|
Post by NN on Aug 10, 2018 11:36:39 GMT -6
Well shucks....looks like Mueller's investigation won't be over by September as Trump's crazy lawyer, Giuliani, has demanded as Mueller has subpoenaed Randy Credico, whom Roger Stone stated was his back channel to Julian Assange. Don't want to come in for a voluntary interview....fine, we'll just subpoena you. And don't you worry Mr. Stone, I bet there's a subpoena with your name on it as well. www.cnn.com/2018/08/10/politics/randy-credico-roger-stone-wikileaks/index.htmlSpecial counsel Robert Mueller has subpoenaed Randy Credico to testify before a grand jury next month, according to Credico's attorney. Martin Stolar told CNN he received a subpoena Thursday and Credico intends to comply and testify on September 7. Credico, a comedian and radio show host, will likely meet with Mueller's team for a voluntary interview first. Credico previously declined a request from Mueller's team for a voluntary interview. Roger Stone claimed Credico was his back-channel to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange during the 2016 campaign. Stolar said it's unclear exactly what Mueller's team wants to question Credico about. "My speculation is that they probably want to talk to him about Roger Stone and Julian Assange," Stolar said. Mueller is going to drag it out for as long as he can. If he can inadvertently “influence “ the midterms, no harm no foul right? Cry much? Fucking Starr was on Clinton for four years and all he got was Clinton lying about a blowjob.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 10, 2018 11:50:02 GMT -6
Mueller is going to drag it out for as long as he can. If he can inadvertently “influence “ the midterms, no harm no foul right? Yeah that's it. It's not like it matters anyway. Trumpers gonna Trump no matter what he does anyway....5th avenue and all that.
Matter of fact, I'm sure that's Giuliani's strategy. Tell Mueller to get it done by September, knowing that Mueller is under no obligation to do so, then when October rolls around and it's still going on Trump can whine to his minions that he's being mistreated and the witch hunt and NFL players are hurting America (cue the violins) in an attempt to rile up what might be an otherwise less energetic turnout for midterms.
Possible, but then again, who knows. Currently in special elections under President Trump, the Democrats are 1-8 & this is with a “re-energized “ base. As for the minions quote, considering a certain former Presidential Candidate used “undo influence “,(along with sexism, Russia, etc) with little to no push back for on her supporters both on here & in the media, then it’s fine to run with that excuse correct?
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 10, 2018 11:54:33 GMT -6
Mueller is going to drag it out for as long as he can. If he can inadvertently “influence “ the midterms, no harm no foul right? Cry much? Fucking Starr was on Clinton for four years and all he got was Clinton lying about a blowjob. Not crying, more like making sure since one side used that excuse,(along with numerous other excuses), to explain away their loss, then it’s perfectly acceptable if the other side gets to use it if they have any losses,(issue of fairness & all). As for the Starr investigation, I’ve been on the record stating I did not approve of that, nor did I like it. When the blowjob lie was what they got him with, it went beyond being a waste of taxpayer money. Mueller is no different & in ways, this is their way of getting even for Bill being impeached,(coupled with the opponent’s irrational behavior in regards to the current administration).
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 10, 2018 12:06:27 GMT -6
Mueller is going to drag it out for as long as he can. If he can inadvertently “influence “ the midterms, no harm no foul right? Cry much? Fucking Starr was on Clinton for four years and all he got was Clinton lying about a blowjob. Starr was Whitewater. Clinton lied in the Paula Jones case.
|
|
|
Post by NN on Aug 10, 2018 12:08:54 GMT -6
Cry much? Fucking Starr was on Clinton for four years and all he got was Clinton lying about a blowjob. Not crying, more like making sure since one side used that excuse,(along with numerous other excuses), to explain away their loss, then it’s perfectly acceptable if the other side gets to use it if they have any losses,(issue of fairness & all). As for the Starr investigation, I’ve been on the record stating I did not approve of that, nor did I like it. When the blowjob lie was what they got him with, it went beyond being a waste of taxpayer money. Mueller is no different & in ways, this is their way of getting even for Bill being impeached,(coupled with the opponent’s irrational behavior in regards to the current administration). So getting a guy that was hiding about 15 million from being taxed is nothing? Manafort should be excused somehow? GTFO.
