Columns, Criminal law, Lawyering, Media, Politics, Society

“I Answered Them Very Easily”: The Five Most Chilling Words In The Russian Investigation

Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on reported completion of answers to the questions given to President Donald Trump by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.  The White House anticipated giving the answers to the Special Counsel before Thanksgiving.  As noted below, that could put the collusion part of the investigation into high gear toward a report to Congress.

Here is the column:

For White House legal counsel, it may be the most chilling five words uttered thus far in the long Russia investigation. President Trump said he has finished working on the questions submitted to him by special counsel Robert Mueller, declaring, “I answered them very easily.”

If there is one universally accepted fact in this political morass, it is that nothing is easy about this investigation, let alone “very” easy. Reports indicate that Trump was given a couple dozen questions that focused on Russian collusion allegations and other matters before his inauguration. That alone defies any “easy peasy lemon squeezy” responses.

It ignores what the questions notably did not include, which is a single query about obstruction of justice. That is an ironic twist, since some of us opposed the appointment of a special counsel after the 2016 election but changed our minds when Trump unwisely fired then FBI director James Comey in the midst of the Russia investigation. That act triggered the obstruction investigation and produced an overwhelming level of support for an independent investigator. Had Trump just fired Comey at the outset of his administration, or waited for the conclusion of the investigation, it is likely that all of this would have been ended long ago.

The omission of obstruction questions can mean a variety of different things, from the mundane to the horrific. It may be that Mueller concluded earlier that obstruction was not a serious allegation, which would explain why Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein did not recuse himself for being a witness in that investigation. Or it could mean that, given White House opposition to obstruction questions, Mueller will leave that matter to the Congress after he issues his special counsel report.

Finally, and this is the most difficult course, Mueller could be prepared to hit Trump with a subpoena to answer the rest of the questions that fall under his mandate. The assumption, or at least the profound hope, is that his statement was signature bravado and that, in reality, Trump is yielding to counsel on the content of his answers. The concern obviously is his penchant for speaking his mind and making impulsive statements. Indeed, the second most scary six words uttered in this controversy followed the first. Trump stated that it “didn’t take very long to do them.”

If Trump believes these questions are really just about whether he personally colluded with the Russians, he has not been paying attention to the developments in the investigation. The list of Mueller indictments shows that collusion is largely immaterial to most of his prosecutions. Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort was prosecuted entirely for matters predating the election and separate from collusion allegations. Virtually all of the remaining American defendants were charged with unrelated crimes or with making false statements to investigators.

The point is that it was not easy for them to answer the questions, but it was relatively easy for Mueller to indict them. Lawyers for Trump evidently delayed submission of his answers due to concerns over possible “perjury trap” questions. If Trump answers with any specificity, his responses will be overlaid with the testimony of a host of cooperating witnesses, from former national security adviser Michael Flynn to former Trump “fixer” Michael Cohen. If statements by Trump do not match up, Congress will then be left with a stark choice over who is lying on the issue.

Putting aside that obvious danger, there also is the fact that the answers will have a profound impact on the next stage of this controversy. They will clear the way for Mueller to issue a report on Russian collusion. It also would give him ample reason to separate that report from a report on other potential crimes such as obstruction. That would mean Congress could conceivably receive a report early in the new year. With the House under Democratic control then, that could trigger a flurry of investigations and subpoenas even before an obstruction report arrives on Capitol Hill.

With only two years remaining in his term as president, the Democrats will be rapidly losing runway to get any investigation off the ground, at least if they hope to preserve time for a possible impeachment. This is not to say there is any indication of a serious crime related to collusion linked to Trump. The most serious but least likely allegation is that Trump somehow conspired with Russians to hack the computer systems of his opponent. The timing and structure of that operation, described in prior filings, would seem to undermine such an allegation.

That leaves a second possible allegation that the Russians did not give advance notice of their hacking efforts, but made Trump or his aides a type of accessory after the fact in the use of the purloined emails. That tack appears to have been a focus of Mueller in drilling down on figures like Trump associate Roger Stone. However, there is no crime in Trump celebrating or even inviting the release of hacked emails, as he did on the campaign trail repeatedly and controversially before the 2016 election.

Finally, there could be allegations that Trump offered assurances to the Russians about some quid pro quo in exchange for the release of the Clinton campaign emails. The promise of any official act in exchange for a political favor could raise corruption allegations, as shown by the conviction of former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, who went to prison for trying to trading a Senate appointment for campaign donations.

