Skjellyfetti wrote:Yeah, I agree that it is going to slow way down. And, the daily bombshells will be drying up. But, this week has been too fucking ridiculous and my work productivity has gone down the shitter.
Hormonal surge?dbackjon wrote:The amount of spin, mental gymnastics, etc by the right would be comical if it didn't involve Treason, from Trump, Pence, Ryan, McConnell, etc.
If Obama or Clinton had done 1/1000000 of the **** that Trump and his "team" are pulling, they would have been impeached by now.
It's nauseating. As well as the so called "non-partisans" who are too chicken **** to take a stand.
And wouldn't it come down to the tone and context of the comments? It's one thing if Trump flat out orders Comey to stop the investigation or obviously implies it, it's another if he's opining that he wishes Comey would stop the investigation.Ivytalk wrote:SDHornet wrote:I think too many people are putting too much stock in the Comey notes/memos. Seems like any decent lawyer with cross examination skills would be able to knock their validity pretty easily.
Even an indecent lawyer....
Actually, the legal issue that interests me the most is not "validity" but whether Trump has an executive privilege argument.
It's been established since the Nixon case that there is an executive privilege that the POTUS can invoke to preserve confidences concerning the functioning of the executive branch of government. However, it's only a qualified privilege that can be overcome on a showing of good cause. Here, the national security concerns that could be invoked to sustain the privilege (go easy on Flynn) seem rather weak.kalm wrote:And wouldn't it come down to the tone and context of the comments? It's one thing if Trump flat out orders Comey to stop the investigation or obviously implies it, it's another if he's opining that he wishes Comey would stop the investigation.Ivytalk wrote:
Even an indecent lawyer....
Actually, the legal issue that interests me the most is not "validity" but whether Trump has an executive privilege argument.
"I hope you can let this go."
It would seem pretty tough to prove either simply based on Comey's memorandum. Doesn't an executive have the right to "hope"?
Sorry if that's what you meant by "executive privilege".
(Directional school graduate)
That was the jist I was going for in another post. Exactly what Trump said, the context in when he said it, and even how he said it would appear to be pretty important with regards to obstruction of justice or not. Obviously, if he flat out ordered and demanded that Comey drop the investigation, that would take it to a whole new and unambiguous level. And if he just did it this once or if there were repeated instances of him "hoping" that Comey would close the case would matter too. Still a lot to know and find out - can't be definitive on this one potential item.kalm wrote:And wouldn't it come down to the tone and context of the comments? It's one thing if Trump flat out orders Comey to stop the investigation or obviously implies it, it's another if he's opining that he wishes Comey would stop the investigation.Ivytalk wrote:
Even an indecent lawyer....
Actually, the legal issue that interests me the most is not "validity" but whether Trump has an executive privilege argument.
"I hope you can let this go."
It would seem pretty tough to prove either simply based on Comey's memorandum. Doesn't an executive have the right to "hope"?
Sorry if that's what you meant by "executive privilege".
(Directional school graduate)
Would Trump speaking about it publicly - even referring to the three meetings in Comey's firing letter - affect Trump's claim to executive privilege?Ivytalk wrote: Actually, the legal issue that interests me the most is not "validity" but whether Trump has an executive privilege argument.
And the left has only been in full bore breathless, hyperventilating, fapping mode for a week.Skjellyfetti wrote:Yeah, you also have the other meeting and phone call. And, it depends what Comey says when he is interviewed and/or testifies. Comey's testimony, backed up by contemporaneous notes, will be very credible. The other conversations may be even more damning... we don't know.
You also have Trump threatening Comey on Twitter.
Trump firing Comey because of Russia investigation
Flynn and Trump are reportedly still in contact. Who knows what has been said... but, there's another possibility for some obstruction.
Obstruction still might not clearly be there. But, give it time. These guys have only been in panic mode on this for a week. And the investigation just went t another level. Hopefully they don't obstruct. But, we'll see. Still not sure how Hillary and anyone on her team got away with obstruction.
BDKJMU wrote:And the left has only been in full bore breathless, hyperventilating, fapping mode for a week.Skjellyfetti wrote:Yeah, you also have the other meeting and phone call. And, it depends what Comey says when he is interviewed and/or testifies. Comey's testimony, backed up by contemporaneous notes, will be very credible. The other conversations may be even more damning... we don't know.
You also have Trump threatening Comey on Twitter.
Trump firing Comey because of Russia investigation
Flynn and Trump are reportedly still in contact. Who knows what has been said... but, there's another possibility for some obstruction.
Obstruction still might not clearly be there. But, give it time. These guys have only been in panic mode on this for a week. And the investigation just went t another level. Hopefully they don't obstruct. But, we'll see. Still not sure how Hillary and anyone on her team got away with obstruction.
