Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:38 AM

BOOM! Trump allegedly asked Director of National Intelligence Coats

to intervene with Comey to get the FBI to "back off" the investigation into Flynn. That, ladies and gentlemen, is obstruction of justice, almost exactly what Nixon did by ordering the CIA to obstruct the FBI's Watergate investigation.

"Coats told associates that Trump had asked him whether Coats could intervene with Comey to get the bureau to back off its focus on former national security adviser Michael Flynn in its Russia probe, according to officials. Coats later told lawmakers that he never felt pressured to intervene."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/special-counsel-is-investigating-trump-for-possible-obstruction-of-justice/2017/06/14/9ce02506-5131-11e7-b064-828ba60fbb98_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_no-name%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.9c1c9d4eb740

HOLY SHIT! Trump asked Coats to obstruct justice.

78 replies, 24117 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

78 replies	Author	Time	Post
BOOM! Trump allegedly asked Director of National Intelligence Coats (Original post)	KingCharlemagne	Jun 2017	OP
Of course, he did! He asked Rogers as well. Trump knows the deeper they dig, the more he's...	writes3000	Jun 2017	#1
Trump couldnt get Coats or Rogers (or Comey) to do his bidding. So	KingCharlemagne	Jun 2017	#44
But he didn't 'pressure' him.	onit2day	Jun 2017	#62
which proves he knew what he was asking would be wrong	SleeplessinSoCal	Jun 2017	#68
I'm sure Trump has extensive experience in making threats and illegal suggestions	Nitram	Jun 2017	#75
Who can judge what "pressure" is? Pressure in this case is asking while being the POTUS!	Maraya1969	Jun 2017	#71
that is why Coats discussed how he "felt"....	virtualobserver	Jun 2017	#2
What one "feels" is subjective....	Tommy_Carcetti	Jun 2017	#12
Good point. - nt	KingCharlemagne	Jun 2017	#43
Nor does he wish to lose his job	Maeve	Jun 2017	#17
He wouldn't go to jail	Sgent	Jun 2017	#18
that was what I meant to imply	virtualobserver	Jun 2017	#19
has Comey	mercuryblues	Jun 2017	#3
Yes he did	Phoenix61	Jun 2017	#10
They might not have done Trump's bidding, but they were in contempt of	WinkyDink	Jun 2017	#14
Thank you	mercuryblues	Jun 2017	#30
From Coats wouldn't answer this in public we knew the answer	malaise	Jun 2017	#4
Prepare for the now famous "locker room talk" defense	Freethinker65	Jun 2017	#5
The spin:	DefenseLawyer	Jun 2017	#6
he was just asking for his friend.	mopinko	Jun 2017	#7
Hahaha	rusty fender	Jun 2017	#48
Say Dan, Bannon and I have a bet, maybe you can settle it for us. n/t	DefenseLawyer	Jun 2017	#58
hahahahaa Kellyanne's eyeballs might pop right out of her head from the pressure on this one grin	luvMIdog	Jun 2017	#8
That dog won't hunt.	Still In Wisconsin	Jun 2017	#9
Oh I'm not saying it will hunt	DefenseLawyer	Jun 2017	#33
It was a hypothetical question. Info for the screenplay he's writing...	Shrike47	Jun 2017	#13
And once again, Ryan will probably ask us to believe that Comrade Fatass	Buns_of_Fire	Jun 2017	#15
Yup. That's already what one of the sons said after Comey's testimony.	progressoid	Jun 2017	#25
Was that Uday or Qusay?	flibbitygiblets	Jun 2017	#34
Beats me. I can't tell the difference.	progressoid	Jun 2017	#38
They always look to me like home invaders with stockings pulled over their head.	NBachers	Jun 2017	#64
LOL, I never realized that before.	flibbitygiblets	Jun 2017	#72
RICO! RICO!	Eyeball_Kid	Jun 2017	#52
Hope they'll be putting copies of Prison Times through cell bars. (n/t)	klook	Jun 2017	#67
LOL Ah, the infamous "hypothetically speaking" defense! :) -nt	KingCharlemagne	Jun 2017	#45
