Bluff Called: Trump Has No “Tapes” Of James Comey

See, this is what occasionally happens when you go all-in with a weak hand.

Sometimes the guy across the table calls your bluff.

Which is exactly what James Comey did earlier this month when, during testimony, the former FBI Director said he hopes that the tapes Donald Trump suggested may exist of conversations between the two are real and are released.

As it turns out, Trump was bluffing.

Trump

So he’s trying to play it off like he was just speculating and didn’t intend to suggest he had made recordings himself. What a joke. I wonder how long it took his advisers to come up with that.

Here’s Bloomberg

President Donald Trump doesn’t have recordings of his conversations with then-FBI Director James Comey, according to a person familiar with the matter, capping weeks of speculation about whether such tapes exist.

Trump himself raised the question of whether he was taping his Oval Office conversations when, days after firing Comey on May 9, he blasted out a series of tweets suggesting the existence of tapes as a way to try to deter the ousted FBI chief from talking to reporters.

“James Comey better hope that there are no ‘tapes’ of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!” Trump wrote. He concluded with a tweet calling the investigation into Russian interference in the election and his campaign’s possible involvement a “witch hunt,” asking, “when does it end?”

Trump raised the possibility of tapes in a strategic fashion to ensure that Comey told the truth, said the person, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

I see.

Well, if that bolded bit is true then it either didn’t work (i.e. Comey lied to make Trump look bad) or Trump doesn’t understand that this is one case where “the truth” will not in fact “set him free.” Because what Comey told lawmakers was that Trump is a habitual liar and that he felt pressured (under threat of his job) to ease up on the investigation.

Either way, it seems like Trump’s “tapes” tweet was exactly what a lot of people suspected it might be: a bluff gone horribly awry.

*******

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Bluff Called: Trump Has No “Tapes” Of James Comey

  1. not a bluff…….an outright lie. as usual. IF his excuse today were even true, there would have been no reason not to say that at the time he was asked. That it took this long to come up with and rehearse it, makes it clearly just another lie from this PIG’s fat mouth.

  2. Does Trump’s tweet end the inquiry? Not a chance. It’s Washington, D.C., home of the denial-non-denial, and worse yet, it’s Donald Trump uttering the words, “I did not make, and do not have, any such recordings.” Did he say there were no recordings? Of course not. He easily could have. Granted, if there are recordings, Trump personally did not record Comey and he wouldn’t personally take custody of any such recordings. Just imagine him crawling through the attic space that holds the recording apparatus looking for the recording!! Do not doubt for a second that Mueller will cause subpoenas to be served upon the proper White House records custodian and witnesses for any such records and recordings. Whatever system, if any, that was in place during Obama’s term is by now well known to Mueller. And if was removed, altered, tampered with, or kept in place, that too is by now known to him.

  3. This man is an idiot. This man is the President of the United States. The President of the United States is an idiot. Let that sink in for a while.

    • And what’s worse is the chicken shit Republicans will do nothing to get him out of the WH because they want to rape the country and the system for whatever they can get while they have the chance! Like this horrible healthcare crap — those men know it is a pile of dung and they really don’t care — they can just change the rules because they have the ‘control’ while asswipe sits in the WH. If some of these Repubs don’t step up and put Country over party, the Republican Party will go down in flames.

      – Murphy

      • I posted on another site as I was working out how I would support the Republican health care plan without resorting to the arguments that lefties throw out all the time; those being that it’s a tax cut for rich people and they are just puppets for the Koch brothers.

        The argument that Paul Ryan makes when he is in public (because I have no doubt that he makes a different one in private) is that the ballooning principal on the federal deficit is risking financial calamity down the road. They need to cut social programs (entitlements like SS and medicaid) in order to stave off Armageddon. Mixed in there is some moralizing about how they want people to work instead of live off the public dime, but the financial side of the argument is pretty much that: we spend to much on social works that aren’t productive, therefore we should cut these benefits which will increase productivity by forcing those people who fall under the cuts to find work. Logically this makes sense if you disregard the reason people are poor or unhealthy in the first place.

        Again, I don’t agree with this line of reasoning and I think the AHCA was a hideous bill that essentially cuts medical coverage for people that are poor and gives that money to rich folks. I am merely pointing this out because, as a ‘leftist’ or left-of-center type, I feel the need to understand the opposing argument. How am I doing? Any supply-siders want to take a crack at explaining it or shoring up my faulty reasoning?

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply