tequila4kapp;842845305 said:

---

It is also worth remembering that - IIRRC - if Comey believed anyone was obstructing justice he had a legal obligation to report it. He did not report it. He is only now coming forward with his opinions about Trump's actions (and inviting others to make that conclusion) now that he's been fired.

---

Read up thread. This is simply not true. It is a deliberate misreading of the statute and the case law surrounding it

tequila4kapp;842845305 said:

---

It is also worth remembering that - IIRRC - if Comey believed anyone was obstructing justice he had a legal obligation to report it. He did not report it. He is only now coming forward with his opinions about Trump's actions (and inviting others to make that conclusion) now that he's been fired.

---

This has also already been refuted by OaktownBear. The statute in question places no such obligation on law enforcement.

Don't believe everything you hear on Fox News.

The President's attorney's press conference was laughable as they attempt to assassinate his testimony and character. Where are the President's tapes? Trump has lied constantly (See his Twitter Feed). When will Trump sit down and provide comments under oath? It is my belief that this President did need loyalty and asked for loyalty. Who are you going to believe, Comey and his carefully written memos regarding the President clearing the room of Sessions, Kushner, and others, then asking for the cloud to be lifted, or Trump's recollection?

What the HELL did the Arizona Diamondbacks do to America's Hero Senator?

McCain has explained why his line of questioning sounded like he was senile. He blamed it on baseball or specifically the Diamondbacks

ClaremontBear;842845169 said:

---

There was no bait. I said what I meant. Read or watch primary sources for a month before reading secondary sources and see how much you respect those secondary sources when the month is over.

I posted the fact the Donald Trump has said recently that he would consider working with Democrats over the Republicans on the ACA replacement not to get into a healthcare debate but to highlight how the media dishonesty covers the healthcare debate. I specifically said FoxNews lies by omission on this too, so obviously I am not shilling for the Republicans.

The media has covered healthcare from a Republican vs. Democrat perspective. At the very least they should be hammering both President Trump and Democrats about these statements. If you think President Trump is being disingenuous that is completely fine. I don't care. I am not trying to debate that. I am literally just pointing out that these statements get zero coverage which means that the American public isn't getting an accurate picture of the President's statements on a very important issue. They could be calling him a liar over these statements. They literally just leave out huge details that don't fit their Republican vs. Democrat narrative. It is lying by omission.

---

has he found the 4,000,000 illegal votes he claimed voted for Hillary yet?

tequila4kapp;842845303 said:

---

I am saying:
1. Because the investigation was not impeded or halted there cannot be obstruction of justice. [this is obviously an opinion that may be factually wrong; lawyers on the board feel free to chime in here]
2. I am not aware of a crime called "attempted obstruction of justice" but if such crime exists, Comey's opinion could matter.
3. To the extent Comey's opinion might matter it is superceded by the explanation of the person who actually said the words (minus some overt indisputable evidence supporting Comey's opinion, which does not exist).

---

Obstruction of Justice includes attempt:

a person who "corruptly or by threats of force, or by threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice" is guilty of the crime of obstruction of justice

Think about it. The FBI breaks in on you while you are shredding evidence that you were supposed to turn over. They put the shreds back together and nail you anyway. Under your theory, you didn't commit obstruction of justice.

3 is absolutely not true. It is a matter of a trier of fact to determine. Otherwise every intent crime would just boil to the accused saying they didn't intend to do it. "When I gave you the suitcase full of cash, I was just being generous and when I said it would be nice if somebody shoots that guy, I didn't mean for you to think I was giving you cash in exchange for shooting the guy."

Indisputable evidence is never the standard either. Trump's numerous tweets about the investigation and about Comey before he even fired him could be other evidence of his state of mind. As could his answer to Lester Holt. And his reported attempts to get his intelligence chiefs to intervene on the probe would be relevant too - if the investigation goes in that direction they will have to answer the question.

