• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.
It's not semantics.

Leaking involves releasing information that is supposed to be secret. Sometimes it is justified, sometimes it is not. Comey owned the information and disseminated it in the way he felt most appropriate.

Do you know that an FBI employee would own material prepared in the course of their job?
I know I wouldn't own it in my job.

I found this
https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fd-291.pdf
 
Last edited:
I disagree. I think there is plenty, at this point, to justify a probable cause inquiry focused on obstruction of justice.

Once again, no other president at any point in US history could avoid, at a minimum, censure over this.

Jeffrey Toobin, a legal expert, agrees:



I'm not sure what you're waiting for. People aren't convicted before the trial. This is plenty of evidence of a dumb, arrogant man attempting to quash in investigation.

We also learned that the Flynn investigation was a criminal investigation and Trump fired Comey in an attempt to alter the course of the investigation just like Trump told Lester Holt.
 
As usual, this will probably come down to which side you want to believe.

But, first, it seems clear to me that Comey confirmed Trump was not under investigation for Russia-gate, despite everybody and his brother claiming he was.

Second, I still don't understand how the "obstruction of justice" claim has any legs.

If Trump had the authority say to Comey "I hereby order you to stop the investigation," how is it "obstruction" if he says "Flynn is a good man, I hope you can wrap this up soon"?
 
As usual, this will probably come down to which side you want to believe.

But, first, it seems clear to me that Comey confirmed Trump was not under investigation for Russia-gate, despite everybody and his brother claiming he was.

Second, I still don't understand how the "obstruction of justice" claim has any legs.

If Trump had the authority say to Comey "I hereby order you to stop the investigation," how is it "obstruction" if he says "Flynn is a good man, I hope you can wrap this up soon"?

How was Richard Nixon forced to resign (because he would have been removed from office) over obstruction of justice. After all, all he did was have try to have the CIA get the FBI to drop the Watergate investigation.
 
As usual, this will probably come down to which side you want to believe.
Yeah, either the side that says the occupant of the Oval Office fired the FBI Director in an[other] attempt to stifle a criminal investigation, or the occupant of the Oval Office itself which expressed relief [to a representative of its Russian overlord] that firing the FBI Director would reduce the pressure from that same criminal investigation.

Tough call.
 
Last edited:
How was Richard Nixon forced to resign (because he would have been removed from office) over obstruction of justice. After all, all he did was have try to have the CIA get the FBI to drop the Watergate investigation.

If I was president, I would use my pardon power to protect me from ever being impeached.
 
The constitution specifically says the President's pardon powers do not apply in cases of impeachment.

I didn't say how I would use​ it. I will let Congress know that efforts to impeach me would be met with immediate clemency for all federal prisoners, immediate pardons to every American for every crime, and daily pardons until they stopped or completed impeachment. I would threaten to turn the country into the purge.
 
I didn't say how I would use​ it. I will let Congress know that efforts to impeach me would be met with immediate clemency for all federal prisoners, immediate pardons to every American for every crime, and daily pardons until they stopped or completed impeachment. I would threaten to turn the country into the purge.

Then some people in white coats would come by and adminster some happy sleep pills.
 
He does. He has complete authority of what crimes are investigated. The other branches are limited to political solutions.
IIRC, he can pardon people retroactively, or fire subordinates until he gets one who does what he wants, a la Nixon. He can't order a specific investigation terminated.
 
IIRC, he can pardon people retroactively, or fire subordinates until he gets one who does what he wants, a la Nixon. He can't order a specific investigation terminated.

he can directly give order. He can actually directly assume the powers of the FBI director or attorney general.
 

Back
Top Bottom