Both Trump and Gingrich said that Trump's tweet about tapes was designed to affect the testimony that James Comey gave to the Senate Intel Committee.
Comey was under oath. What Trump did, therefore, was try to influence the sworn testimony of a witness.
Which may be witness tampering. That's a bit of a crime.
Even if Trump isn't charged with that, his little tweet adds more weight to the scales to substantiate that he has been obstructing justice.
Meanwhile, someone else pointed out that Trump promised that he had a "very secret thirty-day plan to defeat Isis". Maybe he ought to get cracking on that, instead of yelling at televisions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Or it could be a bid to get Comey to tell the truth. Odd how after the "Tapes" comment his expected testimony was such a disappointment to the Dems....
Funny how that worked out, innit?
That makes no sense.
If Comey had lied, he eventually would have been found out. Then his testimony would have been discredited and he may have faced a perjury indictment. All of which would have worked to benefit Trump.
The "Trump tweeted about tapes to keep Comey honest" doesn't pass the giggle test, let alone the sniff test.
B
Comey said he hoped there were tapes . The attempt to influence his testimony was juvenile .
There is no logical connection between the dems disappointment and Trumps lie .
Glenn
I don't see any way that the tweet would influence Comey to lie, either.
There's also the fact that lying to people about recording their conversations is just something president four-year-old does. He admitted as much under oath in 2007.
Also, it doesn't matter what the pressure on a witness is trying to accomplish, does it?
-Doug in Oakland
I think it does. We put them under oath specifically to impress upon them the importance of the matter, and to improve the odds of honesty. That's influencing testimony, albeit for the better. I doubt an attempt to keep the witness honest qualifies as a crime. A lot of Judges and lawyers would be going to jail for a very bad reason.
What statute would you rely on?
And yet, everyone expected Comey to tell us that Trump told him to stop the investigation.
And other incriminating stuff.
He chose not to say any of that. it certainly wasn't about loyalty.
What else made him change his expected statements? If the DNC folks had known he wasn't gonna incriminate Trump, they'd never have pushed him into the whole "testify before Congress" bit....That testimony was expected to damage Trump, instead, it made him look stronger as there was nothing damaging to Trump. Off how Comey's demeanor changed immediately after the 'Tapes" tweet.
I think the two were related (there is certainly a time correlation). You may feel otherwise. I doubt that either of us are entirely objective.
It is my belief that Comey planned (and was encouraged by the DNC side) to say things that could be neither proven nor disproven in order to damage Trump because he had been fired and he disliked Trump. The fear of "tapes" derailed that plan. We will likely never know if I am right or not.
YMMV
B., again I ask you to prove your statement(s). Please show the changes in the facts that Comey testified to in front of the committee from his previous statements. There is none, your allegations are a baseless attempt to protect a lying four year-old.
B How do you square your belief that the "fear of "tapes" derailed that plan " with the fact that Comey said he hoped there were tapes .
What is obvious is that Comey understands that the only safe position for him is to state the truth to the best of his ability .
He has no obligation to fullfil the expectations of the DNC or anyone else . He is also not responsible for the speculations of others .
Glenn
Center, Din, 4-year-olds are pretty nice people compared to trump. Let's not forget Mueller and Comey are Republicans and that Trump also has donated money to Democrats, his slur against some of Mueller's troops.
Comey's testimony wasn't disappointing. He merely repeated his written statement, under oath.
The fact that a Republican led government won't indict a Republican criminal is disappointing.
Post a Comment