Trump attorneys' letter to Mueller spells out legal arguments ...

Trump's lawyers sent a letter to Mueller about the constitutionalism of a Trump interview.

FoxNews and the NYTimes "got" the letter.

Presidential Power or Desperation ?

2 views from 2 articles....

Trump attorneys' letter to Mueller spells out legal arguments against Trump sitting down for interview

President Trump’s legal team sent a letter to Special Counsel Robert Mueller in January outlining many reasons why the president should not sit down for an interview.

Fox News has obtained the letter, which offers a detailed look at the president’s legal team and its thinking about whether he should submit to an interview, including the argument that under the law and the U.S. Constitution, Mueller faces a high bar in trying to prove he needs in-person answers from the president.

*************

Trump’s Lawyers, in Confidential Memo, Argue to Head Off a Historic Subpoena

President Trump’s lawyers have for months quietly waged a campaign to keep the special counsel from trying to force him to answer questions in the investigation into whether he obstructed justice, asserting that he cannot be compelled to testify and arguing in a confidential letter that he could not possibly have committed obstruction because he has unfettered authority over all federal investigations.

In a brash assertion of presidential power, the 20-page letter — sent to the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and obtained by The New York Times — contends that the president cannot illegally obstruct any aspect of the investigation into Russia’s election meddling because the Constitution empowers him to, “if he wished, terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon.”

GOP already set precedent that a president can be subpoenaed and deposed. Now they are trying to say he cant? Hum double standard?

originally posted by: Pyle
GOP already set precedent that a president can be subpoenaed and deposed. Now they are trying to say he cant? Hum double standard?

Which precedent was that?

It might tie-in.

🔑🔐

I still don't understand why Mueller needs an interview with Trump. He ether has the goods or he doesn't. If he needs Trump to incriminate himself then he doesnt have the goods, it's that simple; moderates wont care for a prosecution based on a technically. Just ask Bill "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is" Clinton.

So erther way Mueller should just end this right now for the betterment of the country. Something tells me that's not what he wants or he would have ended this a while ago.

No need for competing constitutional lawyers, Qs, leaks and ext. All we need to do is apply simply logic to realize the whole thing is a political farce wyith each side thinking they are winning the game while the rest of us are losing. At this point it will all come down to how big that blue wave is.

this entire thing is designed to keep the ignorant low IQ masses talking about it endlessly like you're doing now

it's all a total farce none of it means anything the incremental increase of tyranny and the erosion of your "rights" continue

a reply to: xuenchen

Sounds like Nixon saying you can't subpoena my tapes.
Or Clinton saying I don't have time to sit and answer questions.
And when the supreme court looked at the rule of law they said umm no the president isn't above the law.
This release is for his base again. And look. He was right. Hook line and sinker.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Pyle
GOP already set precedent that a president can be subpoenaed and deposed. Now they are trying to say he cant? Hum double standard?

Which precedent was that?

It might tie-in.

🔑🔐

This might Trigger you but William Jefferson Clinton. You might want to do some reading.

I know a lot of people think he should take the interview, but the point is, legally he absolutely does not have to.

Dear Robert Mueller
Special Counsel for the Department of Justice.

Why my client can't answer your questions;
1) He might lie
2) He might get chatty and forget what he said and therefore lie.
3) They might try to trick him thereby making him lie.
4) He may get defensive and blame someone else and tell a lie.
5) They may ask questions he doesn't know the answer to but rather than say I don't know that he may lie.

So please do not ask my client any questions.

Sincerely,
Juan Epsteins mother.

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist
I know a lot of people think he should take the interview, but the point is, legally he absolutely does not have to.

He should take the interview and say absolutely nothing, just sit there and look at Muller. With every new question just shift his eyes slightly making an increasingly funnier and funnier face until Muller just can't help from laughing or storms out to stop himself from laughing.

I'd like to see that.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Why my client can't answer your questions;
1) He might lie
2) He might get chatty and forget what he said and therefore lie.
3) They might try to trick him thereby making him lie.
4) He may get defensive and blame someone else and tell a lie.
5) They may ask questions he doesn't know the answer to but rather than say I don't know that he may lie.

