Do you think they have much on Comey?

Jarod said:
I know he said he did not leak information, but is there evidence that is not true?

I have asked for a link about this but it seems nobody can produce.
I can't find any evidence of it on the internet.

Also, I understand there is some question if Comey was talking about the formal process of authorizing a leak, because he did not do that. I understand there is some evidence he gave the leaked information to a friend (he himself leaked it) but I do not see how that is authorizing a leak.
Click to expand...
You're fumbling through the internet like a toddler with a smartphone, desperately hunting for evidence that’s apparently too complex for your Google skills. No one’s handing you a link because, clearly, you’d just stare at it like it’s quantum physics.

I'll help you out a little. Try searching for McCabe's testimony that contradicts Comey's; one of them is lying. Hmm, which one? I suspect the very liberal NJ grand jury was treated to evidence that answers that question. Also, the fun part of these cases is all the other things that surface when the light is turned on. This is only step one of many, stock up on your meds.

And that adorable attempt to split hairs over Comey’s “formal process” of leaking? Precious. You’re actually pondering if passing secrets to a buddy counts as a leak, like it’s some philosophical riddle. The 'formal process of authorizing a leak', please do tell us what that is, I can't wait. It depends on what the definition of is is, right?
 
BartenderElite said:
Whoosh.
Click to expand...
You can always tell a MAGA moron but you can't tell'em much. :rofl2: :ROFLMAO: :rofl2:

They're evil liars. Stupid, but still evil liars.

a7gh2p.jpg
 
Damocles said:
Yet you have tried to tell us that it isn't justice. Without the evidence. I prefer waiting for information, every time. All the time. I say this regardless of which "side" is prosecuting.

Anyway, trying to convince people that this is political while another isn't based on your feels and then saying you haven't seen the evidence... well, that's just political hackery, counselor.
Click to expand...

Reasonable people should be able to say that the way Trump and his DoJ went about this was wholly inappropriate, and that has nothing to do with what follows in evidence after the fact of a trial.

Just as Trump should not be able to use a random name generator and pull out American citizens to be audited and investigated for crimes, we should not have to wait to see what they find to say that is wrong.

Damocles can you say what Trump is doing in these demanded prosecutions is wrong without saying you need to see what they find or have?
 
Tobytone said:
You're fumbling through the internet like a toddler with a smartphone, desperately hunting for evidence that’s apparently too complex for your Google skills. No one’s handing you a link because, clearly, you’d just stare at it like it’s quantum physics.

I'll help you out a little. Try searching for McCabe's testimony that contradicts Comey's; one of them is lying. Hmm, which one? I suspect the very liberal NJ grand jury was treated to evidence that answers that question. Also, the fun part of these cases is all the other things that surface when the light is turned on. This is only step one of many, stock up on your meds.

And that adorable attempt to split hairs over Comey’s “formal process” of leaking? Precious. You’re actually pondering if passing secrets to a buddy counts as a leak, like it’s some philosophical riddle. The 'formal process of authorizing a leak', please do tell us what that is, I can't wait. It depends on what the definition of is is, right?
Click to expand...
Passing information IS a leak, it is not authorizing a leak to the media.
 
Damocles said:
Yet you have tried to tell us that it isn't justice. Without the evidence. I prefer waiting for information, every time. All the time. I say this regardless of which "side" is prosecuting.

Anyway, trying to convince people that this is political while another isn't based on your feels and then saying you haven't seen the evidence... well, that's just political hackery, counselor.
Click to expand...
When did I try to tell you it isn’t justice.

I think firing prosecutors until you find one that will undertake a prosecution of someone you clearly hate is evidence of injustice.
 
QP! said:
Reasonable people should be able to say that the way Trump and his DoJ went about this was wholly inappropriate,
Click to expand...
What is 'inappropriate'?
QP! said:
and that has nothing to do with what follows in evidence after the fact of a trial.
Click to expand...
Random words. I guess you've never been near a trial. Well, keep supporting the terrorists, and you'll find out!
QP! said:
Just as Trump should not be able to use a random name generator and pull out American citizens to be audited and investigated for crimes, we should not have to wait to see what they find to say that is wrong.
Click to expand...
He isn't, Kewpie. It must REALLY suck to be so paranoid.
 