However, using or encouraging the public release of hacked emails is not a crime, absent some direct role in a precursor crime. Hillary Clinton and Democratic leaders were undermined by the hacked emails because those showed they were misleading or lying to the public on various issues. Many critics aside from Trump celebrated the disclosure of such false statements by major political figures. Of course, the disclosures were one sided and clearly calculated to hurt Clinton and help Trump.

Yet, without a quid pro quo, it is hard to discern even a conceivable crime. The most likely crime remains unchanged from my first column on this controversy written two years, which is false statements. Trump is answering questions following hundreds of hours of testimony and millions of pages of evidence gathered from other witnesses. This is why there is nothing “easy” about answering these questions by the president as opposed to the ease of using those answers by a special counsel.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

244 thoughts on ““I Answered Them Very Easily”: The Five Most Chilling Words In The Russian Investigation”

  1. Muler has Trump right where he wants him, just like George Foreman had Ali dead to rights back in the day…https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search;_ylt=AwrDQ2qSOfVb.wEA.nc0nIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTBncGdyMzQ0BHNlYwNzZWFyY2gEdnRpZAM-;_ylc=X1MDMTM1MTE5NTcwMARfcgMyBGFjdG4DY2xrBGJjawM1b3B2ZnJ0Y3BiYmwzJTI2YiUzRDMlMjZzJTNEN3YEY3NyY3B2aWQDN3NCZDRqRXdMakZjWi5fZldaV3VvMHFiTWpZd01RQUFBQUNWd3BJNARmcgN5aHMtcHR5LXB0eV9jb252ZXJ0ZXIEZnIyA3NhLWdwBGdwcmlkAwRtdGVzdGlkA251bGwEbl9yc2x0AzU4BG5fc3VnZwMwBG9yaWdpbgN2aWRlby5zZWFyY2gueWFob28uY29tBHBvcwMwBHBxc3RyAwRwcXN0cmwDBHFzdHJsAzMyBHF1ZXJ5A211aGFtbWFkIGFsaSBrbm9ja291dCBvZiBnZW9yZ2UgBHRfc3RtcAMxNTQyNzk3NzE4BHZ0ZXN0aWQDbnVsbA–?pvid=7sBd4jEwLjFcZ._fWZWuo0qbMjYwMQAAAACVwpI4&p=muhammad+ali+knockout+of+george+&ei=UTF-8&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Av%2Cm%3Asa&fr=yhs-pty-pty_converter&hsimp=yhs-pty_converter&hspart=pty&type=co_appfocus1_cr&param1=20180817&param2=7c07e27d-195b-4760-9186-227fe7ae1365&param3=converter_~US~appfocus1&param4=d-ccc4-lp0-bb8~Chrome~muhammad+ali+knockout+of+george~4EDB419B6897F88AEBA0A76D74D0C8CE#id=3&vid=bddccedaf58ba92866e43d78b080f2f3&action=view

    1. https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search;_ylt=AwrDQ2qSOfVb.wEA.nc0nIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTBncGdyMzQ0BHNlYwNzZWFyY2gEdnRpZAM-;_ylc=X1MDMTM1MTE5NTcwMARfcgMyBGFjdG4DY2xrBGJjawM1b3B2ZnJ0Y3BiYmwzJTI2YiUzRDMlMjZzJTNEN3YEY3NyY3B2aWQDN3NCZDRqRXdMakZjWi5fZldaV3VvMHFiTWpZd01RQUFBQUNWd3BJNARmcgN5aHMtcHR5LXB0eV9jb252ZXJ0ZXIEZnIyA3NhLWdwBGdwcmlkAwRtdGVzdGlkA251bGwEbl9yc2x0AzU4BG5fc3VnZwMwBG9yaWdpbgN2aWRlby5zZWFyY2gueWFob28uY29tBHBvcwMwBHBxc3RyAwRwcXN0cmwDBHFzdHJsAzMyBHF1ZXJ5A211aGFtbWFkIGFsaSBrbm9ja291dCBvZiBnZW9yZ2UgBHRfc3RtcAMxNTQyNzk3NzE4BHZ0ZXN0aWQDbnVsbA–?pvid=7sBd4jEwLjFcZ._fWZWuo0qbMjYwMQAAAACVwpI4&p=muhammad+ali+knockout+of+george+&ei=UTF-8&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Av%2Cm%3Asa&fr=yhs-pty-pty_converter&hsimp=yhs-pty_converter&hspart=pty&type=co_appfocus1_cr&param1=20180817&param2=7c07e27d-195b-4760-9186-227fe7ae1365&param3=converter_~US~appfocus1&param4=d-ccc4-lp0-bb8~Chrome~muhammad+ali+knockout+of+george~4EDB419B6897F88AEBA0A76D74D0C8CE#id=3&vid=bddccedaf58ba92866e43d78b080f2f3&action=view

