Trump Fires FBI Director James Comey

[Calliecake]

I heard on the radio this afternoon that Christopher Wray did some work on the Trump children trust. Has anyone else heard this?

 

[redwood66]

So Molly may have to weigh in here on this please.

I watched an interview with Sen. Graham today and he said that if Mueller had any intention of charging obstruction of justice there is no way that he would let Comey testify in open hearing as he is the only witness and would be required to testify in any court/senate proceedings. I have read that Mueller reviewed the memo and interviewed Comey and approved his appearance tomorrow. Is this what a prudent prosecutor would do?

 

[AGBF]

DC Bars to Open Early for Comey Hearing Watch Parties

WASHINGTON — What’s a showdown without an audience?

The latest must-watch event — former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee — has some D.C. bars opening their doors as early as 9 a.m. on Thursday, June 8, to host viewing parties complete with food and drinks.

As Comey faces questions regarding his discussions with President Donald Trump about the federal investigation into Russia’s election meddling, watch partygoers can “watch the drama unfold” while tucking into “FBI”-themed fare or nursing Covfefe cocktails.

Click through the gallery below for the D.C. establishments holding Comey hearing watch parties.

The names of drink and food specials are topical and amusing.

http://wtop.com/dc/2017/06/14136931/slide/4/

When I saw on television that there were parties at bars and drinking games, I wondered why we had been so slow. One bar advertized a drinking game in which everyone everyone drank when Trump tweeted something. I just don't recall whether it was something specific or any old thing that he had to tweet. But Pricescope could make up its own rules to a drinking game. (I don't drink alcohol, but I always love Pricescope parties that surround debates and other televised political events!)

Are we going to watch the testimony tomorrow (and Friday) together?

AGBF

 

[AGBF]

Here is one suggestion for a drinking game. It comes from "The Seattle Times".

"Is there a more anticipated TV event than James Comey’s testimony in the front of the Senate intelligence committee on Thursday? Well, not this month at least.

It feels more like we’re getting ready for the Super Bowl of Testimonies, so we thought we’d have a little fun. Take a drink of coffee or your morning beverage of choice each time you hear or see one of these words or events.

You’ll be buzzing all afternoon.

Watch Thursday's hearing
Former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony before the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on Thursday in Washington, D.C., is set to begin at 7 a.m. Pacific time. The hearing will be broadcast live on the major networks and cable news channels. You can live-stream the entire hearing for free on C-SPAN and PBS NewsHour on YouTube.
Read Wednesday's story on Trump’s national security team testifying before the Senate intelligence committee

Note: If President Trump tweets it, it counts. Testimony starts at 7 a.m. Pacific time on most of the broadcast and cable-news networks.

Take a sip

If President Trump starts live-tweeting
If a newscaster uses the word “blockbuster”
Impeachment
The American people
President Trump

Take two sips

Fired
Obstruction
Jeff Sessions
Jared Kushner
The New York Times
The Washington Post
Intelligence

Take three sips

Russia
Fake news
Hacking
DNC
Michael Flynn
Mainstream media (MSM)
“Don’t leave me alone with Trump”
MAGA
Putin
Ambassador Kislyak

Take four sips
Hillary Clinton’s email
Benghazi
Election
Collusion
Back channel
Unmasking
Leaks
Witch hunt
Robert Mueller
Watergate
Tweets
Investigation"

Link...http://www.seattletimes.com/entertainment/james-comey-testimony-drinking-game-play-along/

 

[MollyMalone]

I heard on the radio this afternoon that Christopher Wray did some work on the Trump children trust. Has anyone else heard this?

I missed hearing that, but it sounds like someone has confused Christopher Wray with Bobby Burchfield. Mr. Wray is a partner (or soon to be an ex-partner, assuming he gets confirmed) in the Atlanta-based firm of King & Spalding. Bobby Burchfield left another firm and joined King & Spalding's DC office 2 years ago; he's the one who's serving as the outside ethics advisor to the Trump Corporation. That's a part-time, sideline gig for Burchfield.

 

[E B]

 

[Calliecake]

I missed hearing that, but it sounds like someone has confused Christopher Wray with Bobby Burchfield. Mr. Wray is a partner (or soon to be an ex-partner, assuming he gets confirmed) in the Atlanta-based firm of King & Spalding. Bobby Burchfield left another firm and joined King & Spalding's DC office 2 years ago; he's the one who's serving as the outside ethics advisor to the Trump Corporation. That's a part-time, sideline gig for Burchfield.

