NSA, ODNI, FBI and DOJ Tell Congress No Investigation Interference by President Trump…

The MSM attempts to construct a narrative about President Trump interfering with intelligence agencies and investigative agencies took a big hit today as Mike Rogers (NSA), Dan Coats (ODNI), Andrew McCabe (FBI) and Rod Rosenstein (DOJ) each took turns telling the Senate Intelligence Committee that President Trump never attempted to interfere with their efforts.

The entire construct of the “impeding with an investigation” narrative, part of the ‘muh vast Russian Conspiracy’, begins to collapse.

This entry was posted in AG Jeff Sessions, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Dept Of Justice, Jeff Sessions, media bias, President Trump, Russia, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

121 Responses to NSA, ODNI, FBI and DOJ Tell Congress No Investigation Interference by President Trump…

  1. calbear84 says:

    Pretty nice to be under fire when you’ve got nothing to hide! MAGA.

    Liked by 26 people

    • Mike says:

      The truth is that Obama, Hillary, the Deep Staters, the Dems and Rinos have been interfering heavily with the formation of the Trump administration, attempting a slow motion coup. Many of these turkeys are clear enemies of the Constitution.

      They are so lucky to live in the remnants of a once free country. In many times and places their heads would be front and center, outside on a pike.

      Liked by 19 people

      • Kaco says:

        Including my own senator, Portman, but we all knew that. I got a response email from him yesterday. He praised Comey, believes in Russia interfering in our election and believes it needs to be fully investigated, and believes in further sanctions against Russia until not only Crimea is given up but also they stop supporting Assad.

        Liked by 2 people

        • calbear84 says:

          Look in the dictionary under “RINO” and you’ll see Portman’s picture. He’s safe in 2018, but maybe Josh Mandel can knock out Sherrod Brown.

          Liked by 1 person

          • WVPatriot says:

            Tried that in 2012…pray for a lightening bolt to take out Sherrod (Lenin) Brown.

            WE need a righteous and educated population to maintain our Republic.

            Liked by 2 people

          • With almost every post I made in 2015-2016, I begged for a true Patriot to come forward and oppose Portman. He has the COC backing and ran without any significant opposition, other than our horrible former Gov. Strickland. He sends me replys that never even address the reason I wrote to him, just a form e-mail touting his work with Lake Erie. An original (GA island) and continuing Never-Trumper. At least Brown actually responded to my e-mails, I’ll give him that. I’m not totally convinced about Mandel, after seeing him at Ryan rallies, but he never did speak at any rally I attended. He seems to run under any radar, mostly silent. We need true reinforcement for President Trump, no more RINOS. People seem to like Brown, but I pray for help for Trump. I hope Mandel is a Patriot. Renacci needs to be replaced, too, touring NE OH with his “good friend, Paul Ryan,” but I heard rumors that he is considering a run for Governor. Ugh!

            Liked by 1 person

            • calbear84 says:

              It’s all going to change now that we have our POTUS, and kudos to Ohio for going MAGA!

              Liked by 1 person

            • Kaco says:

              Renacci is my congressman, he IS running for governor. He early on supported the Repeal/Replace that didn’t get a vote, but then at a phone town hall he says one has to be in Congress for 20 years to have a voice.

              Mandell, I don’t know, I remember not being impressed with him several years ago, I had voted for someone else in that primary. He has been a chosen one from the beginning, endorsed by the RNC.

              At any rate, I will not be voting for Brown or any Dem.

              Like

            • Kaco says:

              I have to add, I met Patriot Lady who sometimes posts on here, she’s in my county. She campaigned for Tom Connors, who was an independent running on an America First platform. I couldn’t vote for Portman, I know Sundance said to do it, but I was so mad, I also found out my husband voted for Connors as well. I knew Portman was going to win, though.

              I didn’t know Renacci was such good buddies with Ryan, that doesn’t sit well with me either.

              What county are you in?

              Like

          • setup2100 says:

            That is the SAD he is safe??? Why? Because the people will not primary him and will not vote for a DEM just to get him removed?? And they everyone complains how much of a RINO basta*d he is. And one thinks the SWAMP will be drained with thinking like that. !

            Like

    • All American Snowflake says:

      “Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at and missed.” ~Winston Churchill

      Liked by 9 people

  2. wodiej says:

    Good grief this is all so wasteful. They just began the investigation and already President Trump is being accused of interfering with it. To hell with them and lets get on with getting the job done.

