Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DOJ: Comey Provided False Testimony About Jeff Sessions’ Recusal From Russia Investig

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DOJ: Comey Provided False Testimony About Jeff Sessions’ Recusal From Russia Investig

    He lied........go figure.

    The Department of Justice (DOJ) on Thursday evening accused former FBI director James Comey of providing false testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. According to DOJ spokesman Ian Prior, who made the accusations against Comey via an official DOJ press release, Comey did not answer truthfully when Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Cali.) asked him about the process by which Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from any federal investigations of Russian interference with the 2016 elections.

    https://thefederalist.com/2017/06/09...estimony-oath/
    "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

  • #2
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post
    He lied........go figure.

    The Department of Justice (DOJ) on Thursday evening accused former FBI director James Comey of providing false testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. According to DOJ spokesman Ian Prior, who made the accusations against Comey via an official DOJ press release, Comey did not answer truthfully when Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Cali.) asked him about the process by which Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from any federal investigations of Russian interference with the 2016 elections.

    https://thefederalist.com/2017/06/09...estimony-oath/
    Typical Trump Admin press release, it's wrong. Read the testimony your from your quoted article and compare it to the Press release... Here I'll help.

    Direct quote from Mr Comey from YOUR source.

    HARRIS: Is there any kind of memorandum issued from the attorney general to the FBI outlining the parameters of his recusal?

    COMEY: Not that I’m aware of.
    Now read the press release.

    https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/depar...or-james-comey

    In his testimony, Mr. Comey stated that he was “not *** aware of” “any kind of memorandum issued from the Attorney General or the Department of Justice to the FBI outlining the parameters of [the Attorney General’s] recusal.” However, on March 2, 2017, the Attorney General’s Chief of Staff sent the attached email specifically informing Mr. Comey and other relevant Department officials of the recusal and its parameters, and advising that each of them instruct their staff “not to brief the Attorney General *** about, or otherwise involve the Attorney General *** in, any such matters described.”
    He was under oath and answered the EXACT question ask. The AG NEVER sent him nor the FBI an email. YOUR quote demonstrates that.

    The DoJ Press release CHANGES the quote to include the DoJ, He NEVER said that according to YOUR quote.

    Thanks.
    “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
    “To talk of many things:
    Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
    Of cabbages—and kings—
    And why the sea is boiling hot—
    And whether pigs have wings.”
    ― Lewis Carroll

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
      Typical Trump Admin press release, it's wrong. Read the testimony your from your quoted article and compare it to the Press release... Here I'll help.

      Direct quote from Mr Comey from YOUR source.

      He was under oath and answered the EXACT question ask. The AG NEVER sent him nor the FBI an email. YOUR quote demonstrates that.

      The DoJ Press release CHANGES the quote to include the DoJ, He NEVER said that according to YOUR quote.

      Thanks.
      Read it and melt:

      https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/depar...or-james-comey
      "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Nichols View Post
        I did, I quoted it and linked to it in my post....... Here I'll quote it AGAIN.

        In his testimony, Mr. Comey stated that he was “not *** aware of” “any kind of memorandum issued from the Attorney General or the Department of Justice to the FBI outlining the parameters of [the Attorney General’s] recusal.” However, on March 2, 2017, the Attorney General’s Chief of Staff sent the attached email specifically informing Mr. Comey and other relevant Department officials of the recusal and its parameters, and advising that each of them instruct their staff “not to brief the Attorney General *** about, or otherwise involve the Attorney General *** in, any such matters described.”
        Now lets look once again at the question and Mr Comey's answer. From YOUR article.

        HARRIS: Is there any kind of memorandum issued from the attorney general to the FBI outlining the parameters of his recusal?

        COMEY: Not that I’m aware of.
        Please show me where she ask about the DoJ???
        “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
        “To talk of many things:
        Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
        Of cabbages—and kings—
        And why the sea is boiling hot—
        And whether pigs have wings.”
        ― Lewis Carroll

        Comment


        • #5
          And now for a useful infomercial!

          Comment


          • #6
            On the one hand:

            You're willing to use the phrase spoken by the President in which he 'hopes' that something will go away as a direct order to the Director of the FBI, and he considered that a Direct Order even though in no way was it ordered.

            On the other hand:

            Receiving an email sent by the AG's Chief of Staff on behalf of the AG shouldn't be considered an email from the AG.

            See the difference? If possible implied meaning is enough in the first, then actual procedural standards in the second would express meaning. The AG has a chief of staff after all to do things like send emails, things which frankly are beneath an AG's station as he has so many other things to do than sit down at a computer and send emails.

            I presume that your boss's secretary sends you an email, you don't consider it to come from your boss? Chiefs of staff routinely act on the behalf of and as a deputy of their boss.....it's common practice. The way being a Chief or Deputy of someone works is that when you give an order on their behalf, unless they countermand it, the order is considered given with their authority. If high officials had to give out every single solitary order, email, memo, etc for it to be from them, then there would literally be no time left in the day and half wouldn't get sent.

            Comey received an email from and on the behalf of the AG, from the AG's appointed Chief and Representative for such things. The Email could then be said to come from the AG, and the AG is responsible for the contents of it. Therefore, Comey saying that he didn't receive one from the AG because he received it from [email protected] rather than [email protected] is utterly dishonest and a semantic game along the lines of asking for the meaning of a being verb (aka IS).
            Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

            Comment

            Latest Topics

            Collapse

            Working...
            X