Thank you Molly. I so appreciate your taking the time to explain so many of our questions. I feel like we owe you a fee for your legal interpretations!

 

[MollyMalone]

So Molly may have to weigh in here on this please.
I watched an interview with Sen. Graham today and he said that if Mueller had any intention of charging obstruction of justice there is no way that he would let Comey testify in open hearing as he is the only witness and would be required to testify in any court/senate proceedings. I have read that Mueller reviewed the memo and interviewed Comey and approved his appearance tomorrow. Is this what a prudent prosecutor would do?

FoxNews itself doesn't seem to have posted an article; the Daily Caller's is the most detailed of the written accounts I read (and they included the video):
http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/07/g...y-if-there-were-obstruction-of-justice-video/
The Senator draws an interesting conclusion from the fact that the Special Counsel is "letting" Comey testify today. But I'm not sure why Graham apparently thinks Mueller could actually prevent Comey from testifying.

​

 

[ABKIS]

Here is one suggestion for a drinking game. It comes from "The Seattle Times".

"Is there a more anticipated TV event than James Comey’s testimony in the front of the Senate intelligence committee on Thursday? Well, not this month at least.

It feels more like we’re getting ready for the Super Bowl of Testimonies, so we thought we’d have a little fun. Take a drink of coffee or your morning beverage of choice each time you hear or see one of these words or events.

You’ll be buzzing all afternoon.

Watch Thursday's hearing
Former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony before the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on Thursday in Washington, D.C., is set to begin at 7 a.m. Pacific time. The hearing will be broadcast live on the major networks and cable news channels. You can live-stream the entire hearing for free on C-SPAN and PBS NewsHour on YouTube.
Read Wednesday's story on Trump’s national security team testifying before the Senate intelligence committee

Note: If President Trump tweets it, it counts. Testimony starts at 7 a.m. Pacific time on most of the broadcast and cable-news networks.

Take a sip

If President Trump starts live-tweeting
If a newscaster uses the word “blockbuster”
Impeachment
The American people
President Trump

Take two sips

Fired
Obstruction
Jeff Sessions
Jared Kushner
The New York Times
The Washington Post
Intelligence

Take three sips

Russia
Fake news
Hacking
DNC
Michael Flynn
Mainstream media (MSM)
“Don’t leave me alone with Trump”
MAGA
Putin
Ambassador Kislyak

Take four sips
Hillary Clinton’s email
Benghazi
Election
Collusion
Back channel
Unmasking
Leaks
Witch hunt
Robert Mueller
Watergate
Tweets
Investigation"

Link...http://www.seattletimes.com/entertainment/james-comey-testimony-drinking-game-play-along/

If anyone played this drinking game, they would have alcohol poisoning by now.

 

[Matata]

WTF was wrong with John McCain this morning? He looked as though he was physically uncomfortable; his questions to Comey were obtuse and he had trouble not only making his point but understanding what his point was.

 

[redwood66]

WTF was wrong with John McCain this morning? He looked as though he was physically uncomfortable; his questions to Comey were obtuse and he had trouble not only making his point but understanding what his point was.

OMG he is mentally deficient or on drugs. Of course I ask the same question every time I see Pelosi speak.

They both need to go.

 

[MollyMalone]

If I may add

• Not everything that any of us might find not "right", ethically questionable or repugnant is subject to the onus of criminal prosecution & punishment
• There actually is not a crime called "obstruction of justice"; rather, there are a number of different offenses clustered under that Chapter heading in the federal penal code:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-73​

Obstruction of criminal investigations (18 U.S.C. § 1510) requires proof of bribery/attempted bribery, or involves the thwarting of subpoenas for records of financial institutions or of certain insurance companies.

Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally (18 U.S.C. § 1503) is the one I think most "talking heads" are thinking of, more particularly, the so-called omnibus clause that's toward the end of (a), the first paragraph:

Whoever * * * corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
​

Since I was a NYC ADA (not an Ass't U.S. Attorney), I'm familiar with only some of the Federal penal code provisions & was especially curious about the corruptly element. So I pulled up what I think is the current edition of the U.S. Attorneys' Criminal Resource Manual. Here's the page on corruptly in §1503: https://www.justice.gov/usam/crimin...nment-processes-state-mind-requirement-18-usc

But... here's the BIG surprise to me: on the next page, the Manual states that "the due administration of justice" requires that there be a pending judicial proceeding -- and investigations conducted by the FBI, Internal Revenue Service or some other governmental agency do not constitute judicial proceedings [case citations omitted, emphasis mine].
https://www.justice.gov/usam/crimin...vernment-processes-omnibus-clause-18-usc-1503

Section 1505 -- Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees -- fills in the gap somewhat as it speaks of

the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress. ​

But the Manual advises the reader that investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) are [also] not section 1505 proceedings [case citations omitted].
https://www.justice.gov/usam/crimin...vernment-processes-omnibus-clause-18-usc-1505

I don't now have the time to do additional research of my own, and maybe there are other Federal criminal statutes that would be applicable (e.g., the witness tampering statute - 18 U.S.C. § 1512). But based on my initial survey, I can't say it's obvious to me that, say, a President who expressly threatens a FBI Director with termination -- if the Director does not shut down a (pre-Grand Jury) investigation into the President's parents' business dealings with Tony Soprano -- could be indicted. Although no possibility of prosecution in that scenario seems too weird a result to be likely.

 

[LLJsmom]

I just listened to the second half of the hearings. My take away is that Trump just isn't competent. I know. big surprise right? But I don't think I internalized it until now. I guess I am really slow. It's not even about being a democrat or a republican. It's not about being pro choice or pro life, health care plans or tax cuts. I am really sad that this person is in the White House.

 

[AGBF]

OMG he is mentally deficient or on drugs. Of course I ask the same question every time I see Pelosi speak.

They both need to go.

I never saw Pelosi like that. I was shocked by McCain today, whom I always liked in spite of myself (except when he was divorcing his wife after Vietnam). I think McCain and Trump are the two that have to go. And I am glad that McCain is not, now, in The White House , although whatever dememtia that he now has might not have set in yet had he won the presidency and we might have been safe had he been elected! Unlike Trump, he was a solid candidate when he was running for president. I mean for a Republican. In my opinion.

AGBF

 

[AGBF]

I just listened to the second half of the hearings. My take away is that Trump just isn't competent. I know. big surprise right? But I don't think I internalized it until now. I guess I am really slow. It's not even about being a democrat or a republican. It's not about being pro choice or pro life, health care plans or tax cuts. I am really sad that this person is in the White House.

I knew Trump wasn't competent. It was McCain having become incompetent that shocked me. And it saddened me. He was, in my opinion, a hero.

AGBF

 

[AGBF]

WTF was wrong with John McCain this morning? He looked as though he was physically uncomfortable; his questions to Comey were obtuse and he had trouble not only making his point but understanding what his point was.

I was certain, as I watched, that he he had developed dementia. When a commentator suggested he disliked Comey, I was surprised. Didn't the commentator notice that from the start McCain was confused and mixed up the names "Comey" and "Trump" when he spoke? Of course I could be wrong (as Comey said so many times).

 

[Dee*Jay]

The head scratching over McCain's questioning is pretty widespread...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/08/politics/john-mccain-comey/index.html

 

[Dee*Jay]

.

 

[partgypsy]

I was doing some reading, and it is possible that obstruction can be proved because can be interpreted broadly. What is troubling, is from what I read impeachment hearing are based on what the senate and house want to do, versus a legal threshold. So it is a political versus a legal decision whether to go forward with impeachment hearings. Needless to say, I don't have any confidence that with the current congress, they will vote for impeachment hearings, no matter what damming evidence is heard. Trump himself, literally pejured himself by saying that by firing Comey, he had relieved pressure on himself. What more do people want? It is obvious Trump's intent on firing Comey.

 

[AGBF]

The head scratching over McCain's questioning is pretty widespread...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/08/politics/john-mccain-comey/index.html

Thanks for that link, Dee*Jay. This line in it refers to what I mentioned in one of my postings above, that I heard Senator McCain confuse Director Comey and President Trump! That is why I did not buy the story put forward by one television pundit, that Senator McCain just did not like James Comey and was going after him. McCain was confused!!!

This is the line from your link:

"Here's the start of McCain's exchange with Comey (Note: McCain appears to mistakenly refer to Trump as Comey at one point)"

AGBF

 

[LLJsmom]

I knew Trump wasn't competent. It was McCain having become incompetent that shocked me. And it saddened me. He was, in my opinion, a hero.

