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

...Question:

...how long does anybody think it would take the Donald to answer what the definition of the word "is" is...?

 

If they have nothing on you then just decline to interview and let them issue their findings or go for a subpoena.

We have no idea whether they have anything on him or not.

It's possible they have nothing on him.
It's possible they think they have something on him but hope he gives them what they need in an interview.
It's possible they have something on him but want to get on the record answers so when they reveal what they know he can't make up a story.

We have no idea. And you AND Trump are included in "we." WE have no idea what Mueller does or doesn't have.

I do agree with you though that Trump would be foolish to interview unless compelled.

 

so you are fine with him crafting answers with 'mommy and daddy'. glad we can cross off that complaint.

 

that's basically what trump's done. T

with how much his investigation leaks, we do really know.

 

Well "fine with" is probably the wrong way to describe it, but I accept that as the right of an American to have legal counsel.

 

He hasn't officially declined an interview yet, but like I've said, I'm fine with him doing that. I won't judge him for that or say it shows guilt. I don't blame ANYONE for refusing to do an interview with someone investigating you if you aren't legally compelled to do so. Why would you want to? They aren't your friend or ally. In Trump's case it would be especially dangerous because he is so prone to lying and talking too much in general.

I don't even blame his attorneys for asking for the questions in writing. Can't hurt to ask. I'm annoyed at people like you acting like it's an injustice that Mueller won't agree to let him get questions submitted in writing for his lawyers to answer on his behalf.

 

Flynn was not investigated and busted for lying.

He is a criminal who did numerous illegal acts, and was offered a deal, which just so happened to be lying to the FBI, because it is one of the most minor things they can charge him with. He would not have been charged with lying to the FBI, if all the other illegal things did not happen.

If you think the authorities "have nothing", then you are astonishingly clueless.

You really do think he is innocent, don't you?

 

#1. Do you know what a subpoena is?

A subpoena is a subpoena, an order to do something. Be that to turnover documents or be deposed.

Again, no there is no way for you to justify "again, it's something that would likely fail in court". You have zero basis for this.

Indeed, it is simply your opinion.

The precedent is that President Trump would have to respond to a subpoena but it isn't a slam dunk either way.

Again, it ultimately would fall in the lap of the Supreme Court to decide.

https://lawfareblog.com/can-presidency-trump-special-counsel-subpoena

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...no-one-knows-for-sure/?utm_term=.2b4acc4cccb3

https://www.vox.com/2018/3/15/16997474/mueller-subpoena-trump-russia-probe

#2. Your second paragraph is garbage and not even worth addressing, as it is again just one of your usual farts in the wind that are devoid of any substance.

 

I take this to mean that you don't understand the difference between handing over evidence and being compelled to appear and testify. Fair enough, but that sort of ends the conversation.

 

Again...... another fart in the wind.

Bobby logic 101: "Just because"

 

...everything about Robert Mueller's prosecutorial history suggests that this challenge may be one of the major indicators of his pursuit of this case up to this point. He has been remarkably methodical, but he seems loathe to have to do what I am fairly certain Donald Trump will almost compel...

...and that is not to challenge Donald Trump personally (which is what all of the exposition of his ancillary behavior suggests, and was really at the heart of the scandal surrounding Bill Clinton)...but to challenge the idea of the presidency in general, once again. However political such a confrontation would be presented, the inevitability of it, and its implications for the republic, seem to be at least enough for now to give Mr. Mueller some pause as to how to proceed. He is, of course, of the era of the Nixon/Watergate investigation, and I am sure he keenly remembers how disillusioned much of the nation was by what was discovered about Richard Nixon's behavior while in office.

Stymieing (pre-planned or pre-arranged questions-and-answers), or removing Mueller as the special prosecutor outright (which is actually just as likely at this juncture), serves, as history shows, to only delay the inevitable. Whatever else can be said, it is widely held that Robert Mueller, in little more than a year, has secured several indictments in relation to the cloud of suspicion surrounding Donald Trump's presidential candidacy and term. Those facts, in and of themselves, are extraordinary, given their proximity to the president. Nothing about those indictments suggests anything other than timeliness and thoroughness. And I would also surmise that Mr. Mueller knows far more that he is willing to divulge outside of process.

It may very well be time to have this thing aired out...because I suspect that the only major discovery will be just how compromised our public offices and institutions really are, and how we might be at our last opportunity, as something resembling a democratic nation, to correct it...

 

This isn’t even remotely accurate, might want to check your facts there kiddo.

 

The stupidity does look amazing when you think Trump is innocent and there is actually no good cause to think otherwise. When you're pretty sure he's guilty, it takes on a different aspect.

As to why I want Trump to invoke his rights himself is because he is the witness. I'll defer to a resident lawyer on the niceties of practice, but I wouldn't think it'd be responsive to the subpoena if Trump had a lawyer assert the right for him instead of showing up himself.

Agree with your whole post. Mueller seems to want to delay the head-to-head clash for as long as possible so he can have his whole case built before it becomes a brazen political fight. The fact that we are not talking about the potential to subpoena the president in the near future might mean we will have the culmination soon, either because Mueller is ready or because he can avoid it no longer.

 

A big sticky point for the President is that he does not want to read 49 questions. 4 or 5 may be his limit.

Word on the street is also that Trump wants to tweet his answers.

 

Yes, questions must be submitted via a powerpoint presentation lasting no longer than 5 minutes, and the answers will be tweeted. Because he is a fully grown up very stable adult genius.

 

Put him on ignore. It’s what the cool, smart kids do.

 

...lol.....

...well that explains it for me then...
....I ain't ever been cool OR smart...

 

Which President was that?

 

Okay so if Mueller had to kick over the Cohen case to SDNY and not the Manafort case and the Cohen case had 500k of Russian Oligarch funds paying back a Trump scandal payoff, what does that tell us about the Manafort probe and it’s connection to the Russia collusion case?

Look... Mueller could be overstepping here and for some unknown reason decided to refer one case and not the other even though the one he kicked over has more to do with Russia collusion than the other.

Or it could be that in the pages and pages of redacted evidence in the indictment, the Manafort case actually does tie back to Russian collusion in a big way and the judge who smacked around Mueller’s team the other day just needed to make sure that there was evidence there to connect to Russian collusion.