Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the reported proposal that President Donald Trump sit down with Special Counsel Robert Mueller to address four specific areas of inquiry. Those areas just happen to be the ones where Trump has the strongest and most obvious defenses. If the deal is that this would be a one-time sit down (and any later issues would be addressed in written interrogatories), it is a deal that would be hard to pass up. It is not without considerable risks of course, particularly for any false statement allegations. However, if the President were ready to be properly prepped and listens to counsel, he could thread this needle. It would also avoid a fight over a subpoena. While the law on the question is hardly settled, Mueller could win such a court fight and force Trump into an interview. Both the political and constitutional costs of such a fight should be avoided.
Here is the column:
Special counsel Robert Mueller has reportedly made an offer to Donald Trump’s legal team on the parameters of an interview as part of the Russia investigation. If true, this is a deal the president should seriously consider.
According to the press, Mueller is offering an interview on four main areas: the Trump Tower meeting with Russian sources and Donald Trump Jr., the president’s role in putting out a misleading account of that meeting, the firing of former FBI Director James Comey, and the meeting of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Notably missing from that list are the subjects that should be the greatest concern for Trump, including his financial dealings (including deals on a Trump Tower in Moscow) and the payments to alleged paramours Stormy Daniels, Karen McDougal and others to remain silent before the election.
What is most striking about these areas is that they happen to be the areas where, even if things go badly, Trump has strong defenses. It does not mean that Mueller could not charge on these allegations, but he would likely lose on the evidence currently known. Obviously, this will require careful preparation and Trump would have to exercise uncharacteristic levels of control in his answers. The president’s just-resigned counsel, John Dowd, reportedly may have doubted the ability to keep Trump out of a perjury trap. Yet, with the exception of a false statement or some undisclosed bombshell evidence, these limits are as good as it is going to get, and it could get worse.
Trump Tower
The meeting of Trump Jr., former Trump presidential campaign manager Paul Manafort and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and others in Trump Tower in New York was based on a promise to share evidence of criminal wrongdoing by the Clinton Foundation. Rod Goldstone, a promoter acquainted with the Trumps, told Trump Jr., “This is obviously very high-level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”
Once at the relatively short meeting, Veselnitskaya reportedly focused on sanctions of the Magnitsky Act, including the bar on Russian adoptions. Veselnitskaya had worked for years against the ban and raised it with Democrats and Republicans alike. Indeed, when she was turned down for a visa during the Obama administration, she was granted a “special immigration parole” to enter the United States by President Obama’s attorney general, Loretta Lynch.
If the meeting were part of a secret collusion, this would be a rather curious way to go about it, calling a conspiratorial meeting in an email at Trump Tower with unknown attendees. What is clear is that, as late as June 2016, a meeting with the Russians had to be arranged through a friend with a promise of criminal evidence to secure a meeting. Goldstone has admitted publicly that he “hyped the message” to get a meeting with Trump Jr. Even if Veselnitskaya had supplied evidence of criminal conduct by the Clintons or opposition research, it would not have constituted a crime.
Moreover, the Clinton campaign not only paid a huge amount to gather potentially incriminating evidence on Trump but the resulting dossier was composed by a former British spy with information from Russians. The Clinton campaign long denied any connection to the dossier and only admitted the funding relatively recently, when confronted by reporters. If Mueller wants a criminal charge on that record, he will likely lose.
Air Force One
Rather than taking the obvious path of making full disclosure, Trump Jr. issued a misleading statement about the meeting. The statement said that he and the Russian lawyer had “primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children” and emphasized that the subject of the meeting was “not a campaign issue at the time.” The statement, reportedly dictated by President Trump on Air Force One, did not disclose the stated purpose of the meeting or promise of material from the Russian government.
Like the Trump Tower meeting, the statement was another self-inflicted wound. Nevertheless, there was no crime in holding the meeting, and it was not a crime to spin the resulting controversy. Politicians have long spun scandals. When confronted about NSA leaker Edward Snowden’s disclosure of a massive surveillance program on American citizens, President Obama went on Jay Leno’s show and proclaimed, “There is no spying on Americans.” His CIA director, James Clapper, went before Congress and denied the existence of such a program, a statement he admitted later was a lie.
For her part, Hillary Clinton adopted a series of denials and defenses in her email scandal, including statements now established as false. The State Department later refuted her claim that she was given approval to use her personal server for State Department business. Obviously, some spins can become criminal matters, such as Bill Clinton lying under oath that he never had a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky and then insisting that it depended on “what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” If Mueller wants to charge Trump with spinning a scandal, he would have to frog march virtually every member of Congress and every living president to federal lockup.