    Liked by 19 people

    • Agreed. I often wonder how much taxpayer money is being spent on all this humbug. The politicians create chaos and use our money to sort it out and pretend to look for the truth.

      Liked by 12 people

      • It will be hundreds of millions and staffers will have to lawyer up as well… costing them tens of thousands just because they might have gotten an email about one Muh Russia thing from someone. It bankrupts the staffers.

        Liked by 3 people

      • MK says:

        All part of the Dem’s plan. Hammer at nothing for two years, control the narrative and hope the best at mid terms.

        As long as the Don sticks to his promises, build wall, control immigration, laying a strong foundation so small business can jump start the economy, and wack terrorist, we’ll hold the line.

        Liked by 11 people

      • dbw1776 says:

        The only thing I disagree with in your statement is that they just began this investigation. This witch hunt has been going on since before president Trump was inaugurated. We the deplorable’s need to start calling Congress every day telling them to get to work and stop this reverse McCarthyism that they are employing against our president so they could sit on their asses and block President Trumps/The American Peoples agenda.

        Liked by 7 people

        • BebeTarget says:

          I still do not trust ADM Rogers . . . . “to the best of my recollection” and “not that I can recall” are weasel words, especially coming from a military man. His answers should have been forceful, unequivocal and firm in his denial. He was the NSA director under Obama when a lot of this unmasking took place. Why is he still in this position. Obama allowed him to retain his job. If he weren’t aboard the Obama train he would have been thrown off. Weasel words are used for a reason. An honorable man would not need them.

          Like

          • deanbrh says:

            Bebe, but
            Rogers did stick to his guns, though they hammered at him 6 times to tell them if Trump had ever questioned them about the investigation. Rogers was VERY clear in saying he had NEVER “felt pressured” to talk about the investigation, which didn’t satisfy them. ” I don’t care about your feelings” King ranted! “I want to know if he questioned you about the investigation.”

            Like

    • chojun says:

      President Trump is himself not a swamp creature; ergo this gives him tremendous amounts of leverage against the swamp.

      During the primary season we saw the effect of this when the other challengers were not able to meet Trump head-on. Ted Cruz only represented a threat insofar as the anti-Trump establishment finally coalesced around him to ensure a Trump defeat and a Clinton win.

      With the swamp wholly unable to stop the Trump juggernaut (Trump’s true power is God and the People), which is driving the direction of the country to a more foundational, traditional track (based on constitutional republicanism), they have allowed and exploited this Russian investigation in an attempt to gain some kind of leverage over Trump to manipulate him into accepting their legislative priorities (which is driven by lobby and special interests).

      Spoiler alert: They will not succeed.

      Liked by 8 people

    • Howie says:

      The Uniparty Creed

      Liked by 6 people

    • Pinot Guy says:

      Maybe we should start back-charging the various MSM for false reporting in these circumstances. That might precipitate them checking their “sources” more carefully if they had skin in the game, so to speak.

      Liked by 8 people

    • larry outlaw says:

      That lop eared Rubio,what a idiot!

      Liked by 5 people

    • Paco Loco says:

      Man, Rubio has huge ears! This is such a waste …it’s all about “Gotcha” and sound bites for the press by. SIckening display of partisan politics.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Atticus says:

    Oh, what a disappointment for the Dems, Never Trumpers and other Swamp Ilk.

    Liked by 4 people

  4. Sentinel says:

    What was the meaning of the interchange where the intel chiefs refused to answer King’s questions? I’m confused even as to the nature of what he was asking.

    Like

    • Deplorable Canuck says:

      I think they were refusing to answer questions regarding the content of discussions with the President. Classified of course. Dem’s didn’t like that!

      Liked by 3 people

      • deanbrh says:

        “Dems didn’t like that” is the understatement of the day. It made them apoplectic, and King is the worst of them all. No, Kamala Harris is…No Collins ….she has Parkinsons, as does Feinstein. They should be forced to quit and go home. I was outraged at the rudeness of every congress person. They are sooooooo determined to sink the President. Where were the Republicans? Are there only Democrats allowed to speak, besides Rubio, who is a little kid trying to act big?

