Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Does the Trump Tower meeting and the effort to cover the true intent of the meeting ring a bell?
Or Trump telling Lester Holt that "And in fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself -- I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It's an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should've won" although he also said it was the way Comey handled the Clinton investigation. So which was the reason to fire Comey?
So he had more than one reason to fire him. I have several reasons to get up tomorrow morning too, its not a big deal.
No proof of any cover up just accusations without fact.
Just like the witch hunt being call an investigation. That's the bell that rings.
Mueller has no crime so there is no need to testify. If there was a crime then Mueller needs to charge
him to get his testimony.
Mueller is investigating the possibility of crime. Mueller doesn't need to charge Trump to get him to testify. He has subpoena power that will compel Trump to testify before a Grand Jury if he doesn't want to sit down for a face-to-face with Mueller.
So he had more than one reason to fire him. I have several reasons to get up tomorrow morning too, its not a big deal.
No proof of any cover up just accusations without fact.
Just like the witch hunt being call an investigation. That's the bell that rings.
"Witch hunts" don't produce indictments, guilty pleas, and plea deals in exchange for the testimony of those indicted. This investigation has already demonstrated beyond all doubt that it has substance.
So he had more than one reason to fire him. I have several reasons to get up tomorrow morning too, its not a big deal.
No proof of any cover up just accusations without fact.
Just like the witch hunt being call an investigation. That's the bell that rings.
So why didn't he cite that reason as well?
Why did Trump ask Comey to let Flynn go?
Why did Trump ask Rogers and Coats to intervene with Comey on the behalf of Flynn?
Why did they feel the need to concoct a story regrading the meeting at Trump Tower?
A witch hunt isn't based on solid evidence and as previously noted, produce indictments and guilty pleas.
Mueller is investigating the possibility of crime. Mueller doesn't need to charge Trump to get him to testify. He has subpoena power that will compel Trump to testify before a Grand Jury if he doesn't want to sit down for a face-to-face with Mueller.
It's not that easy. A judge cannot compel The President to do anything. Three distinct branches of Government and separation means one cannot enforce the others to do something. A Grand Jury and court order but it is different in that it all depends on what that 'order' is. If it's obvious criminal, or really needed as evidence (as the Nixon Tapes), than it is up to Congress to take that as a cue to impeach. If it's a general testimony statement, it doesn't work that way (note that they couldn't compel Nixon to answer if he knew about it).
In the case of Paula Jones for Bill Clinton, it was ruled by the US Supreme court that a sitting President is not exempt from civil litigation from actions before taking office and that is unrelated (event occurred while he was Governor). There was no testimony.
Regarding Mueller, there is no precedent that a President has to give testimony. Who would enforce it? The US Marshalls? In the past, Presidents have volunteered testimony. But let's say that happens. It's the US Attorney General that the US Marshals report to. But I guess in this case, Rosenstein might have authority. All Trump than has to do is fire Rosenstein. Ultimately Trump can install people that will not comply and in fact, withdraw the grand jury subpoena.
It's only the threat of impeachment that makes a President comply. But since anything Mueller has is nothing (even negative with Flynn's case falling apart), the chance of a Subpoena with no basis will not go through.
Congress will see how foolish it is to enforce a Subpoena by Mueller which is based on nothing (that's why Flynn is so important.). Especially when it's the President that's the Target, they're not going to (especially Republicans) going to risk their own hide to help out the Democrats by threatening Impeachment over a subpoena that will potential be an embarrassment in Michael Flynn. Manafort's indictment is before the campaign so that is toothless. The Russian meeting thing for his sons/adoption is also a nothing burger.
It's not that easy. A judge cannot compel The President to do anything. Three distinct branches of Government and separation means one cannot enforce the others to do something. A Grand Jury and court order but it is different in that it all depends on what that 'order' is. If it's obvious criminal, or really needed as evidence (as the Nixon Tapes), than it is up to Congress to take that as a cue to impeach. If it's a general testimony statement, it doesn't work that way (note that they couldn't compel Nixon to answer if he knew about it).
