I might be wrong, but I thought lying to a federal investigator was a crime regardless whether there was a sworn oath. Anyone know for sure?
Correct.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I might be wrong, but I thought lying to a federal investigator was a crime regardless whether there was a sworn oath. Anyone know for sure?
OK, then, a couple more easy questions.Correct.
OK, then, a couple more easy questions.
What format do these “interviews” take?
Will Trump’s lawyers be in the room and, if so, can they speak to intercede for him? Will Mueller’s co-counsel be in the room?
Written questions?
Will it be recorded? Informal tape recordings or formal court reporter?
Sorry for all these but I can’t imagine Trump has any advantage in granting an interview and am trying to see why. Thanks.
This is stupid. And I think you know this. These types of investigations can take years. Quit being obtuse.I just stopped in to get a status update. Back on 21Jan2107 I was told, "any day now" and "it's only a matter of time now" and "they're getting close". Are we there yet? Thanks in advance, I haven't been following things lately.
This is stupid. And I think you know this. These types of investigations can take years. Quit being obtuse.
A senior National Security Council official proposed withdrawing some U.S. military forces from Eastern Europe as an overture to Vladimir Putin during the early days of the Trump administration, according to a former administration official in the room with him.
This is stupid. And I think you know this. These types of investigations can take years. Quit being obtuse.
I don't know, but my impression is that all that will be subject to negotiation between Mueller and Trump's lawyers.
This is stupid. And I think you know this. These types of investigations can take years. Quit being obtuse.
If I am Trump's lawyer, my top goal is to prevent any interview. Even if I believe Trump is innocent of any wrongdoing, there is no way he survives an interview without making false claims, just as there is no way he survives a deposition without committing perjury. He is the nightmare client.Ok lawyers out there.....can Trump's lawyers really let this guy be interviewed under oath by some of the best prosecuters in the country?
That just seems destined for disaster.
This is a guy who can't stay focused on topic for more than ten minuets.What's the odds he can answer questions for several hours without screwing the pooch?
Hell, Bill Clinton...an ivy league lawyer, with a silver tongue couldn't survive a similar interview without committing perjury.
Here's an interesting piece of Trump's history with depositions.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...eposed-but-not-that-way-louise-mensch/550073/
If Trump refuses, then isn't it like he is admitting that he is guilty?This is really all it comes down to, at this point.
Will Trump agree to do an interview Mueller? The idea of such has to make his lawyers incredibly nervous.
Legally, no. Politically, very likely.If Trump refuses, then isn't it like he is admitting that he is guilty?
Oh the irony.... 'world is laughing at the stupidity they are witnessing.
'Something big must be about to drop...
Oh the irony.... 'world is laughing at the stupidity they are witnessing.'
Probably because his lawyers sat him down and explained to him that offering to talk to Mueller is the single stupidest thing he could possibly do.If there were no collusion, why is he resisting to testify? The mere facts that he has been saying he is not guilty for nearly a year and refusing to testify seem to prove that he is guilty, or at least hiding something.
Probably because his lawyers sat him down and explained to him that offering to talk to Mueller is the single stupidest thing he could possibly do.
I'm sure he thinks so, but sometimes a lawyer's job is to say to his client, "No. Bad client. Very bad client. No."But with all his stable genius, bigly words, surely he must be the greatest witness ever to testify in any investigations?
I'm sure he thinks so, but sometimes a lawyer's job is to say to his client, "No. Bad client. Very bad client. No."
You missed "I am a stable genius!" part.We should start a fund and have a plane fly over DC praising him and telling him that he went to the best schools-- and will definitely outsmart a simpleton nobody like Mueller who went to crappy schools and didnt make billions by the age of 9.
You missed "I am a stable genius!" part.
Axios said:Steve Bannon made one conspicuous slip up in his closed-door hearing on Tuesday with the House Intelligence Committee, according to four sources with direct knowledge of the confidential proceedings. Bannon admitted that he'd had conversations with Reince Priebus, Sean Spicer and legal spokesman Mark Corallo about Don Junior's infamous meeting with the Russians in Trump Tower in June 2016.
Why it matters: The meeting — and the subsequent drafting of a misleading statement on Air Force One — has become one of the most important focal points of the Russia investigations, both on Capitol Hill and within Robert Mueller's team, because it provides the closest thing that exists to evidence that the Trump campaign was willing to entertain collusion with Russians.
Bannon immediately realized he'd slipped up and disclosed conversations he wasn't supposed to discuss, because they happened while he was chief strategist in the White House. Throughout the rest of the session, committee members — in particular Republican Trey Gowdy and Democrat Adam Schiff — hammered Bannon over the fact that he'd mentioned those conversations but refused to discuss anything else about his time in the White House.
Axios said:Trey Gowdy, who led the Republican questioning, pressed Bannon hard on his description of Don Junior's Trump Tower meeting as "treasonous." Gowdy asked Bannon whether he would consider it treason for somebody close to him to approach Wikileaks' Julian Assange to get opposition research on Hillary Clinton. Bannon replied that such a scenario would be bad judgment. Then Gowdy produced emails from a Cambridge Analytica employee — the Trump campaign data firm closely affiliated with Bannon — boasting of just such contacts with Assange. Bannon claimed this was the first time he'd seen these emails (though they've been in the news.)
Gowdy is a grandstander, but I like that he's pissed off about how Bannon and the White House are trying to stonewall the committee. The fact that Nunes was all in on the subpoena is remarkable in and of itself. Could it be the committee Pubs aren't total Trump sycophants after all?
Gowdy is a grandstander, but I like that he's pissed off about how Bannon and the White House are trying to stonewall the committee. The fact that Nunes was all in on the subpoena is remarkable in and of itself. Could it be the committee Pubs aren't total Trump sycophants after all?
Grandstanders aren't notable for their effectiveness.I don’t have much faith in Gowdy. All those investigations, select committees, and hearings and he couldn’t catch the known criminal Hillary. I mean, everyone knows she’s the criminal of all criminals and he couldn’t catch her, how is gonna ever catch anyone?
Gowdy is a grandstander, but I like that he's pissed off about how Bannon and the White House are trying to stonewall the committee. The fact that Nunes was all in on the subpoena is remarkable in and of itself. Could it be the committee Pubs aren't total Trump sycophants after all?
Potential Russian mafia funding links with Donald Trump’s five-star Doonbeg golf resort in Co Clare have been discussed behind closed doors at a US intelligence committee hearing,
‘Russian mafia link’ to Trump golf course probed
https://www.irishexaminer.com/break...-link-to-trump-golf-course-probed-823829.html
“Well, we don't rely on American banks. We have all the funding we need out of Russia.”
“We've got some guys that really, really love golf, and they're really invested in our programs. We just go there all the time.”
-Eric Trump to sports/golf writer James Dodson in 2014
Here's a juicy tidbit for the conspiracy theorists. In a court filing last night, DOJ argued that it could not release certain documents in response to a FOIA request on the grounds that the focus and scope of Mueller's ongoing investigation have not been made public, and releasing those documents would highlight certain "persons, activities, or interactions" that might be relevant to the investigation and any resulting legal proceedings.
The particular documents in question? Comey's memos documenting his private conversations with Trump.
See the filing here, detailed explanation at pp. 21-22:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4356495-Summary-Judgment.html