      1. Mr. Bill,

        Someone told me once that all of the characters following the first question mark in a link enable data tracking for various social-media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Google and the like with each new click. And that’s why they keep getting longer and longer, or something. Supposedly, you don’t need to copy and paste all of those characters. I don’t know if that’s true. But I’ve also been told that it scares some people away from clicking on the link. And that has been true for me ever since I was informed about it.

        1. Translation for you Ms. Late: Trump is Ali and Muler is Foreman. Ali executed rope-a-dope on Foreman much the same as Trump is doing to Muler. Game over.

    2. Unless Mueller establishes that actual “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia existed – basically unless Mueller proves there are unicorns. This dies.

      It is Trump that has everyone where he wants them.

      Absolutely you can convince 67% of democrats. According to Yougov they already beleive that the Russian hacked US voting machines and changed thousands of votes to Trump.
      Something no one credible has even alleged. Something that sounds more like Alex Jones than FBI. Something with less plausibility than the claim Obama was born in Kenya.

      But it is not the 67% of democrats who clearly will beleive anything that matters.

      It is the rest of the american public. You are not going to get anywhere unless you can demonstrate something more egregious than what HRC has actually done.

      You should also let go of all the stupid legal claims that have been lofted as credible in the press.

      Mueller did not ask about obstruction. For good reason. Trump’s constitutionally legitimate actions can not be obstruction.

      Wishful thinking is not a credible case.

  2. “Trump has submitted answers to Robert Mueller”

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2018/nov/20/trump-latest-live-news-updates-ivanka-emails-asylum-ruling-cnn-us-politics-today

    “Trump has submitted answers to Robert Mueller

    Trump’s lawyers have formally submitted their answers to written questions from special counsel Robert Mueller and his lawyers.

    John Santucci
    ✔
    @Santucci

    BREAKING – Trump attorneys tell @ABC News – the President’s answers to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s questions have been submitted

    3:49 PM – Nov 20, 2018”

    1. Marci Wheeler says [paraphrased] that Trump refused to answer any question about events that took place during the transition period when Trump was President-Elect. Presumably those would have been questions about Flynn and Kushner’s back-channel communications with Russia. Evidently Emmett Flood has cooked up a new-fangled pre-executive privilege for The President-Elect during the transition. I presume that Mueller will appeal that assertion since Whitaker is not The Solicitor General.

      Ms. Wheeler also speculated that the assertion of executive privilege over the transition period questions might mean that the mystery appellant with the sealed subpoena and sealed motions might be Trump, himself, instead of Gen. John Kelly. If so, then that would mean that Mueller had subpoenaed Trump before Sessions resigned, before Whitaker was appointed and even before the midterm election had been held. Something tells me that the only reason Mueller would have had for initiating the very long appeals process over a subpoena for Trump’s answers to Mueller’s questions would have been to get that subpoena into the purview of a United States Judge before Sessions resigned and Whitaker was appointed. That way Mueller’s authority to issue the subpoena would have to be contested in court rather than simply denied by Trump and Trump’s lackey, Whitaker.

      Marco’s right. Don’t mess with The Marine.

      1. L4Yoga/Annie/Inga enables David Benson, and the NPCs R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – Mueller has an excellent record for ruining people’s lives and costing the tax payer money, not for actually winning cases.

          1. Is it possible for you to consider that people might prevail in a legal conflict because they are right ?

      2. The vast majority of media stories about Mueller, the Mueller investigation, and what Trump has or has not done in the whitehouse have proven FALSE.

        I would give them very little merit.

        I doubt Mueller would have asked anything post election. Regardless, I would expect that Trump’s lawyers would have resisted answering.

        It is not executive priviledge that precludes Mueller from post election queries. It is his authorization as Special Counsel.

        The SC law requires an investigation of a crime – while that has already been greatly exceeded, it is also a requirement of the 4th amendment as well as any legitimate criminal investigation, and a subpeona. Mueller is not free to ask Trump questions about whatever he pleases. And Trump’s lawyers will preclude a Mueller fishing expedition.

