I hope you can let this go

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

I hope Democrats can let this go. But I suspect that they'll just find something else to obsess about.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/read...-conversations

Comey will also testify that he told the President on three separate occasions that he was not personally the target of the federal intelligence investigation—assurances Trump spoke about publicly. A key caveat, however, is that Comey told Trump he was reluctant to make that information public “because it would create a duty to correct, should that change,” per the statement.

Comey confirmed that, at the time, Trump was not a subject of the counter-intelligence investigation (though his minions were). There is a good chance, however, that he is the subject of an obstruction of justice investigation by Mueller. In any event, Trump is a low-life, malignant skank and your unwavering loyalty to him says a great deal about you.

[CarlV]

Originally Posted by whell

I hope Democrats can let this go. But I suspect that they'll just find something else to obsess about.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/read...-conversations

Comey will also testify that he told the President on three separate occasions that he was not personally the target of the federal intelligence investigation—assurances Trump spoke about publicly. A key caveat, however, is that Comey told Trump he was reluctant to make that information public “because it would create a duty to correct, should that change,” per the statement.

Too bad that has absolutely nothing to do with Trump's obstruction of Justice that will come to light tomorrow.

Jump aboard the sinking ship boys.

[barbara]

So, what I heard on tv from the "experts" is that the language used is important. Within the investigative team there is a difference between a "subject" of an investigation and a "target" of an investigation.

They mentioned other nuances of language that would make a difference but those two terms are what seemed to be the crux of the issue they were debating.

[bobabode]

"James Comey’s seven-page written statement, released by the Senate Intelligence Committee this afternoon in connection with Comey’s impending testimony tomorrow, draws no conclusions, makes no allegations, and indeed, expresses no opinions. It recounts, in spare and simple prose, a set of facts to which Comey is prepared to testify under oath tomorrow. Despite this sparseness, or maybe I should say because of it, it is the most shocking single document compiled about the official conduct of the public duties of any President since the release of the Watergate tapes." Lawfare

https://www.lawfareblog.com/initial-...tten-testimony

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

I hope Democrats can let this go. But I suspect that they'll just find something else to obsess about.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/read...-conversations

Comey will also testify that he told the President on three separate occasions that he was not personally the target of the federal intelligence investigation—assurances Trump spoke about publicly. A key caveat, however, is that Comey told Trump he was reluctant to make that information public “because it would create a duty to correct, should that change,” per the statement.

Cling, baby. Cling.

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by barbara

So, what I heard on tv from the "experts" is that the language used is important. Within the investigative team there is a difference between a "subject" of an investigation and a "target" of an investigation.

They mentioned other nuances of language that would make a difference but those two terms are what seemed to be the crux of the issue they were debating.

Thank you for the explanation and it does make sense. So with this caveat, those around Trump directly involved in Russian meddling are targets such as Flynn & Kushner. I simply cannot believe that Trump did not know what was going on at least in essence.

[Pio1980]

Originally Posted by barbara

So, what I heard on tv from the "experts" is that the language used is important. Within the investigative team there is a difference between a "subject" of an investigation and a "target" of an investigation.

They mentioned other nuances of language that would make a difference but those two terms are what seemed to be the crux of the issue they were debating.

Unlike with 45, the grown-ups know that words matter, and precise communication depends on their meaning in context.

[barbara]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

Thank you for the explanation and it does make sense. So with this caveat, those around Trump directly involved in Russian meddling are targets such as Flynn & Kushner. I simply cannot believe that Trump did not know what was going on at least in essence.

I'm beginning to think a law degree would be helpful in understanding all of this.

And, I believe the current questioning has more to do about if Trump tried to have the initial investigation squashed rather than the contact with Russians.

[Pio1980]

E.J. Dionne: A constitutionally impossible relationship - http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/537838...e-relationship

[HarmanKardon]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

For the hard core (25-30%) just about nothing will do it as long as Trump keeps fighting. Only when he surrenders or dies will the bond be broken.

They may 'see the truth,' but it won't matter, they still will stay loyal.

Same with hard core Hitlerists, even in Spring, 1945!