James Comey
Perhaps the greatest blunder of this administration was Comey’s firing. Trump not only fired him in the midst of the Russian investigation but raised the investigation repeatedly with Comey before firing him. The problem is that Trump had ample reason to fire Comey, despite the poor timing of the decision. While Trump admitted in an interview that he was thinking of the Russian investigation when he fired Comey, he did not say that was the reason for the firing.
In a memo, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein listed former attorneys general, judges and leading prosecutors who believed Comey “violated his obligation to ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the traditions of the department and the FBI” and “violated long-standing Justice Department policies and tradition.” He also noted that Comey “refused to admit his errors.”
Moreover, Comey himself admitted under oath that Trump agreed with him that the Russian investigation should run its course. (Trump was reportedly angry that Comey had told members of Congress that he was not under investigation but refused to confirm that publicly). Firing Comey would not have ended the Russian investigation, and there is no evidence that Trump sought to bar further investigation. Even if Mueller were to secure an indictment on that mixed record, he would have to call Comey, who is damaged goods, as a witness.
Not only did Comey leak information to the press after his firing but, according to fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Comey knew of his giving sensitive information to the press on the Clinton investigation. Comey expressly denied leaking information or approving such leaks by subordinates in testimony to Congress. Mueller could call Comey as a witness, but a jury might have difficulty seeing the moral high ground from where Comey is sitting.
Michael Flynn
Finally, there is Michael Flynn, charged with misleading federal investigators on his discussions with Russian diplomats. There was nothing illegal or unprecedented in Flynn meeting during the Trump presidential transition with the Russians, or his discussion of sanctions. However, he reportedly denied discussing sanctions and pleaded guilty to making a false statement.
Trump asked Comey to go easy on Flynn after Flynn resigned. This has been widely portrayed as evidence of obstruction or witness tampering. However, Trump could simply argue that he felt Flynn had already suffered enough with the resignation and was expressing loyalty for a longtime friend and supporter. Mueller could always try to portray the comments as obstructive rather than empathetic, but that is pretty thin soup for a criminal case against Trump.
None of this means Trump cannot get himself into serious danger in an interview, with incautious or false statements. There also is the possibility of undisclosed evidence, particularly as a result of Flynn’s cooperation agreement. However, these four categories represent the most predictable, frontal assaults on Trump where the armor is the thickest. Trump will have counsel present and can insist that any later questions or issues be addressed in written interrogatories to counsel. In an otherwise bad situation, that is not a bad deal.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
Does anyone on the blog have information about past cases where Mull Err prosecuted innocent people whom he knew were innocent? I heard something about that on tv.
See my LA Times post above.
According to Turley, so many “self-inflicted wounds” but, the professor, otherwise, finds no gun.
Turley wrote, “Notably missing from that list are the subjects that should be the greatest concern for Trump, including his financial dealings (including deals on a Trump Tower in Moscow) and the payments to alleged paramours Stormy Daniels, Karen McDougal and others to remain silent before the election.
What is most striking about these areas is that they happen to be the areas where, even if things go badly, Trump has strong defenses. It does not mean that Mueller could not charge on these allegations, but he would likely lose on the evidence currently known.”
Turley is probably right about both of his observations cited above. The notable absence of Trump’s suspected financial crimes from the four areas of inquiry in Mueller’s proposed interview of Trump is truly astounding. It was not all that long ago that Mueller issued a subpoena for additional financial records from The Trump Organization. And while that does not mean that Mueller could not charge Trump with suspected financial crimes at some point after Mueller interviewed Trump, it strongly suggests that Mueller does not currently have any questions to pose to Trump about Trump’s financial dealings with Russia or Russians.
Parenthetically, it is not especially surprising that Mueller currently has no questions for Trump about the payments to Daniels and MacDougal.
And that leaves the areas of inquiry listed in Mueller’s offer to interview Trump. Turley says that Trump has strong defenses based on the evidence currently known. If true, then Mueller could be nearing the end of the special counsel’s investigation. If there is evidence known to the OSC that is not currently known to Turley nor any other member of the public press, then Trump’s defenses in the areas of inquiry for which Mueller currently has questions to pose to Trump might not be as strong as Turley suspects based on what is already publicly known.
