All Episodes
Previous Next
July 13, 2019 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
36:43
The Truth About The James Comey Memo | President Trump Obstructing Justice?
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi everybody, Stefan Mullany from Free Domain Radio.
I hope you're doing well.
Hey, can I ask you for a wee favor?
My friends, my brothers, my sisters, could you please just follow me through this really challenging but exciting and illuminating material?
This is the truth about the James Comey memo.
There's going to be some legalese.
There's going to be some shocking and exciting information.
Just please, I'm going to work myself to the bone.
If it takes me getting an aneurysm at the end of this presentation, I'm going to transfer this knowledge to you and you are going to be An enriched person thereby, I promise you that.
So this is the truth about the Comey memo.
Let's start at the beginning.
February 14th.
Hey, a day for lovers.
2017.
President Donald Trump had a meeting with then FBI director James Comey at the White House in the Oval Office.
At the time, the New York Times described the meeting as taking, quote, place just a day after Mr. Flynn was forced out of his job, after it was revealed he had lied to Vice President Mike Pence about the nature of phone conversations he had had with the Russian ambassador to the United States.
Now, the New York Times, May 16, 2017, said, President Trump asked the FBI director, James B. Comey, to shut down the federal investigation into Mr. Trump's former National Security Advisor, Michael T. Flynn, in an Oval Office meeting in February, according to a memo Mr. Comey wrote shortly after the meeting.
Now this is being referred to as a memo as if it's stamped, as if it's official, as if it's gone through channels.
It's a note.
I mean, it's three steps up from a doodle and somewhere to the left of a scribble.
So it's a note.
And let me tell you something.
So for those who don't know, like I had a 15 year career as a software entrepreneur and executive, and I sat down with very high level, very challenging meetings with clients and partners.
And we would talk in intense terms about complicated things and if somebody was making a note we'd say I'm going to make notes of the meeting and then we would distribute those notes to all the participants of that meeting so everyone could make sure they ended up on the same page.
Like if I just kept my own notes and didn't tell anyone and didn't tell anyone I was making those notes and didn't send them out to those people who were part of the meeting so they could verify those notes Well, if I'd done that in the business world, I don't know how it works at the FBI, I'd be a total douchebag.
Because it's one side of the story.
And James B. Comey, not an impartial observer of the political scenes, direct ties, indirect ties to the Clintons, I mean, it's all over the place, right?
So you've got one guy writing down his particular thoughts about a meeting, and then that's somehow coming up months later as if it's objective fact, as if it's somehow verified.
I just wanted to point that out.
The New York Times went on to say, this is May 16th, quote, Mr. Comey shared the existence of the memo with senior FBI officials and close associates.
The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey's associates read parts of it to a Times reporter.
This is what we have come down to.
This is where we are as a civilization.
The New York Times is reporting, and we'll get to the headlines in a second, the New York Times is reporting all of this stuff.
They've not actually viewed the memo, but someone claims to be reading from some parts of this note.
Now, boy, if James Comey has been making memos or notes of all of his conversations going all the way back to the Obama administration, he's going to be a busy boy with Freedom of Information requests.
So this is important.
Comey's not commented on it directly.
Nobody's seen this memo directly.
Just some deep throat guy whispering down the phone to a Time supporter, I'm going to read you a little bit of it.
This is where we are.
According to the New York Times, President Trump spoke to Comey saying, I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go.
He is a good guy.
I hope you can let this go.
This is something that was written out.
Was it written right after the meeting?
Did Trump have a chance to review?
Of course not, right?
Of course.
And Comey just got fired, and then, oh, lo and behold, months later, right after he gets fired, not him, some associate who has a copy of this memo phones the New York Times and says, my goodness.
It's hearsay.
Listen, I get it.
I get it.
I get it.
I get it, Democrats.
I get it, the mainstream media.
You don't like the election.
I get it.
You want to overturn the effects of the election.
Because this stuff would never happen under Obama.
Special prosecutors and stuff?
Oh, Republicans, Republicans, Republicans.
It's a battle.
