• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Comey opening statement posted, now with in person testimony

Page 19 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Doc Savage Fan said:
Without an explicit order from Trump, I have trouble putting much weight on someone's perception of such a nebulous comment. There is nothing here that can be used to indict imo....nothing.
Click to expand...

Absent context I might agree, but with 1) clearing the room of other witnesses, 2) firing Comey, and 3) Trump explicitly stating he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation there's evidence of Trump's intent to obstruct the investigation.
 
[DHT]Osiris said:
Intent can be measured without implicit instruction. Any reasonable person would have judged his 'I hope this is a thing that can happen' as intent and near as I can tell, every person on that panel yesterday (Comey included) agrees with that notion, so we cannot viably separate the two situations as being 'one was an order and one wasn't'. Now having said that, that may not be enough for an indictment, but it may be enough for congress to consider a 'no confidence' vote for impeachment, and I don't think the majority would argue them on that.
Click to expand...

Yes, people have been convicted for precisely those sort of 'I hope' statements in the past:

https://twitter.com/adamliptak/status/872835418194157568

DBztgxBW0AA7but.jpg
 
MomentsofSanity said:
Can't see the twitter feed here at work but I know of two which were essentially telling potential witnesses the accused "hoped" they wouldn't tell the police/prosecutors about X. I'm assuming that's the one you've linked.
Click to expand...
I think the premise is that a_crime was committed, and a person was brought obstruction of justice charges by attempting to make the matter go away with an 'i hope' statement.
 
Just to bring some facts to the lynch thing:

The investigation was already over when lynched asked comey to call it a matter, which is why he didn't bother "dying on that hill".

After calling it a matter, the media still called it an investigation.
 
ivwshane said:
Just to bring some facts to the lynch thing:

The investigation was already over when lynched asked comey to call it a matter, which is why he didn't bother "dying on that hill".

After calling it a matter, the media still called it an investigation.
Click to expand...
When Comey was almost humorously talking about that last part, I saw it as an example of the media kind of cutting through the mealey-mouth wording that Politics loves to use to call a_thing not_a_thing.
 
ivwshane said:
Just to bring some facts to the lynch thing:

The investigation was already over when lynched asked comey to call it a matter, which is why he didn't bother "dying on that hill".

After calling it a matter, the media still called it an investigation.
Click to expand...

Well Lynch didn't come looking very good in yesterday's hearings, not good at all. That being the case Hillary lost, and whatever Lynch and Bill talked about and how she tried to have Comey use political campaign friendly language doesn't change what Trump is doing now.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
Well Lynch didn't come looking very good in yesterday's hearings, not good at all. That being the case Hillary lost, and whatever Lynch and Bill talked about and how she tried to have Comey use political campaign friendly language doesn't change what Trump is doing now.
Click to expand...


Agreed.
 
ivwshane said:
I enjoyed exposing several posters hypocrisy in that thread.
People think I go too far when I call certain posters lying pieces of shit, I beg to differ and DSF is a perfect example of why I feel that way. He will never change and he will continue doing the same thing time and time again.
Click to expand...

Yes, I recall a short while after that you nailed PCGeek for the same hypocrisy, on the very same issue IIRC. I don't think it's going too far to point out prior posts as contradicting current posts. If these people are just going to say whatever is politically convenient at any given time, then they deserve all the humiliation they receive.
 
Last edited:
woolfe9998 said:
Yes, I recall a short while after that you nailed PCGeek for the same hypocrisy, on the very same issue IIRC. I don't think it's going too far to point out prior posts as contradicting current posts. If these people are just going to say whatever is politically convenient, they deserve the humiliation they receive.
Click to expand...

People earn the fruits of their labor but there is nothing more satisfying for me at least than countering untruths with facts. Flummoxicate should be a word.
 
Doc Savage Fan said:
Without an explicit order from Trump, I have trouble putting much weight on someone's perception of such a nebulous comment. There is nothing here that can be used to indict imo....nothing.
Click to expand...
Even Trump not stupid enough to order something he knows is wrong. That's why he ordered the room be cleared. Its not uncommon when Presidents want something done and not have their prints on it they will request in a passive tone. Direct reports know this is a de facto order. Plausible deniability
 
HomerJS said:
Even Trump not stupid enough to order something he knows is wrong. That's why he ordered the room be cleared. Its not uncommon when Presidents want something done and not have their prints on it they will request in a passive tone. Direct reports know this is a de facto order. Plausible deniability
Click to expand...


Like someone else said it's like the Mafia walking into a store and saying "I hope nothing bad happens here". Everyone knows what it means but it's not as direct. Interestingly the words "I hope" have been used to successfully prosecute at least one obstruction case, probably more.
 