Do we know if Coats or Rogers actually asked Comey to back off? Does that make them guilty as well?	writes3000	Jun 2017	#11
I believe Comey.	WinkyDink	Jun 2017	#16
Did Comey testify that Coats or Rogers told him to back off?	writes3000	Jun 2017	#29
I believe Comey testified they did not. Cant swear to it, though - nt	KingCharlemagne	Jun 2017	#46
so that's the head of the FBI and the head of the DNI are asked to derail an investigation....	spanone	Jun 2017	#20
Simply the appearance of that happening cost HRC the presidency.	JudyM	Jun 2017	#74
re: "HOLY SHIT! Trump asked Coats to obstruct justice."	thesquanderer	Jun 2017	#21
Obstruction does not require that the obstruction was successful, I believe.	Honeycombe8	Jun 2017	#23
Is there ambiguity in firing Comey, as being obstruction ?	Pluvious	Jun 2017	#37
There was ambiguity right up to the point that the idiot told Lester Holt why he fired him.	grantcart	Jun 2017	#60
This thread is not about Comey. nt	Honeycombe8	Jun 2017	#70
This thread is about obstruction, firing Comey was defiantly obstruction of justice	Pluvious	Jun 2017	#73
Good point. (n/t)	thesquanderer	Jun 2017	#57
Makes no different if an investigation was actually obstructed	Saviolo	Jun 2017	#28
Correct.	Eyeball_Kid	Jun 2017	#54
"therefore no obstruction occurred"	alcibiades_mystery	Jun 2017	#31
Old news. Coats has already testified about it before Congress.	Honeycombe8	Jun 2017	#22
If Trump asked Coats to intervene, Trump was obstructing	KingCharlemagne	Jun 2017	#47
I doubt if it matters what Coates "felt" or did.	Patterson	Jun 2017	#59
True enough. But he wouldn't confirm or deny what Trump had said to him.	Honeycombe8	Jun 2017	#69
How can the fucking republicans continue to ignore this?	liberal N proud	Jun 2017	#24
Their Oath Is To Billionaires	All-In	Jun 2017	#27
Trump probably really didn't understand that he was breaking the law,	MGKrebs	Jun 2017	#26
He knew exactly what he was doing. It is what he has done	Enoki33	Jun 2017	#35
That's what I mean though. In the business world the boss "leaning on" a subordinate	MGKrebs	Jun 2017	#39
Trumpy's always had enough money to buy off anyone. Except for now.	Eyeball_Kid	Jun 2017	#56
oh yes he was well aware	onetexan	Jun 2017	#36
The White House REFUSED ethics briefings. He didn't even give himself the chance to pay attention.	Bernardo de La Paz	Jun 2017	#41
Oh jeez, that's right. And now he'll claim ignorance	MGKrebs	Jun 2017	#61
His scamming has gone beyond intuitive. It is now reflexive. He can't help himself. . . . . nt	Bernardo de La Paz	Jun 2017	#66
Did Flynn give Trump an ultimatum?	procon	Jun 2017	#32
Gang members stick together-----until they don't.	Doitnow	Jun 2017	#40
Coats is not a career Intelligence person he's a career GOPer.	FenwayDonkey	Jun 2017	#42
Honest question here.	Grammy23	Jun 2017	#49
Thinking back to Watergate, once Nixon ordered Haldeman and Ehrlichman to	KingCharlemagne	Jun 2017	#50
Doesn't it depend on the crime and what was actually done?	hughee99	Jun 2017	#53
It seems comparable to when someone tries to hire a "hit man" to commit a murder.	Tanuki	Jun 2017	#76
And the maggot	MFM008	Jun 2017	#51
Mueller allowed Coates & Rogers to GLOMAR to support comey's testimony...but kgop sat on their hands	MedusaX	Jun 2017	#55
Did he think Trump was joking? Seriously not believable that never felt pressured.	Justice	Jun 2017	#63
If you start by assuming that every word that leaves a Republican's	KingCharlemagne	Jun 2017	#65
Coates	Catherine Vincent	Jun 2017	#77
I agree. - nt	KingCharlemagne	Jun 2017	#78

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:40 AM

writes3000 (4,734 posts)

1. Of course, he did! He asked Rogers as well. Trump knows the deeper they dig, the more he's...

F&cked!

