Comey: Told Trump not personally under investigation, no attempt to interfere ..


Comey: Told Trump not personally under investigation, no attempt to interfere in Russia probe


The official statement (pdf.) from James Comey, to be read during the hearing tomorrow, has bombshells — but they are helpful to Donald Trump. The statement is embedded in full at the bottom of this post.

Comey confirms — contrary to media reports — that he told Trump that Trump was not personally under investigation.

Comey also paints a picture of Trump trying to put in a good word for Michael Flynn, but there is no suggestion that anything rising to the level of obstruction of justice was said. Also, Comey made clear that those comments did not relate to the general investigation of Russian interference in the election.

Comey: Told Trump not personally under investigation, no attempt to interfere in Russia probe


Oh, this is going to break the fake media’s hearts!


ALL of the spook chiefs made clear, Trump didn’t interfere:

The Last Refuge

NSA, ODNI, FBI and DOJ Tell Congress No Investigation Interference by President Trump…

June 7, 2017

by sundance


The MSM attempts to construct a narrative about President Trump interfering with intelligence agencies and investigative agencies took a big hit today as Mike Rogers (NSA), Dan Coats (ODNI), Andrew McCabe (FBI) and Rod Rosenstein (DOJ) each took turns telling the Senate Intelligence Committee that President Trump never attempted to interfere with their efforts.



How are the democrats ever going to walk back the UGE expectations of their loony base?


The statement confirms what we already know: that Trump is a shameless and cretinous buffoon, a liar, morally unfit to be president. But I don’t see how you get from what took place in the statement to a criminal obstruction case. But who knows what will be said behind closed doors later.


BS on shingle, J. Anderson!


IF that were true, the Obama and Hillary would be sitting in a cell today!


I am not sure that I see what you are trying to say --* “The statement confirms what we already know:…”* What statement are you referring to? Looks to me like the second and third sentences offer nothing in support for the first sentence so what is their purpose?


Trump shamelessly lying again, essentially accusing Comey of making up the entire thing about “I need loyalty.” Of course, every fair-minded person can see that Trump’s a lying wretch. How can he be so brazen? There’s that telling comment from Trump during the campaign:

**“I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, okay, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay? It’s, like, incredible.” **

He thinks you’re all a bunch of credulous idiots who will do whatever he tells you to do, believe whatever he tells you to believe. Guess what? Looks like he was right.

*Edit: There are also the “eyes wide open” Trump voters like Ann Coulter, who say bluntly that they know Trump is a despicable immoral wretch, but they voted for him anyway because they thought he could produce the political results they want. This type of person voted for Trump not out of some sort of cult-like credulity, but out of a radical commitment to a nationalism that no one but Trump would ever dare champion.


Putting America first in business and treaties is not nationalism…anymore than you or anyone else puts themselves first when buying a car, home, bicycle or anything else. Getting screwed by the other side especially when the person representing you is selling you out…J Kerry, Hillary, Obama…


Well I see that there has been no effort to explain the statement made in post #5 that I have already questioned so I’ll give getting an answer another try.

Prove it. Show some evidence that Trump requested that Comey have loyalty above and beyond that expected of an employee regarding his/her supervisor. Sort of like what I was expected to show for my boss and with the passage of time what I expected from my subordinates.

Just where does a fair minded person look to see this opinion?