It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump legal team seeking precedent to avoid Mueller interview: report

page: 3
16
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex

originally posted by: toysforadults
who cares

Obviously not the faithful.

Evidently only those on the outside , looking in




posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 07:40 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

The President has few choices. If The President wants to talk to the FBI voluntarily, then that's how it will happen. By the way, you can not lie to the FBI without breaking the law. If the President refused to testify, he'll be issued a subpoena (just like President Bill Clinton had). Then The President will talk to a Grand Jury. No lawyers in a Grand Jury, just the Prosecutor and you testifying. It is against the law to lie to a grand jury. The only other option would be taking the fifth. But we all know The President has nothing to hide, SO WHY WOULD HE HAVE TO DO THAT?

Sorry, but it's not up to Trump's lawyers whether or not he has to talk to the FBI. If the FBI want The President to talk to them, The President will. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW. Not Bill Clinton, in his day. Not Trump now.



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oaktree
a reply to: matafuchs
You forgot that Trump hates avocados.
He’s building the wall knowing it will eventually stop the flow of avocados to the U.S.

Ah , yes. Avocados. And rightly so.
Teen Titans episode The Avogodo




posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 07:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: carewemust


whatever.. we noticed the "if my lawyer lets me" crap right off. jesus..j

he's a puss, that's what pusses do.

no way in hell his lawyer would want him under oath.


That is a most intellectual , mature , and informative post.



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: gortex

originally posted by: toysforadults
who cares

Obviously not the faithful.

Evidently only those on the outside , looking in

Of course , what happens in your country effects my country.



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: MiddleInsite

well, there's always the great "I don't recall"...
maybe he could get out of it by resigning, but that might not even work.



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Mueller: Are you a Russian spy?

Trump: Nop.

Mueller: Are you from Moscow?

Trump: Nop.

Mueller: Are you planning on nuking America?

Trump: Maybe.

Mueller: Are you Putin's ho?

Trump: Maybe.

Mueller: You cleared.



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: diggindirt

a reply to: Southern Guardian
Had you watched the actual "impromptu" press conference when he made the "I'm looking forward to it." statement you would have noted that he added the "...depending on the what the lawyers say." meaning he would follow the advice of his counsel. Who would not follow the advice of counsel?



As usual, the liberal media doesn't report an important part of the President's statement. They do that all the time. I'm going to ENJOY watching them fry.


I have to differ with you. I was trapped in a room with msm on the tv when the clip was shown. Don't recall whether it was CNN or NBC but it was there, even in the hit pieces. Some people just refuse to hear. Some people fail to employ logic in pursuit of emotional reinforcement.

One of things I did notice about the msm coverage was the lack of footage/comments of Trump's arrival. I heard a lot of dire predictions about how he was going to be snubbed....but actual footage shown by Infowars showed quite a warm reception for him upon arrival.

I watched the speech and was impressed. Seems that the audience gave him a nice round of applause at the end.



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 09:55 PM
link   
Who knows, it could be all smoke and mirrors and this interview might not be what we think.

"Good afternoon Mr. President. Here is what I've discovered so far about Hillary et al..."




posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

If i was one of Trump's advisers and knew a rogue agent was trying to trip him up with a "one on one" dialogue, I know I'd find any way to prevent that... Its Mueller's job to try to prove Russia/Trump collusion. Trump owes this investigation NOTHING... I would stone wall them if I was him, just like the Dems are stonewalling all the congressional/senate hearings and the damning evidence being released..



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

In the absence of a "source" for the original Wall Street Journal article that's being recycled by the liberal media, its safe to chalk this up to another "news" piece that's based on some reporter's dream.



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 10:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
Who knows, it could be all smoke and mirrors and this interview might not be what we think.

"Good afternoon Mr. President. Here is what I've discovered so far about Hillary et al..."



Ding! Ding! Ding! Have a cigar 'cause I think you've hit the jackpot here. I've heard several pretty intelligent and savvy people express the opinion that it isn't Trump who should be worried about being tricked in this interview. If Trump has the truth on his side as he claims, it is Mueller who better hope he's got his ducks in a row.

I don't find it out of the realm of possibility that this "interview" will devolve into a series of written questions.



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 10:29 PM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt


Another possibility is that President Trump already interviewed with Bob Mueller.

All of the current rumor-pushing, and hours of panel discussions, will make the liberal media look like bigger idiots than they already are. Egg-on-face x1000.



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 10:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
a reply to: dawnstar

The President has few choices. If The President wants to talk to the FBI voluntarily, then that's how it will happen. By the way, you can not lie to the FBI without breaking the law. If the President refused to testify, he'll be issued a subpoena (just like President Bill Clinton had). Then The President will talk to a Grand Jury. No lawyers in a Grand Jury, just the Prosecutor and you testifying. It is against the law to lie to a grand jury. The only other option would be taking the fifth. But we all know The President has nothing to hide, SO WHY WOULD HE HAVE TO DO THAT?

