That's the question now isn't it? I see no reason to believe either of them without actual proof. Without proof one way or the other I see this as nothing more than a disgruntled employee wanting to take a shot at his former boss who publicly fired him for incompetence. That's not to say he's for sure lying, but it's that I can't take his word for it......just like I can't take Trump's word for it if he were to tell his side of the story even if he was under oath. Both sides have reason to lie and they aren't lies that can be definitively proven to be lies. When neither side is credible and there is no proof, I can't take much away from the testimony except for perhaps a little bit when both sides agree. Also this isn't a binary thing, for all we know, both of them could be lying.
And... here are the Trump lies: about the tapes... ducks them with a "I will tell you about it over a short period of time" (whatever that means): re: requiring loyalty pledge... note the answer includes "why would I do that, I hardly know the man" and uses the words "pledge allegiance" (which of course, wasn't what Comey said): about Comey is a leaker (and quickly pivots to another topic): http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pres...questions-tapes-james-comey/story?id=47935492
What if the other intel directors had similar conversations with president Trump? They would not say they did not have such conversation in public hearings, so closed hearings are coming.
Sure, you can go that route. But you also have to consider the history of the individuals you are dealing with. I'm asking you who you think is lying in terms of the contradictory statements. I will tell you that I think, in terms of those, I would have to say Trump is probably the one lying. That is a subjective opinion, but one based on a pattern of behavior. We could say that, without proof, I don't think Bill Cosby drugged and molested all of those women. But at some point, you have to make a judgment. It would be nice if President Trump wasn't such a serial liar. But we've been dealing with an enormous pattern of lies for over 2 years now. Yes, without recorded proof, we can't say 100% who is telling the truth. But I can make a very sound judgment based on precedent. BTW, this is no way is based on the fact that I am still upset Hillary Clinton lost the election.
That still wouldn't be proof of what happened or what didn't happen in other conversations with different people. It would just be more for the court of public opinion and nothing for the actual courts.....which so far is pretty much all we've seen.
Sure, we'll consider that they are both politicians that both potentially have a reason to lie and something potentially to gain from lying. Of course those who are against Trump will assume that he's the one lying (which you'd do in every single instance no matter what) and those who support Trump will assume that Comey is lying (which they'd do no matter who said what against Trump). What I'm saying is that there is absolutely no proof one way or the other and both people are politicians (don't fool yourself, you've gotta play a TON of politics to become the head of the FBI) with a reason to lie so without proof there's no way I can believe either of them.
I don't think every single word out of Trump's mouth is a lie. Take terrorist attacks, for example. Trump's reaction is very honest, "this sucks! We have to do something about it! Like friggin ban all of them!" That is a genuine, very honest reaction. It just doesn't translate as easily into policy. He is correct in that the media does treat him unfairly. He is incorrect in that he blames nearly everything on them. He brings on many of these problems himself. Take for example his alleged exchange about the "cloud" hanging over him. That cloud is mostly self-induced. Instead of just saying, "We should get to the bottom of this, and I support all efforts in this regard," he chooses to constantly rail against it. So, no, not everything he says is a lie. But he's at a very high level. Every politician lies. Every person lies. That does not mean they all do it to the same degree. Trump has proven that he is a high-level liar, based on actual evidence, and if I have to take one side or the other, I'll go against the guy who has proven he is often incapable of being truthful. Please see my signature. Thank you.
The Comey discrediting is well under way..... just a disgruntled employee.... dishonest..... deep state operative.... leaker....
So it's just a happy coincidence that this subjective description perfectly fits your political preferences? You lucky dog.
No. The firing of an FBI director is historic. It's not "just a disgruntled employee." Show Comey's dishonesty, since you claim it. Deep state, yes. Guess what: it's not going away. Every single president has to deal with it, no? Leaker? He's been a bit fickle, but only Trump has pissed off allies with his leaking ability.
Trump needs to shitcan anyone in government who was at any time appointed by Obama. Comey should have taught him this lesson. Good people might get caught up in that, and they are welcome to reapply, but too many of these unelected operatives think it's their job to damage him politically, rather than serve as his (and thus the people's) employee to implement his agenda.
The FBI director has no agenda from the president especially when it comes to associates of the president under investigation.
Dude, 2/3 of the people "in government" are not even in the executive branch. It's not their job to "serve as his employee." And it's not the FBI director's job to "serve as his employee" either. This is basic to American government.
Comey was fired because Trump rightly believed Comey was allowing/encouraging leaks to create the impression that Trump was under investigation, to undermine his election and his administration. Comey's refusal to publicly say Trump wasn't under investigation only confirmed his suspicion.