In the case of Paula Jones for Bill Clinton, it was ruled by the US Supreme court that a sitting President is not exempt from civil litigation from actions before taking office and that is unrelated (event occurred while he was Governor). There was no testimony.
Regarding Mueller, there is no precedent that a President has to give testimony. Who would enforce it? The US Marshalls? In the past, Presidents have volunteered testimony. But let's say that happens. It's the US Attorney General that the US Marshals report to. But I guess in this case, Rosenstein might have authority. All Trump than has to do is fire Rosenstein. Ultimately Trump can install people that will not comply and in fact, withdraw the grand jury subpoena.
It's only the threat of impeachment that makes a President comply. But since anything Mueller has is nothing (even negative with Flynn's case falling apart), the chance of a Subpoena with no basis will not go through.
Congress will see how foolish it is to enforce a Subpoena by Mueller which is based on nothing (that's why Flynn is so important.). Especially when it's the President that's the Target, they're not going to (especially Republicans) going to risk their own hide to help out the Democrats by threatening Impeachment over a subpoena that will potential be an embarrassment in Michael Flynn. Manafort's indictment is before the campaign so that is toothless. The Russian meeting thing for his sons/adoption is also a nothing burger.
I find it very amusing that you have drawn such mundane conclusions based solely upon your opinions concerning Mueller's progress thus far. What is really interesting is that it seems as if you are actually condoning an obstruction of the investigation if that were to occur. Trump is not a king and in fact, he did not even have a mandate when he slithered into office. If he fires Mueller, it will not end well for the birther-in chief and wtf is he so afraid of if he has nothing to hide? But we all know the answer to that because Trump is hiding everything.
It's not a question of "if", but of "when". His lawyers are prepping him now. If he is innocent, he should have no problems convincing Mueller's team of it. If not, he may plead the Fifth. Anybody have any guesses as to how this will go down...?
I personally think it will take until sometime in May or June to get all the obstacles out of the way.
If this interrogation was shown on television, it would probably break the record for most viewers. Watching Trump squirm and obfuscate, would be better than any comedy show.
If this interrogation was shown on television, it would probably break the record for most viewers. Watching Trump squirm and obfuscate, would be better than any comedy show.
Trump has a history of lying under oath which is why his lawyers are terrified to have him testify.
It's not that easy. A judge cannot compel The President to do anything. Three distinct branches of Government and separation means one cannot enforce the others to do something. A Grand Jury and court order but it is different in that it all depends on what that 'order' is. If it's obvious criminal, or really needed as evidence (as the Nixon Tapes), than it is up to Congress to take that as a cue to impeach. If it's a general testimony statement, it doesn't work that way (note that they couldn't compel Nixon to answer if he knew about it).
In the case of Paula Jones for Bill Clinton, it was ruled by the US Supreme court that a sitting President is not exempt from civil litigation from actions before taking office and that is unrelated (event occurred while he was Governor). There was no testimony.
Regarding Mueller, there is no precedent that a President has to give testimony. Who would enforce it? The US Marshalls? In the past, Presidents have volunteered testimony. But let's say that happens. It's the US Attorney General that the US Marshals report to. But I guess in this case, Rosenstein might have authority. All Trump than has to do is fire Rosenstein. Ultimately Trump can install people that will not comply and in fact, withdraw the grand jury subpoena.
It's only the threat of impeachment that makes a President comply. But since anything Mueller has is nothing (even negative with Flynn's case falling apart), the chance of a Subpoena with no basis will not go through.
Congress will see how foolish it is to enforce a Subpoena by Mueller which is based on nothing (that's why Flynn is so important.). Especially when it's the President that's the Target, they're not going to (especially Republicans) going to risk their own hide to help out the Democrats by threatening Impeachment over a subpoena that will potential be an embarrassment in Michael Flynn. Manafort's indictment is before the campaign so that is toothless. The Russian meeting thing for his sons/adoption is also a nothing burger.
We may be gettng ready for a practical course in legal proceedings.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