And I keep saying this and others have pointed out the same thing. People can parse words on statutes if they like. Impeachment is a political process, not a criminal one. The president doesn't have to violate a statute or penal code to be impeached. Abuse of power is enough. It boils down to whether there are the votes in congress. That is it. Obviously for both ethical reasons and political reasons, Congress should not impeach lightly. As i pointed out, it is not illegal for the president to give launch codes to North Korea, but he would surely be impeached for it. Practically it comes down to whether the people want the president out and they think he has behaved badly enough to use the impeachment process.

OaktownBear;842845320 said:

---

As i pointed out, it is not illegal for the president to give launch codes to North Korea, but he would surely be impeached for it.

---

You really think the current Congress would impeach Trump if he did that? I don't think so.

OaktownBear;842845320 said:

---

Impeachment is a political process, not a criminal one. The president doesn't have to violate a statute or penal code to be impeached. Abuse of power is enough. It boils down to whether there are the votes in congress. That is it.

---

Then Trump is never getting impeached, and if he had done something criminal, that would have come out months ago. The Democrats are going to destroy themselves over this unless a criminal circumstance can be proven.

dajo9;842845322 said:

---

You really think the current Congress would impeach Trump if he did that? I don't think so.

---

Honestly, I think they'd be happy to do it now if they thought they could get away with it without a backlash from Trump supporters. I think they'd much prefer to move forward with President Pence. But in the extreme example, yes I believe that would be enough for even his supporters to turn on him and believe that even if they didn't despite potential political fallout Congress would act.

dajo9;842845322 said:

---

You really think the current Congress would impeach Trump if he did that? I don't think so.

---

He could launch a sarin gas attack on the city of Berkeley and he wouldn't get impeached until after 2018

DangerBear;842845325 said:

---

He could launch a sarin gas attack on the city of Berkeley and he wouldn't get impeached until after 2018

---

Hell if he did that he would gain supporters and lock up Congress for the GOP.

ClaremontBear;842845169 said:

---

There was no bait. I said what I meant. Read or watch primary sources for a month before reading secondary sources and see how much you respect those secondary sources when the month is over.

I posted the fact the Donald Trump has said recently that he would consider working with Democrats over the Republicans on the ACA replacement not to get into a healthcare debate but to highlight how the media dishonesty covers the healthcare debate. I specifically said FoxNews lies by omission on this too, so obviously I am not shilling for the Republicans.

The media has covered healthcare from a Republican vs. Democrat perspective. At the very least they should be hammering both President Trump and Democrats about these statements. If you think President Trump is being disingenuous that is completely fine. I don't care. I am not trying to debate that. I am literally just pointing out that these statements get zero coverage which means that the American public isn't getting an accurate picture of the President's statements on a very important issue. They could be calling him a liar over these statements. They literally just leave out huge details that don't fit their Republican vs. Democrat narrative. It is lying by omission.

---

Let me ask you. Do you know that they didn't report his statements about working with the Democrats weren't reported or did a particular network say the other networks didn't report it. Because I personally heard it reported on NPR, on the NewsHour, on CNN, and MSNBC. Actually debated on NPR.

No question that news networks across the board suck, but quite honestly Trump has not had a problem getting direct quotes on the networks.

And, by the way, his statement about working with the Democrats was clearly aimed at threatening Republicans as he made no movement to actually work with the Democrats, didn't call any Democrats, and the next day walked in and met with conservative Republicans on the issue. None of which I have any issue about - he's a Republican - but saying and doing are two different things.

Strykur;842845323 said:

---

Then Trump is never getting impeached, and if he had done something criminal, that would have come out months ago. The Democrats are going to destroy themselves over this unless a criminal circumstance can be proven.

---

Do you know how long it took to get Nixon? There is almost no chance criminal behavior would have come out yet. Those that have the power to find it are not going public until they have buttoned up every shred of evidence they can find. And as in most negotiations of this type, you have to nail the underlings and then get them to crack. I doubt this investigation concludes one way or the other within 18 months.

If by destroying themselves you mean impeaching without public will to do so, I don't see any indication they are going to do that. If you mean by continuing to make this an issue, the polls do not agree with this notion. His approval rating is in the toilet and a majority of Americans think he did something either illegal or unethical with respect to Russia, and that is across many polls with questions asked many different ways.