Trump has been the biggest liar in American politics, forever. Now lies bother him. The sad fact is that Comey made Trump the president with a badly mistaken press conference about Hillary's emails. She was clearly ahead, and after his mistake, Trump squeezed out an undeserved win. This is not much of a thank you from Daffy Donald.
 
Nordberg said:
Trump has been the biggest liar in American politics, forever. Now lies bother him. The sad fact is that Comey made Trump the president with a badly mistaken press conference about Hillary's emails. She was clearly ahead, and after his mistake, Trump squeezed out an undeserved win. This is not much of a thank you from Daffy Donald.
Click to expand...
Comey didn't prosecute Hillary. She committed many crimes. He's a dirty cop.
A dirty cop as the head of the FBI is NOT good, brah. It's functioning 100% or more better already.
Pedos rings getting busted, human trafficking rings, all backlogged in all reality for the past 16 years.
16 years of garbage. The people deserve better. Comey has done things way worse than what he's charged with right now.
 
Nordberg said:
Trump has been the biggest liar in American politics, forever. Now lies bother him. The sad fact is that Comey made Trump the president with a badly mistaken press conference about Hillary's emails. She was clearly ahead, and after his mistake, Trump squeezed out an undeserved win. This is not much of a thank you from Daffy Donald.
Click to expand...
that was the one time he did something right.

then he went on to propagate Russiagate and lie to congress, now he's going down to Chinatown.
 
QP! said:
Reasonable people should be able to say that the way Trump and his DoJ went about this was wholly inappropriate, and that has nothing to do with what follows in evidence after the fact of a trial.

Just as Trump should not be able to use a random name generator and pull out American citizens to be audited and investigated for crimes, we should not have to wait to see what they find to say that is wrong.

Damocles can you say what Trump is doing in these demanded prosecutions is wrong without saying you need to see what they find or have?
Click to expand...

"...@Damocles can you say what Trump is doing in these demanded prosecutions is wrong without saying you need to see what they find or have?..."
 
Reraising. If this prosecution is based on the Congress testimony to Ted Cruz's question, which it appears to be people need to note the following.

Note that McCabe has stated he told Comey AFTER he released it and that COmey was OK with his action once informed. THAT IS NOT the same as Comey AUTHORIZING the release.

So on its face Comey and McCabe agree and their is no perjury.


.......


AI Summary:
Andrew McCabe claimed that he informed James Comey after he had authorized the leak to The Wall Street Journal — not before.



🔍 Breakdown of Their Conflicting Accounts:​


​


  • McCabe authorized the leak in late October 2016 (specifically Oct. 30) via his special counsel and an aide.
  • He later claimed that he told Comey afterward about the authorization.
  • McCabe has said this was standard practice and that Comey was informed after the fact, not in advance.

In McCabe’s telling, the disclosure was “cleared internally,” and he followed up with Comey after it happened to explain the context.
Click to expand...


------------------------------

AI Summary:

Here’s a summary of the key Ted Cruz question to James Comey (in a Senate hearing) that is often cited as central to the McCabe/Comey leak dispute:



🔍 The Question by Ted Cruz​


  • Cruz reminded Comey that in May 2017, under questioning by Senator Chuck Grassley, Comey had testified under oath:
“Have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation?”
→ Comey answered: “Never.”
“Have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports ...?”
→ Comey answered: “No.” cruz.senate.gov+2Washington Examiner+2
Click to expand...

  • Cruz then confronted Comey with Andrew McCabe’s public and repeated claims that McCabe had been a source for The Wall Street Journal and that Comey had been aware of it or had authorized it. Washington Examiner+2Fox News+2
  • Cruz framed it like this:
“Now, what Mr. McCabe is saying and what you testified to cannot both be true. One or the other is false. Who’s telling the truth?” Fox News+3MRCTV+3cruz.senate.gov+3
Click to expand...
  • And he also asked:
“So your testimony is you’ve never authorized anyone to leak? And Mr. McCabe, if he says the contrary, is he not telling the truth?”
→ Comey declined to characterize McCabe’s testimony as false, but said he stood by his own testimony. MRCTV+3wkjc.com+3cruz.senate.gov+3
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top