OK, let me be real clear about this concept pertaining to ex-FBI director Comey’s remarks.

He claims to have written memos about a conversation he had with President Trump pertaining to investigations his office might or might not be conducting, and supposed comments he had between the president and himself.

OK, that’s all well and good. The problem is with writing a “memo” about anything that you were involved in is nothing more than your opinion about what took place or how you interpreted the event as you saw it in your mind.

It’s not backed up with any witnesses or cameras, or audiotapes, per se. It’s just your opinion, and everyone has an opinion, and that opinion is not based on any case law. It’s just how, in this case, the way Mr. Comey viewed the event between him and the president which, (in my opinion) goes nowhere, because it has nothing to back it up as being factual.

For that you need a witness or more to be able to sustain the “memo” as being factual. Common sense, you can write or say anything you want, it’s free speech. Now prove that it really happened; where’s the proof?

Talk is cheap, opinions are free, everyone has got one. Where’s the proof that supports the “memo?”