clear to me that Comey was fired because Trump wanted him and several others to make inappropriate statements regarding the case. Comey and I will also assume the others had told him that he himself wasn't being investigated as of yet and as to why they couldn't state that publically. This shows a man who is paranoid and feels that everything being investigated involving his name and advisors actually means himself.  He's going to have to get over that or his hubris will bite him.

4) It is a little more murky but also leaves the reader to conclude that Comey was also fired because Trump wanted the Flynn thing gone. That's strange to me, because if you're so confident that *YOU* are in the clear, then you should rightly condemn people that haven't served you or have the country's interests at heart.

5) Comey recalls 9 meetings, but does not list all of them, why?

6) He states he and others decided not to mention the original perceived 'shakedown' to Sessions because they *knew* he was going to recuse. This observation happens a while before Sessions claimed to have made such a decision. So how did they know before the date Sessions pretended to know?

7) Sessions and others in the room during one meeting seemed reluctant to leave and did not speak up to advise the President (if we pretend he is that dense about legal matters). Doesn't sound like anyone knows exactly what to do. Presidents are not well served by spineless yes men.

8) It is not the FBI director's job to be loyal to a President.

9) The questions refused to answer on the Hill today by the intel chiefs were the most concerning yet. Crazy stuff even conservative publications are not liking it one bit.

10) How do we define asking vs pressuring vs directing. To me if you are asked something you cannot do once, and you say no and explain why, and this continues in a pattern of behavior - that's wrong. None of these men might have felt 'pressured' per say, because they know the law and they know what is being asked is impossible and ridiculous. None of them have stated that they were dragged in on their ear and ordered/directed to do something under threat of 'or else'... but the fact remains they seem to have been asked things they should never have been asked repeatedly. It's what several senators attempted to get at today.. and we need to ask ourselves why critically.

[CaliCat 3,957]

13 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Here is how I see his statement.

 

1) The contact he had between himself and the President was inappropriate. He did not wish to take part in any of the contact but was seemingly ordered or even obligated to?

Is the head of the FBI able to refuse to pick up the President's phone calls, his dinner invites, or interrupt him when he starts yammering on subjects that border into inappropriate and potentially unethical territory?

2) This report perhaps is further confirmation of Jeffy and several within the DOJ's inability to direct or correct a President who seemingly has no knowledge or little care to the law when it involves the FBI.

3)It is clear to me that Comey was fired because Trump wanted him and several others to make inappropriate statements regarding the case. Comey and I will also assume the others had told him that he himself wasn't being investigated as of yet and as to why they couldn't state that publically. This shows a man who is paranoid and feels that everything being investigated involving his name and advisors actually means himself.  He's going to have to get over that or his hubris will bite him.

4) It is a little more murky but also leaves the reader to conclude that Comey was also fired because Trump wanted the Flynn thing gone. That's strange to me, because if you're so confident that *YOU* are in the clear, then you should rightly condemn people that haven't served you or have the country's interests at heart.

5) Comey recalls 9 meetings, but does not list all of them, why?

6) He states he and others decided not to mention the original perceived 'shakedown' to Sessions because they *knew* he was going to recuse. This observation happens a while before Sessions claimed to have made such a decision. So how did they know before the date Sessions pretended to know?

7) Sessions and others in the room during one meeting seemed reluctant to leave and did not speak up to advise the President (if we pretend he is that dense about legal matters). Doesn't sound like anyone knows exactly what to do. Presidents are not well served by spineless yes men.

8) It is not the FBI director's job to be loyal to a President.

9) The questions refused to answer on the Hill today by the intel chiefs were the most concerning yet. Crazy stuff even conservative publications are not liking it one bit.

10) How do we define asking vs pressuring vs directing. To me if you are asked something you cannot do once, and you say no and explain why, and this continues in a pattern of behavior - that's wrong. None of these men might have felt 'pressured' per say, because they know the law and they know what is being asked is impossible and ridiculous. None of them have stated that they were dragged in on their ear and ordered/directed to do something under threat of 'or else'... but the fact remains they seem to have been asked things they should never have been asked repeatedly. It's what several senators attempted to get at today.. and we need to ask ourselves why critically.

 

Why would Trump press him into declaring loyalty to him, and to let the investigation about Flynn go? And why do so in private? 

 

The so-called president tried to strong-arm Comey, and he would have none of that. Trump fired him our of spite, because Comey refused to be bullied by the man-child.

 

[JimandChristy 1,689]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

Then why didn't Comey immediately bring those allegations to a federal prosecutor?

Because he would have to report his findings to the Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, who recused himself into the Russian investigation.