Trump accuses Comey of lying to Congress

[Jack Hays]

Not what we're hearing here.

I am glad you're so unconcerned your Democratic process had been damaged without so much as a complete investigation. You're saying the Russians didn't interfere or that it didn't work.

In any event you can have and keep a nation that would be so cavalier about the absolute core of democracy. Instead of arguing about the messenger I would be organizing a more for a parliamentary inquiry, we want to know who and how.

You guys don't give a fiddler's **** so long as you can continue with the assigned narrative.

I care quite a bit. Gave several decades of my life to the service of our Republic. There's nothing to argue about; the election outcome was unaffected.

 

[Jack Hays]

Comey unequivocally disproved your dishonest assertion.

Simply not true.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Let's assume that NYT had his memos, somehow, prior to Comey's permission in the timeline.

Does that somehow disprove that Comey authorized their release in response to the tweet?

Note: the obvious answer to that question is NO.

Comey didn't authorize the release of the memos. He privately, and presumably without consulting anybody, gave them to a friend to 'leak' to the media. What that looks like to me is a cowardly way of trying to punish the President because he (Comey) was angry. I don't say he had no reason to be angry. I would have been. But doing it the way he did it, betraying what was intended to be a privileged conversation in that way, is just wrong, unethical, and should put Comey and his closest allies in the Department in the crosshairs of the investigation in process.

 

[Rogue Valley]

I care quite a bit. Gave several decades of my life to the service of our Republic. There's nothing to argue about; the election outcome was unaffected.

As did I. I'm glad as hell I never had to serve under a CinC that ignored a Russian attack against this country.

 

[Rogue Valley]

The May 11 New York Times story was *not sourced* from any Comey memos.

The precise timeline is here...

Fact-checking President Trump’s attorney after Comey's testimony

 

[Jack Hays]

As did I. I'm glad as hell I never had to serve under a CinC that ignored a Russian attack against this country.

I agree there was an attack. I have yet to see any evidence that it mattered.

 

[Rogue Valley]

I agree there was an attack. I have yet to see any evidence that it mattered.

It didn't matter perhaps THIS time. What about 2018? 2020? Do you honestly believe Moscow will cease when there is no downside?

Trump hasn't done anything about the Russians attacking the US. Quite the contrary, Trump wants to remove the sanctions. For absolutely nothing in return.

Perhaps Americans wouldn't be so complacent if we swapped an Islamic State attack here for the Russian GRU attack.

 

[maxparrish]

iLOL


If investigated that will likely be the given excuse but it is not a rational one.

You don't just give people information to hold for you to release at their whim after you are fired.
You would have to assume they took it upon themselves to immediately give information to the news instead of conferring with the person who gave it to them.
That scenario is extremely is unlikely.

The fact remains that currently it appears as though Comey lied.

There is no evidence that he "just gave" people information with instructions to release it if he was fired. There is evidence that he shared his meetings with his senior leadership team, sought advice on how to handle it, and ask for confidentiality of the information as long as he worked at the FBI.

It would seem, on or before May 11th, two members of that team phoned and gave an oral rendition of what they knew of the meetings; most likely informed by the memos shared in the FBI (which likely were a part of the team leadership group discussions over several months). And as I recall, they said they did it on their own.

There is no evidence he "leaked" the actual memos to anyone before the date he specified. Therefore your accusation that Comey lied has no legs.

Finally, be reminded that there is nothing illegal about discussing with the public what you know about a meeting with the President; nor is Comey obligated to keep silent about those meetings. The issue of "leaking" is one of the custody of a document itself. As far as known the basis of the May 11th memo was (at most) kept in the hands of the FBI folk who contacted the Times.

 

[Jack Hays]

It didn't matter perhaps THIS time. What about 2018? 2020? Do you honestly believe Moscow will cease when there is no downside?

Trump hasn't done anything about the Russians attacking the US. Quite the contrary, Trump wants to remove the sanctions. For absolutely nothing in return.

Perhaps Americans wouldn't be so complacent if we swapped an Islamic State attack here for the Russian GRU attack.

There is no useful discussion of these matters in public. I'm quite certain countermeasures are under way, and have been for a long time. If done properly, they will never be discussed.

 

[Absentglare]

OK. let me slow this down for you.