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 10, 2018 12:09:16 GMT -6
Yeah that's it. It's not like it matters anyway. Trumpers gonna Trump no matter what he does anyway....5th avenue and all that.
Matter of fact, I'm sure that's Giuliani's strategy. Tell Mueller to get it done by September, knowing that Mueller is under no obligation to do so, then when October rolls around and it's still going on Trump can whine to his minions that he's being mistreated and the witch hunt and NFL players are hurting America (cue the violins) in an attempt to rile up what might be an otherwise less energetic turnout for midterms.
Possible, but then again, who knows. Currently in special elections under President Trump, the Democrats are 1-8 & this is with a “re-energized “ base. As for the minions quote, considering a certain former Presidential Candidate used “undo influence “,(along with sexism, Russia, etc) with little to no push back for on her supporters both on here & in the media, then it’s fine to run with that excuse correct? 1. As to the midterms, about a month ago CNN was all about this "blue wave" and I believed they were using the whole, "name and claim" strategy, i.e. say it enough and it will come true. I wasn't falling for it. After the close race in Ohio, I'm not so sure they're wrong.
2. And you're right, which is why I never defend, Hillary, her name is Hillary. Me and my secretary discuss politics and we both rip Trump. But, in our conversations I always rip Hillary too. She's a dirty politician, opposite side of the same coin as Trump. And yes, she has minions as well who couldn't even admit that she screwed Bernie. I have no love for either side that blindly support "their guy".
|
|
|
Post by NN on Aug 10, 2018 12:18:51 GMT -6
Cry much? Fucking Starr was on Clinton for four years and all he got was Clinton lying about a blowjob. Starr was Whitewater. Clinton lied in the Paula Jones case. The main take away here was the 4 years with really nothing to show. And I'll raise your Pala Jones with a Stormy/ McDougal, grabem by the pussy, and a creepy teen usa pageant dressing room tour.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 10, 2018 12:55:19 GMT -6
thehill.com/hilltv/rising/401185-the-handwritten-notes-exposing-what-fusion-gps-told-doj-about-trumpOne notation that stands out is Simpson’s account that he asked Steele to talk with Mother Jones reporter David Corn about their muckraking on Trump and Russia in the final days of the election. At the time, Steele still worked as an FBI source. Corn’s Oct. 31, 2016, story was one of the most definitive to allege possible ties between the Trump campaign and Moscow, creating an important talking point for Democrats in the final days of the campaign. “Glen asked Chris to speak to the Mother Jones reporter. It was Glen’s Hail Mary attempt,” Ohr wrote. www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump/When Simpson testified before Congress, he said he and Steele acted out of a sense of duty. “For him it was professional obligations. I mean, for both of us it was citizenship. You know, people report crimes all the time,” he told the Senate Judiciary Committee. www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/09/us/politics/document-Fusion-GPS-Simpson-Transcript.html....... Ohr made clear he took possession of some evidence from Simpson, writing: “Glen gave me a memory stick.” Early on, Ohr’s notes detail, the conversation focused on a theory apparently offered by Simpson that revolving Trump team members — former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, followed by informal adviser Carter Page, then Cohen — forged a secret channel with Moscow to hijack the election. All three men long have been cited in the Russia investigation; each denies any coordination with Russia. But Ohr’s notes are the first to quote Simpson as suggesting the three essentially were shark-tooth spies who replaced each other in a secret plot. “He identified Michael Cohen, a lawyer in Brooklyn w. Russian (Brighton Beach) clients, as the go-between from Russia to the Trump campaign who replaced Manafort and Carter Page,” Ohr’s notes read, quoting Simpson’s alleged narrative. The notes suggest guilt by association, citing Cohen’s wife and suggesting one of Cohen’s in-laws had real estate dealings in Moscow “with ties to the Kremlin.” ...... “What was on the memory stick? What did Ohr do with the information? Did the FBI rely on it for future court actions? Did the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court that approved surveillance warrants know Ohr was getting information from the Simpson-Steele operation after Steele had been dismissed?” John Solomon asked.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 10, 2018 12:59:21 GMT -6