Not at all. The longer the left keeps up the hyperventilating the better for Trump.Chizzang wrote:BDKJMU wrote: And the left has only been in full bore breathless, hyperventilating, fapping mode for a week.
You seem to be taking this pretty hard there little buddy...
I honestly wouldn't put it past one of the tolerant, loving, peace-minded snowflakes from the left making a real attempt on Trumps life.BDKJMU wrote:Not at all. The longer the left keeps up the hyperventilating the better for Trump.Chizzang wrote:
You seem to be taking this pretty hard there little buddy...
I think one of 2 things will happen:
-Trump will be impeached.
-Trump won't be impeached, and the left with their attack Trump all the time will cause a huge backlash. They'll double down on insulting his supporters, calling them (insert numerous 'ists' here), and Trump will brag that he survived the greatest effort by the MSM & Deep State to bring down a sitting president in US history, & they couldn't do it, which also could provide cover for some of his domestic agenda not getting done.
I think the latter has at least equal if not better chance of happening than the former.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/p ... comey.htmlPresident Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office this month that firing the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, had relieved “great pressure” on him, according to a document summarizing the meeting.
“I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”
Mr. Trump added, “I’m not under investigation.”
The conversation, during a May 10 meeting — the day after he fired Mr. Comey — reinforces the notion that Mr. Trump dismissed him primarily because of the bureau’s investigation into possible collusion between his campaign and Russian operatives. Mr. Trump said as much in one televised interview, but the White House has offered changing justifications for the firing.
The White House document that contained Mr. Trump’s comments was based on notes taken from inside the Oval Office and has been circulated as the official account of the meeting. One official read quotations to The Times, and a second official confirmed the broad outlines of the discussion.
Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, did not dispute the account.
In a statement, he said that Mr. Comey had put unnecessary pressure on the president’s ability to conduct diplomacy with Russia on matters such as Syria, Ukraine and the Islamic State.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... e23a12d109Russia probe reaches current White House official, people familiar with the case say
The law enforcement investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign has identified a current White House official as a significant person of interest, showing that the probe is reaching into the highest levels of government, according to people familiar with the matter.
The senior White House adviser under scrutiny by investigators is someone close to the president, according to these people, who would not further identify the official.
The revelation comes as the investigation also appears to be entering a more overtly active phase, with investigators shifting from work that has remained largely hidden from the public to conducting interviews and using a grand jury to issue subpoenas. The intensity of the probe is expected to accelerate in the coming weeks, the people said.
The sources emphasized that investigators remain keenly interested in people who previously wielded influence in the Trump campaign and administration but are no longer part of it, including former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort.
Flynn resigned in February after disclosures that he had lied to administration officials about his contacts with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Current administration officials who have acknowledged contacts with Russian officials include Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, as well as Cabinet members Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.
It's not real until breitbart, Fox, The Blaze and/or Daily Beast reports it.Skjellyfetti wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/p ... comey.htmlPresident Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office this month that firing the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, had relieved “great pressure” on him, according to a document summarizing the meeting.
“I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”
Mr. Trump added, “I’m not under investigation.”
The conversation, during a May 10 meeting — the day after he fired Mr. Comey — reinforces the notion that Mr. Trump dismissed him primarily because of the bureau’s investigation into possible collusion between his campaign and Russian operatives. Mr. Trump said as much in one televised interview, but the White House has offered changing justifications for the firing.
The White House document that contained Mr. Trump’s comments was based on notes taken from inside the Oval Office and has been circulated as the official account of the meeting. One official read quotations to The Times, and a second official confirmed the broad outlines of the discussion.
Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, did not dispute the account.
In a statement, he said that Mr. Comey had put unnecessary pressure on the president’s ability to conduct diplomacy with Russia on matters such as Syria, Ukraine and the Islamic State.
You left out a more likely scenario: Trump saying "fuck this shit... I'm outta here" and resigning.BDKJMU wrote: I think one of 2 things will happen:
-Trump will be impeached.
-Trump won't be impeached, and the left with their attack Trump all the time will cause a huge backlash. They'll double down on insulting his supporters, calling them (insert numerous 'ists' here), and Trump will brag that he survived the greatest effort by the MSM & Deep State to bring down a sitting president in US history, & they couldn't do it, which also could provide cover for some of his domestic agenda not getting done.
BDKJMU wrote:Not at all. The longer the left keeps up the hyperventilating the better for Trump.Chizzang wrote:
You seem to be taking this pretty hard there little buddy...
I think one of 2 things will happen:
-Trump will be impeached.