The Times piece, printed May 11th, tracks exactly to the Comey memo that, according to him, was leaked on May 12th. How did that happen? Did the Russians hack Comey's computer, steal the memo and then leak it to the Times just to prompt Trump to tweet his "tapes" thing thus prompting Comey to authorize a release anyway? Is that what you figured happened?

Based on the timeline it's evident that the information in Comey's memos was in the hands of the Times prior to the point at which Comey testified to releasing it. There is a possibility that Comey was mistaken in his timeline and that would be reasonable except for the fact that he expressly stated he woke up in response to Trump's tweet. That's one hell of a "misremembering".

You're not understanding my point. You are trying to explain the May 11th article. You are implicitly arguing that it is impossible for the May 11th article to exist when considering Comey's testimony that he authorized the release of the memos after the tweet.

 

[Absentglare]

Comey didn't authorize the release of the memos. He privately, and presumably without consulting anybody, gave them to a friend to 'leak' to the media. What that looks like to me is a cowardly way of trying to punish the President because he (Comey) was angry. I don't say he had no reason to be angry. I would have been. But doing it the way he did it, betraying what was intended to be a privileged conversation in that way, is just wrong, unethical, and should put Comey and his closest allies in the Department in the crosshairs of the investigation in process.

What are you talking about? Do you think nobody is ever allowed to comment about any conversation they had with the president? That is just completely false. Nothing Comey did was wrong. The fact that he kept the media at arms length doesn't make him a coward, he openly took responsibility in the congressional hearing.

 

[iguanaman]

It didn't matter perhaps THIS time. What about 2018? 2020? Do you honestly believe Moscow will cease when there is no downside?

Trump hasn't done anything about the Russians attacking the US. Quite the contrary, Trump wants to remove the sanctions. For absolutely nothing in return.

Perhaps Americans wouldn't be so complacent if we swapped an Islamic State attack here for the Russian GRU attack.

I agree Trump has violated his oath of office by not even asking the FBI about the Russian investigation except where it pertains to his own neck. Protecting us from enemies foreign and domestic is the main job of the President and Trump has failed at even that basic duty.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/06/10/i-was-an-fbi-agent-trumps-lack-of-concern-about-russian-hacking-shocks-me/?utm_term=.c4add0248db7&wpisrc=nl_most-draw4&wpmm=1

 

[Lutherf]

The May 11 New York Times story was not sourced from any Comey memos.

The precise timeline is here...

Fact-checking President Trump’s attorney after Comey's testimony

With all due respect, whether the content of the memos was leaked verbally or in written form makes little to no difference. If Comey leaked the information to his "associates" before he leaked them to the general public he still leaked them. It's also remarkable how close to the memos the Times piece is so that should lead one to at least question the veracity of Comey's testimony.

 

[Excon]

There is no evidence that he "just gave" people information with instructions to release it if he was fired.

Wut? iLOL
I said that would be unlikely.

It would seem, on or before May 11th, two members of that team phoned and gave an oral rendition of what they knew of the meetings; most likely informed by the memos (which likely were a part of the team leadership group discussions over several months). And as I recall, they said they did it on their own.

It would seem? Where did you get this info?
Is this what Comey said?
That makes no sense in light of Comey's testimony.
He said he woke up and remembered the memo. No, he would have remembered the existence of the memo from the earlier report.

Therefore you accusation that Comey lied has no legs.

No, there is no therefore here.
What I said was:

" ... it appears as though Comey lied"​

It still appears that way.

Finally, be reminded that there is nothing illegal about discussing with the public what you know about a meeting with the President; nor is Comey obligated to keep silent about those meetings. The issue of "leaking" is one of the custody of a document itself. As far as known, the May 11th memo was (at most) kept in the hands of the FBI folk who contacted the Times.

Experts disagree.

 

[Lutherf]

You're not understanding my point. You are trying to explain the May 11th article. You are implicitly arguing that it is impossible for the May 11th article to exist when considering Comey's testimony that he authorized the release of the memos after the tweet.

Are you suggesting that Comey may have leaked the memos after he leaked the memos? I'm not sure why you would argue that point but, if that's the case, then we are in agreement.

 

[iguanaman]

There is no useful discussion of these matters in public. I'm quite certain countermeasures are under way, and have been for a long time. If done properly, they will never be discussed.

Does the President have any say in these "countermeasures" if so I would not be so sure that any are in place. My guess is we will have to wait for another leak. We already know that Trump tried to get Russian sanction removed as soon as he took office and has already given back the "spy houses" to the Russians.

