OK.
He threatens Comey with tapes. In other words, there are tapes.
Comey doesn't respond to threat and testifies.
Congress says turn over the tapes.
He says he has no tapes. There could be tapes, but he wasn't responsible for these tapes, which may or may not exist, and he has no tapes and so there is nothing to turn over.
The question, then, for him and for Spicey is, was he lying then or is he lying now?
Yes, yes, he lies all the time. About everything. Even when telling the truth would be to his advantage.
But this is a very specific set of lies, all of which are in tweet form. No words to misunderstand or misinterpret. Well, sort of, course, as that first tweet was that Comey had better hope there were no tapes. So one would have to infer that there were tapes and that the release of such tapes would be detrimental to Comey. As in, nice pension you have there, Jimmy. It'd be a shame if you lost it.
But still, a reasonable person would conclude that there were tapes. And now he says there are no tapes. Simple question. Was he lying then, or is he lying now?
And do we now have another item to add to Mueller's list of investigations?
= new reply since forum marked as read