www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/10/manafort-trial-judge-mysteriously-delays-testimony-after-new-mueller-team-complaint.htmlJudge T.S. Ellis III mysteriously delayed testimony Friday in the case of ex-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, pushing off the day’s proceedings for hours after prosecutors once again complained about his criticism of them. It’s not clear if the delay is connected to the complaint filed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team. But the postponement is significant, as prosecutors had been hoping to finish calling witnesses Friday — and Ellis has a reputation as a strickler for keeping trials moving. In the Mueller team motion filed Friday morning, they accused the judge of unfairly criticizing them in court, saying it’s possible his recent comments could “confuse and mislead the jury.” Mueller deputy Andrew Weissmann and other attorneys on the team specifically noted how Ellis made negative comments this week about their focus on a bank loan Manafort applied for but did not receive. “You might want to spend time on a loan that was granted,” Ellis said in court Thursday. The prosecutors, in Friday’s motion, asked Ellis to retract his comment, saying it “misrepresents the law regarding bank fraud conspiracy” and “improperly conveys the Court’s opinion of the facts, and is likely to confuse and mislead the jury.” Ellis has not yet addressed motion in court.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 10, 2018 14:14:54 GMT -6
Starr was Whitewater. Clinton lied in the Paula Jones case. The main take away here was the 4 years with really nothing to show. And I'll raise your Pala Jones with a Stormy/ McDougal, grabem by the pussy, and a creepy teen usa pageant dressing room tour. Bill Clinton was the president. The chief LEO. A lawyer. He lied, under oath, to a federal judge. Doesn't matter what it was about. He can't do that. Stormy et al has nothing to do with this. Odd how all of a sudden someone's private life matters. But you keep moving those goal posts.
|
|
|
Post by sheepdog on Aug 10, 2018 14:20:59 GMT -6
The main take away here was the 4 years with really nothing to show. And I'll raise your Pala Jones with a Stormy/ McDougal, grabem by the pussy, and a creepy teen usa pageant dressing room tour. Bill Clinton was the president. The chief LEO. A lawyer. He lied, under oath, to a federal judge. Doesn't matter what it was about. He can't do that. Stormy et al has nothing to do with this. Odd how all of a sudden someone's private life matters. But you keep moving those goal posts.That's what they do. That and barns.
|
|
|
Post by NN on Aug 10, 2018 14:34:54 GMT -6
The main take away here was the 4 years with really nothing to show. And I'll raise your Pala Jones with a Stormy/ McDougal, grabem by the pussy, and a creepy teen usa pageant dressing room tour. Bill Clinton was the president. The chief LEO. A lawyer. He lied, under oath, to a federal judge. Doesn't matter what it was about. He can't do that. Stormy et al has nothing to do with this. Odd how all of a sudden someone's private life matters. But you keep moving those goal posts. LOL, captain bone spur is too scared to go under oath.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 10, 2018 14:59:53 GMT -6
Conversation Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll Process Server Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll Process Server @processservicec @wikileaks By Court order, you are being served with the following legal documents: (link: www.cohenmilsteinprocessserver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Summons-WikiLeaks.pdf) cohenmilsteinprocessserver.com/wp-content/upl…, (link: www.cohenmilsteinprocessserver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/DNC-COMPLAINT-STAMPED.pdf) cohenmilsteinprocessserver.com/wp-content/upl…, (link: www.cohenmilsteinprocessserver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Electronic-Case-Filing-Rules-Instructions-SDNY.pdf) cohenmilsteinprocessserver.com/wp-content/upl…, (link: www.cohenmilsteinprocessserver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Individual-Practices-of-Judge-John-G.