OaktownBear;842845328 said:

---

His approval rating is in the toilet and a majority of Americans think he did something either illegal or unethical with respect to Russia, and that is across many polls with questions asked many different ways.

---

It's June 2017, you really think this will still be the case a year from now? Or in 2020?

Wishful thinking. If nothing criminal is revealed, the Democratic Party will be incinerated.

Strykur;842845329 said:

---

It's June 2017, you really think this will still be the case a year from now? Or in 2020?

---

Most Presidents are never more popular than when they are first inaugurated, and Trump began with the lowest approval rating since that poll started being taken. I can absolutely see his approval rating staying in the toilet through 2020.

Strykur;842845329 said:

---

It's June 2017, you really think this will still be the case a year from now? Or in 2020?

Wishful thinking. If nothing criminal is revealed, the Democratic Party will be incinerated.

---

I suspect you may be right. Do you think the dems will ever fall to as low a level as Cal FB?

Strykur;842845329 said:

---

It's June 2017, you really think this will still be the case a year from now? Or in 2020?

Wishful thinking. If nothing criminal is revealed, the Democratic Party will be incinerated.

---

Did it hurt Republicans that nothing criminal was ever found against Clinton?

It's not likely the appetite for investigation will ever be satiated during the current Congress because they aren't even looking at the obvious criminality in the Trump Administration. Sessions perjury, Kushner illegally lying on federal security forms, ongoing emoluments clause violations. You can't reveal something criminal if you refuse to look. Public anger will continue to rise through 2018.

The Comey/Trump obstruction of justice stuff will ultimately go down as an interesting but inconsequential aspect of the larger Russia matter. Trump's moral and ethical orientation allows him to play in grey areas where $1000+/hr attorneys can always rescue him or at least mitigate any real impact. He will never be punished for his actions with respect to Comey. Ultimately, the significance of the scandal comes down to why everyone around him is lying about Russia, why Trump so steadfastly wanted to help Flynn, why Trump has never said a bad word about Russia (but has repeatedky about our sworn allies), etc. That's the only real story and it's still unfolding. Today may have had drama but it was not all that important.

Strykur;842845329 said:

---

It's June 2017, you really think this will still be the case a year from now? Or in 2020?

Wishful thinking. If nothing criminal is revealed, the Democratic Party will be incinerated.

---

I can only say what the situation is now. I have no reason to believe it will change. I have no reason to believe it won't. But you are making a claim that has no objective basis. I think that is the definition of wishful thinking. I think, for instance, it is hard to back up the claim that if a whole bunch of unethical behavior that doesn't rise to being criminal behavior is shown that the Democrats "will be incinerated". Also, Trump's approval ratings have mostly been impacted by his own actions. Moves downward followed his initial travel ban, his wiretapping tweets, and pulling out of Paris.

If I were looking for an indicator, it would be that the no one a few months ago thought the Democrats had a chance to take the House in 2018 because of their disadvantages in how the districts are drawn, but now the Republicans are really worried about it and the Democrats are acting confident. At the moment the generic ballot is far enough in the Democrats favor that if they held it they would have an excellent chance of getting a majority. Also, in special elections at almost every level of government, the Democrats have been "beating the spread", doing better than normal, sometimes winning offices by more than expected, sometimes winning where expected to lose and sometimes losing by less than expected.

Strykur;842845323 said:

---

...if he had done something criminal, that would have come out months ago.

---

What makes you think these things happen fast? Do you recall the Watergate timeline? Two years from crime to the presentation of clear evidence of that crime.

sycasey;842845332 said:

---

Most Presidents are never more popular than when they are first inaugurated, and Trump began with the lowest approval rating since that poll started being taken. I can absolutely see his approval rating staying in the toilet through 2020.

---

You must be joking. He will be super popular after making America great again. Duh!