For heaven's sake, stop self-inflicting all the damn time.
This would never happen under Obama.
I mean, you've got IRS scandals, you've got Benghazi, you've got all kinds of nefarious dealings, you've got uranium deals through Clinton's State Department with Russia.
And no special prosecutors.
But now they're all over the place.
I get it.
Don't like the effects of the election when I overturn it.
And as far as...
James Flynn goes.
So this is from the Washington Post.
Not exactly a Trump friendly organization.
Thanks, Jeff.
But the Washington Post, January 23rd, said the FBI in late December.
Oh, by the way, that's December 2016.
The FBI in late December reviewed intercepts of communications between the Russian ambassador to the United States and retired Lieutenant General Michael T. Flynn, National Security Advisor to then President-elect Trump, but has not found any evidence of wrongdoing or illicit ties to the Russian government, U.S.
officials said.
So... Trump's saying, I hope you're gonna let all this stuff go, because...
The FBI, at least according to some sources, said there was nothing there.
It was a nothing burger.
Nothing going on.
So yeah, let it go.
Stop continuing all this stuff.
He's expressing a hope.
He's expressing concern about an associate.
He's saying, look, there's nothing there according to FBI sources, so let it go.
I know, it's been a while since I've watched that movie too.
Still sticks in my head.
The New York Times went on to say, Mr. Trump told Mr. Comey that Mr. Flynn had done nothing wrong, according to the memo.
Mr. Comey did not say anything to Mr. Trump about curtailing the investigation, replying only, I agree.
He is a good guy.
So you understand this, this process?
FBI sources say he did nothing wrong.
Trump says, yeah, I hope you can let this go.
He's a good guy.
Nothing happens.
Comey gets fired.
Boom!
Half this goes to the New York Times.
You understand?
Banana Republic stuff going on here.
We need to wake up to this kind of stuff.
New York Times says, After writing up a memo that outlined the meeting, Mr. Comey shared it with senior FBI officials.
Mr. Comey and his aides perceived Mr. Trump's comments as an effort to influence the investigation.
Ooh.
Well, that is quite a charge.
You see, we'll get to this in a second.
Thanks for your patience here, but just stay with me, people.
Mr. Comey and his aides perceived Mr. Trump's comments as an effort to influence the investigation.
Well, that...
I'm no lawyer.
That doesn't seem to me to be specifically legal, if Mr. Trump did that.
Anyway, New York Times goes on to say, but they decided that they would try to keep the conversation secret, even from the FBI agents working on the Russia investigation.
So the details of the conversation would not affect the investigation.
You know, a good way to keep things secret is not to share it with a whole bunch of people.
It's just my particular thought, but... The White House statement.
Regarding this, quote, while the president has repeatedly expressed his view that General Flynn is a decent man who served and protected our country, the president has never asked Mr. Comey or anyone else to end any investigation, including any investigation involving General Flynn.
The president has the utmost respect for our law enforcement agencies and all investigations.
This is not a truthful or accurate portrayal of the conversation between the president and Mr. Comey.
Now my particular opinion time of course the attack on Flynn was a leftist attack designed to discredit the president and it was the first blood in the water the first scalp they got which has now continued to allow for this escalation of trying to get other scalps from the Trump presidency and his administration and so if it was a politically motivated pursuit of Flynn and if the FBI officials prior to the meeting that Comey has written up his notes about
If the FBI sources say there's nothing there, he did nothing wrong, then of course Trump is going to say, oh, let it go because you guys are saying they did nothing wrong.
He did nothing wrong.
It's a good guy.
What are you doing?
President Donald Trump on May 12th, 2017 said, James Comey better hope that there are no tapes of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press.
Right.
So this was after he fired Comey.
He was anticipating that something like this, I assume, was going to happen.
And, you know, the security agencies of the United States have accumulated quite a lot of power over the past, say, 50 years, and in particular since the passage of the first Patriot Act.
And, you know, Attempting to manage to control, to reassert some civilian oversight over these alphabet soup of highly invasive agencies.
