BOMBSHELL! Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation

[Good1]

Because you don't seem to get the hilarity of it.

You whined and whined that there is NO EVIDENCE of collusion even though there are multiple investigations into Trump-Russia but not only you don't have any EVIDENCE of a wrongful investigation Comey supposedly conducted - you don't even know there was an INVESTIGATION itself but you are very happy speculating about Comey's guilt.

Maybe you didn't think through things?

I get the Hillarity of it. And if this is funny, Comey should also be laughing till his sides hurt, just like you. Maybe he laughs at the thoughts that come into his head too.

If i don't know there was an investigation, you don't know either.

You said the FBI never talks about evidence during an ongoing investigation.

So i asked you, "So you are admitting there is no evidence?"

You now call this "whining" about evidence...and this is enough to make you laugh till your sides hurt?

You are assuming that if there is an investigation, there is evidence.

I don't assume that, nor do i assume i, as joe public, get to know if there are any investigations at all.

You assume you know anything about any investigation, or non-investigation.

At the beginning of any investigation there must be a premise.

I'm saying that an investigation, if it is based on a false premise, can add up to OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

We all know the Russia-hacked-my-voting-machine is a ruse put out by the DNC, in the heat of an election cycle, to deflect from internal leaks; to deflect from the criminality that the leaks exposed, and to deflect from the violation of ethical standards they exposed.

That is evident, and joe public can see that.

The head of the FBI tried to get career mileage from running with that meme. The purpose of the meme was to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE, and by flying the meme, the head of the FBI is guilty of OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

Except the administration said that the justification was the memo and then Trump says that he decided to fire and then he asked them to find a justification. Lying part is significant or are you saying that the Trump administration is separate from Trump?

The recommendation of the deputy AG was acceptable. Trump may also have recommended the deputy recommend some action, based on the deputy's own justifications, after the deputy expressed concern about Comey. Trump did not have to spell out his own reasons. When partisans tried to make political meat of it, Trump spelled it out. Essentially, he took the gloves off, challenging the partisans to a fight.

The fight is about obstruction of justice.

Trump is betting that Comey was obstructing justice, and partisans, like you, are betting that Trump is obstructing justice.

Since there is more evidence that the Russia-hacked-Americas-voting-machines meme is a media hack job, and since there is no other premise upon which to base an FBI investigation, i have the evidence that satisfies my sense of justice...and you still lack any evidence at all relative to the premise.

Total nonsense, the investigation into Flynn was his bribes and being a foreign agent, nothing to do with Russians hacking.

No, there was a dragnet investigation into the Russia-hacked-my-voting machine meme, and, in capturing all calls to Russian agents, such as Russian DIPLOMATS, Flynn was HAULED IN, and PRESENTED AS IF HE HAD DONE SOMETHING WRONG.

When that began to fail, it was suggested that Flynn had improper dealings with Russia...BUT WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ORIGINAL PREMISE THAT RUSSIA HACKED OUR VOTING MACHINES.

So when did DNC/Clinton/Podesta ask any law enforcement professional to stop investigating these? That's obstruction, so where is your evidence? Any reporting?

If they had asked, it would not be obstruction. Asking is not obstructing unless you can actually stop a valid investigation. Since they refused the FBI request to check out their server, it's very possible they did obstruct justice, besides floating a malicious meme through media hack jobs.

The Russia-hacked-our-voting-machines is not a valid premise, but it does serve to cover DNC retribution against Seth Rich, and covers Podesta's criminality by attempting to control the narrative away from key issues. It serves to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE by actually obstructing it.

If and when any IC head carries that dirty water bucket even a mile, they are complicit in the OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

Again, Flynn is being investigated by the Senate Intelligence Committee, are they maintaining an illusion too? All the evidence against Flynn that led to grand jury subpoena is an illusion? What?

It could be that partisans are investigating Flynn, because no other IC head will, hoping to come up with political meat to fry. So yes, they could easily be maintaining an illusion.

Whatever they may call evidence that may go against Flynn, it is not related to the Russia-hacked-my-voting-machine meme, unless Flynn, along with Manefort, broke into polling places, and installed Russian hacking software, green-lighted by Putin, onto the voting machines to get them to vote for Trump.

 

[jem]

No Bush won by the rules, by the court and by the vote in florida when they went back and counted the undervotes as requested by gore.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/2001-04-03-floridamain.htm

George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election.

By this logic, was Bush an illegitimate President.

 

[exGOPer]

You said the FBI never talks about evidence during an ongoing investigation. .

I didn't say there was any wrongful investigation, you made the claim - what is your evidence.

So i asked you, "So you are admitting there is no evidence?"

You now call this "whining" about evidence...and this is enough to make you laugh till your sides hurt?

You are assuming that if there is an investigation, there is evidence.

I don't assume that, nor do i assume i, as joe public, get to know if there are any investigations at all.

You assume you know anything about any investigation, or non-investigation.

I know based on the reporting - Comey under oath admitted there is a Trump-Russia collusion investigation which is what I based my comment on.

You based your comment on what?

I'm saying that an investigation, if it is based on a false premise, can add up to OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

We all know the Russia-hacked-my-voting-machine is a ruse put out by the DNC, in the heat of an election cycle, to deflect from internal leaks; to deflect from the criminality that the leaks exposed, and to deflect from the violation of ethical standards they exposed.