Reply to this post

Response to writes3000 (Reply #1)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 12:52 PM

KingCharlemagne (7,908 posts)

44. Trump couldnt get Coats or Rogers (or Comey) to do his bidding. So

next step is to fire Comey.

Reply to this post

Response to writes3000 (Reply #1)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 03:39 PM

onit2day (1,201 posts)

62. But he didn't 'pressure' him.

Reply to this post

Response to onit2day (Reply #62)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 07:39 PM

SleeplessinSoCal (7,871 posts)

68. which proves he knew what he was asking would be wrong

and illegal. Not the neophyte some reps are claiming.

Reply to this post

Response to SleeplessinSoCal (Reply #68)

Fri Jun 16, 2017, 08:08 AM

Nitram (20,365 posts)

75. I'm sure Trump has extensive experience in making threats and illegal suggestions

using fairly neutral language.

Reply to this post

Response to onit2day (Reply #62)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:52 PM

Maraya1969 (20,856 posts)

71. Who can judge what "pressure" is? Pressure in this case is asking while being the POTUS!

That alone is pressure and he knew it! And pressure is asking while everyone knows about all your contacts with the Russians who routinely poison anyone who doesn't do their bidding.

If that scumbag had said those things to me I would have been afraid, to say the least. And that is pressure.

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:48 AM

virtualobserver (8,760 posts)

2. that is why Coats discussed how he "felt"....

He didn't say that Trump didn't ask him.....just that he never "felt" pressured to intervene.....

He didn't want to go to jail.

Reply to this post

Response to virtualobserver (Reply #2)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:22 AM

Tommy_Carcetti (42,057 posts)

12. What one "feels" is subjective....

.....the facts surrounding those feelings most definitely aren't.

Reply to this post

Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Reply #12)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 12:50 PM

KingCharlemagne (7,908 posts)

43. Good point. - nt

Reply to this post

Response to virtualobserver (Reply #2)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:33 AM

Maeve (41,497 posts)

17. Nor does he wish to lose his job

tRump like to fire disloyal poeple

Reply to this post

Response to virtualobserver (Reply #2)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:34 AM

Sgent (5,807 posts)

18. He wouldn't go to jail

if he was just asked. Now if he acted on the request...

Reply to this post

Response to Sgent (Reply #18)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:36 AM

virtualobserver (8,760 posts)

19. that was what I meant to imply

Coats was trying to thread the needle with his response.

He won't be able to get away with that with the special counsel.

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:52 AM

mercuryblues (13,145 posts)

3. has Comey

ever testified if Coats tried to get him to back off on Flynn?

Reply to this post

Response to mercuryblues (Reply #3)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:15 AM

Phoenix61 (15,570 posts)

10. Yes he did

He said that Coats and Rogers never asked him to back off Flynn.

Reply to this post

Response to Phoenix61 (Reply #10)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:30 AM

WinkyDink (51,311 posts)

14. They might not have done Trump's bidding, but they were in contempt of

Congress, and Trump obstructed justice.

Reply to this post

Response to Phoenix61 (Reply #10)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:28 AM

mercuryblues (13,145 posts)

30. Thank you

I tried googling it, but could not come up with the answer. All the hits were about trump asking Coats, Rogers and Comey.