AGBF

Yes Deb, you knew. I am heartbroken for our country. We deserve better. The position of President deserves better. We have no choice but to rely on the institutions in place to rectify this situation. I want to be hopeful that they will but it's hard.

 

[LLJsmom]

Thanks for that link, Dee*Jay. This line in it refers to what I mentioned in one of my postings above, that I heard Senator McCain confuse Director Comey and President Trump! That is why I did not buy the story put forward by one television pundit, that Senator McCain just did not like James Comey and was going after him. McCain was confused!!!

This is the line from your link:

"Here's the start of McCain's exchange with Comey (Note: McCain appears to mistakenly refer to Trump as Comey at one point)"

AGBF

Yes, the poor man was very confused. That is a good word. I thought he sounded stupid but maybe that is not it. Confused would make more sense.

 

[mary poppins]

WTF was wrong with John McCain this morning? He looked as though he was physically uncomfortable; his questions to Comey were obtuse and he had trouble not only making his point but understanding what his point was.

+1 on that. Whatever point McCain was trying to make was lost on me. He issued a statement afterwards wherein he attempted to explain his questions:


“I get the sense from Twitter that my line of questioning today went over people’s heads. Maybe going forward I shouldn’t stay up late watching the Diamondbacks night games.

“What I was trying to get at was whether Mr. Comey believes that any of his interactions with the President rise to the level of obstruction of justice. In the case of Secretary Clinton’s emails, Mr. Comey was willing to step beyond his role as an investigator and state his belief about what ‘no reasonable prosecutor’ would conclude about the evidence. I wanted Mr. Comey to apply the same approach to the key question surrounding his interactions with President Trump—whether or not the President’s conduct constitutes obstruction of justice. While I missed an opportunity in today’s hearing, I still believe this question is important, and I intend to submit it in writing to Mr. Comey for the record.”

https://www.mccain.senate.gov/publi...eases?ID=99CC344D-985C-4575-801D-9FBA8043A24B

 

[redwood66]

Oof Mr. McCain. I watched the whole hearing and that is not what I got from any of your words that came out of your mouth.

Yes he is a hero but it is time to retire. Please let someone else take the mantle in AZ.

 

[E B]

I didn't know where to put this, so it goes here for now.



This is now 3 'undisclosed' meetings Sessions 'forgot' about having under oath. How many makes it perjury?

 

[Matata]

This, this...AAHHHAAAAHAAAABWAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAA. I cannot stop laughing. Tears running down my face, gasping for breath. I get myself under control and then reread the headline and I start again. Seriously cannot.catch.my.breath. AAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAAAABWAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA....

 

[mochiko42]

This, this...AAHHHAAAAHAAAABWAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAA. I cannot stop laughing. Tears running down my face, gasping for breath. I get myself under control and then reread the headline and I start again. Seriously cannot.catch.my.breath. AAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAAAABWAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA....

Best joke ever! Trump always has the best jokes!!

 

[AGBF]

I didn't know where to put this, so it goes here for now.



This is now 3 'undisclosed' meetings Sessions 'forgot' about having under oath. How many makes it perjury?

I was going to make a remark to the effect that that there was no limit to the number of times one can lie under oath if one is a member of the Trump cabinet, but then I remembered that Karl and redwood said I was wrong when and implied I was just a complaining, whining Liberal when I posted that thread about how we now had a "lawless presidency". I guess Sessions is NOT above the law. I wonder why he can keep lying under oath with impunity then? Maybe Karl and redwood have a legal explanation for this.

 

[katharath]

.

So crazy that McCain actually brought up "her emails". Omg

I didn't know where to put this, so it goes here for now.



This is now 3 'undisclosed' meetings Sessions 'forgot' about having under oath. How many makes it perjury?

Incredible. So is every current elected Republican a lying immoral POS, or does it just seem that way?

 

[redwood66]

I was going to make a remark to the effect that that there was no limit to the number of times one can lie under oath if one is a member of the Trump cabinet, but then I remembered that Karl and redwood said I was wrong when and implied I was just a complaining, whining Liberal when I posted that thread about how we now had a "lawless presidency". I guess Sessions is NOT above the law. I wonder why he can keep lying under oath with impunity then? Maybe Karl and redwood have a legal explanation for this.

I have no idea what you are talking about.