So complete hypothetical

Secondly, who made the claim that there is any investigation into Russians hacking voting machines?

Thirdly, what criminality was exposed in the DNC leaks and why isn't that being pursued by Trump's DOJ

That is evident, and joe public can see that.

The head of the FBI tried to get career mileage from running with that meme. The purpose of the meme was to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE, and by flying the meme, the head of the FBI is guilty of OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

Again, if these were legitimate issues then why didn't Trump's DOJ order the FBI to investigate those cases. You do understand that DOJ is still FBI's boss right?

The recommendation of the deputy AG was acceptable. Trump may also have recommended the deputy recommend some action, based on his own justifications, after the deputy expressed concern about Comey. Trump did not have to spell out his own reasons. When partisans tried to make political meat of it, Trump spelled it out. Essentially, he took the gloves off, challenging the partisans to a fight.

Except this version of events is not what transpired.

Trump is betting that Comey was obstructing justice, and partisans, like you, are betting that Trump is obstructing justice.

This is complete garbage.

If Comey was obstructing justice then why wasn't that mentioned when he was being fired?

Since there is more evidence that the Russia-hacked-Americas-voting-machines meme is a media hack job, and since there is no other premise upon which to base an FBI investigation, i have the evidence that satisfies my sense of justice...and you still lack any evidence at all relative to the premise.

Citation needed of this "Russia-hacked-Americas-voting-machines" FBI investigation

When that began to fail, it was suggested that Flynn had improper dealings with Russia...BUT WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ORIGINAL PREMISE THAT RUSSIA HACKED OUR VOTING MACHINES.

Citation needed of this "Russia-hacked-Americas-voting-machines" FBI investigation

It could be that partisans are investigating Flynn, because no other IC head will, hoping to come up with political meat to fry. So yes, they could easily be maintaining an illusion.

Whatever they may call evidence that may go against Flynn, it is not related to the Russia-hacked-my-voting-machine meme, unless Flynn, along with Manefort, broke into polling places, and installed hacking software on the machines to get them to vote for Trump.

Is the Senate Judiciary Committee led by Republicans investigating Flynn also partisan? What party do they belong to?

Who said Flynn's investigation or Trump asking Comey to stop investigating Flynn was about voting machines?

That's complete red herring and total BS.

 

[exGOPer]

No Bush won by the rules, by the court and by the vote in florida when they went back and counted the undervotes as requested by gore.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/2001-04-03-floridamain.htm

George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election.

Except that's a hypothetical 'would have won' is not the same as won because the courts didn't allow a recount.

 

[Good1]

I didn't say there was any wrongful investigation, you made the claim - what is your evidence.

You said they never talk about evidence during an investigation.

So i asked you, "So you are admitting there is no evidence?"

Meaning, if they don't talk about evidence during an investigation, then you, as joe public, don't have any evidence, if you are relying on the IC for your evidence.

Are you relying on the IC for your evidence?

 

[exGOPer]

You said they never talk about evidence during an investigation.

So i asked you, "So you are admitting there is no evidence?"

Meaning, if they don't talk about evidence during an investigation, then you, as joe public, don't have any evidence, if you are relying on the IC for your evidence.

Are you relying on the IC for your evidence?

Yes, just like how people relied on IC to provide evidence during Watergate and they were right.

 

[Good1]

Who said Flynn's investigation or Trump asking Comey to stop investigating Flynn was about voting machines?

That's complete red herring and total BS.

"Hack" is the word used by media hacks, to float the DNC meme that Russia "hacked" our elections.

Hacking is a technical term implying machines were hacked into, and code was installed to violate the vote.

That's how all this started, as a DNC political response to a Wikileaks bombshell.

That basic implication has morphed and migrated with political winds.

It then morphed into the idea that by hacking the DNC server, and forwarding info that was published by Wikileaks, Russia threw our elections.

But it started with the idea that Russia hacked our elections, implying access to voting machines.

The DNC, and their media hacks, capitalized on conflating the term "hack", implying that hacking into a DNC server and hacking into our voting machines is the same thing.

This distracted, as planned, from the Seth Rich murder, and the CONTENT of the internal leaks, such as John Podesta's language implicating him with pedophilia, which is considered criminal.

By running with this distraction, the IC implicates itself with the intent of the smear, which is to obstruct an investigation into Seth Rich, and to obstruct an investigation into Podesta's code language used by pedophiles.

While running with it, someone in the IC unmasked an American who was speaking with a Russian diplomat, and tryed to make political meat out of it.

This is sufficient evidence, to any of us in joe public land, that Comey was obstructing justice, and Trump was right to fire him for it, under the euphemism, "not doing a good job".

 

[Good1]

Yes, just like how people relied on IC to provide evidence during Watergate and they were right.

Ok, so, you don't have any evidence, because they don't talk about it.

 

[exGOPer]

Ok, so, you don't have any evidence, because they don't talk about it.

They talk to trusted sources - just like they talked to trusted sources during Watergate otherwise those corrupt politicians in charge would FIRE them.

 

[jem]

you brought up the need for the hypothetical because after all Bush was President.
and you suggested that the logic made him illegitimate.

you are so full of leftist shit.

Except that's a hypothetical 'would have won' is not the same as won because the courts didn't allow a recount.