Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×
Government Security Politics

FBI Director Comey Confirms Investigation Into Trump Campaign (reuters.com) 537

FBI Director James Comey confirmed during testimony before Congress Monday that the FBI is investigating whether the Trump campaign colluded with a covert Russian campaign to interfere with the election. From a report on Reuters: Comey told a congressional hearing on Russian activities that the probe "includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia's efforts. Because it is an open, ongoing investigation and is classified, I cannot say more about what we are doing and whose conduct we are examining," Comey said. Earlier, the chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Intelligence Committee, Republican Representative Devin Nunes, told the same hearing that the panel had seen no evidence of collusion between Russia and Trump's 2016 campaign. Nunes also denied an unsubstantiated claim from Trump that there had been a wiretap on his Trump Tower in New York but said it was possible other surveillance was used against the Republican.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FBI Director Comey Confirms Investigation Into Trump Campaign

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:21AM (#54073577)

    trump campaign investigates you

    • by Big Hairy Ian ( 1155547 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:44AM (#54073827)
      Hang on let me get this straight. The man who interfered with the election is accusing Russia of interfering with the election?

      Only in America!

      • Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA (Score:4, Interesting)

        by msauve ( 701917 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @12:36PM (#54074385)
        "The man who interfered with the election is accusing Russia of interfering with the election?"

        ...and is reported by the US media, who also sought to influence the election.
      • Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve ( 949321 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @02:18PM (#54075587)

        Hang on let me get this straight. The man who interfered with the election is accusing Russia of interfering with the election?

        Only in America!

        No, he's pretending to investigate the Trump campaign. I am sure his actions in the final weeks were clearly designed to ensure Trump's victory under the cover of being open and impartial. More than anything else, I believe this pushed the last undecideds into the Trump corner because it convinced them the email issue was never, ever going to go away and if Hillary was president, she was just going to resign in disgrace or be removed from office soon enough over it anyway and nobody wanted to watch Tim Kane become president by default. So given the help he gave the Trump campaign, I'm pretty sure that the final result of this investigation will be the shocking revelation that nobody in the Trump campaign did anything wrong.

  • FAKE NEWS! (Score:5, Funny)

    by OzPeter ( 195038 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:23AM (#54073597)

    It's all fake news. The president tweeted that out just this morning. And if you can't trust the president then who can you trust? [1]

    [1] Note .. for the sarcasm impaired, that was sarcasm.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ISoldat53 ( 977164 )
      Can we trust Comey?
      • by Rei ( 128717 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:30AM (#54073683) Homepage

        I only trust reliable sources, like the voice that speaks to me in colours when I touch the arcane metal orb that I found out hiking out in the wastes.

      • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by tim620 ( 1052986 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:34AM (#54073729)
        I have far more confidence and trust in Comey, than I do President Trump.
        • by ls671 ( 1122017 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @12:21PM (#54074195) Homepage

          How often do you do president Trump?

        • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Mitreya ( 579078 ) <mitreya@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Monday March 20, 2017 @12:49PM (#54074545)

          I have far more confidence and trust in Comey, than I do President Trump.

          Based on what?
          The fact that Comey blatantly violated the law by interfering in the election (sending a big announcement of Clinton investigation right before election and then retracting it in a few days?)

          • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:4, Insightful)

            by tim620 ( 1052986 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @01:22PM (#54074929)
            Don't get me wrong. I never said I thought Comey was completely trustworthy. I only stated I would trust him, more than Trump. Trump and his surrogates constantly lie, deflect and distract the public and the press. I would trust a stranger on the street, over Trump.
      • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:5, Informative)

        by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:37AM (#54073759) Journal

        He was the Republicans' bestest friend when he was after Clinton. Now all of sudden, the shoe is on the other foot, and he's the bad guy.

        It's hilarious thought... no evidence of Obama wiretapping Trump, and confirmation that the FBI is investigating links between Trump's campaign and Russia.

        • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Bartles ( 1198017 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @12:20PM (#54074181)

          What did Democrats think of Comey right before and after the election?

      • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:38AM (#54073763)

        Can we trust Comey?

        Sure. Inversely proportional to how much Trump likes him.