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:52 AM

malaise (254,752 posts)

4. From Coats wouldn't answer this in public we knew the answer

Lock up the Con

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:52 AM

Freethinker65 (8,250 posts)

5. Prepare for the now famous "locker room talk" defense

Boys will be boys. It was just a joke. IOKIYAT

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:56 AM

DefenseLawyer (11,101 posts)

6. The spin:

When he asked if he "could" intervene, he wasn't suggesting that he should intervene. No, he was literally just asking, in the abstract, if he "could". Because you know, he's a novice and doesn't really understand what everyone in the government actually does. Insert eye roll here.

Reply to this post

Response to DefenseLawyer (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:58 AM

mopinko (66,556 posts)

7. he was just asking for his friend.

Reply to this post

Response to mopinko (Reply #7)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:10 PM

rusty fender (3,428 posts)

48. Hahaha

Asking for lil' Jeffie Beau.

What a rube!

Reply to this post

Response to mopinko (Reply #7)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 02:12 PM

DefenseLawyer (11,101 posts)

58. Say Dan, Bannon and I have a bet, maybe you can settle it for us. n/t

Reply to this post

Response to DefenseLawyer (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 09:59 AM

luvMIdog (2,533 posts)

8. hahahahaa Kellyanne's eyeballs might pop right out of her head from the pressure on this one grin

Reply to this post

Response to DefenseLawyer (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:12 AM

Still In Wisconsin (4,450 posts)

9. That dog won't hunt.

Reply to this post

Response to Still In Wisconsin (Reply #9)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:36 AM

DefenseLawyer (11,101 posts)

33. Oh I'm not saying it will hunt

I'm just saying it may very well be his dog.

Reply to this post

Response to DefenseLawyer (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:28 AM

Shrike47 (6,913 posts)

13. It was a hypothetical question. Info for the screenplay he's writing...

Reply to this post

Response to DefenseLawyer (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:30 AM

Buns_of_Fire (16,050 posts)

15. And once again, Ryan will probably ask us to believe that Comrade Fatass

isn't really malicious or evil or crooked -- he's just STUPID!

What a glowing endorsement!

Reply to this post

Response to DefenseLawyer (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:10 AM

progressoid (47,973 posts)

25. Yup. That's already what one of the sons said after Comey's testimony.

Reply to this post

Response to progressoid (Reply #25)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:38 AM

flibbitygiblets (7,220 posts)

34. Was that Uday or Qusay?

I can't wait for those smug a-holes to get their comeuppance as well.

Reply to this post

Response to flibbitygiblets (Reply #34)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:46 AM

progressoid (47,973 posts)

38. Beats me. I can't tell the difference.

They both have that blank, lack of emotion, look. Kind of creeps me out.

Reply to this post

Response to progressoid (Reply #38)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 06:14 PM

NBachers (15,763 posts)

64. They always look to me like home invaders with stockings pulled over their head.

Last edited Fri Jun 16, 2017, 02:42 AM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Response to NBachers (Reply #64)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:15 PM

flibbitygiblets (7,220 posts)

72. LOL, I never realized that before.

Like Nick Cage in Raising Arizona: "Son, you got a panty on your head"

Reply to this post

Response to flibbitygiblets (Reply #34)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:35 PM

Eyeball_Kid (7,196 posts)

52. RICO! RICO!

Oh.. and let's not forget emoluments. The kiddies are caught up in both. They'll need to get newspaper routes after the feds are done with them.

Reply to this post

Response to Eyeball_Kid (Reply #52)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 07:16 PM

klook (11,637 posts)

67. Hope they'll be putting copies of Prison Times through cell bars. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Response to DefenseLawyer (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 12:57 PM

KingCharlemagne (7,908 posts)

45. LOL Ah, the infamous "hypothetically speaking" defense! :) -nt

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:18 AM

writes3000 (4,734 posts)

11. Do we know if Coats or Rogers actually asked Comey to back off? Does that make them guilty as well?

Reply to this post

Response to writes3000 (Reply #11)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:31 AM

WinkyDink (51,311 posts)

16. I believe Comey.

Reply to this post

Response to WinkyDink (Reply #16)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:27 AM

writes3000 (4,734 posts)

29. Did Comey testify that Coats or Rogers told him to back off?

I'm trying to assess whether they followed through with Trump's request.

