-
Paul Ryan just released a statement saying Trump is new at this and simply didn't know his one on one interactions with the FBI director were inappropriate. Unless we are talking about a second term president every president is new at this. Such BS! Trump has/d some career politicians (hey Pence! hey Sessions! hey Flynn!) working with him to help guide him. If only they spoke up or he listened. If only his team didn't cancel the Ethics training when it was initially offered. The level of incompetence and the excuses made for this administration pisses me off.
-
@Adira: @pwnstar: It's like he didn't understand the difference between the two investigations. So bizarre.
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: Totally agree. The fact that so many Republicans are willing to just give Trump a pass is astonishing to me.
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: @Adira: Yeah. Paul Ryan has definitely hit a new low. It's not inexperience. It's directly-and intentionally-interfering with an investigation being conducted by an independent national agency. It's also an abuse of executive power. Period. Full Stop.
-
Late to the party. I only caught a little bit of the live version, and definitely saw McCain. Wtf was he talking about? @pwnstar: that Twitter image was the first reaction I had when it was McCain's turn. His line of questioning was unbelievably bizarre.
-
Did you guys see this? super interesting how the news is portrayed https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/politics/comey-hearing-chyrons/?utm_term=.677a35be05ba
-
Anyone here bothered by the Lynch discussion during the testimony? Seems a bit like obstruction to me...
It would seem if you're offended by what Trump did...the Lynch story should equally offend you?
@NorthStar: I always find articles like that interesting. I understand no news network is perfect - and I obviously have my own opinions...but I've always felt it unfair to compare the biases at CNN and MSNBC to those at Fox...especially from a News Reporting standpoint...i.e. tickers where it should be "factual" items being shared...not snipets out of context hoping to incite opinions...
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: @Adira: Yes! So many things he's getting a pass for that other presidents would have been crucified for already.
-
@Mrs D: I read about it on Fox, but fill me in if he said more. Lynch asked him to call the investigation a "matter" and then she and Bill had their Tarmac meeting. I don't know if I would call it obstruction since Lynch didn't say to stop conducting the investigation, but just like the Tarmac meeting the optics don't look good. Based on what he said and didn't b/c it was classified and already shared with the Senators I was happy that Lynch recused herself after the tarmac meeting. The way she behaved and Sessions when he finally recused himself from the Russia probe is what you're supposed to do. I don't understand why Trump is pissed at Sessions for doing that as its been reported.
ETA: Comey didn't go on public record saying Lynch asked him to make HRC's email server investigation go away. No matter what though Trump is POTUS and is supposed to be the moral and ethical compass for the country.
ETA2: did anyone ask a f/u about the fake Russian story or Intel that sources say also played into Comey's decision to squash the HRC investigation? I read that he felt forced to do so the Russians couldn't blackmail us or something.
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: an AG directly instructing him to call it a "matter" not an "investigation"...and speaking in a way that makes the director uncomfortable...that certainly seems at least the same as "I hope you can find a way to put this matter to rest..."...one is clearly a direct order. As one member of the committee said "have you ever in your law career seen some prosecuted for wishing something to happen?"...
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: my coverage was choppy - FB live was not my friend today...so I missed pieces here and there...maybe someone else can shed light...
It may also be one of the things he needed to discuss in closed session.
-
@Mrs D: Lynch resigned, as she should have. No complaints here if Trump were to follow her lead.
-
@Mrs D: Telling the Director of the FBI not to use the word matter versus investigation is not even in the same universe as telling the Director of the FBI to let an investigation go (eta: and then firing him for not doing what he was told). Both are improper. Neither camp comes out looking good there. But Trump's personal involvement and thinly-veiled direct order to let an investigation go is an abuse of power. Trump's use of the word "wish" does not change the context/intent of his statement.
-
@Mrs D: I am somewhat bothered by the Loretta Lynch thing, though I have to agree with @Mrs. Lemon-Lime: that she wasn't implying or ordering Comey to stop the investigation. She was giving him direction on wording when asked about it. What made him uncomfortable was the idea of the attorney general trying to align their wording with a presidential campaign. (According to an article I read). I agree, that is a troublesome thing. But I do wonder if she was trying to use neutral language so as to not affect the election. Comey seems to be a very literal guy.
-
@pwnstar: It was an investigation...there was an attempt by her to mislead the public regarding what it is...calling it a matter as opposed to an investigation is misleading. I just dont see it differently...
I find it shocking that so many people seem to be surprised by this type of behavior going on in politics and cant help but wonder how many people would be appalled by conversations they heard from all politicians should they ever be a fly on the wall.
If Comey was so uncomfortable that Trump was in fact suggesting he end an investigation or truly trying to obstruct justice...and if Comey is such an ethical human being...I cant help but wonder why he wasnt compelled to either 1) avoid solo meetings with President T following the first inappropriate comment or 2) raise concerns of these discussions to others through the proper channels. It seems all he did was take notes to be leaked publicly. The train of thought is odd to me...