So what does Trump know about Flynn’s meeting with the Russian Ambassador that the public does not yet know? For that matter, what does Trump know about The Trump Tower meeting that the public does not yet know? How should any of us know the answers to those questions? We’re not supposed to know–yet.
Late
Yes, Mueller is going to allow him to BS his way to being free to continue his mission of more wars, more comfort for the rich, more privatization of public services, millions more immigrants for cheap labor and new customers for businesses, and co-presidents Jared/Ivanka will continue slum-lording, pay-for-play loans, and rookie-grade world diplomacy.
billmcwilliams, please forgive me for being unwilling to go along with you on your bemused cynicism tour. I have reason to believe that you are not nearly so delighted with the continual confirmation of your pessimism as you might like the rest of us blawg hounds to suppose. But on the odd chance that I’m wrong about that, please feel free to rub my nose in the wickedness of this world. I’ll still refuse to be happy about it.
“Personal Values and Support for Donald Trump” by Ryne Sherman published recently in Personality and Individual Differences, validates villmc’s view about conservative/Republican voters. Fifteen traits are identified as collectively shared including (1) little regard for democratic values…justify winning at all costs (2) greater rejection of inconvenient information (3) want to hurt others outside of the tribe (4) exhibit toxic forms of behavior associated with collective Narcissism (5) believe they are victims of racism, racially resentful and hostile to non-Whites (6) strong desire for power, money, little interest in supporting social welfare programs
(6) political bullies (7) attracted to Trump’s threats of violence (8) strict adherence to social order/conventions, etc.
I agree that this would be a way to possibly resolve the entire investigation into the President’s activities.
If I were Trump/his legal team, as a condition of even considering an interview with Muler, I would first ask Muler to state probable cause for his investigation and share all discovery relating to the areas for discussion. Otherwise no f___ing way meet with Muler. I think this Tweeter feed is going to JT’s head. JT used to be a voice of reason, but now it looks like he just floats provocative ideas to generate clicks for his tweeter feed/website. Also, bright lights from cable news studios went to his head and he has gotten sloppy.
What law requires the President to give an interview to a special prosecutor? How can a judge order it? What happened to the Fifth Amendment? Until those questions are answered, Trump should offer Mueller nothing more than the time of day.
“It is not enough to simply beat Trump. He must be destroyed thoroughly. His kind must not rise again.”
2:03 PM – 13 Jun 2016
Tweeted by Obama advisor/strategist, David Plouffe, during the 2016 campaign. Makes you wonder what was going on in the Obama administration, doesn’t it?
When you’re the people’s champion and you hate the people, well … you get the picture. Very Czar-like.
Trump may end up being cordially invited to plead his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination during his grand jury appearance, if Trump asserts them during his interview with Mueller.
L4D:
Soooo it’s a secret proceeding (unless the liberals unlawfully run their mouths) and it’s exactly what he should do assuming Mueller clears the Executive Privilege hurdle.
Excerpted from a Lawfare article on Executive privilege by John E. Beis:
However, the Court rejected Nixon’s argument that the privilege was absolute and therefore precluded enforcement of the grand jury subpoena. Instead, at least when grounded in the president’s generalized interest in the confidentiality of his communications, the Court viewed the privilege as a qualified one, subject to a balancing of the competing interests and legitimate needs of the respective branches—and ordered the production of the tapes.
Make that John E. Bies, instead.
L4D:
Here’s your primer on the various executive privileges available to all POTUSs. You can count the ones that apply: https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/background-executive-privilege
Great! Most people believe taking the Fifth is an admission of guilt, didn’t Trump once assert that himself? Still, from a Trumpish perspective, anything is better than him testifying: he would doubtless hang himself based on his sheer stupidity and intemperance.
wildone:
“Most people believe taking the Fifth is an admission of guilt, didn’t Trump once assert that himself?”
***************
Most [uneducated] people believe taking the Fifth is an admission of guilt, didn’t Trump once assert that himself?
There I fixed it for you! BTW, It’s especially true when you have a Javert on your six.
Mueller is Javert? Mueller’s going to let Jean Valjean [Trump] go? Mueller will then jump in the Seine [Potomac] to commit suicide?
Diane – will this all be televised by the MSM?
Mueller has nine lives! Ask the Anthrax investigators.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-mueller-record-20171122-story.html
There’s a training manual attributed to the founder (Weyrich) of the Koch’s Heritage Foundation. The manual’s lessons reflect hatred and calls for wholesale destruction of American institutions. The shadow government of ALEC fits one of the strategies identified in the manual.
mespo – I only saw parts of the Stormy interview, so did Anderson ask her about her run for office as a Democrat? BTW, her explanation for staying in the room was the worst I have ever heard. It has set women back 100 years.
