Here Are The Questions that Bob Mueller Wants President Trump to Answer.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Why?

Trump has been tweeting, shouting and complaining for over a year that there is nothing illegal or illicit that occurred?

These questions appear straight forward and an opportunity for Trump to clear his name and move on to more important issues.

The Special Counsel is conducting an investigation on behalf of the People of the United States of America.
Trump can simply honestly answer the questions put to him an he will be fine.

Dozens and dozens of people, who don't have the added advantage of Presidential Immunity, have happily testified under oath in this investigation.

How do you envision any of these questions a trap if honestly answered? He has not done anything wrong, correct?

Any sort of misstatement or error can and will be construed as obstruction of justice, such as in the case of Martha Stewart and Scooter Libby.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: carewemust

They are not quoted verbatim, and some were condensed.

why ????

Obviously the NYTimes chose not to. I agree. WHY?

a reply to: soberbacchus

if he had evidence would his boss reportedly tell trump he was not a target?
either rr is lying on 4/19 or he is not

rr says there is not even enough evidence to make trump a target, reportedly
how do you spin that into an impeachable offense?
when rr is giving the recommendation?
oops congress my bad, he was a target?
yeah sure

a reply to: soberbacchus

You wrongly (illogically) offer that as proof that the Special Counsel does not have incriminating evidence on Trump

So true...
Forty nine lines of inquiry sure say different doesn't it?

What's even more perplexing is why the Russian lawyer (Natalia?) who used deceit to set up the Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump jr, is complaining that Bob Mueller never interviewed her. "If he wants to know the truth, he should interview me. I was there!".

a reply to: carewemust

I think that the reason Mueller doesn't raise that alarm is because he doesn't intend to indict.

a reply to: shooterbrody

You're the one acting like something about the case being made public is somehow new. Every single thing about the case has been made public up to this point so it's strange that you are just now taking issue with it.

a reply to: shooterbrody


Papadapoulos wasn't a target. Look what happened to him. Indicted for lying.

a reply to: Sillyolme

so you think this is over?

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

thanks!
it will all be public shortly
foia and all

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

I think that the reason Mueller doesn't raise that alarm is because he doesn't intend to indict.

Do you feel the $36 million taxpayer dollars he's spent thus far has been worthwhile?

a reply to: Sillyolme

Do people usually plead the fifth when the cops question them or do they simply choose to remain silent as is their right?

I'm not sure what people usually do, but people can either invoke their 5th amendment right or they can practice it by remaining silent.

I'm not saying it doesn't apply I'm saying the fifth and miranda is redundant in my opinion.

Miranda rights are nothing more than the police giving a criminal suspect notice of their right to remain silent.

When this was breaking this morning,
the inital 'framing' was that someone close to, but not in, Trum's team was the leaker,
Any further info slipping out ?

I'd say Dowd or Giuliani... but that's just me !

Anyhow, if these are the real questions that Mueller really does want to ask,
then, to a certain extent, Trump will have to take the 5th.
Which will make him look bad in public opinion.

If Trump was in a combatatif mood,
wanting to 'duke it out' with Mueller,
then he'll finish up by putting his foot in his mouth
-> Lying under oath in a criminal investigation, what's that worth ?

Any how, just a few of the questions from the OP's Link :

• What did you think about Mr. Comey’s intelligence briefing on Jan. 6, 2017, about Russian election interference?
The briefing revealed that American intelligence agencies had concluded that Russian operatives meddled in the election to hurt Mrs. Clinton and to boost Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump has repeatedly cast doubt on these conclusions and said he believes the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, who denies any interference.

• What was your reaction to Mr. Comey’s briefing that day about other intelligence matters?
This question addresses documents written by a retired British spy, Christopher Steele, who said that Russia had gathered compromising information on Mr. Trump. The documents, which became known as the Steele Dossier, also claim that the Trump campaign had ties to the Russian government. Mr. Comey privately briefed Mr. Trump about these documents.

• What was the purpose of your Jan. 27, 2017, dinner with Mr. Comey, and what was said?
A few weeks after his briefing, Mr. Comey was called to the White House for a private dinner. Mr. Comey’s notes say that Mr. Trump raised concerns about the Steele Dossier and said he needed loyalty from his F.B.I. director. This question touches on Mr. Trump’s true motivation for firing Mr. Comey: Was he dismissed because he was not loyal and would not shut down an F.B.I. investigation?

.. snip ...

• Regarding the decision to fire Mr. Comey: When was it made? Why? Who played a role?
Over the past several months, Mr. Mueller has asked White House officials for the back story, and whether the public justification was accurate. He will be able to compare Mr. Trump’s answers to what he has learned elsewhere.

• What did you mean when you told Russian diplomats on May 10, 2017, that firing Mr. Comey had taken the pressure off?
The day after Mr. Comey’s firing, Mr. Trump met with Russian officials in the Oval Office. There, The Times revealed, Mr. Trump suggested he had fired Mr. Comey because of the pressure from the Russia investigation.
“I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. Trump said. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”

These are just 5 questions, out of about 50
Each one of those would be a minefield for Trump
They are all massively open ended questions,
leading on to even more - potentially high gain, for Mueller - questions

Manafort's Lawyer has just asked the judge to investigate
what's being seized on as the 'Mueller Leaks' !

Brilliant, how's that gonna look when it becomes
'The John & Rudy Show'

a reply to: shooterbrody

What is that status?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: soberbacchus

if he had evidence would his boss reportedly tell trump he was not a target?
either rr is lying on 4/19 or he is not

rr says there is not even enough evidence to make trump a target, reportedly
how do you spin that into an impeachable offense?
when rr is giving the recommendation?
oops congress my bad, he was a target?
yeah sure

Do you understand the difference between being a target vs being a subject of a criminal investigation?

I suggest you learn. Fast.

(Fun fact: John Gotti remained a subject, and not the target, right up until his indictment ...)

a reply to: AnnaThema

did john gotti testify?
was john gotti involved in a sc investigation?
was john gotti potus?

a reply to: Sillyolme

from the article i sourced not a target as of 4/19
you have other info?

a reply to: shooterbrody

He's a subject dude. That means they are looking at him. That means they have evidence.
They have it...not me. Before you go there...
There's only one reason, based on the line of inquiry presented here, that he is not labeled a target. That is that Mueller does not intend to indict. Hey that's great news.
Mueller intends to make a report instead. And here's even better news for you guys. Rosenstein could just say thank you and file it away without any action.

a reply to: carewemust

Does she live here? Mueller would have to subpoena her from another country I think.
I don't know anything about how that would work unless she just comes here to volunteer her cooperation. I'm sure Mueller would love to talk to her.

a reply to: Sillyolme

if they had evidence he would be a target, not just a subject
i believe actual evidence is what separates the subject and target
what legal recourse is there is trump tells mueller to pound sand?