If Trump hasn’t done anything wrong, why is he engaging in a cover-up?
I find this attempt to shift the narrative rather interesting.
Trump started it in the Lester Holt interview, loudly proclaiming his PERSONAL innocence and attempting to distance himself from the activities of his campaign and his campaign associates.
I’ve actually always thought there was a good chance that Old Dickory managed to keep himself isolated from the wrongdoing, at least enough to maintain plausible deniability.
But the investigation and the issue still revolves around whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. Not Trump himself.
Once again, he’s found what he thinks is a strand of truth in his web of lies “I didn’t do nuthin, personally” and he’s going to try to use that strand to redefine the entire issue. “Look, I AM innocent and no one on my campaign really worked for me that much”. Their collusion has nothing to do with me."
I think his campaign colluders see him winding up to throw them under the bus. I think this will backfire.
This is my take. I find it eniterly plausible that Trump isn’t under investigation, yet. That up to this point Comey has been following leads that implicate various underlings. But I also find it plausible that Trump is very concerned that those leads might eventually lead up to him, and the fact that he couldn’t get Comey to take a loyalty oath meant he had to go.
It’s like on those crime shows where the detective says to the husband that he isn’t a “suspect” in his wife’s death, but he would like him to come down to the station to answer a few questions.
Nine months ago, a lot of Dems were twisting themselves into knots to explain why Hillary Clinton’s email activities were not illegal, while glossing over the fact that they were dumb.
I see Trump supporters have now adopted the same line of argument.
How well do you think that is going to work out for ya?
Jesus Christ. Trump went on fucking national TV and said, as clearly as Trump ever says anything, that he fired Comey because Comey was pursuing “this Russia thing with Trump and Russia.” Trump thinks that’s a “made up story” so he fired Comey. Who the hell cares if Comey told Trump he wasn’t under investigation, if he told him he was but there were not findings yet, or if he told him he likes to speak to Leprechauns through his microwave? Trump admitted, to Lester Holt and everyone else on Planet Earth, that he fired Comey to stop the investigation.
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.
Well, that’s just like, Trump’s opinion, man.
Here is how Grassely’s statement can be true, but Trump could still be a target of investigation:
COMEY TO GRASSLEY: We are targeting in this investigation Smith, Jones, Brown, and Trump. I intend to tell Trump he is not under investigation in order to ensure his continued cooperation.
COMEY TO TRUMP: Sir, you’re not a target of this investigation.
TRUMP TO WORLD: Comey said to me, “Sir, you’re not a target of the investigation.”
GRASSLEY TO WORLD: Comey told us who the targets were. (True) And nothing in Trump’s statement (“Comey said to me, ‘Sir, you’re not a target of the investigation.’”) contradicts this.
Or post #8 and #9 
As a rule of thumb, when people phrase things using weasel words (“nothing I was told contradicts the letter”) as opposed to clear, declarative statements (“Comey told me that Trump is not being investigated”) there is a reason for doing so.
We can speculate on the reasons why Grassley chose to use weasel words. Why do you think that Grassley chose not to communicate clearly and definitively?
In order to avoid a situation where mistakes were made.
Well. Yeah.
But my version had dialog.
I am not going to say that I didn’t have a reaction that could be interpreted by some people as an expression of an opinion to that remark. Maybe.
Grassley uses weasel words because he is a weasel. He has been a weasel for years. He will always be a weasel.
Bingo.
…and the other lawyer said “I wonder what he means by that.”
A couple of weeks ago, Trump said Obama was investigating him. People said that wasn’t true. Trump insisted he was the subject of an investigation. And his supporters believed him because he said it was true.
This week, Trump insisted he was not the subject of any investigation. And his supporters believed him because he said it was true.
I guess his supporters are consistent. They’ll believe whatever Trump tells them to believe.
Because he said in his statement that he would not disclose the contents of his conversation with Comey. I think some of you are having probems reading in between the lines: Grassley is telling you that Comey said that Trump is not under investigation without telling you that. Because telling you would be wrong. 
Or, he may be trying to imply that Trump is not under investigation without saying it, because actually saying that would be a lie.
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.