If so, they could be in legal jeopardy.

Reply to this post

Response to writes3000 (Reply #29)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:01 PM

KingCharlemagne (7,908 posts)

46. I believe Comey testified they did not. Cant swear to it, though - nt

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:39 AM

spanone (133,416 posts)

20. so that's the head of the FBI and the head of the DNI are asked to derail an investigation....

i wonder what would ensue had a democrat done the same?

well, i really don't wonder.

Reply to this post

Response to spanone (Reply #20)

Fri Jun 16, 2017, 07:59 AM

JudyM (26,218 posts)

74. Simply the appearance of that happening cost HRC the presidency.

If in fact Comey's announcement of taking up the case again is what threw the election to tRump... seeing as Comey essentially stated that Bill's tarmac meeting with Lynch was the turning point for his decision to make that announcement.

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:42 AM

thesquanderer (11,571 posts)

21. re: "HOLY SHIT! Trump asked Coats to obstruct justice."

It sounds like he asked, but they did not comply... therefore no obstruction occurred (in this particular case). I think maybe the most important part of this is that it is further evidence of Trump's state of mind, helping to prove the intent behind telling Comey he "hoped" he could let the Flynn thing go. As if that weren't obvious enough already.

Reply to this post

Response to thesquanderer (Reply #21)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:46 AM

Honeycombe8 (37,648 posts)

23. Obstruction does not require that the obstruction was successful, I believe.

It's just that the head honcho did actions TO obstruct justice. The fact that the underling he was pressuring didn't succumb, or didn't catch on, or didn't get an opportunity to follow the "suggestions" of the head honcho is immaterial, I believe.

Reply to this post

Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #23)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:44 AM

Pluvious (3,626 posts)

37. Is there ambiguity in firing Comey, as being obstruction ?

And all the "could" questions just put the act of firing in context ?

Reply to this post

Response to Pluvious (Reply #37)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 02:16 PM

grantcart (52,673 posts)

60. There was ambiguity right up to the point that the idiot told Lester Holt why he fired him.

That kind of settled it but if you were in doubt he confirmed it to the Russians in the WH the next day.

The only thing we are missing is "Of course I fired him, I didn't want to get caught".

Reply to this post

Response to Pluvious (Reply #37)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 08:47 PM

Honeycombe8 (37,648 posts)

70. This thread is not about Comey. nt

Reply to this post

Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #70)

Fri Jun 16, 2017, 01:27 AM

Pluvious (3,626 posts)

73. This thread is about obstruction, firing Comey was defiantly obstruction of justice

Think about it

Reply to this post

Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #23)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:53 PM

thesquanderer (11,571 posts)

57. Good point. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Response to thesquanderer (Reply #21)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:26 AM

Saviolo (3,180 posts)

28. Makes no different if an investigation was actually obstructed

Here's some information from a lawyer on the meaning of the term:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029175368

It doesn't matter if Coats "felt" pressured or if there was anything actually obstructed. If Trump asked them to intervene, it is obstruction of justice.

Reply to this post

Response to Saviolo (Reply #28)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:37 PM

Eyeball_Kid (7,196 posts)

54. Correct.

Reply to this post

Response to thesquanderer (Reply #21)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:31 AM

alcibiades_mystery (36,437 posts)

31. "therefore no obstruction occurred"

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:44 AM

Honeycombe8 (37,648 posts)

22. Old news. Coats has already testified about it before Congress.

He takes the position that he was not pressured to do anything, and he didn't feel pressured, and he did in fact not do anything.

The other intel officer or advisor who also testified at the same time about the same thing, also said what Coats said.