So please do not ask my client any questions.

Sincerely,
Juan Epsteins mother.

OR, they may ask a bunch of BS that has absolutely nothing to do with "Russian Collusion"

a reply to: DanDanDat

Because that's how investigations work.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: DanDanDat

Because that's how investigations work.

Ummm hmmm - I understand sir ... It's been said over and over and over and over and over again for months on end now.

My comments are still accurate.

a reply to: DanDanDat

Mueller probably doesn't need an interview with trump. He is giving trump an opportunity to tell his side of the story.

originally posted by: Pyle
GOP already set precedent that a president can be subpoenaed and deposed. Now they are trying to say he cant? Hum double standard?

Yeah, they had evidence that Clinton had done something he shouldn't have done, and even then he got impeached because he lied under his questioning, not because he had an affair. There is no precedence that can be brought forth from that, there is no evidence that Trump did anything illegal or colluded to even authorize a special council interveiw. Clinton was not forced to talk on the matter, he just went there and said I had no sexual relations with that girl.

a reply to: xuenchen

Nixon's tapes and William Clinton's sitting down for questioning in a civil suit.

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: Pyle
GOP already set precedent that a president can be subpoenaed and deposed. Now they are trying to say he cant? Hum double standard?

Yeah, they had evidence that Clinton had done something he shouldn't have done, and even then he got impeached because he lied under his questioning, not because he had an affair. There is no precedence that can be brought forth from that, there is no evidence that Trump did anything illegal or colluded to even authorize a special council interveiw. Clinton was not forced to talk on the matter, he just went there and said I had no sexual relations with that girl.

Clinton was impeached for allegedly lying during a deposition (He didnt which is why he wasnt convicted). The alleged lie happened to be about his affair which had nothing to do with Whitewater. He was also subpoenaed before he voluntarily came in for the deposition after which the subpoenaed was pulled. Also you dont have to have evidence of wrong doing to interview subjects of investigations.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: DanDanDat

Mueller probably doesn't need an interview with trump. He is giving trump an opportunity to tell his side of the story.

Then Muller is a very bad man, to allow the manchurian candidate to continue to ruin the country so that he can give the manchurian the opportunity to tell his side of the story.

Does Muller not have the political back bone to bring charges now dispit what deplorables might have to save about him.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Pyle
GOP already set precedent that a president can be subpoenaed and deposed. Now they are trying to say he cant? Hum double standard?

Which precedent was that?

It might tie-in.

🔑🔐

This might Trigger you but William Jefferson Clinton. You might want to do some reading.

He was served a subpoena which he could have ignored (there is precedent) which was withdrawn when he agreed to testify.

All liberal BS opinion pieces aside, you can subpoena a sitting President, but he can ignore it.

Because you cannot indict a sitting President.

Hope that helped...

Edited to add because you probably don't know and will get confused, but Clinton's case was a civil suit.

Not a criminal investigation.

There is a difference.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: Pyle
GOP already set precedent that a president can be subpoenaed and deposed. Now they are trying to say he cant? Hum double standard?

Yeah, they had evidence that Clinton had done something he shouldn't have done, and even then he got impeached because he lied under his questioning, not because he had an affair. There is no precedence that can be brought forth from that, there is no evidence that Trump did anything illegal or colluded to even authorize a special council interveiw. Clinton was not forced to talk on the matter, he just went there and said I had no sexual relations with that girl.

Clinton was impeached for allegedly lying during a deposition (He didnt which is why he wasnt convicted). The alleged lie happened to be about his affair which had nothing to do with Whitewater. He was also subpoenaed before he voluntarily came in for the deposition after which the subpoenaed was pulled. Also you dont have to have evidence of wrong doing to interview subjects of investigations.

Clinton lied, he was impeached and was pardoned by the senate. He was guilty, that was evident by all evidence. You pardon people who are convicted, not people who are charged with a crime. Look it up, even Wiki talks about this on their site.