  5. “I have no recollection of the event you describe. It was over two years ago and I’ve been busy running the government and keeping the country safe. If you have documents to jog my memory please show me otherwise I don’t temember.” Easy.

    1. Thanks Mr. M. I did enjoy reading it. But it’s a guilty pleasure. The poor schnooks deserve far better than they’ve earned.

  7. “I answered them very easily.”
    ________________________

    I thought you were quoting Justice Kavanaugh.

    He also answered absurd, misandrist, incoherent and hysterical questions as part of a hoax and “witch hunt.”

    Justice Kavanaugh, meet the 19th amendment.

  9. Even the Clinton News Network’s recounting of the interactions between Comey and Trump reveal that Trump had a reasonable basis to believe that he was not personally under investigation at the time he fired Comey:

    https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/politics/donald-trump-james-comey-conversations/index.html

    Comey’s Congressional testimony:

    “I discussed with the FBI’s leadership team whether I should be prepared to assure President-Elect Trump that we were not investigating him personally. That was true; we did NOT have an open counter-intelligence case on him. We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted. During our one-on-one meeting at Trump Tower, based on President-elect Trump’s reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, I offered that assurance. ” 6 January 2017

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40194208

    What obstruction? Trump had no reason to believe that he was personally under investigation when he fired a public servant who serves at his pleasure. He wasn’t pleasured by Comey’s performance and stated that he came to that conclusion after consulting DOJ (Comey’s immediate bosses).

  10. One possibility that Turley forgets here is that Trump associates didn’t explicity collude, but knew of the Russian cyberattacks and didn’t report them to the authorities.

    Failing to report crimes you know are occurring should be equally scandalous.

    1. And the evidence is that is not Trump.
      While Corsi is apparently working on a plea deal with Mueller – he continues to publicly assert that he has no fore knowledge of anything Wikileaks has done.
      Stone continues to assert the same thing.

      Todate no claim of prior contact with Russia or Wikileaks has proven true. In fact all actual contact has been with agents of the FBI, CIA, or MI6 in some cases pretending to be Russians.

      You seem to fail to grasp that asserting something is insufficient. You must actually prove it.

      It is possible – though dubious that the Mueller investigation is the one thing in this entire mess that does not leak like a seive – though the evidence does not support that.
      Or that despite myriads of other leaks that have proven to be disinformation Mueller is holding a couple of secret aces up his sleave.

      But even that requires beleiving that the entire world press corp which has been dreging through everything trump for 2 years has also found nothing. Has not even found a wiff of any trail Mueller is one.

      There is no easter bunny – get over it.

  11. Hahaha!

    There’s nothing simple about this situation except for Donald Trump’s mentality.

    1. Please point to the real estate developments you’ve completed, the businesses you’ve founded and run, and the children you’ve shepherded to adulthood.

      1. His reply should also reference the multiple bankruptcies, business failures, lawsuits, proven fraud (Trump University), along with money laundering and perjury. His shepherded children are guilty of some of the same offenses.

        1. Enigma:

          Let’s see: Wrong (they were business bankruptcies); sort of -business failures (only one I know of and it was a licensing deal at Trump Casino-no ownership or management); everybody has lawsuits; wrong again -no proven fraud (class action case settled for reimbursement; one claimant who opted out claiming fraud lost his case); no money laundering or perjury. No convictions for any of his kids.

          You’re batting 1.000!

          1. mespo – Perhaps you’ve been drinking too much Trump Wine? Or dining on Trump Steaks? No business failures those… Trump Airlines maybe? Name two people with more lawsuits against them? Trump University definitely was fraud. Settling the case for $25,000,000 doesn’t exactly shout one’s innocence.
            No his kids haven’t been convicted of anything… yet. Donald Jr. and Ivanka surprisingly had a criminal fraud case dropped against them (the prosecutor later received a large gift fro Donald). That sounds a lot like payments to the Pam Bondi ($25,000) to not prosecute fraud in florida and a similar payment to the Arizona AG.
            What never fails to amaze me is that intelligent people (talking about you Mespo, Paul Schulte, and a few others) not only seem to have convinced yourselves Trump is somehow an ethical, legitimate businessman and politician, but then you try to convince others as well. You know he’s a fraud and a criminal, I guess admitting it would make you seem hypocritical in continuing to support him.

            1. enigma – I think Trump is just as ethical as Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc.

              I heard that the feds will be handling the election count in Broward in 2020. I didn’t hear one Democrat call out Snipes on her actions down there.

