MSN POLL RESULTS

christiefan915 said:
Put down the crack pipe, GQ. :D trump wasn't exonerated in this life or any other.
Click to expand...

He is not under investigation and Comey believes he doesnt have evidence Trump obstructed justice, deferring it to someone else.

Trump most certainly was not convicted as many liberals thought he would be. Today was a win for Trump.
 
Yaya said:
He is not under investigation and Comey believes he doesnt have evidence Trump obstructed justice, deferring it to someone else.

Trump most certainly was not convicted as many liberals thought he would be. Today was a win for Trump.
Click to expand...

You're crazy. I don't think anybody expected a bombshell from Comey. But his precise memories of all the calls and meetings he had with trump don't suggest lying. He didn't have a single sheet of paper in front of him to help keep his story straight. And Comey certainly was not the "nut job" trump called him; he was perfectly articulate and knowledgeable. Even cons acknowledged the nastiness of of the way he was fired, learning about it on TV for god's sake. How classless.

I can't speak for other liberals but I wasn't expecting anything like a "conviction", whatever you mean by that. I think Comey did a great job of defending his character and the way he did his job, after all trump's lies about him.
 
Dang Marco slayed him.

How anyone can think this turned out bad for Trump is beyond me. Only extreme hysteria could make you believe that.
 
He admitted he leaked to the NYT and doubt it was his 1st time at bat in this ballpark. Maybe WAPO...NY Post.......others???? We're about to find out. :cool:
 
Stretch said:
He admitted he leaked to the NYT and doubt it was his 1st time at bat in this ballpark. Maybe WAPO...NY Post.......others???? We're about to find out. :cool:
Click to expand...

Leaking is not illegal. And he didn't leak classified info, he leaked his impressions of meetings with trump.
 
"Contrary to Kasowitz’s suggestion, there was nothing illegal about Comey’s decision to tell a reporter—directly or indirectly—about the contents of the memos he’d written after his meetings with the president. Furthermore, the notion that the conversations described in those memos were “privileged” is nonsensical. As University of Texas School of Law professor Stephen Vladeck explained to me in an email, that’s not how privilege works:

The President can claim privilege over whatever he wants to, but it’s irrelevant here; privilege is a defense against an effort to compel disclosure (for example, against a subpoena or a warrant). It’s a shield, not a sword. Here, where a former government employee is voluntarily testifying / acting, there just aren’t any criminal consequences for violating even a valid claim of privilege.​

The only way there could ever be a criminal case against Comey for leaking his memos, Vladeck told me, is if they contain classified national security information (in that case, a leak could be a violation of the Espionage Act) or information “that has pecuniary value to the United States” (which could be a violation of the federal conversion-of-property statute). Would it be possible to make the argument that the memo Comey leaked did contain that kind of information? “If all he did was memorialize the contents of a conversation with the president the contents of which were not themselves classified, no,” Vladeck says.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...ests_james_comey_broke_the_law_he_didn_t.html
 
I was mistaken earlier today in a post I made. These memos are unclassified. I will start a new thread to explain further.
 
From what I've read about this, it didn't turn as well as the dems hoped for, neither did it for the Trumptards. That said, it merely proved Trump is a liar.
:whoa:

:eek:

:shock:

:tardthoughts:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top