 

[Jack Hays]

Does the President have any say in these "countermeasures" if so I would not be so sure that any are in place. My guess is we will have to wait for another leak.

Such activity has been under way for decades, by all sides.

 

[iguanaman]

Such activity has been under way for decades, by all sides.

So nothing new would be in order for the Russians considering their recent activity? I would disagree.

 

[Jack Hays]

So nothing new would be in order for the Russians considering their recent activity? I would disagree.

The situation is consistently dynamic. There is something "new" all the time.

 

[exoplanet]

As usual you characterize things poorly [read: incorrectly].

The president sometimes exaggerates, and we all lie on occasion, though car salespeople, politicians and lawyers are well known culprits. Trump is new to the game and he says things the way he is used to saying them. And many of the "lies" turn out to ultimately be true, so are therefore lies from your side and not him. Comey tries to lie and obfuscate in a lawyerly deceitful way, but damn that guys trips himself up with every twist and turn getting stuck more and more.

This is one of the saddest defenses of dishonesty I've ever seen. Yeah, he's always been a compulsive liar, and he didn't realize people would try to hold him accountable as a politician. Was Trump lying when he said that his supporters would stick with even if he shot someone in broad daylight? I guess that must be one of the statements that turned out to be true

 

[AlbqOwl]

What are you talking about? Do you think nobody is ever allowed to comment about any conversation they had with the president? That is just completely false. Nothing Comey did was wrong. The fact that he kept the media at arms length doesn't make him a coward, he openly took responsibility in the congressional hearing.

I just see it differently than you do.

 

[Rogue Valley]

With all due respect, whether the content of the memos was leaked verbally or in written form makes little to no difference.

With all due respect, I would rather the information being posted is correct and precise.

May 16, 2017

Mr. Comey shared the existence of the memo with senior FBI officials and close associates. The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey's associates read parts of it to a Times reporter.

Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation

From the NYT article. Mr. Comey did not share parts from a memo of his with a NYT reporter for the story you keep referring to and insisting he did. Someone else [unnamed] did so over the phone.

The fact is, the NYT reporter (Michael S, Schmidt) did not receive any memo information from Mr. Comey and Schmidt states so. I know Kasowitz wishes this factoid was different, but tough nutz.

 

[Rogue Valley]

There is no useful discussion of these matters in public. I'm quite certain countermeasures are under way, and have been for a long time. If done properly, they will never be discussed.

Trump has never said anything in public to Moscow about the hacking. Not one single solitary word.

Trump even had the stupid audacity to have Russian officials in the Oval Office and entertain them by calling Comey 'crazy' and a 'nut case'.

 

[Jack Hays]

Trump has never said anything in public to Moscow about the hacking. Not one single solitary word.

Trump even had the stupid audacity to have Russian officials in the Oval Office and entertain them by calling Comey 'crazy' and a 'nut case'.

DJT's avoidance of public remarks addressed to Moscow is one of his rare lapses into professionalism.

 

[maxparrish]

Wut? iLOL
I said that would be unlikely.

I took the sentence "You don't just give people information to hold for you to release at their whim after you are fired." to be chastisement of Comey's presumed actions. Upon re-reading the whole post, I misunderstood your comment. Then we agree that it did not happen that way.

It would seem? Where did you get this info?
Is this what Comey said?

The information I provided can be found in the NY Times article of May 11th, as well as the background information provided by Comey in his testimony and/or written statement. I don't know which factual specific you object to.

That makes no sense in light of Comey's testimony. He said he woke up and remembered the memo. No, he would have remembered the existence of the memo from the earlier report.

If he said that, literally, he didn't recall a memo at all anytime prior to his slumber then he lied for dramatic effect. I recall he said something about being reminded of the memo(s), and realized the need to get it out to the media ASAP and the public. (I would have liked more questioning for clarification along these lines, but the hearing moved on.).

In any event, it has no bearing on the accusation that he leaked the memos on or before May 11th, and therefore is lying.

No, there is no therefore here.
What I said was:

" ... it appears as though Comey lied"​

It still appears that way.

"No therefore here"? Perhaps you would prefer me to have written:

"There is no evidence he "leaked" the actual memos to anyone before the date he specified. Therefore your 'seeming' accusation that Comey 'appears' to have lied has no legs."

So you think that saves your point?

Experts disagree.

Handwaving. Please specify which part of my statement do "experts" disagree.