              1. Democrats do not have fixed principles, just improvisations which incorporate specious reasons for them to get what they want.

                And what they want is to be able to stuff the ballot boxes.

              2. Paul – I’m still waiting to see any evidence of crimes in Broward? Snipes announced her resignignation, should we demand blood? I am far more concerned about Brian Kemp controlling his own race for GA Governor as Sec. of State, blocking votes all the way by removing hundreds of thousands from the rolls and using his “exact match” program to block voters. Rick Scott took millions off the rolls, coincidentally more likely to vote Democrat.

                1. No, you’re not concerned about that. It’s just another talking point.

                2. enigma – she resigned before she was fired. She had her bags packed last week. It is not my state so I do not have to worry about it. 😉

                3. “Rick Scott took millions off the rolls, coincidentally more likely to vote Democrat”

                  Dead people seem to cast Democratic votes and remain on the roles long past the smell test.

                    1. AS I have shown you in the past I can document and make a fool of you starting with your calling Trump a racist because of an incident in the 1920’s decades before DJT was born. Your own evidence proved you make a lot up and twist facts. Despite that you restated the claim over and over again until it became too embarrassing even for you.

                    3. “Allan’s words… worthless. Documents nothing.”

                      When you called Trump a racist and provided your reasons even supplying a news article from the 1920’s I documented that the news article didn’t say what you said it said. I provided the actual data from the news article and then when you talked about suits I provided the information that showed you lied. Anyone can go and pull up the documentation and see the actual signatures that ended the dispute. Anyone who calls another a racist based on something that happened about two decades before they were born is recognized as somewhat loony. They are even more loony when there are signed documents proving other things to be wrong as well.

                      Enigma, you are full of it virtually everytime you open your mouth. Mespo and a few others documented your continuous tendency to prevaricate and you keep repeating the same things that twist the truth even after the documentation shows you are mixing a little bit of truth with lies to prove what you wish to believe that is contrary to what has happened.

              3. Paul, even by Clinton standards Trump’s ethics are lacking. Real industrialists, who care about their brand, don’t franchise their names to numerous, unrelated products.

            2. Donald Jr. and Ivanka surprisingly had a criminal fraud case dropped against them

              Brought by whom, when, and with what evidence?

            3. I note I took up all or almost all of these issues with you in prior discussions. When it came down to the basic facts with proof you could no longer reply yet without dealing with those facts brought up to you earlier you have restated the same basic accusations. You mix a little bit of truth with a bit of stretching the truth and lies or misunderstandings of words, court cases, etc. Maybe we should blame it on a poor education. As finale you often draw conclusions based on erroneous facts and then convert those erroneous conclusions into Enigma factoids.

              Lie on Enigma. We have all heard this before

                1. I have produced the data over and over again. No need for me to repeat myself. Enough people present today have seen it and recognize you to be a prevaricator. I proved that quite awhile ago when you accused Trump of being a racist due to something that happened around two decades before he was even born.

                  Keep it up Enigma. Your word means very little.

                  1. Allan, for all we know, is employed by Alex Jones. Yet every day Allan presumes this voice of righteous authority. Anyone questioning Donald Trump is somehow a ‘liar’ or ‘provocateur’. Like no patriotic American doubts Donald Trump. And anyone who does should be promptly shouted down! Allan feels an obligation to yell at ‘communists’.

                    1. Peter, you have now become a delusional conspiracy theorist. Keep on this way and you will end up in a padded room.

                    1. Enigma, where is your documentation that is not from a secondary source? When you provide documentation of that nature from quacks like you, primary sources with signatures are more valid.

              2. Excellent. You are delusional in your interactions with all, it appears. Please continue.

                this is to “but making up sh*t is so much easier that getting tired head from thinking too much” allen / allan

              2. Slander against his kids? You know what the ultimate defense against slander is don’t you? The truth! Don Jr and Ivanka did escape fraud charges after the prosecutor was paid a visit b a money man. Ivanka has lied about the properties she marketed. We’ll more than likely learn about Don Jr being indicted for minimum lying to the FBI. We just learned about Ivanka’s emails which sound remarkably similar toHillary’s situation. Don Jr and Eric are constantl retweeting Neo-Nazi and Skinhead memes. Which specifically of these things are untrue? I’ll grant the indictment won’t be reaql until it actually happens, maybe as soon as this week?

                1. “Trump Vodka that was the scam.”

                  What was the scam? Poor timing? Difficulty getting shelf space? A failed business startup? Loads of startups fail. Are they scams as well? Some startups with almost the same plans succeed should they be called scams?

