Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Andux]

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-jcomey-060817.pdf

TL;DR: Old man yells at complains to FBI director about cloud.

Some key bits:

On the morning of March 30, the President called me at the FBI.  He described the Russia investigation as “a cloud” that was impairing his ability to act on behalf of the country. He said he had nothing to do with Russia,  had not been involved with hookers in Russia, and had always assumed he was being recorded when in Russia.  He asked what we could do to “lift the cloud.”

(I did not tell the President that the FBI and the Department of Justice had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an open case on President Trump for a number of reasons, most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change.)

Bonus slashfic material:

I didn’t move, speak, or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed.  We simply looked at each other in silence.

[smjjames]

I bet that Congress is also going to want to talk to Sessions, then-acting AG Dana Boente, and possibly deputy AG Rhorabacher (forget the name offhand) after this, since they're now even more involved in this.

Will be interesting what else he says in the hearing tomorrow.

[Baffler]

-snip-

Trump is apparently just as eloquent in person as he is while giving speeches. And I guess he's referring to the whole golden shower thing. I can see how an accusation like that (or of being on a foreign country's payroll) would weigh on somebody tbh, especially if it's not true yet millions of people still believe it.

, and you don't need to look very hard to see where tech companies' political leanings go.

...Generally right-wing, like most companies do?

You mean left-wing.

*proceed to discuss the difference between American Left and Right wing vs European Left and Right wing*

In all seriousness, in general, yeah, companies tend to be right wing (because business), but they can just as easily be anywhere on the political spectrum.

It's not as simple as that. Silicon Valley types tend to be extremely liberal socially, but would prefer to pay less in taxes. They're the source of a lot of financial steam behind 'neoliberal' politicians in the USA.

[Reelya]

Traditional left/right is workers vs management. Owners of businesses are automatically on the right by that definition. The details can be discussed, but generally if you accept that shareholders are autocratic rulers of the company by natural right and that the CEO, chosen by the shareholders, is the rightful autocratic ruler of the company, and that all of this is the perfectly natural order of the world, then you're on the right wing of economics.

Baffler is right, silicon valley leaders espouse socially liberal policies. But that has nothing to do with the left/right economic argument. It's perfectly conceivable of a world in which organized labor is anti-LGBT, and they are against a ruling class which accepts LGBT. In that case, the organized labor would hold that the rulers are "decadent" in their acceptance of LGBT rights. There's nothing inherently on the economic left or right about being pro or anti LGBT. The association only comes about because organized capital allied itself policitically with conservative religion.

[smjjames]

Heh, the URL title of this speaks for itself: http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/politics/republicans-trump-no-tweeting-during-comey/index.html

[Frumple]

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-jcomey-060817.pdf

Heeey, is that comey's opening statements? *checks* It is, it is. Going to be interesting to see what comes after it. Both in what he says, and what is asked, by who.

... particularly curious if someone's going to have sufficiently sized reproductive organs to bring up criminal charges, though. About 80, 85% sure people have been stuck in the clink for less than what parts of that statement describe, heh; some of it could be spun as obstruction by a dreidel stuck in a vice, never mind a lawyer. Almost certainly not enough on their own, given the issues regarding corroboration, but it'd be fairly unsurprising if someone calls to open a case to the full brunt of criminal investigation over it. Also entirely unsurprising if no one does, of course, but... still. It'd be neat to see it happen.

[smjjames]

A Democrat (not Maxine Walters) has already started up an effort to impeach Trump, which two other Dems have already joined.

Any New Yorkers want to confirm Chris Christies claim of the exchange that Trump and Comey had was just 'normal New York conversation'? It sounds like complete and utter BS to me because it doesn't make any sense.

Also, lawyers gonna lawyer, Trump's lawyer says that Trump feels vindicated by Comeys testimony. Seems premature because who knows what else Comey will say.

[Frumple]

Well, normal in the sense of normal conversation between crooked businessfolk, sure? Not from NY myself, but there's family up there that comes and visits every once in a bit. It did look a bit like how one of them (an in-law, mind, but still) talked at times, actually, now that I think of it. The rest, not so much.

... iirc, that one is still in prison for gambling ring related charges, or something along those lines. So, uh.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

According to 538, there are four outstanding issues that the initial statement doesn't cover for tomorrow:

-If Trump suggested Comey start arresting reporters.

-If Comey was expanding the Russia investigation when he was fired.

-If Comey actually told Trump he was not under investigation.

-If Trump tried to sway the investigation towards leaks instead of Russia.

Gonna be one hell of a rodeo. Apparently a bunch of bars in DC are holding viewing parties. At 10 AM on a Thursday.

[Neonivek]

There is a good chance Comey won't have anything truly damning to say, so who knows. I think we should prepare for both eventualities.

[smjjames]

Hopefully he isn't as, um, demurring, on his answers as he has been before because he wants to talk, so, if he does the hearing and demurrs a lot like he has before, it'd be like 'Come on, you wanted to talk, and yet you're hardly giving answers!'.

Obviously there'd be some stuff that he might not want to say because of ongoing investigations, but still....

[MetalSlimeHunt]

People are saying that, but fuck man, look at the last...year, now? I'm not comfortable betting against escalation anymore.

[Frumple]

Eh, there's good odds whatever he says will be fairly carefully worded -- not necessarily demurring, but being relatively studious about not saying anything that strictly makes a legally weighty claim or accusation. The statement was like that, too, ferex. Very careful to not actually say, "Yo' dawg, this shit be obstruction what the hell this scraggly old sot trying to bribe my pale FBI ass". Just equally carefully laid out a few events that are totally shit that could very easily have an obstruction (or related) charge latched on to your metaphorical gonads and chewing with enthusiasm.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Maybe Trump will tweet that he's ordered the Justice Department to indict Comey for treason during the middle of the hearing. I'm sure he'll tweet something ill-advised after the "TRAVEL BAN" incident.

[smjjames]

Maybe Trump will tweet that he's ordered the Justice Department to indict Comey for treason during the middle of the hearing. I'm sure he'll tweet something ill-advised after the "TRAVEL BAN" incident.

Pfft, he's guaranteed to say something ill advised, which is why Republicans are saying "please, please, PLZZZZZZZ no tweeting during the Comey hearing? M'kay?"