Republican convention speaker, Peter Thiel has the power and will to set women back. Stormy lacks both.
Typical porn queen. Never knows when to pull out!
Trump taking the Fifth to avoid answering questions regarding Russian interference in American elections? I would love to see it, as close to the mid term elections, please.
Cordially, Bill
Trump could make false statements? Outrageous.
Just watched Jonathan Turley’s appearance on Morning Vendetta and when given an question/opening to criticize former student Michael Avenatti for under-delivering on hyped 60 minutes segment – Turley instead pivoted to criticizing Anderson Cooper (and again protected sleazeball Avenatti).
Bill:
Anybody who bought the 60 Minutes-Stormy Daniels hype deserved to lose that time of their life. As always, the propaganda press led by oh-so-journalistic Anderson Snooper builds then fails to deliver and just gave us a salacious he said-she said moment. Whoopi! As for Avenattti, why he’s just another failed carney barker with a JD. Stormy is just a big boob but for once in her life, that won’t help her.
Does he make any other kind?
Alice in Wonderland makes more sense than this.
Actually AIW makes sense of this.
BTW, I saw in the paper that Barry wanted to 1000s of little Barrys. That Hogg kid is one of the first.
Paul – I saw that too. “Obama envisions creating ‘a million young Barack Obamas’ during speech in Japan”
A million more? like that Hogg kid? God help us.
TBob – the Hitler Youth are on the march.
As you safely type from your crawl space, blah, blah, blah. You have never made a difference in life but feel comfortable calling high school kids nazis, you are such a SAD person. Seek help, it is never too late.
YNOT – I taught high school kids. I earned the right to call them Nazis. 🙂 BTW, review my previous posts, there are no crawl spaces where I live. You really need to learn how homes are built in Arizona. Broaden your education. It seems stunted.
@Paul C Schulte, March 26, 2018 at 9:25 AM
“TBob – the Hitler Youth are on the march.”
Are you trying to trigger CV Brown, PC?
Please calm down. 🙂
TBob – didn’t realize Obama was in Japan – another TPP country he’s visiting. Making $$ for speeches.
How bout he go to the South Side do some community organizing and solve the gun problem there?
Yep, he’s flying around the world STILL meeting in private with world leaders. This trip took him to Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Japan where he met with the Prime Ministers of those countries, had ceremonial welcomes, held private events, and played golf.
Since Trump took office the former president Obama has not kept a courteous low profile staying off the world stage as most former presidents have. Nope, Mr. O has already sat down with world leaders from China, India, and about 20 other countries so far. WTH is he up to? And of course the MSM sickophants have nothing to say about his antics.
Oh and Mr. O stays away from Chicago b/c of all the black community protests going on about his gargantuan monument-to-himself that’s in the works for Chicago’s South Side. It’s where he plans to train his millions of mini-me community agitators. God help America.
Yah – “mini Obama’s” – that would totally finish the country off! All these kidz marching and their hero never did a damn thing. Gaming the youth to get votes. That Hogg dude though – as creepy as he is I have to admire his cunning at becoming the face of the “movement” – very adept at PC code words and virtue signaling —he’s probably gonna get a full ride to Yale or Harvard
Paul, I wonder why Killer Mike wasn’t ask to speak? =)
Why does anyone care about Killer Mike? Not even a good deflection, comrade. No mention of DIMS, ZeroHedge, or NZ indies, getting lazy – report for reprogramming before you embarrass the effort.
No deflection – I happen to like Killer Mike so I decided to share. He’s an activist as well as an artist (musician) – very bright and passionate.
Minus a predicate crime, I am not sure a court would require an interview. However, if he does take the deal, it must be videotaped. None of this taking notes crap and then deciding later that the President lied under oath. And it must be highly structured.
No Turley, I strongly disagree. Let us have Trump ask about Mueller’s involvement with the Murder & Cover up of Roger Wheeler/Telex of Tulsa Ok, etc., much more.
Trump should raid some of these Aholes, Rosenstein, at about 4 or 5 in the morning, with press, these Mueller Preps in orange jumpsuit to make up for the Manafort type crap.
Nice “otherism”! Stay on topic.
Crazy talk, typical of the more rabid of Trump’s supporters. They always have a whacky conspiracy to share, some of which are quite amusing.