Sorry, but it's not up to Trump's lawyers whether or not he has to talk to the FBI. If the FBI want The President to talk to them, The President will. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW. Not Bill Clinton, in his day. Not Trump now.



Remember this?

Trump can answer in writing to submitted questions.




Hillary Clinton must answer questions in writing but need not appear for a deposition in a lawsuit that challenges her use of a private email server while she was secretary of State, a federal judge ruled Friday.


www.latimes.com...



edit on 1 27 2018 by burgerbuddy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 10:55 PM
link   
Having paid attention to this, the following can be stated:

The President is between a rock and a hard spot. Anything he does will have political implications and will also affect the Republican directly and indirectly the Democrats as well. Since Mueller was hired, and brought on to do this investigation, the President can not merely just fire the man. To do such, could cause a far greater political backlash, which no one will want.

So eventually the President will have to talk to Mueller. And right now there are really 2 options that are there and both sides know it. And the implications that will come from each. The first thing that Trump’s team is afraid of is that Mueller is setting a perjury trap. And unfortunately, that is the least of their worries, and Mueller is not going for a perjury charge.

So option A. This is where Trump’s lawyers and Mueller’s lawyers come to an agreement about the interview. In this option it is weighed heavy in favor of Trump, where they are getting to set a few options. Ideally, Trump’s legal team is wanting just written questions. And Mueller’s team is wanting a face to face meeting. But in either case Trump’s legal team is wanting to do this interview, to where both sides can talk. As I stated, it would be weighted in favor of Trump, cause they would be able to be in the room and actually give the President advice on how to answer and to the best of their ability, prevent him from saying anything that could get him into trouble or used against him later on. Here the full force of the 5th amendment would be in effect, to protect himself.

But then there is option B. This is where Mueller convenes a grand jury and Trump is handed a subpoena to come to it. He cannot refuse the subpoena, and would have to be there. This is the nightmare scenario that Trump’s lawyers would have, as it would be weighted in favor of Mueller. There Trump would be in front of a jury and would have to answer questions. He would not be allowed to have an attorney present and the Jury there could ask him any question and he would have to answer truthfully. Here the 5th amendment would be curtailed and any other privilege would not be allowed. And it would be recorded and would be part of a record.

So I would say that Option A is what Trump’s lawyers are going for and are right now in negotiations with Mueller’s team to where they are laying the ground work for an actual interview and for the President to talk with.



posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 11:06 PM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

He's a sitting POTUS, his lawyers can ask/argue for written questions.

Citing it's all BS anyway.

Backlash if he fires Mueller? Not if it's within his constitutional wheelhouse.

He could probably have him eliminated. lol, not really but who will complain? Chucky?

Make up your minds, you want him to act like a dictator or not?





posted on Jan, 27 2018 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig
Interesting ideas and well-presented.


I do think there are other options, such as the written questions. But what I've been reminded of just now is that this whole idea that Mueller wants this interview is just backroom whispers at this point. Mueller himself isn't commenting.

I can't find a single story on this "interview" that has a pertinent name associated with any of the information presented except what the president said in the "impromptu" press conference.

As I understand it, Trump would be within his rights to fire Mueller. But I also understand that action probably wouldn't be advisable until this investigation is over.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy
ya, he can argue/ask for written questions, but then it would be up to mueller to accept or deny his request. if mueller decided he wants to sit down and talk face to face, I'm not sure trump could get out of it.
but, I don't understand why the conservatives don't want him to be interviewed, since, they say he didn't do anything wrong and this is just one big nothing burger. or maybe, could it be, they are worried that the man so many of them claim to be chosen by God himself to be president just can't go 10 minutes without lying about something??

but, look at the bright side, if mueller is wanting to interview trump, that might be he's tying up the lose ends and the investigation is about to come to an end.... thought that was what you all wanted???



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 12:50 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

The funny thing about this position is that it requires all three branch's of government to do this position. The legislative branch has to request, the Ex branch has to order and the Judicial branch to empower a person. While the Special Prosecutor is under the jurisdiction of the Justice Department, that is true. However if the President fires Mueller, the political backlash would be there, as then there would be accusations that the President, is obstructing justice. And thus those in congress would call for and thus start proceedings on impeachment on those grounds. it is far too risky for the President to do such.

The only way for the President to avoid such, is either not to fire the man, or if he does would be to present concrete evidence against Mueller and it would mean that Mueller would have an opportunity to testify and then it could go even worse for the President.



posted on Feb, 5 2018 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Monday, February 5, 2018

President Trump's lawyers are advising him to NOT engage in a sit-down interview with Robert Mueller. Might be a trap!
thehill.com...

I didn't start a thread on this development, because as far as I know, Mueller has not (yet) REQUESTED that Trump have a one-on-one interview with him.

-cwm




top topics



 
16
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join