And this is how KN loses every argument. If you are wrong why not just admit it instead of labeling those who beat you as "reality deniers".
You clearly don't know the difference between "No" and "Not that I'm aware of".
I do find it interesting that with Trump committing obstruction of justice you stretch heavily to make the "hope" claim fit the crime, and with Comey you stretch heavily to make his statement
not fit the crime.
Wrong.
With Trump it isn't about the word "Hope". Actually if we just take Trumps statements as individual statements, I agree that he didn't commit obstruction of Justice. My argument is the intent behind those words and my basis for that argument is the situation. Obstruction of Justice is a crime of intent. I've also stated multiple times that I accept that as a possibility but not a certainity.
For Comey, Perjury can be viewed a crime of Intent. Whether it is or not doesn't make a difference because his statement was way to vague to be a "smoking gun". He doesn't allude to it not happening he simply states that he, at that time, he couldn't remember.
The stretch in Comey's case is actually saying that he committed Perjury because you have to infer that he was indeed aware at the time.
I don't think the Trump argument is a stretch either way but a difference in viewing the situation. I, at the least, understand why you guys feel the need to protect Trump. Party above nation right?