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.
Argument for and against Pres. Trump to testify in Mueller's investigation.
After understanding the facts around the perjury trap I believe the only safe action to protect ones self is to take the fifth. Its not an admission of guilt and is the only protection from a aggressive prosecutor who needs a conviction for something/anything to claim success.
The only way anyone could avoid a perjury trap is to have perfect recall of events that happened a year or more ago. The slightest misunderstanding could lead to a charge of perjury or related charge.
A argument by Wapo and why you wouldn't want them as your lawyer in your defense.
No paywall surprisingly. At least I didn't encounter one.
Pleading the fifth is not a legal admission of guilt, however popular perception is a different story. I wonder if you would be OK with the same defense for Clinton or some other politician you don't like.
As far as the perjury trap defense, from your own link:
"when the grand jury is attempting to obtain useful information in furtherance of its investigation, the perjury trap doctrine does not apply"
Testimony by the president would be to obtain useful information, not simply to catch him in a lie. Though I'm not sure you would actually need to set much of a trap to catch the president in a lie.
It is hilarious watching the right attempt to convince everyone that "the memo" and the fact charges haven't yet been filed against Trump and his inner ring "proves" his innocence. Based on that logic, Hillary, Obama, and all the other right-wing boogiemen are also innocent. Of course, since double-standards are the heart of modern right-wing politics, they'll never admit to that.
There is no defense lower than "Well, it's not that I'm innocent, but since you gathered proof of my guilt the wrong way, I'm innocent." Not that the memo even goes that far, but that is the defense Trump is attempting to use, which is basically admission of guilt. Right-wingers lose it when inner city gang-bangers get off the hook by attacking the prosecutor or getting the jury to distrust the arresting policemen, but they have no problem pulling the same tactics to defend Trump colluding with the enemy and perhaps even being an Russian agent. Disgusting double-standards, as always with them.
As for Trump, catching him in a lie shouldn't be too hard, but he'll just plead the 5th... not that I would trust anything that slimebag said under oath anyway. He has not a scrap of decency or morality left in him.
The president is not obligated to talk to anyone about anything. If he does, he's not going to incriminate himself. He's a lot smarter than he gets credit for and whole lot smarter than anyone on this forum.
POTUS is tweeting himself into having to sit with the investigators. If he has a legal problem and takes the fifth, it will be over for him. If he has a subpoena served, and the lawyers fight it, it will go to SCOTUS, even the conservatives would want him to go before the Grand Jury
The president is not obligated to talk to anyone about anything. If he does, he's not going to incriminate himself. He's a lot smarter than he gets credit for and whole lot smarter than anyone on this forum.
Pretty sure Bill Clinton thought that too. As many on the right know he testified. there are plenty of threads on CD.
Argument for and against Pres. Trump to testify in Mueller's investigation.
After understanding the facts around the perjury trap I believe the only safe action to protect ones self is to take the fifth. Its not an admission of guilt and is the only protection from a aggressive prosecutor who needs a conviction for something/anything to claim success.
The only way anyone could avoid a perjury trap is to have perfect recall of events that happened a year or more ago. The slightest misunderstanding could lead to a charge of perjury or related charge.
A argument by Wapo and why you wouldn't want them as your lawyer in your defense.
No paywall surprisingly. At least I didn't encounter one.
Pleading the fifth is not a legal admission of guilt, however popular perception is a different story. I wonder if you would be OK with the same defense for Clinton or some other politician you don't like.
And that's the rub right there it comes down to a matter of perception if we had Hillary in office or some other president from the left, and they pleaded the 5th the right would raise holy hell with it and scream that they are hiding something. IMO, I think pleading the 5th is more or less saying that your guilty and your hiding something. What I find even more interesting is that Trump stated this
" "You see the mob takes the Fifth," Trump said during a campaign stop in Iowa late last September. "If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?"
Yet instead of answering, Donald Trump invoked his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. Over the course of five depositions that summer, he was asked approximately 100 questions related to marital infidelity. He pleaded the Fifth on 97 of them.
Pretty sure Bill Clinton thought that too. As many on the right know he testified. there are plenty of threads on CD.
Bill Clinton was charged with lying under oath to a federal grand jury and obstructing justice. There is no evidence the shows Donald Trump did anything remotely close to that.
Even though the left keeps hammering away, they've come up empty and have only been exposed for their own criminal misconduct.
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.