        Like

    • Martin Adamson says:

      He was truckling in classified info which they refused to confirm or deny.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. mikebrezzze says:

    It’s obvious to me that the democrats are functioning under the premise “prosecute him before he prosecutes the hell out of us”! Their underwear are thoroughly spoiled after Reality Winner’s arrest!!!

    Liked by 15 people

  6. mikebrezzze says:

    It’s obvious to me that the democrats are functioning under the premise “prosecute him before he prosecutes the hell out of us”! Their underwear are thoroughly spoiled after Reality Winner’s arrest!!!

    Liked by 5 people

    • jonvil says:

      Sundance posted an article yesterday about Amazon, I think it was “Depends on Demand – Delivered Direct to Your Doorstep…”. The program must be for these folks 🙂

      Liked by 4 people

  7. Lunatic Fringe says:

    Foolish person in my office is announcing to everyone who will listen that this is all lies and had the testimony been in closed sessions they would have all testified to the opposite.

    Now that I know he’s a mind reader I’m steering clear.

    Liked by 12 people

    • That is why I work from home. I don’t have to deal with idiots…unless I go to HQ in CA, but then again all of us at C level are on the right. I had a sales manager say he wanted to hire someone in Austin. Told him to make sure he isn’t a liberal. Nope he likes guns and Trump. I said hire him.

      Liked by 13 people

      • Wend says:

        I’m retired but was working from home before. It’s great when you have the infrastructure.

        Liked by 1 person

      • akearn says:

        Me, too, Mad. I loathe going into the tech companies in CA, full of nothing but moronic libs. One I’m forced to visit has CNN on in the break rooms, and you should’ve seen the faces and heard the sighs during the Paris Climate announcement. A person at another company lamented, “My God, the world is in disarray. We’ll have no ozone, no allies, no healthcare, no food stamps … he’s a cyborg!” Such idiocy from presumed “educated and enlightened” people. What a farce, how stupid they are. I’ve resolved to just enjoy laughing at them. WINNING!!!!

        Liked by 7 people

      • Good choice. Your new employee with conversative credentials will give you much better results.

        Liked by 1 person

  8. Mikayla825 says:

    I half expected to see “middle-school girl” tears and kicking fits by the dems this morning.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Bull Durham says:

    Watch out for Dan Coats in private sessions. He’s a total traitor with no loyalty to POTUS. He’ll throw dirt in private.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Mikayla825 says:

      Is he the guy sitting next to Rogers?

      Like

    • chojun says:

      My sense is that all of these men are only willing to discuss in a non-public hearing because of the political nature of the hearing. When the public isn’t privy and the cameras aren’t rolling, only the facts will be discussed.

      And there are no facts in the Trump-Russia case because there’s no ‘there’ there. This is why some of the committee members expressed disappointment – their search for a non-ethereal foundation for the Russia claims continues unrewarding and futile.

      Like

  10. Eric Kennedy says:

    This is good, but the whole thing makes me sick. I feel like half the country is completely gone. My dad told me today that my idiot mother is donating $$$ to Reality Winner’s defense fund. Ugh….

    Liked by 6 people

  11. Brian L says:

    Getting flak aren’t ya POTUS?Good thing you got an impenetrable shield of truth.

    Liked by 4 people

  12. Anne says:

    Comey released the statement he will make tomorrow before the Senate: I have not yet read it completely but the media report that he confirms Trump has asked him to abandon the investigation on Flynn:

    https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-jcomey-060817.pdf

    Like

    • gandiji says:

      He didn’t ORDER him to cease; he only asked him if he would do so. When Comey refused, that was the end of it. That was not obstruction of justice; a president may
      ask that an investigation be suspended for the good of the country.

      In the meantime, I await the investigations into the Clinton Foundation, Haiti, Benghazi,
      Hillary’s server, Abedin, Weiner, Lois Lerner and the IRS, Loretta Lynch, etc. etc.

      And I want those investigations public and covered live.

      Liked by 12 people

      • gandiji says:

        Did I leave out Seth Rich, the DNC, the Podestas, and pizzagate?

        How about the kids killed in Arkansas near Mena because they apparently stumbled onto a deep state operation importing drugs? (Was Gov. Clinton in the know? Did he obstruct justice in that instance?)

        Liked by 8 people

    • Anne says:

      Extract:

      January 27 Dinner
      The President and I had dinner on Friday, January 27 at 6:30 pm in the Green Room at the White House.