Well, there's going to be just a little bit of pushback and that's important to remember.
So, this is how the objective, impartial, non-partisan mainstream media has reported this.
It's a dishonest bunch of guys, in my opinion.
The mainstream media, how did they report on the second-hand account of a memo containing hearsay related to the contents of a discussion?
NBC.
Comey memo says Trump asked him to end Flynd investigation.
MSNBC.
Comey memo says Trump asked to drop Flynn probe.
CNN.
The James Comey memo is an existential threat to Donald Trump's presidency.
Salon.
Donald Trump sinks ever deeper.
Comey's explosive memo caps another day of deepening White House scandal.
The Washington Post.
Trump asked Comey to shut down Flynn investigation.
Los Angeles Times.
Comey wrote a memo after Trump asked him to end FBI probe.
Think progress.
Trump asked Comey to kill Flynn investigation!
End!
Drop!
Kill!
Shut down!
Nothing like that was accurate based upon what was actually second-hand hearsay reported over the phone probably to the New York Times.
This is your media on leftism.
This is the non-impartial media.
I hope you can let it go, James Comey, because Flynn is a good guy.
And your agents say that there's nothing there, according to the media.
And this is the challenge.
This is stoking the mob.
What does the left always do?
The left inflates and extends innuendo and rumor to the point of catastrophe, stokes up the mob, arms the mob with rhetorical, escalating hysteria, and then turns the mob loose.
That's what they've been doing since the French Revolution.
And before.
On Thursday, May 3rd, 2017, then FBI Director James Comey testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on his experience with previous instances involving obstruction of justice.
So, here we go.
Senator Mazzehirono said.
So if the Attorney General or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation?
James Comey.
In theory, yes.
Mazzi Hirono said, has it happened?
James Comey, not in my experience.
Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that without an appropriate purpose.
I mean, where oftentimes they give us opinions that we don't see a case there and so you ought to stop investing resources in it.
But I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason.
That would be a very big deal.
It's not happened in my experience.
Let that Marianne Trench-style hour-dropped pebble sink in to your brain.
He says, I've never been told to stop an investigation for a political reason.
Trump gave an opinion and a hope.
He's a good guy.
I hope that you'll drop it.
Did Obama have a lot to say about the Hillary case?
The FBI's investigation of Hillary Clinton's mishandling of classified information and emails?
Obama had a lot to say about the Hillary case.
He campaigned for her!
Did he talk about the IRS scandal?
Benghazi?
Of course he did!
Publicly?
Privately?
Of course he did!
But it's okay, because he was Obama!
Magic shield of leftism!
Now people will say, and there's a pushback on this, right?
And they say, well, he's talking about the Attorney General, a senior official to the Department of Justice, not the President.
The President is the boss of the Attorney General.
And he's asking a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, not by specific individuals in general.
It's never, it's not happened in my experience.
James Comey saying, I have never been told to stop an investigation for political reasons.
This ends in a very bad place unless we can start to defund the hysterics of the mainstream media.
Stop consuming.
I have to.
You don't.
So.
Was he lying?
Seems kind of serious.
This is 18 U.S.
Code 1621.
Perjury.
Generally.
Quote.
Whoever won Having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed is true, willfully, and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true.
Don't lie!
These guys are just Shakespearean in their eloquence, aren't they?
Or, two, in any declaration, certificate verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28 United States Code willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true.
So that is perjury.
James Comey, under oath.
Says, but I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason.
That would be a very big deal.
It's not happened in my experience.
If the mainstream media is right, and Comey truly believes that Trump tried to stop an investigation, then he lied under oath to the senator.
The penalty, quote, Is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription is made within or without the United States.
So, this memo needs to be produced and we'll get to all of that in a second.
Now, if it says, if this memo says Trump told Comey to stop this investigation for political reasons, then Comey seems, to me at least, directly guilty of perjury.
And more, we'll get to more than that in a second.
Now, if Trump was merely expressing an opinion and a hope, then the mainstream media is guilty of, well, just being the mainstream media.