-Koeltl.pdf) cohenmilsteinprocessserver.com/wp-content/upl…. All of these documents may be found here: (link: www.cohenmilsteinprocessserver.com/) cohenmilsteinprocessserver.com. 12:52 PM · Aug 10, 2018 195 Retweets 397 Likes ........ t.co/xobZp3tmJB?amp=1The Democratic National Committee on Friday officially served its lawsuit to WikiLeaks via Twitter, employing a rare method to serve its suit to the elusive group that has thus far been unresponsive. As CBS News first reported last month, the DNC filed a motion with a federal court in Manhattan requesting permission to serve its complaint to WikiLeaks on Twitter, a platform the DNC argued the website uses regularly. The DNC filed a lawsuit in April against the Trump campaign, Russian government and WikiLeaks, alleging a massive conspiracy to tilt the 2016 election in Donald Trump's favor. All of the DNC's attempts to serve the lawsuit via email failed, the DNC said in last month's motion to the judge, which was ultimately approved. The lawsuit was served through a tweet from a Twitter account established Friday by Cohen Milstein, the law firm representing the DNC in the suit, with the intent of serving the lawsuit.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 10, 2018 15:06:35 GMT -6
Bill Clinton was the president. The chief LEO. A lawyer. He lied, under oath, to a federal judge. Doesn't matter what it was about. He can't do that. Stormy et al has nothing to do with this. Odd how all of a sudden someone's private life matters. But you keep moving those goal posts. LOL, captain bone spur is too scared to go under oath. More like he learned from Bill Clinton’s mistake. Starr had nothing and pressed for the interview. Clinton in his arrogance of his belief in his charisma took the bait & the rest is history,(i.e. lying under oath about the bj). President Trump doesn’t need to help an investigation that is as equally politically motivated as the Starr investigation was,(& was floundering all the same until the interview). What President Trump should do instead is what the Republicans in Congress are asking him to do,(& falls under his ability to do), & that is release the unredacted FISA application pages and let it ride. If/When the investigation gets close to election date, use it to your advantage by telling how it is politically motivated to hurt him & his agenda & there is still no proof of collusion with the Trump campaign, nor any Americans indicted/charged with collusion.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 10, 2018 15:07:41 GMT -6
LOL, captain bone spur is too scared to go under oath.
It's not about Russia. It's not about collusion. It's not about obstruction. It's to get him to say something so they can spring a perjury trap on him. Trump feels he has nothing to hide. In no way should he be part of this sham.
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 10, 2018 15:22:51 GMT -6
LOL, captain bone spur is too scared to go under oath.
It's not about Russia. It's not about collusion. It's not about obstruction. It's to get him to say something so they can spring a perjury trap on him. Trump feels he has nothing to hide. In no way should he be part of this sham. Oh God.
You can't commit perjury if you don't lie. Just don't lie.
He's just afraid he wont' tell the truth to legitimate questions like, "Mr Trump....did you have anything to do with writing that letter for your son about the Trump tower meeting?" I guess the folks that asked him that the first time were just trying to get him to lie.
|
|
|
Post by NN on Aug 10, 2018 16:11:05 GMT -6
LOL, captain bone spur is too scared to go under oath.
It's not about Russia. It's not about collusion. It's not about obstruction. It's to get him to say something so they can spring a perjury trap on him. Trump feels he has nothing to hide. In no way should he be part of this sham. Keep telling yourself that, I'm sure it's very comforting.
|
|
|
Post by politicalmexininja on Aug 10, 2018 16:39:01 GMT -6
It's not about Russia. It's not about collusion. It's not about obstruction. It's to get him to say something so they can spring a perjury trap on him. Trump feels he has nothing to hide. In no way should he be part of this sham. Oh God.
You can't commit perjury if you don't lie. Just don't lie.
He's just afraid he wont' tell the truth to legitimate questions like, "Mr Trump....did you have anything to do with writing that letter for your son about the Trump tower meeting?" I guess the folks that asked him that the first time were just trying to get him to lie.
