Setting the record straightSomething doesn't make sense here... so he knew that Flynn lied but wanted Comey to back off on Flynn. when that was a no, he then fired Comey?
I'm missing something here. Isn't Trump claiming that he knows of the lies now because of Flynn's plea?
So we got him on obstruction for sure.
Daniel DaleVerified account @ddale8
FollowFollow @ddale8
More
Trump had never previously acknowledged knowing Flynn lied to the FBI at the time of the firing - and the day after the firing, he asked Comey to let Flynn slide.
He said he fired Flynn for lying to the VP AND lying to the FBI. So at the time of firing, he knew Flynn lied to the FBI.I'm missing something here. Isn't Trump claiming that he knows of the lies now because of Flynn's plea?
I love that line. I THOUGHT. The Cop. Was a PROSTITUTE.
He very clearly said he fired him BECAUSE he lied. Not that he now knows.
Thanks - weekend fog on the brain.He said he fired Flynn for lying to the VP AND lying to the FBI. So at the time of firing, he knew Flynn lied to the FBI.
Wait, what? Is he serious? That’s not real, is it?Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
FollowFollow @realDonaldTrump
More
I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI. He has pled guilty to those lies. It is a shame because his actions during the transition were lawful. There was nothing to hide!
9:14 AM - 2 Dec 2017
I think he's laying groundwork for an incompetency defense, and I only say that half-joking.
Sure. But I don’t see the big deal here.Tweets are admissible evidence, right?
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI. He has pled guilty to those lies. It is a shame because his actions during the transition were lawful. There was nothing to hide!
9:14 AM - 2 Dec 2017
Looking at the timeline @Dinsy Ejotuz posted above - forget Comey, consider the timing of the Yates firing. Assuming Trump knew of Flynn's lying prior to that (a reasonable assumption would be that Yates informed Trump of the lying herself, if Trump did not know of it already), could that be considered obstruction of justice? Is your contention that obstruction can not be proved without Trump admitting he fired those people because he wanted to protect Flynn?Sure. But I don’t see the big deal here.
Trump has not admitted that he pressured Comey to lay off Flynn. And Trump has not unambiguously admitted that he fired Comey because he wouldn’t lay off Flynn.
If Trump did either of those things, that’s obstruction even without the tweet. If he didn’t do them, I don’t see how the tweet admits obstruction.
The tweet was moronic, but I don’t think it’s the gotcha that Twitter seems to think it is.
Go awayThat’s how bad Trump is...many are willing to have Pence. Though...it seems hard to imagine he doesn’t have some involvement if Trump did.
It establishes knowledge of a crime. At that point, he can't argue he was just pleading for a friend and it had nothing to do with knowledge of any crime. Then that's what he was thinking when he talked to Comey. He just proved his own mental state.Sure. But I don’t see the big deal here.
Trump has not admitted that he pressured Comey to lay off Flynn. And Trump has not unambiguously admitted that he fired Comey because he wouldn’t lay off Flynn.
If Trump did either of those things, that’s obstruction even without the tweet. If he didn’t do them, I don’t see how the tweet admits obstruction.
The tweet was moronic, but I don’t think it’s the gotcha that Twitter seems to think it is.
Mimsey!!!!!Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1 19m19 minutes ago
It seems Trump is saying he knew Flynn lied to the FBI. I wonder what the White House lawyers think of this tweet.
Yes, the tweet makes it easier to establish obstruction for exactly that reason (assuming his forthcoming attempts to explain it away as a misstatement aren’t successful). But establishing that Trump ever mentioned Flynn to Comey is still part of the case. Has Trump admitted that? If not, I don’t think it’s correct to say that Trump has admitted to obstruction. The case for obstruction still depends on facts not admitted by Trump.It establishes knowledge of a crime. At that point, he can't argue he was just pleading for a friend and it had nothing to do with knowledge of any crime. Then that's what he was thinking when he talked to Comey. He just proved his own mental state.
I’m not saying it can’t be proved without him admitting that. I’m saying it can’t be proved based strictly on his own admissions without him admitting that.Looking at the timeline @Dinsy Ejotuz posted above - forget Comey, consider the timing of the Yates firing. Assuming Trump knew of Flynn's lying prior to that (a reasonable assumption would be that Yates informed Trump of the lying herself, if Trump did not know of it already), could that be considered obstruction of justice? Is your contention that obstruction can not be proved without Trump admitting he fired those people because he wanted to protect Flynn?
Is that from Gin and Juice?Money manipulates most men, mindless of their morals.