                  About 90% of startups fail, are they all scams? Banks and capital investors loan money or take stock in the company. If the company fails those investors lose money. The secretary for the owner of the startup McDonalds took stock because the owner was cash poor. She bought a huge expensive mansion on Palm Beach. Was she involved in a scam that succeeded?

                  Enigma, Ignorance is bliss because you can say whatever you want and not recognize how foolish you sound.

        2. Again, the Trump Organization was an equity investor in a set of Atlantic City properties. All four bankruptcy proceedings were for reorganization of the corporation which owned that same set of properties. He eventually sold his interest.

            1. The Trump Plaza Hotel is still in operation. It was re-organized with a debt-for-equity swap.

              2. I think Trump maintained 51% of the equity and managed the building. That property has been sold over and over again. Trump bought the building out of love stating up front that he paid too much. Trump said the Plaza is like the Mona Lisa.

                It is a beutiful building.

            2. enigma – the Trump Plaza is one of four casinos that closed in Atlantic City. The 1992 bankruptcy was a pre-pack with funding in place to continue on.

                1. enigma – would you mind cutting and pasting that for me. I am having trouble with Turley’s blog and have shifted to IE which won’t open your link for some reason. Oh, for the good ole days of Chrome. 😉

                  1. Paul – Here’s a different story specific to that hotel. I was incorrect in stating Trump gave up control, he only gave up 49% and his salary.

                    Plaza Hotel files for bankruptcy protection under Trump plan
                    ByVIRGINIA MAIDA RANDALL UPI Business Writer
                    NEW YORK — Real estate developer Donald Trump filed a pre- packaged bankruptcy plan for the Plaza Hotel in a deal that will give his bank lenders a 49 percent stake in the legendary Manhattan landmark, a court clerk said Wednesday.

                    Trump’s Plaza Operating Partners Ltd. filed the Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan Nov. 2, according to the court clerk’s office.

                    No hearing has been set on the bankruptcy case, which will be heard by Bankruptcy Judge Prudence Abram, but the Plaza hotel is not likely to remain in Chapter 11 very long since Trump has reached an accord with his lenders.

                    The filing was widely expected following a tentative agreement between Trump, who purchased the New York hotel for $390 million in 1988, and his bank lenders in March as part of his efforts to reduce his debt.

                    Sources familiar with the case said Trump and his lenders have agreed on a total restructuring of the Plaza’s debt, estimated at $550 million on three mortgages.

                    Trump agreed to give up a 49 percent stake in the hotel in return for the restructuring package, they said. Trump would retain 51 percent and continue to operate the Plaza.

                    Trump, who took on heavy debt in the 1980s to purchase overpriced properties that lost some of their value when the boom collapsed, has been swapping debt for equity in his real estate holdings for 2 years to shore up his empire.

                    A banking syndicate, led by Citicorp, holds a $125 million second mortgage and a $125 million third mortgage. The first mortgage of $300 million is held by another Citicorp-led syndicate.

                    In return for Trump’s 49 percent stake in the Plaza, the bank group agreed to forgive the $250 million in second and third mortgages and a $125 million personal guarantee from Trump on the second mortage.

                    The restructuring of the Plaza’s debt includes an extension of the first mortgage maturity date plus a lower fixed interest rate that will replace a floating rate, sources said.

                    The agreement also grants Trump the right of first refusal to purchase his relinquished 49 percent interest if the bank lenders find a buyer.

                    Trump’s former wife, Ivana, was president of the Plaza at one time for $1 a year and all the dresses she could buy, but Trump has remained chairman, a Trump spokeswoman said.

                    ‘This is the last leg of our restructuring with Mr. Trump,’ said Amy Dates, a Citicorp spokeswoman. She said Citibank would not discuss the details of the restructuring agreement.

                    This is not the first time Trump has filed a pre-packaged bankruptcy plan.

                    On March 9, two of his Atlantic City casinos, the Trump Castle and Trump Plaza, filed pre-packaged bankruptcy plans in Bankruptcy Court in Camden, N.J., after winning bondholders’ approval.

                    Trump’s Taj Mahal, the newest and glitziest of his Atlantic City properties, emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy last year just weeks after the filing.

                    1. ” I was incorrect in stating Trump gave up control, he only gave up 49% ”

                      An admission by Enigma. These little mistakes change the context of what Enigma says. Add that to his lack of knowledge of NYC real estate and the surrounding areas along with the laws invoved ond one finds that what Enigma provides is a complete mess.