Alan Dershowitz covered this very scenario in his latest book... www.amazon.com/Case-Against-Impeaching-Trump-ebook/dp/B07D1FN74D/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1533940718&sr=8-1&keywords=alan+dershowitz+case+against+impeachment
|
|
|
Post by thievingmagpie on Aug 10, 2018 17:05:57 GMT -6
Bill Clinton was the president. The chief LEO. A lawyer. He lied, under oath, to a federal judge. Doesn't matter what it was about. He can't do that. Stormy et al has nothing to do with this. Odd how all of a sudden someone's private life matters. But you keep moving those goal posts. LOL, captain bone spur is too scared to go under oath. So says captain keyboard vagina.
|
|
|
Post by xingtherubicon on Aug 10, 2018 17:08:12 GMT -6
It's not about Russia. It's not about collusion. It's not about obstruction. It's to get him to say something so they can spring a perjury trap on him. Trump feels he has nothing to hide. In no way should he be part of this sham. Keep telling yourself that, I'm sure it's very comforting. Keep waiting for that collusion charge, I'm sure it's very comforting.
|
|
|
Post by NN on Aug 10, 2018 17:20:18 GMT -6
LOL, captain bone spur is too scared to go under oath. So says captain keyboard vagina.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 10, 2018 20:35:54 GMT -6
Mark Meadows ✔ @repmarkmeadows DOJ official Bruce Ohr will come before Congress on August 28 to answer why he had 60+ contacts with dossier author, Chris Steele, as far back as January 2016. He owes the American public the full truth. 7:44 PM - Aug 10, 2018 9,062 5,284 people are talking about this dailycaller.com/2018/08/10/bruce-ohr-interview-congress/The Department of Justice official whose wife worked for dossier firm Fusion GPS and maintained close contact with dossier author Christopher Steele will appear for an interview before members of two congressional committees later in August. North Carolina Republican Rep. Mark Meadows, a member of the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee, announced on Twitter that Bruce Ohr will appear on Aug. 28 “to answer why he had 60+ contacts with dossier author, Chris Steele, as far back as January 2016.” “He owes the American public the full truth,” Meadows said of Ohr, a career Justice Department official. A source with knowledge of the plans tells The Daily Caller News Foundation that Ohr will appear before members of the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees for a closed-door interview.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 10, 2018 22:32:39 GMT -6
Mark Meadows ✔ @repmarkmeadows DOJ official Bruce Ohr will come before Congress on August 28 to answer why he had 60+ contacts with dossier author, Chris Steele, as far back as January 2016. He owes the American public the full truth. 7:44 PM - Aug 10, 2018 9,062 5,284 people are talking about this dailycaller.com/2018/08/10/bruce-ohr-interview-congress/The Department of Justice official whose wife worked for dossier firm Fusion GPS and maintained close contact with dossier author Christopher Steele will appear for an interview before members of two congressional committees later in August. North Carolina Republican Rep. Mark Meadows, a member of the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee, announced on Twitter that Bruce Ohr will appear on Aug. 28 “to answer why he had 60+ contacts with dossier author, Chris Steele, as far back as January 2016.” “He owes the American public the full truth,” Meadows said of Ohr, a career Justice Department official. A source with knowledge of the plans tells The Daily Caller News Foundation that Ohr will appear before members of the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees for a closed-door interview.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 11, 2018 7:06:30 GMT -6
On the subject of a perjury trap but one who knows about law: www.nationalreview.com/2018/08/trump-perjury-trap-legitimate-concern-reason-to-decline-mueller-interview/Of Course There Is Such a Thing as a ‘Perjury Trap’ By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY August 11, 2018 6:30 AM And it’s a legitimate reason for President Trump to decline to be interviewed. Studies will someday be done on the deleterious effect Donald Trump has had on the brains of people who loathe him. It drives them to say things that are as palpably foolish as some of the president’s own doozies. This week’s winner: There is no such thing as a “perjury trap.” Because some of the people making this nonsensical claim are very smart, let’s stipulate that the heated moment we find ourselves in is driven by politics, not law or logic. Special Counsel Robert Mueller wants to interview President Trump. President Trump’s legal team is taking the public position