      The President began by asking me whether I wanted to stay on as FBI Director, which I found strange because he had already told me twice in earlier conversations that he hoped I would stay, and I had assured him that I intended to. He said that lots of people wanted my job and, given the abuse I had taken during the previous year, he would understand if I wanted to walk away.

      My instincts told me that the one-on-one setting, and the pretense that this was our first discussion about my position, meant the dinner was, at least in part, an effort to have me ask for my job and create some sort of patronage relationship. That concerned me greatly, given the FBI’s traditionally independent status in the executive branch.

      I replied that I loved my work and intended to stay and serve out my tenyear term as Director. And then, because the set-up made me uneasy, I added that I was not “reliable” in the way politicians use that word, but he could always count on me to tell him the truth. I added that I was not on anybody’s side politically and could not be counted on in the traditional political sense, a stance I said was in his best interest as the President.
      A few moments later, the President said, “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.” I didn’t move, speak, or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed. We simply looked at each other in silence. The conversation then moved on, but he returned to the subject near the end of our dinner.
      (…)
      He then said, “I need loyalty.” I replied, “You will always get honesty from me.” He paused and then said, “That’s what I want, honest loyalty.” I paused, and then said, “You will get that from me.” As I wrote in the memo I created immediately after the dinner, it is possible we understood the phrase “honest loyalty” differently, but I decided it wouldn’t be productive to push it further. The term – honest loyalty – had helped end a very awkward conversation and my explanations had made clear what he should expect.
      During the dinner, the President returned to the salacious material I had briefed him about on January 6, and, as he had done previously, expressed his disgust for the allegations and strongly denied them. He said he was considering ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn’t happen. I replied that he should give that careful thought because it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally, which we weren’t, and because it was very difficult to prove a negative. He said he would think about it and asked me to think about it.

      As was my practice for conversations with President Trump, I wrote a detailed memo about the dinner immediately afterwards and shared it with the senior leadership team of the FBI.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Anne says:

        “the salacious material” is the golden shower report.

        Liked by 1 person

      • FL_GUY says:

        Sounds like a fairy tale to me.

        Liked by 1 person

      • gandiji says:

        “As was my practice for conversations with President Trump, I wrote a detailed memo about the dinner immediately afterwards and shared it with the senior leadership team of the FBI.”

        And I assume Trump has a tape of the conversation (so the only record isn’t Comey’s “memo”).

        Liked by 2 people

        • Dehbashi says:

          Then the first question should be asked is if he did the same with the Won. If not that shows his political nature because why only this practice with President Trump and not the other jack hole

          Like

      • Sylvia Avery says:

        “He then said, “I need loyalty.” I replied, “You will always get honesty from me.” He paused and then said, “That’s what I want, honest loyalty.” I paused, and then said, “You will get that from me.” As I wrote in the memo I created immediately after the dinner, it is possible we understood the phrase “honest loyalty” differently, but I decided it wouldn’t be productive to push it further. The term – honest loyalty – had helped end a very awkward conversation and my explanations had made clear what he should expect.”

        What a load of waffle. It strikes me as very passive aggressive. If Comey didn’t want to say I will be loyal, he needed to make that clear. So what if it was “awkward.” He isn’t the a Duchess at a tea party, he is the head of the FBI. What a prig.

        Liked by 3 people

        • dayallaxeded says:

          Methinks the ladyman doth protest too much! If Homey were really “honest” and “independent,” he wouldn’t have to repeatedly say so–his actions would show that without equivocation. The fact is that 99 and 44/100s% of the time, when people do this kind of self-serving write-up, it’s to cover for lies and misdeeds. That is quite obviously what Homey is and has been doing for a long time. His failure to jar Pickles was, even without his long history of desecrating the law, his oaths, and the public trust to aid the Klintoon Krime Kartel, proof positive that Homey is a crooked shill who deserves, himself, to be prosecuted and jailed for obstruction of justice and malfeasance in office.

          Liked by 3 people

    • Anne says:

      Another extract:

      February 14 Oval Office Meeting

      On February 14, I went to the Oval Office for a scheduled counterterrorism briefing of the President.
      (…)
      When the door by the grandfather clock closed, and we were alone, the President began by saying, “I want to talk about Mike Flynn.” Flynn had resigned the previous day. The President began by saying Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong in speaking with the Russians, but he had to let him go because he had misled the Vice President. He added that he had other concerns about Flynn, which he did not then specify.

