Clapper: 'Uneasy' Comey Told Me Trump Invited Him To White House Dinner

[DonViejo]

Source: Talking Points Memo


Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper on Friday directly contradicted President Trump’s claim that ousted FBI Director James Comey had asked Trump to have dinner a week after the President’s inauguration to ask to keep his job. He said that Comey told him he was “uneasy” about attending the dinner.

-snip-

Clapper told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell on Friday about a farewell ceremony Comey had hosted for him earlier the same day, Jan. 27.

“And Jim and I spoke briefly before the ceremony and he mentioned that he had been invited to the White House to have dinner with the President, and that he was uneasy with that because of even compromising the — even the optics, the appearance of independence, not only of him, but of the FBI,” Clapper recalled.

“But he was going that very night to the dinner. Did he explain why he felt he had to go?” Mitchell asked. “Well, I think anyone who is serving office in the government, and you’re asked by the President for dinner, I think as professional courtesy, you’re in a difficult position to refuse to go,” Clapper said. “But I do know he was uneasy with it, just for the appearance of compromising the independence of the FBI, which is a hallowed tenet in our system.”

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/clapper-contradicts-trump-claim-comey-dinner

---

Clapper: ‘I Don’t Know If There Was Collusion’ Between Trump Camp, Russia

By ALLEGRA KIRKLAND Published MAY 12, 2017 12:59 PM

Former director of national intelligence James Clapper said Friday that he did not “know if there was collusion or not” between President Donald Trump’s campaign and Russian operatives working to influence the U.S. presidential election, saying he was not privy to the details of the FBI’s investigation.

Clapper spoke with MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell after Trump seized on Senate testimony the former DNI gave earlier this week to dismiss the entire Russia investigation as a “witch hunt” and clear his campaign’s name.

“It is not surprising or abnormal that I would not have known about the investigation,” Clapper explained, saying his practice during his six-and-a-half years in his role was to defer to FBI officials about what information he needed to know about counterintelligence investigations.

“So I don’t know if there was collusion or not,” he continued. “I don’t know if there was evidence of collusion or not, nor should I have in this particular context.”

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/james-clapper-dont-know-about-collusion-trump-russia-investigation

[SunSeeker]

1. K & R

[hexola]

2. Another LIE to the tally - direct contradiction to Trump in the Holt interview.

So LAME!

[deurbano]

3. Really? "Uneasy"... after you claim you threw an election because you "lost faith"

in the Justice Department after Lynch happened to be at the same airport at the same time as BILL (not Hillary) Clinton, and dared to have a conversation with someone she has known for years? (Admittedly, not the best optics, but wouldn't there have been a more planned, less public way to meet if they were really up to no good?) So Comey, who is investigating the ties between 45's campaign and the Russians, and who has NO longstanding professional or personal relationship with 45, is invited to a private dinner by
45 (not 45's spouse)... and that just made him "uneasy"? After having thrown all precedent (and honor) aside, by interjecting himself into a presidential election to vilify Clinton (while "clearing" her)... then dropping the October Surprise so late she didn't have time to recover... all the while knowing her opponent's campaign was under investigation for far more serious crimes (that weren't uncovered during a years' long fishing expedition by his Congressional adversaries)? And Comey was FORCED to do all this because Loretta Lynch had a chance meeting with Bill Clinton?!!! This proved Lynch couldn't be trusted, but Comey knew (in his Boy Scout heart) that he always has only the purest of motives, so the standards to which he holds others don't remotely apply to him.

I think Comey was trying to make himself the "hero" again, just like the bogus last time he was supposedly a 'hero" (see Digby link below)... but really he is a sanctimonious partisan-- a former Whitewater prosecutor, for god's sake. And why do only allies of targets of investigations need to recuse themselves? What about those with longstanding vendettas? I doubt he thought his actions would actually elect 45, but he did want to damage Clinton as much as possible without actually arresting her. (Given the absence of any crime!) And Rod Rosenstein, also previously seen as upstanding and above reproach, was ALSO a Whitewater prosecutor. Maybe it's time for Democrats to stop giving the seal of approval to anyone who was involved in that vile enterprise unless they have totally renounced their participation. I mean, at least err on the side of making them prove their newfound integrity.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/03/politics/comey-loretta-lynch-clinton-tarmac-meeting/
Comey cites Lynch-Clinton meeting for lost faith in Justice investigation

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/james-comey-is-no-white-knight.html
James Comey is no white knight