He’s bringing Clint Eastwood’s empty chair with him, along with Katrina Pearson…
Christine O’Donnell could tag along and cast a spell on all of Trump’s enemies.
Comey is smart, so I’m surprised that he hasn’t yet come out with what seems to be the obvious response to this hopeless criticism:
(1) Obstruction of justice isn’t a gotcha crime. It almost invariably involves a course of conduct. Comey’s initial interpretation was that Trump’s direction to let Flynn go was disturbing, unprecedented, and potentially obstructive; but the prudent response was to verify the initial interpretation by reference to subsequent events. Trump’s firing of Comey for failing to abide by the Flynn directive obviously confirms the interpretation that the directive was obstructive.
(2) In any case, if a president’s potential obstruction of justice is directed at the FBI’s investigation of the president, it would be self-defeating to resign or to prosecute the obstruction, because this could have precisely the obstructive effect intended by the president.
Tomorrow am or pm we will get reports (leaks) from the WH about how over the edge this has driven him in terms of raging behavior.
Add the suggestion that when he tweeted (bragged) about Qatar that the WH indicated that Trump might not have known there were troops in Qatar (at the major base in the ME) Doesn’t look so commander in chief like.
But she’s said she’s not a witch. Maybe Sarah Hucksterbee could stand in? Or Omarossa?
Graham: The crimes committed by the T rump Administration with respect to the last election and their collusion with a foreign enemy are nowhere near as damaging to our democracy as the consensual bj received, while in office, by a recent Democratic President from his intern.
You’re going to believe a denial by a witch?
See if she floats.
“If the FBI director believes a crime is committed in his presence, he has to report it and do something about it. He did nothing about it, zero zip,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told reporters
Narrator’s voice: "This investigation has just started.
I posted this elsewhere, but it makes more sense to post it here. Anyone have a comment on this?
What I don’t understand is why no one’s calling it abuse of power or malfeasance in office. Basically, Trump sought to establish a patronage relationship with Comey and when Comey told him that would be improper, he fired him. That seems far more relevant to me than obstruction of justice, since Comey never complied with what Trump wanted.
There’s a pattern of this, too. When Yates informed the WH that Flynn was under investigation…and that Flynn’s compromised position was untenable, Trump fired Yates.
Interestingly, it seems to me there’s a stronger case of obstructing justice with Yates’ firing, since Trump apparently did that to silence her amidst the Flynn controversy.
Burn her!!
Thank you for this one. For the legally-impaired ( that’s below NAL) it’s a perfect break-down. I don’t see how it’s not obstruction.
Good point on the Muellers brilliant staffing choices. While I’d like to see the piece of shit POTUS out of office and in prison today. I take great solace in the fact that this cancer on the president will spread to the internal organs of the GOP and by this time next year, Trump will have taken the whole party down the shitter.
…fulfilling his campaign promise to drain the swamp.
I wish people would also connect the dots that Trump called Comey IMMEDIATELY AFTER YATES TOLD THE WH FLYNN LIED, on January 27 to set that dinner up for that evening.
Man I hope Graham takes himself out with this fucking defence of Trump. I used to think that although he had a lot of beliefs 180 degrees from me he had some integrity, but not with this BS defence of Trump. Have I miss something or does Graham have something to hide that Donald knows about? What’s the deal with this shit?
That was painful to watch!
I’ve gone through relatives with Alzheimer’s, and Johnny today was mid-stage, based on what I’ve experienced…
His attempt to expand on what he meant isn’t much better.