      The President then made a long series of comments about the problem with leaks of classified information – a concern I shared and still share. (…)

      The President then returned to the topic of Mike Flynn, saying, “He is a good guy and has been through a lot.” He repeated that Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong on his calls with the Russians, but had misled the Vice President. He then said, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” I replied only that “he is a good guy.” (In fact, I had a positive experience dealing with Mike Flynn when he was a colleague as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency at the beginning of my term at FBI.) I did not say I would “let this go.”

      I immediately prepared an unclassified memo of the conversation about Flynn and discussed the matter with FBI senior leadership. I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December. I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign. I could be wrong, but I took him to be focusing on what had just happened with Flynn’s departure and the controversy around his account of his phone calls. Regardless, it was very concerning, given the FBI’s role as an independent investigative agency.

      The FBI leadership team agreed with me that it was important not to infect the investigative team with the President’s request, which we did not intend to abide. We also concluded that, given that it was a one-on-one conversation, there was nothing available to corroborate my account. We concluded it made little sense to report it to Attorney General Sessions, who we expected would likely recuse himself from involvement in Russia-related investigations. (He did so two weeks later.) The Deputy Attorney General’s role was then filled in an acting capacity by a United States Attorney, who would also not be long in the role.

      After discussing the matter, we decided to keep it very closely held, resolving to figure out what to do with it down the road as our investigation progressed. The investigation moved ahead at full speed, with none of the investigative team members – or the Department of Justice lawyers supporting them – aware of the President’s request.

      Like

      • prettiestone says:

        The way Comey portrays Pres. Trump, it’s obvious to me that Comey views him as the enemy. It’s revealing how much of a political animal Comey is. He’s so cagey.

        Liked by 9 people

    • Anne says:

      Extract:

      March 30 Phone Call
      On the morning of March 30, the President called me at the FBI. He described the Russia investigation as “a cloud” that was impairing his ability to act on behalf of the country. He said he had nothing to do with Russia, had not been involved with hookers in Russia, and had always assumed he was being recorded when in Russia. He asked what we could do to “lift the cloud.” I responded that we were investigating the matter as quickly as we could, and that there would be great benefit, if we didn’t find anything, to our having done the work well. He agreed, but then re-emphasized the problems this was causing him.

      (…)

      I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating President Trump. I reminded him I had previously told him that. He repeatedly told me, “We need to get that fact out.” (I did not tell the President that the FBI and the Department of Justice had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an open case on President Trump for a number of reasons, most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change.)

      The President went on to say that if there were some “satellite” associates of his who did something wrong, it would be good to find that out, but that he hadn’t done anything wrong and hoped I would find a way to get it out that we weren’t investigating him.

      (…)

      He finished by stressing “the cloud” that was interfering with his ability to make deals for the country and said he hoped I could find a way to get out that he wasn’t being investigated. I told him I would see what we could do, and that we would do our investigative work well and as quickly as we could.

      Immediately after that conversation, I called Acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente (AG Sessions had by then recused himself on all Russiarelated matters), to report the substance of the call from the President, and said I would await his guidance. I did not hear back from him before the President called me again two weeks later.

      Like

    • Anne says:

      Extract:

      April 11 Phone Call
      On the morning of April 11, the President called me and asked what I had done about his request that I “get out” that he is not personally under investigation. I replied that I had passed his request to the Acting Deputy Attorney General, but I had not heard back. He replied that “the cloud” was getting in the way of his ability to do his job. He said that perhaps he would have his people reach out to the Acting Deputy Attorney General. I said that was the way his request should be handled. I said the White House Counsel should contact the leadership of DOJ to make the request, which was the traditional channel.

      He said he would do that and added, “Because I have been very loyal to you, very loyal; we had that thing you know.” I did not reply or ask him what he meant by “that thing.” I said only that the way to handle it was to have the White House Counsel call the Acting Deputy Attorney General. He said that was what he would do and the call ended.

      That was the last time I spoke with President Trump.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. fred says:

    CNN will make you laugh hard.. They can spin a yarn. They are quoting whom when they tell these strories about what Trump said and to whom. Who are the sources. Fiction that’s who……..Trumps just says I nefer said that. End over nothing more to say. Besides no crime of obstruction here but nice try.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. keeler says:

    Time to roll out the nets around CNN headquarters.