So on Thursday, May 11th, 2017, Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on issues related to the Russia investigation and the Trump administration.
So Senator Marco Rubio was about to ask a question.
And he said, has the dismissal of Mr. Comey in any way impeded, interrupted, stopped or negatively impacted any of the work, any investigations or any ongoing stopped or negatively impacted any of the work, any investigations or any ongoing project at the Federal Bureau of It's pretty, pretty broad.
Pretty broad.
Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe said, As you know, Senator, the work of the men and women of the FBI continues despite any changes in circumstances, any decisions.
So there has been no effort to impede our investigation to date.
Quite simply put, sir, you cannot stop the men and women of the FBI from doing the right thing, protecting the American people and upholding The Constitution.
So acting FBI director Andrew McCabe, does he know about the Comey memo?
If he does know about it, and the memo says Trump was interfering with this investigation, then Andrew McCabe just lied to the Senate Intelligence Committee.
If he does know about it, if he does know about the Comey memo, and it does not say that Trump interfered, then the mainstream media is fake news.
If he doesn't know about the Comey memo at all, Why not?
Why does he not know about the Comey memo with Trump's supposed big interference in this investigation?
In other words, the FBI was sitting on information that could potentially impeach a sitting U.S.
president and Comey did not give this information to the acting FBI director?
Why would you keep it to yourself?
You're not actually allowed to.
We'll get to that in a sec.
So, this is what they are alleging that Trump has done.
18 U.S.
Code 1503 Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally.
Quote, A. Whoever corruptly or by threats of force or by any threatening letter or communication.
Okay, so right there.
Any threat of force?
Any threat?
Anything like that?
He's like, hey, he's a good guy.
Your agents have said there's nothing there.
I hope you let it go.
Is that a threat?
Is that intimidation?
Whoever corruptly or by threats of force or by any threatening letter or communication endeavors to influence, intimidate or impede any grand or petit juror or officer in or of any court of the United States or officer who may be serving at any examination or other proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate in the discharge of his duty
or injures any such grand or petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict or indictment assented to by him or on account of his being or having been such juror or injures any such officer magistrate judge or other committee magistrate in his person or property on account of the performance of his official duties
or corruptly, or by threats of force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection B. Right?
I understand all of this.
Threaten people, break property, hurt them, whatever, right?
If, to quote, if the offense under this section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case, and the act in violation of the section involves the threat of physical force or physical force, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law, or the maximum term that could have
That is the code.
you U.S.
Code 1503.
Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally.
It's continued.
B. The punishment for an offense under this section is 1.
In the case of a killing, the punishment provided in section 1111 and 1112.
2.
In the case of an attempted killing or a case in which the offense was committed against a petit juror, And in which a class A or B felony was charged, imprisonment for not more than 20 years, a fine under this title, or both.
And three, in any other case, imprisonment for not more than 10 years, a fine under this title, or both.
So, was it criminal?
Even what Trump is alleged to have done.
George Washington.
The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo.
There are dozens of different variations of obstruction charges ranging from threatening witnesses to influencing jurors.
None would fit this case.
That leaves the omnibus provision on attempts to interfere with the, quote, Jew administration of justice.
However, that still leaves the need to show that the effort was to influence corruptly when Trump could say that he did little but express concern for a long-time associate.
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley also, quote, the term corruptly is actually defined differently under the various obstruction provisions, but it often involves a showing that someone acted, quote, with the intent but it often involves a showing that someone acted, quote, with the intent to secure an unlawful benefit for End quote.
Encouraging leniency or advocating for an associate is improper, but not necessarily seeking an unlawful benefit for him.
He goes on to say, Then there is the question of corruptly influencing what?
There is no indication of a grand jury proceeding at the time of the Valentine's Day meeting between Trump and Comey.
Obstruction cases generally are built around judicial proceedings, not Oval Office meetings.
Former defense attorney and Fox News anchor Greg Jarrett said, Under the law, Comey is required to immediately inform the Department of Justice of any attempt to obstruct justice by any person, even the President of the United States.