        [ (Trump Likes) x (We Trust) = Constant ]

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by s.petry ( 762400 )

        I'm not sure how well we should trust Comey, but so far he's being pretty level. Most important question asked so far. "Is there any evidence that votes were change in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania..." to which the director of the NSA and FBI both stated "no".

        When the Benghazi hearings were going, we had Democrats yelling about gun control and demanding censorship of Youtube instead of asking questions related to the actual issues. The grandstanding to keep the hearings away from Clinton were simply despi

        • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:5, Informative)

          by Ksevio ( 865461 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @12:01PM (#54074023) Homepage
          I don't believe anyone is suggesting that actual votes were changed (as in voting machine hacked or something), the accusation is that Russia influenced the election through the slow release of hacked emails and spreading anti-Clinton propaganda. The "Russia changed votes" theory is just a straw-man.

          The Benghazi hearings were proven to be a political charade anyways where even after months of investigations the Republicans couldn't find any wrong-doings.

          But speaking of asking questions unrelated issues, you should listen to some of the Republicans asking questions. They're more concerned with whether the freedom of press applies to news organizations publishing classified leaks than the actual issue of Russian meddling with the election.
          • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:5, Informative)

            by OzPeter ( 195038 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @12:10PM (#54074103)

            But speaking of asking questions unrelated issues, you should listen to some of the Republicans asking questions. They're more concerned with whether the freedom of press applies to news organizations publishing classified leaks than the actual issue of Russian meddling with the election.

            Killing off the free press was always one of Trump's stated goals with his desire to open up libel laws in order to facilitate suing the press.

            • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:5, Interesting)

              by liquid_schwartz ( 530085 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @12:37PM (#54074391)

              Killing off the free press was always one of Trump's stated goals with his desire to open up libel laws in order to facilitate suing the press.

              Freedom of the press was largely lost when two things happened - ownership became highly concentrated and the press lost a diversity of opinions and morphed into Fox News on the right and everything else on the left. Concentrated ownership contributed greatly to the polarization.

              • by Ksevio ( 865461 )
                While the concentration of news organizations has produced fewer options, there certainly are more options than just "Fox News" and "everything else on the left". There are plenty centrist news sources, including those from other countries.
            • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:5, Insightful)

              by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve ( 949321 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @02:24PM (#54075649)

              Killing off the free press was always one of Trump's stated goals with his desire to open up libel laws in order to facilitate suing the press.

              That's not exactly right. He doesn't really want to kill the free press. He wants try to make everybody but Fox News report from the sideline so that they lose influence. He's not trying to shut down, say, CNN, but he wants to limit their access to him. I have friends who honestly believe that the only fair and impartial news source at all is Fox News. They all believe that CNN is insanely liberal and they have no idea at all that MSNBC is actually pretty far left of CNN. They don't seem to know that MSNBC even exists. There's no need to kill the free press when half the country believes that only one news sources is accurate and impartial and that news source is so biased it's not ever going to say anything against a Republican. You can let CNN, MSNBC, NPR, etc. report all they want to, but when half the country by choice refuses to listen to what they say, they are pretty effectively silenced although technically still alive.

          • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:4, Insightful)

            by msauve ( 701917 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @01:06PM (#54074749)
            "the accusation is that Russia influenced the election through the slow release of hacked emails"

            The press is just miffed that they didn't find it and disclose it first. Really, if the DNC hadn't worked to sway the primaries against Sanders, and CNN employee Brazile hadn't violated journalistic ethics by leaking debate questions to HRC and then lying about it, there wouldn't have been much fire beneath the smoke. Pointing to the Russians or Wikileaks is just an attempt at misdirection by blaming the messenger for revealing things the media would have been praised for revealing.

            Oh, and HRC flat-out lied about Bengazi, first by telling the public and families of those killed that it was an unpredictable violent protest over a video while privately admitting to a planned and foreseeable terrorist attack.
            • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:5, Interesting)

              by F34nor ( 321515 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @01:31PM (#54075035)

              Yeah no... the content has no bearing on the debate. The ends do not justify the means in all but the smallest and most extreme examples. You might note that we have this thing called the 4th amendment for just such events. It says,

              "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

              That makes the e-mail poison fruit. The fact that they we taken by a foreign power makes the whole event into a attack on our country. You are apologizing for the FSB attacking our core mission as a country for your own simplistic tribalism. That makes you a domestic enemy of the constitution.

