Pages

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

Coats and Rogers refute alt-left rumors...

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers told a Senate panel Wednesday that they would not answer questions about whether President Trump asked them to downplay possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials in last year's election, but they said they did not feel "pressured" to interfere or intervene in the Russia investigation.
"I have never felt pressured to intervene or interfere in any way with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relation to an ongoing investigation," Coats testified in response to a question from Vice Chairman Mark Warner, D-Va.
"In the three-plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything I believe to be illegal, unethical, immoral or inappropriate," Rogers said, adding that he has never felt "pressured" to do so.
Well there you... two of the most major players in the IC have now both stated for the record that they were never directed or pressured to interfere or intervene in the Russia investigation. One might think that this would be enough?
Warner said he came out of the hearing "with more questions than when I went in."
Of course... but probably not the questions he "should" be asking himself.  The more likely scenario here is that he did not get the answers he wanted to hear, and therefore wants to ask more questions.
"What we don't seem to have is the same commitment to find out whether the president of the United States tried to intervene with members of the Intelligence Community and asked them to back off or downplay (the Russia investigation)," Warner told the witnesses. "The president is not above the law."
Um, no.... what we don't seem to have is the same commitment to declare that the President of the United States has committed some form of obstruction, based entirely on speculation, rumor, conspiracy theories, and stories from the NYT, WaPo, and Politico that apparently have only a loose connection to the truth.

Moreover, whether or not the President behaved in a manner that would constitute "obstruction" is entirely a question that should be answered by Coats and Rogers. There are no circumstances (legal or otherwise) where a Senator is allowed to question the intentions of the President and the interpretation by heads of the intelligence community, in regards to interactions between the parties.

While I would have been against Trump trying to invoke executive privilege to prevent Comey from testifying. I believe as it pertains to what the Senate panel wants to get out of Coats and Rogers... they answered the question that mattered. The specifics of ongoing communications between the President and top Intelligence members should not be made public because some Democratic Senator is disappointed with the answer he got.

Arguing (as Warner is appearing to do) that stories in the media should be taken at face value, while testimony from high ranking intelligence should be questioned... tells us "exactly" where the collective mindset of the Democratic Party actually is.  

8 comments:

rrb said...

Arguing (as Warner is appearing to do) that stories in the media should be taken at face value, while testimony from high ranking intelligence should be questioned... tells us "exactly" where the collective mindset of the Democratic Party actually is.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


i always take stories in the media at face value. when they're chock full of anonymous sources and innuendo with no substantiated facts to support them, i assign them no value whatsoever.

james said...

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

Note Trump's mention of Russian hookers.

"I am not a crook"

sounds a lot like

"I had nothing to do with Russian hookers"

james said...

Comey statement excerpt:
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.

Comey statement excerpt:
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.

Then the President asked why there had been a congressional hearing about Russia the previous week – at which I had, as the Department of Justice directed, confirmed the investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign. I explained the demands from the leadership of both parties in Congress for more information, and that Senator Grassley had even held up the confirmation of the Deputy Attorney General until we briefed him in detail on the investigation. 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.)

Loretta said...

Troll

james said...

Truth seeker, rather.

Loretta said...

Obnoxious troll.

opie said...

hey said they did not feel "pressured" to interfere or intervene in the Russia investigation.


They also did not answer whether trump asked them to intervene. Very mealy mouthed answer that appeared to me to be protecting the chief as trump tosses all under his trump bus. Sad loretta still has nothing to add except trolls. LOLOL

james said...

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

For fellow truth seekers.
You're welcome. :-)