Posted on 06/08/2017 7:28:23 PM PDT by MaxistheBest
Former FBI Director James Comey is now in a game of legal chicken with the Trump administration. Comey’s testimony (which, in case you missed it, is being given under oath before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence) and President Donald Trump’s repeated denials of having said anything at all about Michael Flynn, as well as seeking loyalty from Comey cannot both be true. Let’s do a quick side-by-side, shall we?
In mid-May, Trump sat down with Jeanine Pirro of Fox News for an interview. When Pirro asked Trump, “The New York Times is selling that you asked Comey whether or not you had his loyalty was possibly inappropriate…. Did you ask that question?” Trump responded, “No, I didn’t, but I don’t’ think it would be a bad question to ask.”
Trump is also reportedly still denying that he asked for loyalty, as well as Comey’s claim that Trump discussed the investigation of Michael Flynn, and expressed a desire for Comey to let Flynn go.
So if Trump is right, that means James Comey is lying under oath, also known as committing perjury. Here’s the applicable federal statute:
(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true;
Comey clearly took an oath. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is clearly a competent tribunal authorized to administer an oath. Comey gave both written and oral testimony. The only things up for discussion are: 1) whether Comey stated anything that he does not believe to be true; and 2) whether, if so, those things count as “any material matter.” Whether we believe James Comey or Donald Trump, I think we can all agree that testimony about private meetings between the FBI director and POTUS count as “any material matter.” Demands or pledges for loyalty, directions or acquiescence to back off an ongoing investigation, or the non-existence of such interactions is about as material as it gets. It all comes down to whether James Comey stated anything he does not believe to be true.
In some perjury cases, possible discrepancy between an accused’s perception of particular information and the actual truth behind that information is relevant. Witnesses aren’t expected to be perfect – they’re just expected to be honest. But in the showdown of Comey v. Trump, there’s no rational risk of interpretive differences making the difference. Either Trump asked Comey to drop the Flynn investigation or he didn’t. Either Trump asked Comey for loyalty or he didn’t. Either Comey’s written and spoken testimony is true, or he has committed perjury.
To prove Comey guilty of perjury, a prosecutor would need to introduce evidence that the conversations Comey detailed in his testimony did not, in fact, take place. As always, proving that something did not happen can be tricky. But “tricky” isn’t “impossible.” Perhaps the best evidence in such a case would be the tapes Trump threat-tweeted.
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump James Comey better hope that there are no "tapes" of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press! 8:26 AM - 12 May 2017
Of course, it’s unclear at best whether the Trump administration would pursue a federal prosecution of James Comey for perjury, even if supporting evidence did exist. However, if the giving of knowingly false testimony given before a Congressional committee by a former FBI-director doesn’t warrant prosecution, it’s tough to know what would. Your move, Mr. President.
I would ather see Sessions begin a collusion investigation into Comey, Lynch, Clinton and Obama.
WELL, WE TANNED HIS HIDE WHEN HE DIED AND THAT’S IT HANGIN’ ON THE SHED...
I agree...he opened that door pretty wide today.
“collusion investigation into Comey, Lynch, Clinton and Obama.”
It’s way past the time to play some serious offence on these hacks. Tie them up legally for years.
This is DJT’S bailiwick. Don’t play chicken with someone who has mastered the game.
LOCK HIM UP.
collusion is no crime - conspiracy to commit a crime is
Gents: Ok-so he took us for a ride. His actions were harmless(no effect). I say pardon him and thereby rattle the cages of the rats. More fun that way.
Tie me Comeyroo down, sport!
Tie me Comeyroo down.
Comey is like Wile E Coyote. After setting up an elaborate trap from Acme Corp, he sets it off and catches himself. Roadrunner then speeds past him with a, “beep, beep” (or parhaps in Trump’s case, “tweet, tweet”).
Trump would have to prove it if he wants to go down that path. I doubt he does.
Forget perjury. He admitted leaking confidential and secret information to the press with the stated goal to prompt an investigation. Leaking secret information and sedition, done deal, lock him up.
Well Done!....
Paging Jeff Sessions! We have been looking for the leakers and FBI director Comey just admitted he is one of them on national television.
Comey knows the definition of Trump's "Loyalty" now.....It's up to him what side he picks to go down in history with....."Oh Lordy!".............I "hope" he chooses wisely.....This could be "Bigly" for him.... (I suggest he channel his upbringing that he spoke so fondly today about.)
FRED???..is that you??
Tell me where I am crazy here...
You’re not the only fossil around here. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.