that, although the president wants bigly to answer Mueller’s questions, the lawyers are discouraging this because it could be a “perjury trap.” That is, Mueller’s prosecutors could be plotting to trip the president up, to dazzle him into saying something inaccurate that could be grist for a false-statements prosecution. Of course, this drives Trump antagonists to distraction. They point out that the president says many things that are not just inaccurate but knowingly false. In maintaining that there are no perjury traps, what they are really arguing is that Trump does not need to be “trapped” into perjury; that his lawyers’ claims about Mueller’s treacherousness are a smokescreen to hide their real worry: viz., that Trump will lie in the interview because that is what Trump does. If that is what they think, then that is what they should say. It’s a perfectly coherent position, especially if one is predisposed to believe that Trump is incorrigible, and that he conspired with Russia to steal the election, then obstructed the FBI in order to cover it up. But it’s just silly to claim that perjury traps do not exist. It is an iteration of the overarching illogic that takes hold when a Republican — especially the incumbent Republican — occupies the White House, to wit: Presidents can be irredeemable reprobates, but prosecutors and investigators are pure as the driven snow, and to question their scruples is to undermine the rule of law itself. Let’s take scruples out of it for a second. Hypothetically, let’s assume a world in which everyone acts in good faith. The flaw in the “there are no perjury traps” nostrum is that it takes two to tango. The theme the anti-Trump camp is pushing — again, a sweet-sounding political claim that defies real-world experience — is that an honest person has nothing to fear from a prosecutor. If you simply answer the questions truthfully, there is no possibility of a false-statements charge. But see, for charging purposes, the witness who answers the questions does not get to decide whether they have been answered truthfully. That is up to the prosecutor who asks the questions. The honest person can make his best effort to provide truthful, accurate, and complete responses; but the interrogator’s evaluation, right or wrong, determines whether those responses warrant prosecution. Remember, we are for now assuming, arguendo, everyone’s bona fides: The witness is being honest, and the prosecutor is not trying to dupe the witness into an inaccurate statement. Even so, most interrogations are not confined to simplicity. In investigations, even straightforward fact patterns implicate the operation of the witness’s mind; the witness’s attention span; the witness’s capacity to perceive, recall, and relate pertinent details. It is the rare interview that is just a matter of the prosecutor asking, “What’s two plus two?” The Mueller investigation itself abounds with examples of this. Former national-security adviser Michael Flynn was questioned about his conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. There were some discrepancies between Flynn’s account of the discussions and the FBI’s understanding of them (we’ll come back to why). Did that necessarily mean Flynn lied? Of course not. To take the most obvious possibility, Flynn could have had an innocent failure of recollection. It happens to all of us; it would happen to you if you tried to describe this this column to someone without having a copy of it in hand.
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 11, 2018 8:46:07 GMT -6
Jesus covered this in his latest book: The LORD detests lying lips, but he delights in men who are truthful. And one of my new favorite authors, Jordan Peterson, also covers it: Rule 8: Tell the truth or at least don't lie. Again, his lawyers are afraid because they know his character, or in this case, lack of character and ability to tell the truth. They know he lies simply by watching him on television as the example I gave above about Trump Jr.s letter that Trump first said he didn't have anything to do with and then later admitted he wrote himself. He is a liar. And when Mueller asks him questions that might get him in trouble, not becuase they're traps, but becuase Trump knows he did things that are not on the up and up, he will lie. His attorneys know this. But keep blaming the fake news (who was right all along about the letter) and Muller and how they boogie men of the FBI are out to get him and are the reason he lies so often.
|
|
|
Post by NN on Aug 11, 2018 9:02:55 GMT -6
What's hilarious are the subjects that team trump want left out of the potential Mueller interview are ooj and collusion. I don't think Mueller is all that concerned with stormy/McDougal or any ill gotten blowjobs.