As I recall, they wouldn't confirm or deny or talk about what Trump had said to them. Same thing Sessions did.

Reply to this post

Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #22)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:04 PM

KingCharlemagne (7,908 posts)

47. If Trump asked Coats to intervene, Trump was obstructing

justice. Whether that is old news lies, I suppose, in the eye of the beholder. The WaPo story is dated yesterday, though.

Reply to this post

Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #22)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 02:15 PM

Patterson (1,468 posts)

59. I doubt if it matters what Coates "felt" or did.

Reply to this post

Response to Patterson (Reply #59)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 08:46 PM

Honeycombe8 (37,648 posts)

69. True enough. But he wouldn't confirm or deny what Trump had said to him.

Neither would the other guy.

The point being...they don't want to get involved in an obstruction of justice issue. Also, they were not fired when they didn't do whatever it was that Trump asked them to do, like Comey was.

Odd...that they don't want to call Trump on trying to influence the investigation.

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:09 AM

liberal N proud (59,682 posts)

24. How can the fucking republicans continue to ignore this?

Not without being in violation of their oath to the constitution.

Reply to this post

Response to liberal N proud (Reply #24)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:24 AM

All-In (312 posts)

27. Their Oath Is To Billionaires

Who write them checks.

And fund the 100 conservative organizations that push them forward.

All the way to hell.

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:23 AM

MGKrebs (8,138 posts)

26. Trump probably really didn't understand that he was breaking the law,

BECAUSE HE DIDN'T PAY ATTENTION IN HIS ETHICS BRIEFINGS.
Dumbass.

Reply to this post

Response to MGKrebs (Reply #26)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:40 AM

Enoki33 (1,520 posts)

35. He knew exactly what he was doing. It is what he has done

his entire life. His miscalculation was based on the fact that he has always dealt with less principled individuals.

Reply to this post

Response to Enoki33 (Reply #35)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:52 AM

MGKrebs (8,138 posts)

39. That's what I mean though. In the business world the boss "leaning on" a subordinate

is normal day to day behavior. An idiot who wasn't prepared to operate in this arena just wouldn't understand it was wrong. Or at least no wrong enough to warrant more than a warning from somebody.
In the business world you do something wrong and you usually get a letter first, and then a fine and then you move on.

Reply to this post

Response to Enoki33 (Reply #35)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:41 PM

Eyeball_Kid (7,196 posts)

56. Trumpy's always had enough money to buy off anyone. Except for now.

America's Grifters. The best of the best, in the White House.

Reply to this post

Response to MGKrebs (Reply #26)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:41 AM

onetexan (11,734 posts)

36. oh yes he was well aware

and deliberately did so thinking because he is so bold GOPs will leave him alone and what he did won't have any consequences.

Reply to this post

Response to MGKrebs (Reply #26)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 12:31 PM

Bernardo de La Paz (44,791 posts)

41. The White House REFUSED ethics briefings. He didn't even give himself the chance to pay attention.

Willful carelessness.

Rank amateurishness.

Arrogant ignorance.

Republican President Trump.

Reply to this post

Response to Bernardo de La Paz (Reply #41)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 02:20 PM

MGKrebs (8,138 posts)

61. Oh jeez, that's right. And now he'll claim ignorance

since he didn't get the briefings.
He's a slippery one, that Trumpy.
A life of scamming and eventually it just becomes intuitive.

Reply to this post

Response to MGKrebs (Reply #61)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 06:21 PM

Bernardo de La Paz (44,791 posts)

66. His scamming has gone beyond intuitive. It is now reflexive. He can't help himself. . . . . nt

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 11:35 AM

procon (15,805 posts)

32. Did Flynn give Trump an ultimatum?

Picture something like this: "You better get me outta this, Donald, or I'm gonna tell all and take you down with me!"

That would sure explain why Trump is so frantic to quash the investigation.