TheSouseFamily;842845338 said:

---

The Comey/Trump obstruction of justice stuff will ultimately go down as an interesting but inconsequential aspect of the larger Russia matter. Trump's moral and ethical orientation allows him to play in grey areas where $1000+/hr attorneys can always rescue him or at least mitigate any real impact. He will never be punished for his actions with respect to Comey. Ultimately, the significance of the scandal comes down to why everyone around him is lying about Russia, why Trump so steadfastly wanted to help Flynn, why Trump has never said a bad word about Russia (but has repeatedky about our sworn allies), etc. That's the only real story and it's still unfolding. Today may have had drama but it was not all that important.

---

Anyone who's been paying even casual attention to Trump over the last few decades realized how he erratic he is and it's only gotten worse in the last six years. Nobody working for him made an uninformed decision. Some will get fired and some will quit, but it will become even more difficult for him to find replacements. Trump wanted a legal dream team for his defense and all the heavy hitters psssed so his divorce lawyer is in charge.

Amazed that the Kushners are even sleazier than the Trumps: Papa blackmails brother in law with a hooker video, sister auctions off visas, and Jared approaches a rogue Russian bank to bail out a bad investment.

OaktownBear;842845320 said:

---

Obstruction of Justice includes attempt:

a person who "corruptly or by threats of force, or by threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice" is guilty of the crime of obstruction of justice.

---

The other side of the coin: where's the action to satisfy the predicate? Corruption. Threat of force. Threatening letter or communication.

ClaremontBear;842845166 said:

---

How horrible for me to tell people to read or watch the primary source before reading secondary sources. Ghastly. Who do I think I am?

---

ClaremontBear;842845079 said:

---

TBut listen to the President for one month before you read the news and I guarantee you will lose all respect for outlets like CNN, Reuters, and The New York Times. They really are fake news. Their reporting is often completely detached from reality. And yes, you have the time. Watching one to three ten minute Youtube videos a day really isn't that big of a deal. Many of you consume hours of news media a day in various forms.

---

Late to the party, but you really think watching video of Trump speaking is going to raise people's opinion of him? [Go to the 6:20 mark]

[video=youtube;5scez5dqtAc][/video]

OaktownBear;842845339 said:

---

At the moment the generic ballot is far enough in the Democrats favor that if they held it they would have an excellent chance of getting a majority.

---

Yes, as of right now. That will sharply decline if this Russian bullshit goes nowhere. Again, if nothing proven, then nothing gained.

Here is what the left does not get: if they think Trump is such a bumbling imbecile (and he kind of is), how could he execute, and keep completely secret, illegal activity with the Russians or anyone else? He is either an idiot, or such a damn genius that he is able to brilliantly convince the public that is a complete loon to hide what he does in secret, FROM EVERYBODY!

Strykur;842845367 said:

---

Yes, as of right now. That will sharply decline if this Russian bullshit goes nowhere. Again, if nothing proven, then nothing gained.

Here is what the left does not get: if they think Trump is such a bumbling imbecile (and he kind of is), how could he execute, and keep completely secret, illegal activity with the Russians or anyone else? He is either an idiot, or such a damn genius that he is able to brilliantly convince the public that is a complete loon to hide what he does in secret, FROM EVERYBODY!

---

He didn't keep it secret, that's why there's a scandal.

By comparison, Nixon kept his corruption secret for much longer. Didn't start coming out until after he'd been elected to a second term. With Trump it started leaking out right away.

Strykur;842845367 said:

---

Yes, as of right now. That will sharply decline if this Russian bullshit goes nowhere. Again, if nothing proven, then nothing gained.

Here is what the left does not get: if they think Trump is such a bumbling imbecile (and he kind of is), how could he execute, and keep completely secret, illegal activity with the Russians or anyone else? He is either an idiot, or such a damn genius that he is able to brilliantly convince the public that is a complete loon to hide what he does in secret, FROM EVERYBODY!

---

I vote for idiot savant.

sycasey;842845375 said:

---

He didn't keep it secret, that's why there's a scandal.

---

Keep what secret? Name one criminal act that Trump could be charged for. Impeachment is political. I want criminal acts revealed.