|
|
|
Post by okirishfan on Aug 11, 2018 9:19:12 GMT -6
What's hilarious are the subjects that team trump want left out of the potential Mueller interview are ooj and collusion. I don't think Mueller is all that concerned with stormy/McDougal or any ill gotten blowjobs. Well, that's becuase he's innocent of those things. If you don't believe me just ask Trump. And we all know, that if Mueller had any evidence of those things, it would be already leaked to the press. And there were two investigators that worked on the investigation who didn't like Trump. The only possible and conclusive conclusion then is that Trump is obviously innocent. These pepole crack me up. It's like they don't know what the word "investigation" means and what "interviews" are for. But...but.....they're just setting trap. Okay, (I don't think they are) let's say they are...there's an easy way to avoid that....tell the truth. And yes, sometimes, in an interview, seeing if people are telling the truth by asking open ended questions and having the interviewee answer those questions, especially if they've already made statments prior to the interview either via an attorneys position statement, or through a public representative, or in Trump's case, his own diahreeah of the mouth, that is an INVALUABLE tool/method in finding out the truth of what actually happend. It's used every day. It's taught in the LE world. Why? Because when peoploe lie, it reduces their credibilty and opens the door to pretext. And when that happens, you're often able to squeeze the truth out of them once they've reliazed they've lied or are inconsistent in their testimony. So, what's the solution to this: put your big boy pants on and tell the truth. Yeah, you might have to pay the consequences in the end , but you'll be better off. But this idea that Mueller is going to charge Trump with perjury becuase Trump said he was in the oval office on a certain date at a certain time when he was actually in another WH room secretly watching CNN is laughable and screams of guilt. He's said himself on numerous occasions, he has nothing to hide and didn't do anything wrong. Good, then let's hear you answer some questions under oath. Should be no problem then.
|
|
|
Post by 1tc on Aug 11, 2018 9:21:36 GMT -6
What's hilarious are the subjects that team trump want left out of the potential Mueller interview are ooj and collusion. I don't think Mueller is all that concerned with stormy/McDougal or any ill gotten blowjobs. Why would Mueller be investigating something that isn’t illegal?
|
|
|
Post by NN on Aug 11, 2018 9:27:57 GMT -6
What's hilarious are the subjects that team trump want left out of the potential Mueller interview are ooj and collusion. I don't think Mueller is all that concerned with stormy/McDougal or any ill gotten blowjobs. Why would Mueller be investigating something that isn’t illegal? Is that you Rudy?
|
|
|
Post by NN on Aug 11, 2018 9:36:55 GMT -6
What's hilarious are the subjects that team trump want left out of the potential Mueller interview are ooj and collusion. I don't think Mueller is all that concerned with stormy/McDougal or any ill gotten blowjobs. Well, that's becuase he's innocent of those things. If you don't believe me just ask Trump. And we all know, that if Mueller had any evidence of those things, it would be already leaked to the press. And there were two investigators that worked on the investigation who didn't like Trump. The only possible and conclusive conclusion then is that Trump is obviously innocent. These pepole crack me up. It's like they don't know what the word "investigation" means and what "interviews" are for. But...but.....they're just setting trap. Okay, (I don't think they are) let's say they are...there's an easy way to avoid that....tell the truth. And yes, sometimes, in an interview, seeing if people are telling the truth by asking open ended questions and having the interviewee answer those questions, especially if they've already made statments prior to the interview either via an attorneys position statement, or through a public representative, or in Trump's case, his own diahreeah of the mouth, that is an INVALUABLE tool/method in finding out the truth of what actually happend. It's used every day. It's taught in the LE world. Why? Because when peoploe lie, it reduces their credibilty and opens the door to pretext. And when that happens, you're often able to squeeze the truth out of them once they've reliazed they've lied or are inconsistent in their testimony. So, what's the solution to this: put your big boy pants on and tell the truth. Yeah, you might have to pay the consequences in the end , but you'll be better off. But this idea that Mueller is going to charge Trump with perjury becuase Trump said he was in the oval office on a certain date at a certain time when he was actually in another WH room secretly watching CNN is laughable and screams of guilt. He's said himself on numerous occasions, he has nothing to hide and didn't do anything wrong. Good, then let's hear you answer some questions under oath. Should be no problem then. Hell as much as much as I believe everyone here hates hillary, she did sit for 11 hours for the Benghazi investigation with everyones hero Gowdy. But when trump's back is against the wall as history shows, he'll lie, file bankruptcy, or come up with a case of the bone spurs. No character and a giant pussy.
|
|