Quote:

---

CNN has corrected a Tuesday report after the release of former FBI Director James Comey's opening statement for his Thursday testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee contradicted the reports' sources.

The CNN report said Comey was expected to dispute President Trump's claims that Comey said he was not under investigation on multiple occasions.

The report, titled “Comey expected to refute Trump," was based on unnamed sources and said Comey's conversations with the president "were much more nuanced," and that Trump drew the wrong conclusion.

The story was complied by four CNN journalists, including Gloria Borger, Eric Lichtblau, Jake Tapper and Brian Rokus.

Borger reiterated the reports claims in an appearance on CNN Tuesday.

“Comey is going to dispute the president on this point if he’s asked about it by senators, and we have to assume that he will be," said Borger, the network's chief political analyst. "He will say he never assured Donald Trump that he was not under investigation, that that would have been improper for him to do so.”

Comey's opening statement did, however, mention asserting that Trump was not under investigation, however the statement failed to specify whether Trump was not under criminal investigation, but only said there was no counter-intelligence investigation on the president.

"Prior to the January 6 meeting, I discussed with the FBI’s leadership team whether I should be prepared to assure President-Elect Trump that we were not investigating him personally," wrote Comey. "That was true; we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him. We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted."

"During our one-on-one meeting at Trump Tower, based on President Elect Trump’s reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, I offered that assurance," Comey added.

CNN published a correction to its story Wednesday afternoon with the revised headline: "Comey unlikely to judge on obstruction.”

"CORRECTION AND UPDATE: This article was published before Comey released his prepared opening statement," it reads above the original Tuesday story. "The article and headline have been corrected to reflect that Comey does not directly dispute that Trump was told multiple times he was not under investigation in his prepared testimony released after this story was published.

---

Quote:

---

Mr. Comey, who was abruptly fired by Mr. Trump last month, will address their interactions about the F.B.I.’s investigation into possible links between Mr. Trump’s associates and the ALLEGED Russian effort to tamper in last year’s presidential election. Read his prepared remarks, which were released Wednesday.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:
He wasn't under investigation by the FBI. There's still Mueller and 4 other 'Trump Loves Putin' investigations by Congress.

---

Quote:

---

The focus on Comey ignores what National Security Agency chief Mike Rogers and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats had to say on Wednesday when they testified before the same committee the former FBI director will face on Thursday.

Both men, each of whom has a reputation as being above reproach, testified that at no time did they feel pressured by the president to interfere with the FBI's ongoing probe of alleged Russian efforts to subvert the 2016 presidential election despite published reports they had.

"In the three-plus years that I have been director of the National Security Agency, I have never been directed to do anything I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate and to the best of my recollection during that same period of service I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so," Rogers told the committee according to an account published in Politico.

---

Quote:

---

It's important to say no one has yet been able to say precisely what it is the Russians were supposed to have done that tipped the outcome of the election to Trump. We've heard about hacking and fake news stories and other activities that might be labeled political espionage, but only in the theoretical sense. Hillary Rodham Clinton lost the election for plenty of reasons, including overconfidence and being a spectacularly bad candidate. It didn't help that the major media did all they could to cover up her flaws either; the American people knew what they would be getting in a second Clinton presidency, even if those who live inside the liberal media bubble could not face up to it. The president did not need the Russians or anyone else to interfere while Clinton was self-destructing.

---