-Trump won't be impeached, and the left with their attack Trump all the time will cause a huge backlash. They'll double down on insulting his supporters, calling them (insert numerous 'ists' here), and Trump will brag that he survived the greatest effort by the MSM & Deep State to bring down a sitting president in US history, & they couldn't do it, which also could provide cover for some of his domestic agenda not getting done.
I think the latter has at least equal if not better chance of happening than the former.
The Trump family is fucked. Even if there's no collusion with Russia, there's going to be some illegal and shady business stuff dug up during the course of the investigation; the smoke's always been there.Chizzang wrote:...and I kinda think he'll probably quit in a few weeks
once the rope he's tied around his own neck begins to tighten
I don't think he wants his sons to go to jail
Not sure. I'm pretty sure that any privilege is waivable if the POTUS/executive/"client" acts voluntarily to make the communication public. If the communication was "leaked", maybe there's no waiver. The memorandum is out there already. I was thinking more about whatever communications are reflected in Comey's notes.Skjellyfetti wrote:Would Trump speaking about it publicly - even referring to the three meetings in Comey's firing letter - affect Trump's claim to executive privilege?Ivytalk wrote: Actually, the legal issue that interests me the most is not "validity" but whether Trump has an executive privilege argument.
Also, Yates was able to testify in detail about meetings she had with McGahn. If she was still acting AG - she wouldn't have been able to speak about those. But, once fired... no executive privilege. Similar in Comey's case?
BDKJMU wrote:dbackjon wrote:The amount of spin, mental gymnastics, etc by the right would be comical if it didn't involve Treason, from Trump, Pence, Ryan, McConnell, etc.
If Obama or Clinton had done 1/1000000 of the **** that Trump and his "team" are pulling, they would have been impeached by now.
It's nauseating. As well as the so called "non-partisans" who are too chicken **** to take a stand.
Thank you, counselor.Ivytalk wrote: Not sure. I'm pretty sure that any privilege is waivable if the POTUS/executive/"client" acts voluntarily to make the communication public. If the communication was "leaked", maybe there's no waiver. The memorandum is out there already. I was thinking more about whatever communications are reflected in Comey's notes.
Yates's testimony is troubling. If I'm your attorney, and you fire me, communications between us that were made during the attorney-client relationship remain privileged.
Just ignore him. He thought the Lavrov / Kislyak meeting was a brilliant strategic move to troll liberals.dbackjon wrote:
Sickened that this egotistic, sexist, sexual predator, low IQ narcissist is in charge of the country I love, destroying gains that have been made for decades in advancing the country, working on destroying the environment, civil rights, while waging class warfare on the 99%. Sickened that anyone could look at him, the trainwreck of an administration with it's corruption, selling the country out for personal gain, incompetence and turning the keys to the country over to Russia, and be ok with it.
But for morons like you, as long there is no darkie or woman in the White House, it is all cool. Just never pretend to be a patriotic American, or a Christian again, because anyone that actually loves the US, and follows Christ, can not support Trump, or the rest of the GOP Cabal.
You're welcome. I have to go back and read U.S. v. Nixon.Skjellyfetti wrote:Thank you, counselor.Ivytalk wrote: Not sure. I'm pretty sure that any privilege is waivable if the POTUS/executive/"client" acts voluntarily to make the communication public. If the communication was "leaked", maybe there's no waiver. The memorandum is out there already. I was thinking more about whatever communications are reflected in Comey's notes.
Yates's testimony is troubling. If I'm your attorney, and you fire me, communications between us that were made during the attorney-client relationship remain privileged.
That just shows right there that obviously someone who was present for that meeting is trying to undermine Trump. That reinforces the notion that when having high level meetings Trump needs to kick most sub cabinet level people out of the room. A president ought to be able to have private high level conversations without people every time writing down what is said and running to the press the 1st chance they get.Skjellyfetti wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/p ... comey.htmlPresident Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office this month that firing the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, had relieved “great pressure” on him, according to a document summarizing the meeting.
“I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”
Mr. Trump added, “I’m not under investigation.”
The conversation, during a May 10 meeting — the day after he fired Mr. Comey — reinforces the notion that Mr. Trump dismissed him primarily because of the bureau’s investigation into possible collusion between his campaign and Russian operatives. Mr. Trump said as much in one televised interview, but the White House has offered changing justifications for the firing.
The White House document that contained Mr. Trump’s comments was based on notes taken from inside the Oval Office and has been circulated as the official account of the meeting. One official read quotations to The Times, and a second official confirmed the broad outlines of the discussion.
Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, did not dispute the account.
In a statement, he said that Mr. Comey had put unnecessary pressure on the president’s ability to conduct diplomacy with Russia on matters such as Syria, Ukraine and the Islamic State.
