Robert Mueller, Former F.B.I. Director, Is Named Special Counsel for Russia Investigation

Anyone who talks to any investigator ever gets to sit with a lawyer and talk through their answers beforehand. Its every Americans right.

 

Mueller can most likely subpoena the president. There is at least a certain amount of precedent for it.

 

Well for sure, when the goal is to try and trip him up in order to get him to say the wrong thing as to have an actual crime to go after him with....something Mueller doesn't currently have, it would be useless to have a prepared statement but that's the only thing on the table for obvious reasons.

If he merely wants on the record answers to questions, the written answers would suffice. He's clearly hoping for a perjury trap in order to finally have something against the president.

 

Perjury trap isn't the only logical reason why someone would want an in person interview. I know that you know this and you are just playing this because it's your shtick right now.

 

Every American has the right to refuse to answer questions except in written format submitted to their lawyers?

 

name some other reasons Mueller would want a personal interview over written answers.

Every American gets to consult with a lawyer before answering any investigators questions. This is what you all seem to be complaining about. I believe you said 'take home test and mommy and daddy answer' or something. That's every American that gets 'mommy and daddy' help. Its your right. Trump agreed to answer his questions.

 

Pretty simple. If I give you my full range of questions you get to see everything I will ask about beforehand and craft a narrative that is designed to answer each question.

If I ask them of you in person without you knowing what's next you may spin a narrative on the spot that doesn't logically work. It isn't about establishing a perjury charge, it's about letting your answers lead me to what you may or may not be hiding. Searching for inconsistencies, seeing what you struggle to answer, etc. Did the question surprise you? Does your answer here create a hole in your story earlier that you now start trying to fix? Maybe as you speak you let something slip that I didn't know. Maybe you add something to your story that your lawyers told you not to mention.

Now, as the target of the investigation I don't blame anyone for not wanting to sit with an investigator. I totally agree with the notion that they aren't looking to help you. That doesn't mean "perjury trap" though, it just means they are looking for you to help THEM. They are trying to lock you into a story, find inconsistencies, find what you try squirm to hide, etc. Why would anyone voluntarily help them with that?

I don't think the president should sit down with Mueller unless he faces subpoena personally. I just think the complaint about not getting a take home interview he can hand to his lawyers to fill out is ridiculous.

 

give him one question at a time. easy. written answers doesn't prevent this. All written answers do is let you choose your words carefully. Like when crafting an important email.

 

That doesn't address the entire post.

I wonder if you guys support this kind of criminal justice reform for the whole country. Should all investigations of all crimes going forward be limited to written questionnaires filed out by attorneys?

 

The President can ignore a subpoena (indeed anyone can) and then he can face contempt of court charges and jail time. It isn't unique to the President. A similar issue was litigated the last time we had a lying piece of **** in office during the Nixon Presidency. Ultimately the Supreme Court ruled against the President.

Ultimately the issue rests with the Supreme Court.

Having said that, there is no guarantee that Mueller will take that tact because it will likely slow down his investigation.

Nope.

There are other avenues that Trump or Mueller can take.

At the end it rests in the hands of the Supreme Court.

 

Fair enough. Mueller has subpoenaed yet and would obviously prefer a voluntary interview. But the implication you've made is that Mueller should be content with carefully crafted answers from Trump's lawyers and he's being unreasonable in rejecting that compromise and insisting on an interview. Maybe its time he really insist. Issue the subpoena. Have the fight about whether or not presidents can be subpoenaed. If Mueller wins, Trump pleads the 5th in person and we move on to the next stage in the investigation. If Mueller loses, Trump doesn't show up for an interview and we move to the next stage of the investigation.

But maybe it is a compromise Mueller will take. Trump does have leverage here. Mueller's not going to gain much from an interview in which the president pleads the fifth. And, he can complicate and slow things by fighting over whether a subpoena should have power. Maybe Mueller would take written responses for Joe Citizen as well if it was more useful and expedient. That's fine. I just don't like the intimation that compelling a president to testify is inappropriate. Mueller's doing his job. If Trump wants to exercise his fifth amendment rights, he should do so.

 

Not really. There are two types of written testimony... depositions and affidavits. Affidavits require a reason why the testimony can't be given in person (illness, incarceration, moving out of state, etc). The affidavit is notarized and then introduced into evidence after being approved by prosecution and defense.

Depositions involve attorneys from both sides and involve cross examination. A court reporter is present at all time to create transcripts that are then made available to prsecution and defense. They can be and usually are videotaped or audiotaped. Bill Clinton gave videotaped testimony in the Monica Lewinsky affair, and as you know that didn't go that well for Clinton.

I suspect trump and his supporters would hope he simply gives an affidavit to avoid trump being cross-examined, but there would be no legal reason he couldn't appear. And a deposition would put him in front of a prosecuting attorney that would certainly ask probing and follow up questions.

 

LMFAO As an attorney that has to deal with written interrogatories all the time, this is laughable.

Guess who would end up answering the interrogatories? Trump's legal representative.

 

No they don't.

 

this is ever american who has been interviewed. you get to craft answers with a lawyer (written or in person). its your right. The reason Mueller wants a personal interview is to avoid this.

 

But what if answers could be delivered in 280 characters or less, including exclamation marks?

 

Could. Because in real life, most people do not have the money it would take to pay the lawyers for such an excruciatingly time-consuming back-and-forth like that. We could reform the justice system in this way and it would be a vehicle to evade prosecutions available only to the rich.

 

"Many people are saying" that Mueller might subpoena trump on May 17. Appears that Giuliani believes so since he is attempting his prep of trump to be ready by May 17... though at the rate the prep is going trump may need until May 17, 2019.

 

Why would Mueller want a personal interview of written answers? Because he wants truthful answers and not answers drafted and composed by Trump's lawyer.

You seem to be confusing having the right to legal representation with having your lawyer testify for you. They are not the same thing.

Ultimately Mueller will subpoena him or he won't and Trump will fire Rosenstein or he won't.

If Trump chooses he can take his Constitutional right against self incrimination. That would be a death knell for any other President, but the expectations of Donald Trump's morality is so low that it likely wouldn't hurt him with his supporter.

 

Are you a lawyer? What world do you live in? You think everyone who's ever been interviewed as part of an investigation gets to take the questions beforehand and script answers with their attorneys? Is this what they are selling on talk radio right now?