Failure to do so would result in criminal charges against Comey.
Hear that?
Not could result.
Would result in criminal charges against Comey.
18 U.S.C.
4 and 28 U.S.C. 1361.
He would also, upon sufficient proof, lose his license to practice law.
If Trump, if Comey believed that Trump was attempting to obstruct justice in any way, he must, must inform the Department of Justice.
Why didn't he?
Why didn't he?
I think we all know the answer to that one.
So, this is what he's referring to.
These are the two statutes.
18 U.S.
Code 4.
Misprision of felony.
Quote, whoever having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years or both.
If you know someone's about to rob a bank, you've got to call someone.
18 U.S.
Code 1361, and I quote, action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty.
The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus, that is, we command a judicial remedy in the form of an order from a court.
The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.
Again, former defense attorney and Fox News anchor Greg Jarrett says, obstruction requires what's called specific intent to interfere with a criminal case.
If Comey concluded, however, that Trump's language was vague, ambiguous, or elliptical, then he has no duty under the law to report it, because it does not rise to the level of specific intent.
Thus, no crime.
There is no evidence Comey ever alerted officials at the Justice Department, as he is duty-bound to do.
He must report an attempt to interfere with these proceedings.
But it's not like Comey ever gets confused about intent.
Greg Jarrett goes on to say, but by writing a memo, Comey has put himself in a box.
If he now accuses the president of obstruction, he places himself in legal jeopardy for failing to promptly and properly report it.
If he says it was merely an uncomfortable conversation, he clears the precedent of wrongdoing and sullies his own image as a guy who attempted to smear the man who fired him.
House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz to Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe on May 16, 2017.
Today, the New York Times reported former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey memorialized the content of phone calls and meetings with the President in a series of internal memoranda.
At least one such memorandum reportedly describes a conversation in which the President referenced the FBI investigation of former National Security Advisor Lieutenant General Michael Flynn and said to Comey, I hope you can let this go.
According to the report, quote, Mr. Comey created similar memos, including some that are classified, about every phone call and meeting he had with the president.
Boom.
Boom.
James Comey writes down phone calls and meetings he has with presidents or with the president.
That is quite a lot of information.
Now they say, oh, there's a culture of memo taking or note taking at the FBI.
Boom.
Good.
Let's see it.
Let's see James Comey's conversations with Hillary.
Let's see James Comey's conversations with Obama.
Let's see James Comey's conversations with Loretta Lynch.
Very interesting.
Ooh, unless the paper trail ends, and I'm guessing it will, the paper trail ends right when Trump gets into office.
He didn't make notes with the previous administration.
Ooh, that tells you all you need to know about impartiality as well.
So, Jason Chaffetz goes on to say, If true, these memoranda raise questions as to whether the President attempted to influence or impede the FBI's investigation as it relates to Lt.
Gen.
Flynn, so the Committee can consider that question and others, provide no later than May 24, 2017, all memoranda, notes, summaries, and recordings referring or relating to any communications between Comey and the President.
The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is the principal oversight committee of the House of Representatives and may, at any time, investigate any matter as set forth in House Rule 10.
An attachment to this letter provides additional information about responding to the committee's request.
Thank you for your attention in this matter.
Boy, talk about opening Pandora's box.
Got notes on everyone and everything, do you?
Mm-mm-mm.
Okay, let's have a look, shall we?
On May 17, 2017, the Senate Judiciary Committee called on the FBI to provide all memos relating to former FBI Director Comey's interactions with his superiors in both the Trump and Obama administrations.
Quote, Yesterday, the New York Times reported that former Director Comey created memos regarding his interactions with President Trump.
Quote, A paper trail Mr. Comey created documenting what he perceived as the president's improper efforts to influence an ongoing investigation.
You see that language?
Improper, not illegal.
Improper.
Quote, the article stated that Mr. Comey created similar memos, including some that are classified, about every phone call and meeting he had with the president.
More generally, the article stated, Mr. Comey was known among his closest advisors to document conversations that he believed would later be called into question.
