Random Politics & Religion #23 (Fake News)

How would that be anywhere close to obstruction of justice?

I swear some times reading the ***on here is worse than doing algebra. They are words but they don't make sense.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/smoking-gun-comey-testified-oathtrump-never-pressured-fbi-halt-investigations/

There the testimony. I can't imagine how Vic missed it.

Wow, pretty early in the day for proving me wrong guys? Did Schumer's twitter tantrums get you all riled up or something?

Because the line of questioning has nothing to do with Trump, they are specifically talking about the FBI's relationship with the DOJ. You didn't read the testimony, you just searched for a right wing link that fit your narrative.

How would that be anywhere close to obstruction of justice?

The FBI is not investigating the unsolved murder of former Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich, Newsweek has learned. The bureau’s lack of involvement refutes a Fox News report that an FBI analysis of Rich’s computer showed he had transferred more than 44,000 DNC emails to a person with ties to WikiLeaks. The report cited an unnamed “federal investigator.”

The circumstances around Rich’s July 2016 murder are mysterious and have led to conspiracy theories that claim he is responsible for passing DNC emails to WikiLeaks. The conspiracy theorists have suggested that the DNC or Hillary Clinton is responsible for Rich’s death. A Fox News report on Tuesday about an alleged connection between Rich and WikiLeaks exploded in conservative media.

On Monday, a local Fox affiliate quoted Rod Wheeler, a private investigator looking into Rich’s death, as saying he knew of evidence connecting Rich to WikiLeaks. The following day, Fox News published an expanded report, claiming that a “federal investigator” had corroborated Wheeler’s comments.

Citing that source, Fox News said that “an FBI forensic report of Rich’s computer—generated within 96 hours after Rich’s murder—showed that he made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen,” whom The New York Times described in an obituary as a mentor to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and as director of WikiLeaks. The source said that sometime before May 21, 2016, Rich had transferred 44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments belonging to DNC leaders dating from January 2015 to late May 2016. MacFadyen, the apparent recipient, died of lung cancer last October....

Right, and trump of course has no offiliation with the DOJ.

Because the line of questioning has nothing to do with Trump, they are specifically talking about the FBI's relationship with the DOJ. You didn't read the testimony, you just searched for a right wing link that fit your narrative.

FBI Not Probing DNC Staffer Seth Rich’s Murder, Despite WikiLeaks Claim
Newsweek

The memo is not a proof of obstruction of justice, but firing Comey adds weight to that theory.

So, you say that the Secretary of Justice hasn't demanded the stop of this investigation, which, by Comey's own testimony they have the authority to do, but Trump's very vague words was obstruction of justice?

Actions speak louder than words Vic, and the lack of action by the DOJ shows that Trump didn't even attempt to obstruct the investigation. So, yes, Comey did state under oath that the Trump Administration didn't attempt to stop this investigation.

Right, completely independent of the Presidency. Notice how they assigned a special counsel without even giving the WH a heads up? Comey was never talking about the President, never got asked about the President, and never lied. Try reading next time instead of going to those trash sites you love so much.

Trump ain't worried Vic. Dems should be.

lol, if he isn't worried, why the twitter tantrums? There is also no reason for Dems to be worried. But I like how you just abandoned your made up argument.

lol, if he isn't worried, why the twitter tantrums? There is also no reason for Dems to be worried. But I like how you just abandoned your made up argument.

Secretary of Justice, a new Cabinet position created by KN. I also never said that Trump obstructed justice. And no, Comey never testified about Trump trying to stop the investigation. He was never asked about it, and never responded to it. Nice assumptions tho.

Head Attorney General, you know what I'm talking about.

You aren't saying that Trump obstructed justice? But that is the whole premise of your argument.

But you are looking for Comey stating specifically that Trump himself didn't tell Comey to stop the investigation. Which is what he didn't say (actually refused to say, which is what he is known to do in testimonies).

He was asked a broad question, which he gave a specific answer. He was asked if the Department of Justice asked Comey to stop the investigation, which he was very specific to say no.

Either way, Comey either committed perjury or the NYT article about the memo is lying. Which is it?

HIRONO: Yes. And so speaking of the independence of not just the judiciary but I'd like you to clarify the FBI's independence from the DOJ apparatus. Can the FBI conduct an investigation independent from the department of Justice. Or does the FBI have to disclose all it's investigations to the DOJ? And does it have to get the Attorney General's consent?

COMEY: Well we work with the Department of Justice, whether that's main justice or U.S. attorney's offices on all of our investigations.

And so we work with them and so in a legal sense we're not independent of the department of justice. We are spiritually, culturally pretty independent group and that's the way you would want ***. But yes, we work with the Department of Justice on all of our investigations.

HIRONO: So if the Attorney General or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation?

COMEY: In theory yes.

HIRONO: Has it happened?

COMEY: Not in my experience. Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that -- without an appropriate purpose. I mean where oftentimes they give us opinions that we don't see a case there and so you ought to stop investing resources in it. But I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience.

He's telling his supporters that he's fighting. This is a witch hunt and a threat to the republic.

We all knew the swamp would not drain itself. I question how anyone can view all this vileness and somehow be ok with a group of unelected people have been this much power over a freely elected president.

Do you think they will always be on your side?

Remember people thought OJ was guilty to how did that turn out...