# Grassley confirms Comey told him that Trump is not being investigated **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 12, 2017, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463 "2017-05-12T17:06:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2017, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/41 "2017-05-12T22:54:32Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Or, he may be trying to imply that Trump is not under investigation without saying it, because actually saying that would be a lie. Assuming Feinstein got the same information as Grassley, if Trump were under investigation, why wouldn’t she say so, or at least release her own weasel-worded statement that suggests he was? Seems to me that the Occam’s Razor explanation is that Trump is not personally under investigation. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2017, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/42 "2017-05-12T23:26:50Z")
**Hurr** , have you tried macramé? Maybe you have a natural knack for it? ---
**Author:** ![Defensive\_Indifference](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/defensive_indifference/32/6502_2.png) [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2017, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/43 "2017-05-12T23:44:51Z")
No, no, see, it’s OK. Trump is not personally under investigation (except when he was, cuz he was being wire tapped). But, now, nosir! Not under investigation. His associates, his business partners, his family. They’re under investigation. And Trump merely fired Comey to stop _those_ investigations. Totally, totally cool. Trump has the libs right where he wants them now! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2017, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/44 "2017-05-12T23:50:12Z")
Mark Shields, the Avatar of Frumpy, just said “Trump criticizing Comey for being a showboat is being called ugly by a frog.” ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/45 "2017-05-13T01:25:14Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > The reason is clear. Saying it straight would be violating the security protocol. The way Grassley said it doesn’t violate it and still conveys the same message. Out of curiosity, do you think that’s cricket? And is our nation’s security protocol so sloppily formulated that you can weasel around it like this and maintain security clearance? If he’s not supposed to tell, it hardly seems appropriate for him to tell us with a wink and a weasel sentence. ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/46 "2017-05-13T01:37:39Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Out of curiosity, do you think that’s cricket? And is our nation’s security protocol so sloppily formulated that you can weasel around it like this and maintain security clearance? That’s a legal question. IANAL. But I think yes, he manages to skate by. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/47 "2017-05-13T01:57:28Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > There are enough Democrats, like Republicans and Independents, etc., who are concerned enough with the actual facts of the case that there is absolutely no need for a statement like this. Why do you say this? Do you disagree that there are a lot of Democrats who believe that the President and/or his campaign colluded with the Russians? More importantly, do you disagree that what I posited to be true will upset Democrats who expect more? I didn’t imply all Democrats will be upset. Stop getting your knickers twisted. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/48 "2017-05-13T02:31:28Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > That’s a legal question. IANAL. But I think yes, he manages to skate by. So you think that Grassley isn’t allowed to say that Trump is not under investigation. You then quote him verbatim as evidence that Trump isn’t under investigation. Do you agree that the FBI should open a leaks investigation on Grassley? After all, we have been told many times that leaks are the problem in Washington, not Russia. ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/49 "2017-05-13T02:39:17Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > So you think that Grassley isn’t allowed to say that Trump is not under investigation. You then quote him verbatim as evidence that Trump isn’t under investigation. The words in quotes are not Grassley’s. They are mine, for argument’s sake: Tell me if you agree with my 3 points below - separately. Each one by itself. 1. “Comey told me Trump is not under investigation” - an affirmative, clear repeating of what Comey said. 2. “Comey told me who is being investigated.” - not an affirmative, clear repeating of what Comey said. 3. “I never heard anything that would contradict Trump’s statements (that he is not under investigation)” - not an affirmative, clear repeating of what Comey said. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/50 "2017-05-13T02:45:54Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > The words in quotes are not Grassley’s. They are mine, for argument’s sake: > > Tell me if you agree with my 3 points below - separately. Each one by itself. > > 1. “Comey told me Trump is not under investigation” - an affirmative, clear repeating of what Comey said. > > 2. “Comey told me who is being investigated.” - not an affirmative, clear repeating of what Comey said. > > 3. “I never heard anything that would contradict Trump’s statements (that he is not under investigation)” - not an affirmative, clear repeating of what Comey said. There is no point in dissecting each of the three statements. You have hypothesized, quite reasonably, that Grassley is under an obligation not to reveal whether Trump is under investigation. Since you are using his words as evidence that Trump is under investigation, it is perfectly clear that Grassley violated his obligation. So, it is a leak. Right? ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/51 "2017-05-13T02:49:59Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I’m talking about the quotes in the OP, with the bolded parts. You’re using that as evidence that Trump isn’t under investigation, a conclusion you draw which you’ve said that you say that Grassley is not supposed to say. If you’re quoting Grassley as evidence for something, and Grassley isn’t supposed to reveal that something, it’s pretty clear that is a leak, right? No. As I illustrated in the points that you refused to consider. Try. Do you agree with every one of the three - separately? 1 is a leak. 2 is not a leak. 3 is not a leak. (well, usually “leak” means an anonymous release of information, but you know what I mean). If you do, then take 2 and 3 - together. Even though neither of them is a “leak”, together they confirm no investigation. Which means 2 and 3 confirm the no-investigation without a “leak”. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/52 "2017-05-13T03:20:06Z")
You think leaks are based on how sentences are phrased, rather than the information (or conclusions) conveyed? Seriously? ETA: have you personally ever been bound by any confidentiality agreement? Like a security clearance, lawyer-client privilege, a non-disclosure agreement, or anything like that? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/53 "2017-05-13T03:22:59Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > No. As I illustrated in the points that you refused to consider. Try. Do you agree with every one of the three - separately? 1 is a leak. 2 is not a leak. 3 is not a leak. (well, usually “leak” means an anonymous release of information, but you know what I mean). > > If you do, then take 2 and 3 - together. Even though neither of them is a “leak”, together they confirm no investigation. Which means 2 and 3 confirm the no-investigation without a “leak”. …you will note that this strategy has not worked for the “Muslim ban”. The courts aren’t stupid and neither are we. Saying it with a “wink and a nod” is the same as “saying it straight”. The end result is exactly the same: we know something that we shouldn’t have known because Grassley couldn’t keep his mouth shut. At least we know where Grassley’s priorities lie. Defending Trump is more important than national security. ---
**Author:** ![OldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3bc359/32.png) [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/54 "2017-05-13T03:36:04Z")
Trump may or may not personally be under investigation for colluding in trying to tamper with the election, but he pretty clearly has Russian ties. His son, in fact said several years ago before this all came up that they were getting financing from Russians. An investigation into ties between Trump associates and Russians, will likely reveal details of this. It seems to me that this is more likely what Trump is worried about coming out. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/55 "2017-05-13T03:51:41Z")
Google Trump Hotel Kazakhstan. Especially if you actually _want_ your hair curled. Or the “…33-story luxury Trump International Hotel and Tower Baku, which never opened…” in Azerbaijan. Ivanka, we are told , played a key role. 'Course, if it never opened, doesn’t much matter if she could unlock it. ---
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/56 "2017-05-13T05:12:46Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Google Trump Hotel Kazakhstan. Especially if you actually _want_ your hair curled. Or the “…33-story luxury Trump International Hotel and Tower Baku, which never opened…” in Azerbaijan. Ivanka, we are told , played a key role. 'Course, if it never opened, doesn’t much matter if she could unlock it. Or Trump Soho and Bayrock Group [https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/06/us/politics/donald-trump-soho-settlement.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/06/us/politics/donald-trump-soho-settlement.html) ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/57 "2017-05-13T05:44:59Z")
> [@Ann\_Hedonia](#): > > Trump Soho Worst Star Wars character ever ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/58 "2017-05-13T06:58:26Z")
No, that would be Trump Trump Binks. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/59 "2017-05-13T12:19:20Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > No, that would be Trump Trump Binks. That’s the guy that said in reference to Obi Wan, “I like Jedi Masters who don’t get struck down;” who called Han Solo “low energy;” said Palpatine was “a smart cookie;” had an aide get in trouble for talking with Grand Moff Tarkin; and who talked about banning Wookiees but in the end suspended travel from Kashyyyk and said it was about galactic security. Right? ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2017, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463/60 "2017-05-13T13:46:22Z")
**Okrahoma** , do you think this reveals classified information: Let’s suppose a raid is schedule for a Tuesday. The reporter knows that a raid is scheduled, because there has been in increase in troops in the area, but the actual day of the raid is classified. Here’s a conversation between the reporter and a general: Reporter: General, when is the raid scheduled? General: Sorry, that information is classified. R: Is it scheduled for Monday? G: No R: Is it scheduled for Tuesday? G: Sorry, I have no comment on that R: Is it scheduled for Wednesday? G: No … R: Is it scheduled for Sunday? G: No If, as you claim, the only possible interpretation for Grassley’s comments is that Trump is not under investigation, doesn’t that essentially boil down to the above? So, I think you can only choose one of the two options: (1) Grassley released classified information and should be investigated, or (2) Trump may or may not be under investigation and Grassley added no insight either way. So, 1 or 2, which do you choose? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grassley-confirms-comey-told-him-that-trump-is-not-being-investigated/786463.md?page=4)