    Liked by 3 people

  15. KBR says:

    Rubio seemed to conflate questions about the current administration and “any/all previous administrations.”

    Sounds like he wants to keep Obama administration including Hillary, from ever being accused of that which the current president is being accused, by inference and by the MSM on a daily basis.

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Johnny says:

    Remember the swamps objective is to keep the russia ball bouncing. That is all.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Question Everything says:

      BINGO!
      Run out the clock is the only play they have and they are doing a good job of using it so far.

      Like

  17. rayvandune says:

    Did not Comey testify several months ago that he had NOT been interfered with?

    Liked by 2 people

  18. BobbiD says:

    There is this article in Breitbart…

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/06/judicial-watch-huma-abedin-emails-show-favors-clinton-foundation-donors/

    But in this article there is a TRUMP, but his name is EDDIE TRUMP and no relation to President Trump and was involved with Russia…

    Clinton aide and Weiner’s wife Huma Abedin connected State Department officials to a Russian cultural organization, per a request by Clinton Foundation donor, Eddie Trump (no relation to President Trump).

    So my question is this: Could it be that people wanted to bring President Trump so bad that they knew about this and made up stories hoping that this information didn’t get out???

    Liked by 2 people

  19. Howie says:

    Now to hang them all by noose’s.

    Liked by 2 people

  20. Questin Everything says:

    Maxine Waters next CNN interview:
    “Impeachment!!! Because Trump did not collude or obstruct!!!….psssst hey Anderson what does collude and obstruct means???” OH! Well he must be impeached now more than ever!!!…..right?

    Liked by 2 people

  21. cav16 says:

    These Senate and House hearings are a Joke and waste of time! Did any of these Clowns demand a Special Prosecutor when it was revealed the ole drunk hag mishandled Top Secret Information on her unsecured home computer? Clinton Foundation? No, they are as corrupt as she is and are scared to death of losing their K Street and COC backing! Absolutely disgusting!

    Liked by 6 people

  22. David says:

    PRESIDENT TRUMP’S LEGAL POWER TO SPEAK TO JAMES COMEY AND ROSENSTEIN.

    The FBI Director and the Attorney General works for the President of the United States. Therefore, the President is allowed to have open discussions with Comey or Rosenstein regarding any matter. The criminal act is only when the President applies pressure (intent) to influence a criminal investigation. This intent is a very high Legal Bar.

    Therefore, the Democrats, Congressional investigation committee, gang of eight, or the Media should not take this “Dust” and create a legal non-necessary discussion that will turn into a fake political explosion.

    James Comey, Mike Rogers and Dan Coats confirmed there was no Criminal Acts of Obstruction of Justice; President Trump should declare Executive Privilege for Admiral Mike Rogers and DNI Dan Coats. The reason is that they will take every word and try to build a circumstantial case based upon dust. The press will continue to take the Dust and create more fake news.

    President Trump has not created any Obstruction of Justice…this Obstruction Story has Ended.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. StormyeyesC says:

    All semantics. The legal definition of a crime is all that matters

    ” a person who “corruptly or by threats of force, or by threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice” is guilty of the crime of obstruction of justice. ”

    Under that definition, DJT committed no crime. What the Prez spoke to these guys is of no consequence if he committed no crime.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Howie says:

      Would a pardon be obstruction? NO. How could the president, who has absolute pardon power, obstruct the silly ongoing forever political scam when he can end it with the stroke of a pen. I call GLOBALONEY!

      Liked by 3 people

  24. citizen817 says:

    What a sham. This entire Congressional dog and pony show is merely to give the appearance that our elected officials are actually working for us, when in fact they are working to provide cover for their IC cronies.

    Liked by 6 people

  25. rsanchez1990 says:

    Al Green should just tear up those articles of impeachment before he embarrasses himself further.

    Like

    • nimrodman says:

      “The subpoenas call for the information to be delivered by Wednesday, June 7, 2017.”

      That’s today. I wonder if it was.

      Like

  26. Sylvia Avery says:

    I was amazed by Admiral Rogers’ performance. Before he always seemed a little sleepy. He was ON FIRE today. He came across like he was pissed! Lots of energy and emotion and ready to spit in their eyes! It was great!

    Liked by 2 people

  27. tsmifjones says:

    We the people want an investigation into this fraudulent, traitorous coup of the President of the United States by ALL involved. We want a special prosecutor

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s