Reply to this post

Response to procon (Reply #32)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 12:06 PM

Doitnow (1,103 posts)

40. Gang members stick together-----until they don't.

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 12:40 PM

FenwayDonkey (68 posts)

42. Coats is not a career Intelligence person he's a career GOPer.

If anyone will lie under oath it will be him.

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:12 PM

Grammy23 (5,749 posts)

49. Honest question here.

If tRump asked any of them (Coats, Comey, etc) to make the investigation go away, even if he asked nicely/sweetly, isn't that still an attempt at obstruction of justice? If a guy goes in a bank, attempts a robbery but ultimately leaves empty handed, isn't he still guilty of attempted bank robbery? Success at the crime is not a prerequisite to being charged with a crime.

Is my logic flawed?

Reply to this post

Response to Grammy23 (Reply #49)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:18 PM

KingCharlemagne (7,908 posts)

50. Thinking back to Watergate, once Nixon ordered Haldeman and Ehrlichman to

tell the CIA to obstruct the FBI, obstruction occurred whether the CIA actually obstructed the FBI or refused to obey. John Dean made the allegation, Nixon denied it, but the tapes corroborated Dean's allegations and were the final evidentiary nail in Tricky Dick's coffin.

IANAL, though.

Reply to this post

Response to Grammy23 (Reply #49)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:36 PM

hughee99 (16,113 posts)

53. Doesn't it depend on the crime and what was actually done?

You don't get charged with Murder if no one died, but there are other charges you may be subject to. If you walk into the bank with the intention to rob it, chicken out, and leave, are you still guilty of attempted bank robbery? If Trump had asked a Mall Santa to make the investigation go away, would that be obstruction of justice?

Reply to this post

Response to Grammy23 (Reply #49)

Fri Jun 16, 2017, 08:45 AM

Tanuki (14,239 posts)

76. It seems comparable to when someone tries to hire a "hit man" to commit a murder.

It's still a serious crime, even if the presumed hit man is an undercover FBI agent and nobody got killed. Interesting discussion here:

https://www.quora.com/If-someone-hired-a-hitman-to-kill-someone-who-goes-to-prison-the-hitman-or-the-person-who-hired-them

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:28 PM

MFM008 (19,698 posts)

51. And the maggot

And his minions are busy undermining the special council so when they release their finding his idiot supporters will ignore it.

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:39 PM

MedusaX (1,129 posts)

55. Mueller allowed Coates & Rogers to GLOMAR to support comey's testimony...but kgop sat on their hands

And played tiddlywinks instead of taking action to impeach
So now we have the drip drip of more supporting evidence -
clearly stated
rather than implied...

Telling house KGOP to wake the fuck up & do their job!

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 05:00 PM

Justice (7,062 posts)

63. Did he think Trump was joking? Seriously not believable that never felt pressured.

Why would you tell associates about it if it were no big deal.

Reply to this post

Response to Justice (Reply #63)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 06:16 PM

KingCharlemagne (7,908 posts)

65. If you start by assuming that every word that leaves a Republican's

lips is a flat-out lie, things that don't make sense at first quickly snap into focus. To wit, Coats actually DID feel pressured. Survival in Trumpland means you lie to protect your boss.

Reply to this post

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Fri Jun 16, 2017, 09:28 AM

Catherine Vincent (34,366 posts)

77. Coates

it sounds like Coates is trying to protect Trump saying he wasn't pressured and it was no big deal.

BOOM! Trump allegedly asked Director of National Intelligence Coats

1. Of course, he did! He asked Rogers as well. Trump knows the deeper they dig, the more he's...

44. Trump couldnt get Coats or Rogers (or Comey) to do his bidding. So

62. But he didn't 'pressure' him.

68. which proves he knew what he was asking would be wrong

75. I'm sure Trump has extensive experience in making threats and illegal suggestions

71. Who can judge what "pressure" is? Pressure in this case is asking while being the POTUS!

2. that is why Coats discussed how he "felt"....