Comey's testimony and contemporary notes are treated as direct evidence (or somesuch) IIRC. It doesn't matter what Trump admits re: any request to Comey. If Comey's notes say that happened (as reported), after Trump knew Flynn had lied to the FBI, it seems like cut and dried obstruction, no?Yes, the tweet makes it easier to establish obstruction for exactly that reason (assuming his forthcoming attempts to explain it away as a misstatement aren’t successful). But establishing that Trump ever mentioned Flynn to Comey is still part of the case. Has Trump admitted that? If not, I don’t think it’s correct to say that Trump has admitted to obstruction. The case for obstruction still depends on facts not admitted by Trump.
His own admissions combined with his own actions (firing two people who brought knowledge of Flynn's impropriety to him or were investigating Flynn's impropriety), wouldn't be enough? Too circumstantial? Is there enough there with this to at least merit bringing impeachment based on obstruction of justice?I’m not saying it can’t be proved without him admitting that. I’m saying it can’t be proved strictly based on his own admissions without him admitting that.
^ Jack Kingston did just this a little while ago on CNN.You guys are making way too much of a big deal over any insistence of Obstruction of Justice going on. There are way more bigger fish to fry than any possible corruption. We need tax cuts, people! Get in line, tow the line, and get the tax reform bill to help the billionaire needy. Freaking Americans need to get their priorities straight. TAX CUTS, PEOPLE... TAX CUTS!!!!!
Lying on my bed doing...you knowWhere were you when the president admitted on Twitter that he is guilty of obstructing justice?
Comey’s testimony about what Trump said is treated as admissible, but it’s not treated as gospel. Trump is allowed to contradict Comey and then the jury has to decide whom to believe. Could be a really tough call.Comey's testimony and contemporary notes are treated as direct evidence (or somesuch) IIRC. It doesn't matter what Trump admits re: any request to Comey. If Comey's notes say that happened (as reported), after Trump knew Flynn had lied to the FBI it seems like cut and dried obstruction, no?
plus...It’s testament to how bad Trump is, that I’d be relieved if Pence took over. I disagree with just about everything he stands for, but, at least we could go back to the old standard: pendulum swings right/pendulum swings back left.
He follows me on the Twitter.^ Jack Kingston did just this a little while ago on CNN.
Three out of four's not bad.plus...
- no constant lying
- no petty social wars (maybe)
- no twitter ####
- no self enrichment
Without going back over every post in this thread, I don't believe that was what people were contending. I think the notion was that that tweet in combination with past events/statements may establish obstruction.Comey’s testimony about what Trump said is treated as admissible, but it’s not treated as gospel. Trump is allowed to contradict Comey and then the jury has to decide whom to believe. Could be a really tough call.
But all of this is beside the narrow point of whether that tweet, in and of itself, constitutes an admission of obstruction. Any testimony from Comey is extraneous to that tweet.
Heart?He's just new at all this. It's not what he says it's what's in his heart.
Have you missed that last 20 years, where the GOP, as baseline practice and an underlying strategy, has worked to swing the pendulum right and then break the pendulum? Gerrymandering and other forms of proactive dismantling of the very foundation of a democracy in right to vote has been designed to pull the pendulum until it rips off and then declare victory even as the electorate as a whole is growing even more blue by the day.It’s testament to how bad Trump is, that I’d be relieved if Pence took over. I disagree with just about everything he stands for, but, at least we could go back to the old standard: pendulum swings right/pendulum swings back left.
Makes me wonder why Comey is unloading with these statements now. Seems like we are only halfway through, but these tweets are nearly celebratory.@jamescomey
Beautiful Long Island Sound from Westport, CT. To paraphrase the Buddha — Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun; the moon; and the truth.
Comey just crushing it on Twitter.
Too bad I think his move a week before the election was the final nail in Hillary's coffin@jamescomey
Beautiful Long Island Sound from Westport, CT. To paraphrase the Buddha — Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun; the moon; and the truth.
Comey just crushing it on Twitter.
I think that's a good point but if that were so then firing her before her meeting laying it all out to McGahn looks a lot worse.Maybe I'm confused but didn't Yates tell him that he lied to the FBI or just that he (supposedly) lied to Pence?
Just gonna keep racking up the obstruction charges and probably put a cherry on top by firing Mueller.I think that's a good point but if that were so then firing her before her meeting laying it all out to McGahn looks a lot worse.
We aren't close to halfway, but he knows who's got what and what that means down the road.Makes me wonder why Comey is unloading with these statements now. Seems like we are only halfway through, but these tweets are nearly celebratory.
I do believe he knows that and regrets it. He did what he probably felt was right, at great risk to his career you'd have to say, but we all make the wrong decisions at times.Too bad I think his move a week before the election was the final nail in Hillary's coffin
What do you think is more likely.1. Flynn pleads guilty to lying to the FBI about legal conversations that occurred after the election, when the transition team was having conversations with a dozen foreign nations.