-
@Mrs D: Both shady for sure. I think the most significant difference is that the AG can't fire the FBI director, whereas the president can. Because the President has that authority, clearing a room so he could tell Comey how he "hoped" an investigation would turn out was incredibly stupid. Even if his intent was not to influence Comey as the person who could end his career (although I am convinced it was - typical NYC businessman BS), how could he not know how terrible the optics were???? In any event, I think the most interesting part of the hearing was how both sides are claiming victory - Trump supporters feel vindicated and his opponents are thrilled that he obstructed justice.
ETA: I always feel so bad for you with the lonely dissenting opinion! Every time you comment, you get a million relies
-
@Madison43: I think it was the complete dud I expected it to be. I agree the optics are bad...no doubt about it. But I also agreed with firing Comey (I think it should have been done sooner personally) - so the whole thing doesnt sit so awful with me.
That said - I wish we could just get over the Comey firing now and move on. I know that is not reality though...hence why I dont bother watching the news anymore
-
FYI...McCain just released this statement, since you all were very intrigued by his line of questioning:
"I get the sense from Twitter that my line of questioning today went over people’s heads. Maybe going forward I shouldn’t stay up late watching the Diamondbacks night games.
What I was trying to get at was whether Mr. Comey believes that any of his interactions with the President rise to the level of obstruction of justice. In the case of Secretary Clinton’s emails, Mr. Comey was willing to step beyond his role as an investigator and state his belief about what ‘no reasonable prosecutor’ would conclude about the evidence. I wanted Mr. Comey to apply the same approach to the key question surrounding his interactions with President Trump—whether or not the President’s conduct constitutes obstruction of justice. While I missed an opportunity in today’s hearing, I still believe this question is important, and I intend to submit it in writing to Mr. Comey for the record." -
@Mrs D: part of the reason why I think a Trump is his own worst enemy is that I think most people expected and/or were ok with Comey being fired but the timing and then series of bizarre and contradictory explanations threw a cloud of suspicion over the whole thing.
As for McCain, that would have been a great question! But totally not what he asked
-
@Madison43: I missed his questioning...it obviously fell short...
-
@Mrs D: MCCain's questions didn't go over anyone's head--except maybe McCain's. McCain asked Comey about stating his opinion about a closed investigation versus stating his opinion about an ongoing investigation. Two very different situations. "No responsible prosecutor" would conclude anything prior to completion of an investigation.
-
@NorthStar: Wow, that's fascinating!
@Mrs D: "I cant help but wonder why he wasnt compelled to either 1) avoid solo meetings with President T following the first inappropriate comment or 2) raise concerns of these discussions to others through the proper channels."
He did. He told the AG he didn't want to have anymore solo meetings with the President. He also talked about his reasons for not bringing up the specific request with AG Sessions (who was about to recuse himself on the matter) and then acting deputy AG (who wasn't going to be replaced).
-
McCain's line of questioning was so bizarre because he implied that the investigation into Clinton's e-mails was somehow related to the investigation into collusion with Russia, when the two investigations are completely separate and had no bearing on each other.
-
@NorthStar: interesting. When I can watch these things live I always flip to all 3 stations. The coverage is so different.
-
Fun times! http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/08/politics/overheard-dc-bars-james-comey-testimony/index.html Covfefe cocktails and Comey Bingo!
-
@pwnstar: I didnt see/hear his questioning, my FB Live was not cooperating. I was merely posting what he wrote on social media in apparent response to others...
@Adira: Yet he continued to have solo meetings? I heard his reasoning for not bringing it up...I just think if he really felt that uncomfortably he could have done more...if he thought his job was on the line.
-
@Mrs D: It's my understanding that after that, he did NOT have any solo meetings.
-
@Mrs D: The written testimony says he shared his memos with senior FBI leadership. That seems like official channels to me.
-
@pwnstar: That's the crux of the issue. Trump and many Trump supporters don't seem to value the separate depts and branches of government and checks and balances. They seem to think that (1) the President can make laws; (2) the President is allowed to pressure anyone he wants to get what he wants as long as he doesn't *order* it, and (3) executive power is the purpose of being President.
Side note. Spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said she had “no idea” if there was taping in the Oval Office. To me, that's feigning ignorance, or her distrusting Trump, thinking that there could be a secret taping system. Since "tapes" were brought up weeks ago, WH staff should have a clear answer, yes, or no?
-
@DesertDreams88: you expect Sarah and Sean to know anything? Come on. Trump contradicts them all the time. They tell the press they haven't spoken to him about certain things so either they are too afraid to ask or Trump hits them with silence. None the less, Trump says 1) he's his best spokesperson and 2) his tweets are official statements.
-
@DesertDreams88: This is the same guy, after all, who had the judicial branch removed from the official White House web site, albeit temporarily. Regardless of how temporary, his *message* came across loud and clear.
- Google Plus
- Stumbleupon
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Pinterest
- Favorite0
70 comments