200 IQ Trump sends lawyer to defend against obstruction claims. Lawyer promptly admits obstruction.
- Thread starter fried-chicken
- Start date
Here I'll make it something you can be outraged about too.
Hey listen police officer I know I was speeding but I'm the black Democrat mayor of a liberal sanctuary city and if you write me a ticket I will fire you. If you look into me beating my wife I'll fire you. If you are investigating me for child pornography I'll fire you.
Hey listen police officer I know I was speeding but I'm the black Democrat mayor of a liberal sanctuary city and if you write me a ticket I will fire you. If you look into me beating my wife I'll fire you. If you are investigating me for child pornography I'll fire you.
Speeding is against the law, but if the cop didn't have it on camera or speed gun it would be tough to prove. Same with wife beating and child porn, there needs to be evidence or probable cause to start those investigations. Where is the evidence of Trump breaking any laws or threatening to fire people if they investigate him?
Evidence doesn't come out for us to approve of or not approve of in an investigation. The investigators have a reason to investigate. Once they decide to convict or not we'll see evidence.
Stop going on crazy tangents. When did Trump threaten to fire people for investigating him?
I don't see where it says Trump fired Comey for wanting to investigate him. Can you provide a quote saying that?
You must be one of those people who graduated high school with a less than 9th grade reading comprehension level.
Oh, given the incontrovertible evidence you’ve put out in this thread, that’s a stronger fact than anything you spew out.
Everyone in the thread has read the quote and told you that you’re reading it wrong. I can’t help you if you persist in being stupid.
lol so far the Trumpets have only hurled personal attacks and completely yawned this away.
Typical.
Typical.
I’m attacking his inability to understand how that article does not prove obstruction and yet he persists. Apparently you share the same inability to comprehend that article.
Are you just making up shit now? Where did I say anything about this article? You just make up whatever fits your narative.
I don't understand what you're confused about. I never said I wasn't talking to you, just that I misunderstood your earlier post.
"If you can't promise me that youre not looking into one of my many crimes I will fire you to make sure you aren't"
-45
That wasn’t the quote at all from the article. This context from the article (provided in the first line of the VERY NEXT paragraph) in the OP matters: "Comey had previously said that he told Trump he wasn't the focus of an investigation but that the president pressed him to make a public statement."
Then, if you listened to Comey's interviews, Comey said he wasn't going to make that statement. Even though he'd made similar statements in other cases. Which corroborates the context provided above.
The quote that you are referencing from Giuliani in the linked story refers to Comey not wanting to make the public statement, not that he wouldn't tell Trump he wasn't a target. Here's Giuliani's quote: “He fired Comey because Comey would not, among other things, say that he wasn’t a target of the investigation...” Giuliani didn't mention who Comey wouldn't say that to but the article you linked clarifies that. As do Comey's own interviews.
Nonetheless, you and a lot of the media are spinning the Giuliani quote to say that Trump fired him because, and only because, Comey wouldn't stop investigating him. Which is blatantly false and, for most of the media that knows better, an outright lie.
That's certainly more accurate than you posted previously. Would be even more accurate if you said "Tell the media what you just told me or else I will fire you because of this and all the other things as well."
Talking to the media creates an obligation to correct. Comey would have had to then inform the media when Trump began to be investigated. He would have been fired for that.
FC gets a hard on every time one of his buddies claim a story sufficiently shits on Trump and he posts it here without actually reading
Can everybody at least just agree that the justice department and the FBI shouldn't act under the discretion of the president?
Talking to Congress creates an obligation to correct. Talking to the media has no such burden.
Let's remember, in Comey's own words he assumed Hillary Clinton would be President and then Trump was elected. At which point he was gathering notes that would correct that Election Day error. Given his statements about his frame of mind at that point in time and his subsequent actions and recent statements, it is logical to draw the conclusion that Comey was not going to make that public statement because there was no way in hell that Comey was going to do anything to help out Trump.
Nah. Would you rather Congress be charge? They'd never get anything done. They have also proven they can't be trusted to be independent the last few years. One of the main tasks of the Pres is to enforce federal law, they couldn't do that without Justice and the FBI.
Electing Hillary would not have stopped that problem.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Around The Kingdom - Will UCF Football win more than 7.5 games?
- Latest: Knightwalker94