        3. “Crazy Abe” Lincoln bankrupted the Constitution and the whole country.

          He wasn’t always wrong.

          Let’s see what “Crazy Abe” had to say.

          Go ahead, Abe.

          Ahem…

          “If all earthly power were given me,” said Lincoln in a speech delivered in Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854, “I should not know what to do, as to the existing institution [of slavery]. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia, to their own native land.” After acknowledging that this plan’s “sudden execution is impossible,” he asked whether freed blacks should be made “politically and socially our equals?” “My own feelings will not admit of this,” he said, “and [even] if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not … We can not, then, make them equals.”

          1. Did “Crazy Abe” Lincoln write the “Affirmative Action Privilege” laws for the enigmas?

            No. It was his BFF Karl Marx.

            Wow!

            It used to be “The Ten Commandments.”

            Now it’s “The Ten Million Commandments.”

            There’s an unconstitutional law to please every dependent parasite.

            1. Are you aware of the “feelings” of the Constitution? Taxation for indivdual welfare and control/nullification of private property are unconstitutional. Can we get rid of antithetical and unconstitutional “Affirmative Action Privilege,” quotas, forced busing, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, generational welfare, food stamps, rent control, utility subsidies, “wrongful termination” laws, unrestricted voting, WIC, HAMP, HARP, etc. now or do ya’all still need the crutch because you’re incapable of self-reliance and you love “free stuff” and other people’s money and success? Can we re-implement freedom yet, comrade? You just hate the Constitution don’t you?

              “Affirmative Action Privilege,” don’t leave home without it!

        4. And yet he has still succeeded – far more than either you or I. Far more than all buy about 500 people in the world.
          He has succeeded in multiple domains – real estate, Casino’s, Global Hotels, Beauty Contests, Reality TV.

          As to Fraud, Money Laundering and Perjury – prove those.

          There are facts establishing the misconduct of many of those in the Obama administrating investigating Trump – including multiple perjuries that have thus far not been prosecuted.
          There are facts in the case against Clinton – including multiple perjuries, actual obstruction, as well as destruction of evidence.

          There are no actual facts that implicate Trump, only your beleifs that facts will ultimately be found.

          It is time to put up or shutup

          1. John Say – Fortunately for the nation, we don’t have to depend on guesses as to Trump’s guilt in sevral areas. A report is being developed as we speak and despite whatever tactics are attempted to conceal it, it almost certainly will be made public. I won’t waste time trying to convince you of Trump’s guilt, we will all have the opportunity to see for yourself, although some here will believe nothing.

      2. Tabby, Trump’s father was mega-rich by the standards of his time. It’s not like Donald started from scratch!

  13. For shame Professor. Professor Turley embraces disinformation, newspeak and a gross perversion of justice when he accepts and legitimizes invalid and frivolous “process” crimes derived from an egregious abuse of power as a conspiracy of “malicious prosecution” not dissimilar to that of convict and former DA, Mike Nifong, in the Duke lacrosse hoax. There was no Russian collusion. The “swamp” is investigating the man not a crime. There was no crime. The only potential violation was one of counter-intelligence. There was no rationale for the appointment of a special counsel. Jeff Session was not required to recuse himself. The only act of import to America is the Obama Coup D’etat. The DOJ and/or special counsel should have and must still investigate the crimes of Obama’s “deep state” co-conspirators:

    Sessions, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Comey, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Kadzic, Yates, Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Brennan, Clapper, Farkas, Power, Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Obama et al.

  14. The truth is what Trump says is the truth, he alone knows what the truth is. I’m just waiting for him to declare his word is truth and lock up anybody that says otherwise. It’s only a matter of time before he declares that he did not cut down the tree of democracy, he only cut it’s roots.

    1. it’s only a matter of time before the tree of liberty gets its long awaited water

    2. “waiting for him to declare his word is truth and lock up anybody that says otherwise. ”

      Trump doesn’t do those things. You are confusing him with the left. It is the left that impairs freedom of speech though antifa and other radical groups.

      2. More cockamamie regurgitations from the fruit-loops on Pravda Faux News. Pro tip: hannity laughs at your befuddling gullibility.

        this is to “I wish I had a ‘hannity was here’ tattoo across my lower back” allan / allen

  15. “Book Offers Firsthand Account of a Venomous Den Inside the White House”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/19/us/politics/team-of-vipers-book-cliff-sims.html

    “A firsthand account of the tumult inside President Trump’s White House is scheduled to be published in January, the latest in a string of books that seek to decipher his unprecedented presidency.

