# Comey Memo: Trump Told Him - Shut Down Flynn Probe **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [May 16, 2017, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792 "2017-05-16T21:40:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 41
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/801 "2017-06-15T02:00:40Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > Nobody wants to be either the first or the last rat off the ship. The Russia sanctions vote today at 97-2 was pretty telling. This was the president’s own party telling their party leader that they don’t trust him to sell out the United States. I hadn’t heard about that yet. Very buoying news indeed. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/802 "2017-06-15T02:06:32Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > I hadn’t heard about that yet. Very buoying news indeed. 🙂 It specifically requires Congressional review for the president to change it. That’s not a vote of confidence! ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/803 "2017-06-15T02:12:11Z")
That said, the White house has apparently been trying to [weaken the sanctions](http://www.businessinsider.com/senate-russia-sanctions-trump-2017-6) for some unknown treason. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/804 "2017-06-15T02:13:15Z")
> [@Fair\_Rarity](#): > > Ok, let’s say Mueller finds sufficient cause for obstruction. What then? Do we think the GOP-led congress is going to do anything? Even with a 60% disapproval for Trump? > > I do take some small comfort in being right on this fucking orange idiot, but “I told you so” doesn’t change a damn thing. The 2018 mid-terms will be very interesting…they could turn into a referendum on impeachment. “Either get rid of this clown, or we’ll find someone who will.” ---
**Author:** ![psychobunny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/54ee81/32.png) [@psychobunny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychobunny)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/805 "2017-06-15T02:22:39Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > That said, the White house has apparently been trying to [weaken the sanctions](http://www.businessinsider.com/senate-russia-sanctions-trump-2017-6) for some unknown treason. I see what you did there. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/806 "2017-06-15T02:29:27Z")
> [@jsc1953](#): > > The 2018 mid-terms will be very interesting…they could turn into a referendum on impeachment. “Either get rid of this clown, or we’ll find someone who will.” The timing of this will be interesting. The GOP senate doesn’t have much to worry about right now-- their control of the senate is probably pretty safe. But if they lose the House, it’s a bad sign for them in 2020, especially since they really don’t know how bad this Trump scandal can get. Trump is of no use to the Senate if they lose the House. That’s why you see the Senate furiously trying to get something - anything - done on an Obamacare repeal. Mitch McConnell has been pounding the podium for 7 goddamn years about repealing Obamacare – and his congressional now very likely going to have to go back to his home districts and say that they’ve got nothing. Not to mention there are now legions of people who are finally speaking up and saying “Get your hands off my Obamacare!” I think the months between August and January will be critical for Trump, for several reasons. One, as mentioned, is that the Congress needs to pass some meaningful legislation, or at least be in the process of it, by August or early September. In the meantime, Trump had better hope that there isn’t more scandal between now and then, and that the economy holds. I don’t think they would wait until after 2018 to ditch Trump. For one thing, that’s too late to save their asses in congress, and for another, that’s too late for President Pence to gain footing for re-election. If it happens, I think it happens around the end of this year or early next. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/807 "2017-06-15T02:31:39Z")
> [@psychobunny](#): > > I see what you did there. Innocent typo. I swear. But not under oath. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/808 "2017-06-15T02:35:49Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > Innocent typo. I swear. But not under oath. You could always claim potential executive privilege for maybe-future executive privilege. I hear that works these days. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/809 "2017-06-15T03:20:23Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > … > That’s why you see the Senate furiously trying to get something - anything - done on an Obamacare repeal. Mitch McConnell has been pounding the podium for 7 goddamn years about repealing Obamacare – and his congressional now very likely going to have to go back to his home districts and say that they’ve got nothing. Not to mention there are now legions of people who are finally speaking up and saying “Get your hands off my Obamacare!”… Along comes Trump and says, “Y’all are too MEAN! Make it better!” As I posted elsewhere: > [@The Trump Administration: A Clusterfuck in the Making](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-administration-a-clusterfuck-in-the-making/774070/6669): > > **[Trump calls House health bill that he celebrated in the Rose Garden ‘mean’](https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/trump-calls-house-health-bill-that-he-celebrated-in-the-rose-garden-mean/2017/06/13/ede11784-5060-11e7-b064-828ba60fbb98_story.html)** > > > [@](#): > > > > President Trump told Republican senators Tuesday that the House GOP health-care bill was “mean” and he expects the Senate to “improve” the legislation considerably, according to several Republicans familiar with the gathering. > > > > Trump’s comments, during a White House lunch with a group of 15 GOP senators from across the ideological spectrum, signaled that he may be willing to embrace a less-aggressive revision of the Affordable Care Act than Republicans have previously promised. > > > > The meeting came as Senate Republicans were struggling to build support for their health-care rewrite among conservatives who are concerned that the legislation is drifting too far to the left… > > I guess someone finally told DJT what was [del]not[/del] in it. > > “Drifting too far to the left”?? :smack: Yeah, it might accidentally help someone. Can’t have that. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/810 "2017-06-15T04:36:07Z")