Interesting news about this deal, Professor Turley, I had not heard of it prior to now.
At any rate, with your fine column, I now know the path Trump won’t take.
Reblogged this on Truth Troubles.
Good article Sir, I am going to reblog it for you.
It’s very sad that Turley appears to be so clueless about the depth of criminal conspiracy Trump is up against, which includes tampering with evidence.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/03/25/0950-doesnt-add-up-never-has-never-will-0950-the-fbi-lied-not-steele/#more-147365
So what Turley clearly doesn’t get is the possibility that Mueller, or whatever criminal cohort he might have interview Trump, will simply falsify the account or the interview, or falsify evidence to contradict something Trump might say.
It’s a huge criminal conspiracy, and they’ve no reason to stop now — nothing to lose by committing just one more outrageous act.
Turley’s living in a fantasy world.
If you begin with the conclusion that any evidence against Trump is manufactured, you can never accept any verdict against him. There is a real possibility that he is deeply involved in money laundering and there is so much evidence there isn’t even a need to exaggerate let alone manufacture evidence. There is a real possibility that the several members of his campaign that met secretly with Russians and then lied about it were actually conspiring to win an election. There is a real possibility that Trump has attempted to obstruct justice and it is almost guaranteed he can’t testify in a hearing and not lie.
He’s screwed, not because people will do anything to take him down but because he’s guilty of several things and very bad at covering them up. Most of the lies he tells every day are easily found out ad he just doesn’t care.There just is no effective legal strategy when the client is so exposed and the prosecution has all the resources it has.
Enigma, I agree with you about Trump’s suspected financial crimes, but the offer Mueller has reportedly made to Trump for an interview suggests that Mueller does not currently have any questions to pose to Trump about Trump’s suspected financial crimes. If the interview with Trump were the next-to-last step in the special counsel’s investigation, then one might otherwise expect Mueller to question Trump about his suspected financial crimes. Unless, of course, Mueller makes a criminal referral to the State of New York or the State of Florida, instead, on whatever evidence Mueller may have gathered about Trump’s suspected financial crimes. In any case, it’s getting curiouser and curiouser.
Enjoy your comments – but a small bone to pick…
He’s screwed, not because people will do anything to take him down but because he’s guilty of several things and very bad at covering them up.
It could be both: He’s screwed because people will do anything to take him down AND because he’s guilty of several things and very bad at covering them up.
You seem to miss out on the fact that as the offer stands, Trump will avoid all areas where he is most at risk. You point out, There is a real possibility that he is deeply involved in money laundering and there is so much evidence there isn’t even a need to exaggerate let alone manufacture evidence.
Perhaps, but those sorts of questions appear to have been precluded in Muller’s offer (unless I’m missing something). Moreover, according to Professor Turley, under this offer, even if Trump does goof up, “[…]even if things go badly, Trump has strong defenses. It does not mean that Mueller could not charge on these allegations, but he would likely lose on the evidence currently known.”
Perhaps I misunderstand the gist of your comment. Would you clarify?
-Thanks, BB
Stopped reading after the first sentence. Sorry I bothered to engage in a discussion with yet another pre-programmed troll. Take a hike, troll.
Enigma’s point hit the nail on the head. The claim that any evidence of criminal wrongdoing against Trump would be “manufactured evidence” is a none-too-subtle variation on the pressing psychological need of all conspiracy theorists for any and all evidence to be perpetually suppressed so that their beloved conspiracy theories may live for time without end. Likewise with the dismissive “troll” comment. You see, proud Bayer, you’re not really capable of defending your position with anything other than dismissive commentary.
William Bayer:
“Stopped reading after the first sentence.”
***************((
Oh, read it all. It’s great Fanatasy about “really possible” things like green men on Mars and fairies in the Dell. For the true believer conspiracy theorist, every meeting is a crime, every finance deal is a treason and every campaign worker is a Benedict Arnold. It’s long on innuendo, suspicion and character assasination and short — as in micromillimeters — on fact, evidence or just plain old common sense. But read it, it tells how the reptile brain functions.
Mespo, we’re not supposed to know what evidence Mueller has. In fact, if we did know what evidence Mueller has, then you’d be complaining most bitterly about leaks form the OSC. If Mueller comes up with a goose-egg on the suspected financial crimes, then we can still beat Trump at the polls on election day. Or the Republicans could beat Trump in the primaries.
Besides, Enigma thinks Trump is looking for an excuse to fire Mueller and get the party really started.