So predictable to see the usual partisan SOP, hand waving nonsense even when a former FBI director is calling a POTUS a liar. You really, really have to try hard to pretend this isn't a sad sad day for the country. Let's not pretend Trump is normal, this level of lying and corruption would make Nixon blush, and at this point that's just objective on-the-record reality.
 
First said:
So predictable to see the usual partisan SOP, hand waving nonsense even when a former FBI director is calling a POTUS a liar. You really, really have to try hard to pretend this isn't a sad sad day for the country. Let's not pretend Trump is normal, this level of lying and corruption would make Nixon blush, and at this point that's just objective on-the-record reality.
Click to expand...
But that's just it. They don't believe he's lying. Even when they can see that he's wrong it's not his fault. It's the media. The media is spinning it to make him look wrong. Look at the shit with the London mayor.
 
So this is now a he said, he said in regard to this conversation between Comey and Trump where Trump allegedly says he "hopes" that Comey can end the investigation of Flynn. I find it amusing to see conservatives arguing inconsistent positions. First, that Comey is lying. Second, that Trump couldn't have been ordering Comey to do anything because he said "I hope." Evidently it hasn't occurred to them that if Comey made the whole thing up, it isn't likely he would have had Trump framing this in a qualified way. A made up version meant to incriminate Trump would have had Trump literally brow beating Comey to drop the investigation. Meaning that, regardless of how you interpret Comey's version from the standpoint of obstruction, Trump is the clearly the one lying here.

I think they need to bring back Andrew McCabe to testify. He was deputy FBI Director at the time Comey had this conversation, meaning he would have been one of the people Comey spoke to about this back in February when it happened, since Comey says he shared this with "FBI leadership."
 
I am so enjoying reading posts from the TrumpTard faithful on the USAT comments sections... the cognitive dissonance on display is truly astounding. How can people be so detached from reality. I wonder if the still alive Nixon supporters are still in denial to this day...
 
woolfe9998 said:
So this is now a he said, he said in regard to this conversation between Comey and Trump where Trump allegedly says he "hopes" that Comey can end the investigation of Flynn. I find it amusing to see conservatives arguing inconsistent positions. First, that Comey is lying. Second, that Trump couldn't have been ordering Comey to do anything because he said "I hope." Evidently it hasn't occurred to them that if Comey made the whole thing up, it isn't likely he would have had Trump framing this in a qualified way. A made up version meant to incriminate Trump would have had Trump literally brow beating Comey to drop the investigation. Meaning that, regardless of how you interpret Comey's version from the standpoint of obstruction, Trump is the clearly the one lying here.

I think they need to bring back Andrew McCabe to testify. He was deputy FBI Director at the time Comey had this conversation, meaning he would have been one of the people Comey spoke to about this back in February when it happened since Comey says he shared this with "FBI leadership."
Click to expand...

It's also important to ask yourself these questions in a 'he said, she said' scenario to determine which party is more credible: is one of the parties Donald Trump? Is the other party literally any human being other than Donald Trump? If so, they are more credible.

Trump has been a pathological liar for decades. Saying he has zero credibility is an insult to the concept of zero.
 
fskimospy said:
It's also important to ask yourself these questions in a 'he said, she said' scenario to determine which party is more credible: is one of the parties Donald Trump? Is the other party literally any human being other than Donald Trump? If so, they are more credible.

Trump has been a pathological liar for decades. Saying he has zero credibility is an insult to the concept of zero.
Click to expand...


Lol!
 
woolfe9998 said:
So this is now a he said, he said in regard to this conversation between Comey and Trump where Trump allegedly says he "hopes" that Comey can end the investigation of Flynn. I find it amusing to see conservatives arguing inconsistent positions. First, that Comey is lying. Second, that Trump couldn't have been ordering Comey to do anything because he said "I hope." Evidently it hasn't occurred to them that if Comey made the whole thing up, it isn't likely he would have had Trump framing this in a qualified way. A made up version meant to incriminate Trump would have had Trump literally brow beating Comey to drop the investigation. Meaning that, regardless of how you interpret Comey's version from the standpoint of obstruction, Trump is the clearly the one lying here.

I think they need to bring back Andrew McCabe to testify. He was deputy FBI Director at the time Comey had this conversation, meaning he would have been one of the people Comey spoke to about this back in February when it happened, since Comey says he shared this with "FBI leadership."
Click to expand...

I expect Mueller to have already or will soon speak with McCabe. Mueller is a fair and just megalodon. Trump the Orangefin Tuna ought to beware.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top