Mueller has been briefed on Comey memos

RetiredWisFighter

Amateur Fighter
@red
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
8,494
Reaction score
1
And has said he will be investigating potential obstruction of justice by Trump. Meaning he will likely personally interview Comey.

THISGONBGUD.gif
 
Comey has delayed testifying in front of Congress as agreed to before because he wants to confer with Mueller first to make sure he doesn't talk about anything that would impede his special investigation now.

I'm betting Comey will not testify at all now.

IIRC Comey's personal memo's were used as evidence before because they were corroborated by Mueller's memory of the same incidents. So likely Mueller will put a lot of weight into the memo's. Also Comey showed the memo's to trusted FBI agents and DOJ officials at the time he made them, so it couldn't be claimed he made them up now after the fact.

Also Trump has lied about anything and everything - lies and doesn't give a shit. So you take Comey's word over his 100x out of 100.

All is not rosy with Dems on this though, as Special Committee would release all findings after they completed their investigation, but Special Council will just release charges, if any.
 
Comey had a legal obligation to immediately disclose any attempts at obstructing the investigation.
 
But they've spent months investigate so that means he's innocent. Nothing but a witch hunt.

Speaking of witch hunt, that excuse only holds true if th Dems were in control of Congress.
 
Comey had a legal obligation to immediately disclose any attempts at obstructing the investigation.

The Comey/Trump dinner alone probably doesn't constitute obstruction of justice but when you compound that with Comey being fired in trumps words to ease the Russian investigation and then also his bragging to the Russian officials Of the firing all of the evidence together may point to obstruction of justice
 
The Comey/Trump dinner alone probably doesn't constitute obstruction of justice but when you compound that with Comey being fired in trumps words to ease the Russian investigation and then also his bragging to the Russian officials Of the firing all of the evidence together may point to obstruction of justice

Nothing you just described is illegal in any way. Maybe something illegal occurred, but I haven't seen one shred of evidence for anything of the sort. Improper at worst. And I don't think any of it was even improper.

Or Comey did not believe Trump's conduct had jumped to the point of obstruction until Comey was fired

That's completely within the president's purview.
 
I can definitely imagine that Trump told Comey to shut down the Flynn investigation.
What I don't get (didn't really follow the story), the "memo" they're talking about all the time would simply be a note written down by then-director Comey?
I don't see why this seems to be treated as the corpus deliciti, at least in media reports. Isn't it still simply Trump's word vs Comey's?
What exactly does him writing something down change? Obviously, anybody can write down anything at any time?

@Quipling answer plz
 
I can definitely imagine that Trump told Comey to shut down the Flynn investigation.
What I don't get (didn't really follow the story), the "memo" they're talking about all the time would simply be a note written down by then-director Comey?
I don't see why this seems to be treated as the corpus deliciti, at least in media reports. Isn't it still simply Trump's word vs Comey's?
What exactly does him writing something down change? Obviously, anybody can write down anything at any time?

@Quipling answer plz

The notes of FBI agents have been used as evidence in many instances.

Reportedly, Comey let other agents know he was taking these notes at the time as well.
 
I can definitely imagine that Trump told Comey to shut down the Flynn investigation.
What I don't get (didn't really follow the story), the "memo" they're talking about all the time would simply be a note written down by then-director Comey?
I don't see why this seems to be treated as the corpus deliciti, at least in media reports. Isn't it still simply Trump's word vs Comey's?
What exactly does him writing something down change? Obviously, anybody can write down anything at any time?

@Quipling answer plz

FBI notes are admissible as evidence like any police officers notes/reportds would be. He showed other agents and DOJ folks at the time of each as well, so in the very least they can vouch for the timing of the memo's. It ultimately is Trump's word against Comey's BUT Trump also tried to get other officials to speak out against the investigation and tried to get it shut down by other means when Comey wouldn't act. In a breaking report from the WaPo tonight he reached out to DNI Coats and NSA Director Rodgers asking them to push back against FBI probe. So Comey's notes could be collaborated by other actions of Trump at the time.
 
I can definitely imagine that Trump told Comey to shut down the Flynn investigation.
What I don't get (didn't really follow the story), the "memo" they're talking about all the time would simply be a note written down by then-director Comey?
Probably a little more formal than a note, but if you're asking if it has some official inherent significance, not that I can think of. I write memos all the time. We use them for things (including as a record that we considered issues that wound up not being publicly discussed), but they mostly just have value as a record.

I don't see why this seems to be treated as the corpus deliciti, at least in media reports. Isn't it still simply Trump's word vs Comey's?
Not sure what you mean by corpus deliciti here. Perhaps its a usage with which I'm unfamiliar - you appear to be using it as a sort of knock-out-blow usage.
What exactly does him writing something down change? Obviously, anybody can write down anything at any time?

@Quipling answer plz
Yes, anyone can write anything down at any time. And at the moment, this is basically a credibility contest. He said-she said contests generally do boil down to credibility contests, but credibility contests are resolvable, if not definitively.

However, the fact that there's a paper record of him having written the memos well before being terminated (and within a day or two of the conversations) is something that weighs in his favor in terms of credibility, which is (at least part of the reason) he did it. In a normal court proceeding, he'd probably read the memo into the record as part of his testimony on what Trump said to him.

At the end of the day, it's basically just his testimony+++. Strong, but not an automatic victory.
 
Probably a little more formal than a note, but if you're asking if it has some official inherent significance, not that I can think of. I write memos all the time. We use them for things (including as a record that we considered issues that wound up not being publicly discussed), but they mostly just have value as a record.


Not sure what you mean by corpus deliciti here. Perhaps its a usage with which I'm unfamiliar - you appear to be using it as a sort of knock-out-blow usage.

Yes, anyone can write anything down at any time. And at the moment, this is basically a credibility contest. He said-she said contests generally do boil down to credibility contests, but credibility contests are resolvable, if not definitively.

However, the fact that there's a paper record of him having written the memos well before being terminated (and within a day or two of the conversations) is something that weighs in his favor in terms of credibility, which is (at least part of the reason) he did it. In a normal court proceeding, he'd probably read the memo into the record as part of his testimony on what Trump said to him.

At the end of the day, it's basically just his testimony+++. Strong, but not an automatic victory.
ok thx
i don't know what i meant, probably just tried to sound like a lawyer
 
Comey has delayed testifying in front of Congress as agreed to before because he wants to confer with Mueller first to make sure he doesn't talk about anything that would impede his special investigation now.

I'm betting Comey will not testify at all now.

IIRC Comey's personal memo's were used as evidence before because they were corroborated by Mueller's memory of the same incidents. So likely Mueller will put a lot of weight into the memo's. Also Comey showed the memo's to trusted FBI agents and DOJ officials at the time he made them, so it couldn't be claimed he made them up now after the fact.

Also Trump has lied about anything and everything - lies and doesn't give a shit. So you take Comey's word over his 100x out of 100.

All is not rosy with Dems on this though, as Special Committee would release all findings after they completed their investigation, but Special Council will just release charges, if any.

Basically...Comeys word against Trumps? Air tight case you got there
 
And this whole Russia thing was designed to entrap Trump in an instruction of justice charge. They know he didn't collude with Russia but if they can just create enough investigations, put out unverified leaks, and spin everything then eventually they'll get him on obstruction.
 
So the interim FBI head will know... what the old FBI head knew.

True if yuge.
 
The Comey/Trump dinner alone probably doesn't constitute obstruction of justice but when you compound that with Comey being fired in trumps words to ease the Russian investigation and then also his bragging to the Russian officials Of the firing all of the evidence together may point to obstruction of justice

I like the rules until I don't.
 
Back
Top