Do you think the interview is not to be recorded?
Beyond that……Trump’s Att. Cohn paid Story Daniels $130k hush money just before the election. Any unreported campaign contribution over $2700 is a felony. Cohn’s campaign contribution exceeds the felony threshold by $127300. If Mueller intended to get a felony conviction, it’s right here on a silver platter.
IMO Mueller knows he has a personal potential felony exposure because I suspect he was part of the plot Re. several felonies while he ran the FBI, plus he knows he BFF Comey faces several major potential big felonies.
IMO Mueller wants to close this up and get outa dodge while the getting good. Interrogating Trump allows the public to perceive that the investigation was real and not corrupted.
The Steele documents played a minor role in getting the fisa warrant on carter page. He was warned in 2014 by the fbi that the russians we’re trying to flip him.
Btw, your link is aptly name: treehouseis where the kids play.
This whole thing smacks of the Stormy Daniels ‘expose’. In the end he boinked her once, leading her on about getting on the apprentice. They didn’t have an affair for a long time, just a horndog on the prowl while his wife was giving birth. Been done before.
Trump will throw a few lawyers under the bus but walk away.
It would be nice to get rid of this imbecile but Congress and the Senate have figured out how to work around him, so, at least one term.
No comments about your demigod Geeziz Soetoro Obama lying through this teeth about the NSA, huh?
Moron alert, JJ in the house.
If this is all Mueller has got – this is done.
Trump Tower Meeting.
Trump did not attend, there is nothing he can say that is not hearsay.
Why Is Mueller even bothering ?
Trump Jr. Statement.
If this was a crime – we must lock up the entire prior administration.
Comey Firing. The entire country wanted Comey fired – until he was.
Frankly It would not have been a crime to fire Comey to terminate the russia investigation.
It is increasingly evident that there was NOTHING to the investigation AT THE TIME, there was no basis, and the FBI/DOJ were struggling to bring life to an investigation whose roots were themselves corrupt.
While Trump did not know this at the time – Comey did. Comey was hiding it.
Flynn. I do not understand at all ?
Despite Mueller later indicting him, there was no investigation of Flynn at the time.
And Obama publicly said Hillary committed no crime right smack in the middle of the Clinton investigation.
There is nothing here.
I can understand the temptation to accept this offer.
But I think the right response is a demand for a basis ?
There is no reason that Mueller needs Trump’s statements on any of these.
This strongly resembles what McCabe did to Flynn.
The purpose of questioning a witness and the requirement to answer truthfully is to aide in advancing an investigation.
It is not ethical to interview a witness about things you already know in the hopes they will lie.
Dream on. Mueller has evidence of which we have no inkling. Mueller is incorruptible as they come. He’s also a battle wounded Marine officer.
In Mueller I trust.
Marco, I agree with everything you said about Mueller. However, Turley is, in effect, attempting to make educated guesses about whatever evidence Mueller might have, and about which we have no inkling, based upon the areas of inquiry listed in Mueller’s offer to interview Trump. There might be a flaw in Turley’s procedure. But then, we don’t know any more than Turley knows, either. Stay tuned, Marco. And keep up the faith in Mueller.
Marco so silly – thinks Obama was the bestest Commander in Chief.
Agree. Take the deal with the stipulation the terms are the same as HRC’s: No video or notes to be taken, Mueller’s report is already written before the interview, not to exceed 3 hours. Oh, yeah, Mueller can’t be there as Comey wasn’t.
“Deal”? What is really in the so called deal? Trump should refuse to yak with Mule Err on grounds of Executive Privilege. Trump should call the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court over for an “interview” and also Mitch McConnell. Three branches of government and as Mark Twain said: Never The Twain Shall Meet.
Others have tried before him to refuse and failed. He can go voluntarily or get dragged in.
Don’t mess with the Marine.
The investigation should have never been started. Retire Mueller.
Yes. The sole justification for the IC is a pack of DNC lies, a conspiracy from the highest seats of power under the demigod Geeziz Soetoro Obama.
If everyone who actually committed a felony related to this last POTUS election was convicted it would be about 90% DNC members and their surrogates/operatives.
It’s quite telling to see all the DNC sycophants here completely ignore that undisputed and indisputable claim that James Clapper got clean away with felony perjury testifying to Congress.
Clapper isn’t the dnc. Wake up and smell the coffee. Herr Drumpfenfuhrer is the most corrupt politician to ever walk into White House.
Investigate Mueller and the “deep state” he works for.