Would that be somewhere left of Czar Nicholas II and to the right of Calvin Coolidge? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/811 "2017-06-15T09:19:28Z")
Philip Rucker, the WaPo’s White House bureau chief, got hold of [the RNC’s talking points](https://twitter.com/PhilipRucker/status/875166972614516737) in response to the WaPo story. They’re really kind of hilarious. First RNC bullet point: “There is no case for obstruction of justice. This point has been made by legal scholars from both sides of the aisle over and over again.” Numero uno, that’s why you have an _investigation_. To see if there’s a case, and nail down the evidence. Duuuh. Numero two-o, Trump’s already said on multiple occasions that he fired Comey to shut down the Russia investigation. He even told the freakin’ _Russians_ that! Given that underlying fact, if your best talking point is that legal scholars say that’s not sufficient evidence to prove obstruction of justice, _you’ve already lost._ Second RNC bullet point: “This story is nothing more than an example of even more leaks coming out of the FBI and special counsel’s office in an effort to undermine the President. These leaks are inexcusable, outrageous, and illegal. The leaks are the only crime here.” Numero uno, if this is really a leak, then apparently this IS where the special prosecutor is going with this. Sure, let’s fight the PR battle on that terrain! Numero two-o, leaks aren’t illegal in and of themselves. What law has been broken here? Third RNC bullet point (no really, I’m not making this up!): “Why is no one investigating Attorney General Lynch’s Department of Justice for obstruction of justice in the Clinton email investigation?” Um, ask President Trump and AG Sessions. Your team has the ball now. Demand a full investigation, and if they don’t come through, demand that Congress impeach them, since they’re clearly part of the obstruction of justice! 😃 And that’s their _first three_ bullet points. I didn’t cherry-pick. That’s their best foot forward. ---
**Author:** ![galen\_ubal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/galen_ubal/32/4440_2.png) [@galen\_ubal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/galen_ubal)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 11:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/812 "2017-06-15T11:01:52Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Philip Rucker, the WaPo’s White House bureau chief, got hold of [the RNC’s talking points](https://twitter.com/PhilipRucker/status/875166972614516737) in response to the WaPo story. > > {MUCH SNIPPAGE} [Seth Abramson](https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/875199563744804864) just posted a 100 (!) post Twitter thread on that very subject. That link goes to it. Yah, the talking points are pretty much all bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/813 "2017-06-15T13:32:17Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > First RNC bullet point: > > “There is no case for obstruction of justice. This point has been made by legal scholars from both sides of the aisle over and over again.” > > Numero uno, that’s why you have an _investigation_. To see if there’s a case, and nail down the evidence. Duuuh. > Numero two-o, Trump’s already said on multiple occasions that he fired Comey to shut down the Russia investigation. He even told the freakin’ _Russians_ that! Given that underlying fact, if your best talking point is that legal scholars say that’s not sufficient evidence to prove obstruction of justice, _you’ve already lost._ No… I started this reply to agree with you, but then I read your point (2). So, point (1) is exactly correct. The evidence at present does not constitute obstruction of justice, but it certainly could be that an investigation would reveal additional evidence that WOULD. But (2) does not work. The fact is that what he’s said is not sufficient to prove obstruction of justice, as you implicitly acknowledge above in point (1). > [@](#): > > “This story is nothing more than an example of even more leaks coming out of the FBI and special counsel’s office in an effort to undermine the President. These leaks are inexcusable, outrageous, and illegal. The leaks are the only crime here.” > > Numero uno, if this is really a leak, then apparently this IS where the special prosecutor is going with this. Sure, let’s fight the PR battle on that terrain! > Numero two-o, leaks aren’t illegal in and of themselves. What law has been broken here? None that I’m aware of. Now, if there were a grand jury in session, then leaks arising from testimony would be illegal. But at present, I know of no law prohibiting these leaks. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/814 "2017-06-15T13:54:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No… > > I started this reply to agree with you, but then I read your point (2). > > So, point (1) is exactly correct. The evidence at present does not constitute obstruction of justice, but it certainly could be that an investigation would reveal additional evidence that WOULD. > > But (2) does not work. The fact is that what he’s said is not sufficient to prove obstruction of justice, as you implicitly acknowledge above in point (1). I’m discussing RNC _talking points_. And I’m discussing them _as_ talking points. Sure, what Trump’s already said isn’t enough to convict him of obstruction of justice in a court of law. But if that’s the best talking point the RNC has to convince the public that there’s nothing to see here, they’re screwed. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/815 "2017-06-15T14:03:33Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > First RNC bullet point: > > “There is no case for obstruction of justice. This point has been made by legal scholars from both sides of the aisle over and over again.” > > Numero uno, that’s why you have an _investigation_. To see if there’s a case, and nail down the evidence. Duuuh. > Numero two-o, Trump’s already said on multiple occasions that he fired Comey to shut down the Russia investigation. He even told the freakin’ _Russians_ that! Given that underlying fact, if your best talking point is that legal scholars say that’s not sufficient evidence to prove obstruction of justice, _you’ve already lost._ I suspect you may have misunderstood that talking point. I believe they’re not saying here that there’s not enough “evidence” to prove that Trump obstructed justice. That’s not a matter for “legal scholars”. What they’re saying is that various legal scholars (e.g. Dershowitz et al) have asserted that even if Trump deliberately ordered various Russia investigations closed down or fired people for failing to do so, that does not constitute “obstruction of justice”, because he is the ultimate authority over the DOJ and under the law can do all these things. If this is correct, then investigating the facts to determine whether or not Trump ordered the Flynn investigation shut down or why he fired Comey is legally moot. I believe other legal experts may disagree, but that’s apparently the position the RNC is taking, and your ostensible rebuttal seems to be a non-sequitor. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/816 "2017-06-15T14:14:41Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I suspect you may have misunderstood that talking point. > > I believe they’re not saying here that there’s not enough “evidence” to prove that Trump obstructed justice. That’s not a matter for “legal scholars”. What they’re saying is that various legal scholars (e.g. Dershowitz et al) have asserted that even if Trump deliberately ordered various Russia investigations closed down or fired people for failing to do so, that does not constitute “obstruction of justice”, because he is the ultimate authority over the DOJ and under the law can do all these things. If this is correct, then investigating the facts to determine whether or not Trump ordered the Flynn investigation shut down or why he fired Comey is legally moot. > > I believe other legal experts may disagree, but that’s apparently the position the RNC is taking, and your ostensible rebuttal seems to be a non-sequitor. That’s one reading of the talking point, but it assumes that Mueller is only investigating these specific allegations, and not the possibility of other ways to obstruct justice that may have occurred. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/817 "2017-06-15T14:21:48Z")
The beauty in all this "investigating is two fold. It keeps the media taking about things negative to Trump, instead of his agenda, and it keeps Trump’s little mind busy defending himself instead of doing anything that can screw up the [del] country[/del] world. Keep the yam on the defensive for the next 3 1/2 years please. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/818 "2017-06-15T14:35:13Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > That’s one reading of the talking point, but it assumes that Mueller is only investigating these specific allegations, and not the possibility of other ways to obstruct justice that may have occurred. Well there could always be bad things happening all over the place. You never know. But pointing out that legal scholars have said that nothing hitherto alleged to have taken place amounts to obstruction of justice is a pretty good point as talking points go. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/819 "2017-06-15T14:38:08Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Well there could always be bad things happening all over the place. You never know. > > But pointing out that legal scholars have said that nothing hitherto alleged to have taken place amounts to obstruction of justice is a pretty good point as talking points go. But there could be tons about the investigation we don’t know about. It’s only a good talking point if one presumes that pretty much everything about Mueller’s investigation is already public knowledge, which to me is a pretty silly presumption. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792/820 "2017-06-15T14:40:05Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Well there could always be bad things happening all over the place. You never know. > > But pointing out that legal scholars have said that nothing hitherto alleged to have taken place amounts to obstruction of justice is a pretty good point as talking points go. Depends what legal scholars you listen to. I’ve heard other scholars say that the president can tell the FBI “let’s lay off prosecution of marijuana offenses” and be within his rights but if he says “lay off prosecution of my friend” is too much even for a president. You may well have heard legal experts say this is not obstruction. I have heard some say that it is a textbook example. I personally see very close parallels with Watergate with Comey playing the role of Archibald Cox. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792.md?page=40) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/comey-memo-trump-told-him-shut-down-flynn-probe/786792.md?page=42)