Well, I'm sure a lot of his conversations with a bunch of people in the Obama administration, you'd have every reason to think that they might later be called into question, I guess, unless you thought Hillary was going to win.
Yeah, it's a bummer when that stuff doesn't work out, I suppose.
So the Judiciary Committee went on to say, presumably this means that Mr. Comey created similar memoranda relating to other controversial conversations, whether with officials in the current administration or the prior one.
And again, if I had to put money on it, I'd say that there's not a lot of paperwork under the Obama administration.
But boom!
The moment Trump comes in, he's writing everything down.
And not giving it to you to review if you're sitting across the table from him.
Just his thoughts, his notes.
One side of the story.
The Senate Judiciary Committee said, We are writing to request that the FBI provide the committee with all such memos, if they exist, that Mr. Comey created memorializing interactions he had with Presidents Trump and Obama.
Attorneys General Sessions and Lynch and Deputy Attorneys General Rosenstein, Buente and Yates regarding the investigations of Trump associates alleged connections with Russia or the Clinton email investigation.
Please provide these documents by no later than May 24th, 2017.
So one of Comey's jobs was to communicate with Attorney General Loretta Lynch about whether to pursue Hillary.
Ooh.
I'm sure he's written all of that stuff down.
Lots of notes.
Lots of memos about all that kind of stuff.
Bet you not.
The Judiciary Committee went on to say, We anticipate that some of these documents may be classified, some may not, and others may contain both classified and unclassified information.
Please deliver any documents containing classified information to the Office of Senate Security and provide all unclassified documents directly to the Committee.
If you have any specific requests with regards to the Committee's handling of unclassified material, please raise those with us in advance.
What is the karmic word for backfire?
We'll see.
So.
Come on, this is just another witch hunt.
Everybody knows that.
The Democrats thought they had it in the bag, did not like how the election turned out, and now are seeking to overturn it through all of this stuff, all of this nonsense.
Now here's what you need to do.
Please, people.
It's like the media has got these remote control ball tasers, or spine tasers if you like.
Zap!
Zap!
Ha!
Ha!
Everybody's freaking out.
Oh no!
It's an existential!
Ha!
Blah!
Blah!
Crazy stuff.
You need to stop feeding this stuff.
You need to stop feeding the beast.
This rumor, this innuendo, this hysteria, this escalation, this... Stop!
Stop going to these websites.
Stop buying this material.
Stop giving them money.
This is not how objective reporting is supposed to go.
This is partisan, soft coup material, in my humble opinion.
Get the facts.
The more the hysteria is occurring, the more, in my opinion, it's covering up a giant nothing burger.
The empty vessel screams the loudest.
When there's nothing there, you get the most air horns.
We need to take a deep breath.
And if you're watching this channel, if you're listening to this channel, you're a smart person.
You're an eloquent person.
You're a good person.
I'm telling you that.
Now that's great.
It's wonderful.
I applaud you for your efforts in virtue, for all of the wonderful happiness and integrity and love and beauty that virtue brings to your existence.
But when you become a good person, you become a responsible person.
And these days, there are times when good people have fun jobs, and then there are times when good people get drafted by the escalating hysteria of the mob into one of the less pleasant jobs that good people just have to do.
I mean, sorry, if you have a magic Healing finger?
And there are sick people around?
Sorry, you've got to touch them from time to time.
It's just the nature of the beast.
If you know how to do the Heimlich Maneuver and someone's choking on a fish bone, you've got to get up, you've got to walk over, you've got to save that person's life.
You don't get to say, well, my Cherry Jubilee is just too lovely, I can't.
No.
Sorry.
You're a good person, you have a job.
Right now, you have one job.
One job, which is to prevent this escalation.
It is to push back.
It is to calm people down.
It is to stop this escalation.
If the Trump presidency founders on this kind of stuff, Trump was the last chance for this all to be done peacefully, in my opinion.
It is your job, as a good person, as an honest person, As a virtuous person, you have one job now.
It's not fun.
You have one job.
▲
Export Selection