              • by msauve ( 701917 )
                Uh, the 4th applies the the US government, not individuals or foreign governments. Taking the emails was certainly illegal, as was Daniel Ellsberg taking the Pentagon Papers or Snowden the NSA files. But that doesn't make them "poison fruit," and is certainly not comparable to the classified material in the examples I gave.
      • Re:FAKE NEWS! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:47AM (#54073849)

        Can we trust Comey?

        Effective government should not depend on trust of specific individuals. Designing laws and institutions is like designing a network protocol: You build in self-corrections for lack of integrity.

    • by mwvdlee ( 775178 )

      It's in the law; the presidant can't lie.

  • Good (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:29AM (#54073671)

    It all needs to be investigated, From Trump's current list of issues all the way back to seeing just how much involvement Russia had with pushing Clinton through the primaries.

    • by JustNiz ( 692889 )

      Totally agree.
      We need a government we can trust. You can't have an honest government or even fight corruption anywhere in the system if it exists at even the highest levels, as it clearly does (on both sides).

      They also badly need to investigate what all the foreign governments "donating" millions to the Clinton Foundation was actually for, and where it actually went.

      • We need a government we can trust.

        Voters say otherwise. I'm hearing that over half of voters distrust Trump and over half distrusted Clinton too. Didn't these two get about 97% of the vote?

        We don't need government we trust; in fact, we prefer government that we think is constantly lying to us. If you don't seem dishonest, we don't want you.

  • Apology (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:34AM (#54073723)

    Why hasn't Trump apologized to Obama? It would seem to be the decent thing to do.

    Trump kept saying Obama was born in Kenya. Then during the election when it was politically expeditious and like a weasel coward said "Obama was born in the US period." No apology nothing. Now the bully we elected president due to the lack of choice has slandered and falsely accused Obama of wiretapping him. What Trump is doing is evil, no president should be falsely accusing people of crimes. If anyone says anything negative about Trump, he takes revenge on them. Trump is like an female dog in heat who can't control control his emotional state. Expect him to carry out many injustices we won't even be told about. As a general rule don't believe in weighing evidence or considering two sides of an issue. Plus he is old, old people's brains stay fixed on an opinion even when shown opposing evidence. They may temporarily agree, and three revert back to their old opinion. It's been proven.

  • by nimbius ( 983462 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:36AM (#54073753) Homepage
    If by interfere we mean "she didnt get elected when it was her time" then, sure, its fairly apparent the trump campaign achieved this by campaigning in more states and cities, and on issues the average person could more easily relate to.

    Full Disclosure, im a California Liberal. That being said, Hillary was a turd of a candidate with a domestic policy that was unrelateable outside of large cities. she ignored two intelligence scandals, rigged her primary to destroy her opponent, and took questions from moderators ahead of the debate. She was the epitome of liberal elite, showing up in a fifteen thousand dollar burlap sack from Beverly Hills to lecture the midwest on povery and jobs.
    • by JustNiz ( 692889 )

      I pretty much totally agree with you but why is it all you liberals have a continuing massive blind spot to the Clintons blatant corruption?
      The obvious selling out to foreign agencies, usually in return for $millions in "donations" to the Clinton Foundation, was alone enough evidence for most people I know to vote Trump.

  • by swb ( 14022 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @11:56AM (#54073967)

    I'd like to remind them as a low-UID Slashdot poster I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their investigatory bureaucracies.

  • by PPH ( 736903 ) on Monday March 20, 2017 @03:13PM (#54076169)

    Yes, that's wrong (if it's true). But it's like a cop opening your car trunk without a warrant. And finding a dead body. It's wrong and inadmissible as evidence. But the body was still there.

    Elections aren't about selecting the first person that manages to escape a guilty verdict on a technicality. Had Hillary not used amazingly poor judgement in her handling of official communications, there would be no ammunition for Russia, Trump, or the GOP to embarrass her with and drive undecided voters to the other camp. The fact that it was Russia, with no right or jurisdiction to conduct an 'investigation' is also problematic. But from a point of view of ethics and justice rather than legality, the voters chose not to overlook the smell of a body in the trunk.

Genetics explains why you look like your father, and if you don't, why you should.

Working...