Strykur;842845377 said:

---

Keep what secret? Name one criminal act that Trump could be charged for.

---

Obstruction of justice.

sycasey;842845380 said:

---

Obstruction of justice.

---

Not happening.

Strykur;842845381 said:

---

Not happening.

---

That's one lawyer's opinion. Others think differently.

Hey, you just asked what he COULD be charged with. Firing Comey put that on the table. I didn't say he would be.

Strykur;842845367 said:

---

Yes, as of right now. That will sharply decline if this Russian bullshit goes nowhere. Again, if nothing proven, then nothing gained.

Here is what the left does not get: if they think Trump is such a bumbling imbecile (and he kind of is), how could he execute, and keep completely secret, illegal activity with the Russians or anyone else? He is either an idiot, or such a damn genius that he is able to brilliantly convince the public that is a complete loon to hide what he does in secret, FROM EVERYBODY!

---

1. You are making a big assumption that the Russia issue is responsible for his approval ratings when the major movements downward in his approval ratings have not come from the Russia issue but in response to actions he has taken.

2. Yes, as of now the polls are as they are. There are 3 possibilities. 1. The stay the same. 2. They move toward the Democrats. 3. They move toward the Republicans. People whose jobs it is to predict usually don't get it right and you will find that people who analyze polls will tell you that historically it is difficult to know what way they will go. I'm not saying I know the Democrats will do well. I'm saying your statement that the Democrats will be incinerated is not based on anything but hope. For instance, an economic downturn would almost certainly hand Congress to the Democrats.

3. Trump is not a stupid man or bumbling imbecile. He is a man who doesn't know the basics of governing in Washington, who thinks he can translate what works for him in business to the presidency and doesn't show any inclination that he needs to learn certain things to be effective. That makes him look like a bumbling imbecile at times AS PRESIDENT, but that does not mean he doesn't know how to keep his activities secret, illegal or not. In fact he has shown a high aptitude for that in the past. And the fact is that investigations like this take a long time to unwind. Show me any investigation of this complexity that has wound up in 6 months. Richard Nixon would have been thrilled if 6 months in everyone said "well, if we didn't find it yet, it must not have happened."

sycasey;842845380 said:

---

Obstruction of justice.

---

He's still making mistakes every day. He might not commit the crime he is ultimately impeached for until next week, next month or next year. Given that his interests are fundamentally misaligned with our country's interest, it's just a matter of time with Trump.

Trump may be a bigger gift for the Democrats than they could've hoped for. Getting rid of Clinton and winning the House in two years is a better outcome in the House than with her in the White House. But the victory-if it comes- is more likely from his general bumbling, inaction, screwing up of health care or a cratering of the economy rather than Russia or global warming which are tangential issues to why he was elected. The biggest negative for the Obama-Trump voter is that Trump so far doesn't seem to have a clue

Strykur;842845377 said:

---

Keep what secret? Name one criminal act that Trump could be charged for. Impeachment is political. I want criminal acts revealed.

---

See, you don't want to have an investigation so you can keep saying there is no evidence.

Being charged is a low bar. So he could be charged with obstruction. It's an interpretation of facts. There are enough facts to send that charge to a jury. Whether he WOULD be charged is another question. Prosecutors usually only charge when they are 99% positive they'll win.

I could list off a number of things that there is enough to INVESTIGATE for. We won't know if he could be charged until there is an investigation.

You can want criminal acts revealed all you want, but if he is shown to have ordered his campaign to orchestrate leaks and social media campaigns with the Russians, it may not be illegal but he is screwed.

As for your position that it all would have come out by now, it is very possible that the FBI has Trump campaign staffers nailed and they would not publicize that until they have followed up the chain to see how far it goes. On the flip side, I could easily argue that if they have nothing to investigate, they'd know that by now and would have concluded the investigation. However, drawing either conclusion is ridiculous at this point. There is an investigation. We'll know the results when we know. If you want to conclude that nothing happened on the basis that it isn't over yet, fine, but you do so at your peril. How many years was Clinton investigated?