    “The new book, “Team of Vipers,” is written by Cliff Sims, a former aide in the White House communications office who had previously worked on the Trump campaign.

    ““He saw how Trump handled the challenges of the office, and he learned from Trump himself how he saw the world,” Mr. Sims’s publisher, Thomas Dunne Books, an imprint of St. Martin’s Press, said in announcing the book. “His book offers never-revealed scenes from this most unorthodox of White Houses — and will stand as a definitive history of an unforgettable era.”

  16. TURLEY MINIMIZES “FALSE STATEMENTS”

    Turley’s column today is written in a deliberately boring and complicated manner. Readers with less grasp of the Mueller Probe could get the impression this matter is ‘only’ partisan politics. No mention of guilty pleas by the former Campaign Chairman and former National Security Advisor. No mention that the president’s son took a meeting with shadowy emissaries. No mention of Trump pronouncements like, “I love Wikileaks!”.

    Instead Turley leads us through a terribly dull rundown of events. So dull the reader needs to be freshly caffeinated. Turley then arrives at this passage: “The most likely crime remains unchanged from my first column on this controversy written two years, which is false statements”.

    Now with Donald Trump this passage reads like a colossal caveat; the pothole so deep it will snap your axel. Since taking office Donald Trump has made literally thousands of false statements! We have never had a president so unmoored from the truth.

    But Professor Turley would have us believe that Mueller intends to spring some catch-all, gotcha trap on an otherwise sincere politician. Which makes me question Turely’s sincerity regarding this column.

    1. well it is partisan to a point; but also bipartisan at least a little, in that we have the Deep State which is to say entrenched bureaucratic interests being advanced by long standing “made men” of the bureaucratic mafia from both parties who are acting in concert to undermine the elected president.

      as for loving wikileaks, yeah, I love it, Trump loved it before, but that same Deep State has him by the cojones now and he’s got wikileaks or at least assange himself under an indictment apparently, in other words, so much for the gravity of that statement, it was an off the cuff remark and nothing more

      1. This “Deep State” entity which you have so cleverly uncovered appears alarming. It’s clear that through your indefatigable sleuthing, you have single-handedly revealed for all the world a nefarious cabal of ne’er-do-wells, seemingly hell-bent on eradicating our ‘Merican way of life; our love of root beer floats; and fluoridating our precious bodily fluids, or some such other dastardly deed. Good work, inspector.

        this is to “Inspector Clouseau, at your service” kurtzie

    2. Again, Trump has nothing to do with Manafort’s tax returns, with which the Justice department could not be bothered until Mueller saw them as useful. As for Gen. Flynn, his indictment and coerced plea is a scandal. No honorable prosecutor would have done such a thing.

      1. “The DOJ, which was fully aware of the actions being taken by James Comey and the FBI, also became an active element acting against members of the Trump campaign. Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, along with Mary McCord, the head of the DOJ’s National Security Division, were actively involved in efforts to remove Gen. Michael Flynn from his position as national security adviser to President Trump.

        To this day, it remains unknown which individual was responsible for making public Flynn’s call with the Russian ambassador. Flynn ultimately pleaded guilty to a process crime: lying to the FBI. There have been questions raised in Congress regarding the possible alteration of FD-302s, the written notes of Flynn’s FBI interviews. Special counsel Robert Mueller has repeatedly deferred Flynn’s sentencing hearing.”
        ————-
        https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/judiciary/upload/2018-02-28%20CEG%20LG%20to%20DOJ%20OIG%20%28referral%29.pdf

        “Dear Inspector General Horowitz:
        We respectfully request that you conduct a comprehensive review of potential improper political influence, misconduct, or mismanagement in the conduct of the counterintelligence and criminal investigations related to Russia and individuals associated with (1) the Trump campaign, (2) the Presidential transition, or (3) the administration prior to the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. …”
        ————
        “The Obama administration engaged in the ultimately successful effort to oust Trump’s newly appointed national security adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn. Yates, along with Mary McCord, head of the DOJ’s National Security Division, led that effort.”

  18. Jon Turley Hype Machine has been revved up just before the holiday. Reading something/nothing into nothing/something. Turley has a fine legal mind when he makes the effort. Other times – like this – he just stirs up the Shiite to generate clicks/traffic for his website at a time when this hoax is dying on the vine heading into holidays. Zzzzzzz

Comments are closed.