12. What one "feels" is subjective....

43. Good point. - nt

17. Nor does he wish to lose his job

18. He wouldn't go to jail

19. that was what I meant to imply

3. has Comey

10. Yes he did

14. They might not have done Trump's bidding, but they were in contempt of

30. Thank you

4. From Coats wouldn't answer this in public we knew the answer

5. Prepare for the now famous "locker room talk" defense

6. The spin:

7. he was just asking for his friend.

48. Hahaha

58. Say Dan, Bannon and I have a bet, maybe you can settle it for us. n/t

8. hahahahaa Kellyanne's eyeballs might pop right out of her head from the pressure on this one *grin*

9. That dog won't hunt.

33. Oh I'm not saying it will hunt

13. It was a hypothetical question. Info for the screenplay he's writing...

15. And once again, Ryan will probably ask us to believe that Comrade Fatass

25. Yup. That's already what one of the sons said after Comey's testimony.

34. Was that Uday or Qusay?

38. Beats me. I can't tell the difference.

64. They always look to me like home invaders with stockings pulled over their head.

72. LOL, I never realized that before.

52. RICO! RICO!

67. Hope they'll be putting copies of Prison Times through cell bars. (n/t)

45. LOL Ah, the infamous "hypothetically speaking" defense! :) -nt

11. Do we know if Coats or Rogers actually asked Comey to back off? Does that make them guilty as well?

16. I believe Comey.

29. Did Comey testify that Coats or Rogers told him to back off?

46. I believe Comey testified they did not. Cant swear to it, though - nt

20. so that's the head of the FBI and the head of the DNI are asked to derail an investigation....

74. Simply the *appearance* of that happening cost HRC the presidency.

21. re: "HOLY SHIT! Trump asked Coats to obstruct justice."

23. Obstruction does not require that the obstruction was successful, I believe.

37. Is there ambiguity in firing Comey, as being obstruction ?

60. There was ambiguity right up to the point that the idiot told Lester Holt why he fired him.

70. This thread is not about Comey. nt

73. This thread is about obstruction, firing Comey was defiantly obstruction of justice

57. Good point. (n/t)

28. Makes no different if an investigation was actually obstructed

54. Correct.

31. "therefore no obstruction occurred"

22. Old news. Coats has already testified about it before Congress.

47. If Trump asked Coats to intervene, Trump was obstructing

59. I doubt if it matters what Coates "felt" or did.

69. True enough. But he wouldn't confirm or deny what Trump had said to him.

24. How can the fucking republicans continue to ignore this?

27. Their Oath Is To Billionaires

26. Trump probably really didn't understand that he was breaking the law,

35. He knew exactly what he was doing. It is what he has done

39. That's what I mean though. In the business world the boss "leaning on" a subordinate

56. Trumpy's always had enough money to buy off anyone. Except for now.

36. oh yes he was well aware

41. The White House REFUSED ethics briefings. He didn't even give himself the chance to pay attention.

61. Oh jeez, that's right. And now he'll claim ignorance

66. His scamming has gone beyond intuitive. It is now reflexive. He can't help himself. . . . . nt

32. Did Flynn give Trump an ultimatum?

40. Gang members stick together-----until they don't.

42. Coats is not a career Intelligence person he's a career GOPer.

49. Honest question here.

50. Thinking back to Watergate, once Nixon ordered Haldeman and Ehrlichman to

53. Doesn't it depend on the crime and what was actually done?

76. It seems comparable to when someone tries to hire a "hit man" to commit a murder.

51. And the maggot

55. Mueller allowed Coates & Rogers to GLOMAR to support comey's testimony...but kgop sat on their hands

63. Did he think Trump was joking? Seriously not believable that never felt pressured.

65. If you start by assuming that every word that leaves a Republican's

77. Coates

78. I agree. - nt

8. hahahahaa Kellyanne's eyeballs might pop right out of her head from the pressure on this one grin

74. Simply the appearance of that happening cost HRC the presidency.