Trump could be interviewed within weeks in Russia probe - Washington Post

[FritsSikkink]

6 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Let's hope this show is over soon as it is a waste of taxpayers money. 

You won't like the outcome. 

[FritsSikkink]

3 hours ago, jackh said:

You could only hope to develop 1/100th of the intelligence of Trump. I understand your jealousy, but you should have more self respect and just try harder. 

Is that because Trump knows the biggest words?

[boomerangutang]

Some answers from Trump. . . .

I don't know  (45% of the time)

I can't recall  (45% of the time) 

(the following answers comprise the remaining 10%). . . . . 

I invoke the fifth

Don't involve my children

Don't even think about looking into any of my financial affairs

The person who said that is a nobody. Next question.

You got that info from a phone tap.  Go and bust Obama or Hillary.

I have no more time for answering questions, it's nap time

I have no more time for answering questions, I have a golf date

I have no more time for answering questions, my cheeseburger is ready

I have no more time for answering questions, Fox news is coming on

There may or may not be recordings - it depends.

Ivanka is perfect.  She can do no wrong.  

Don Jr. is a good guy. He couldn't do anything against the law.

[ilostmypassword]

8 hours ago, jackh said:

From your own boy........http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2074576/President-Obama-signs-law-detain-terror-suspects-indefinitely.html

 

Suggest you educate yourself before doing the snowflake shuffle.

And suggest that you do the same. It's true he signed the bill. But that's because it had a veto-proof majority and was part of the defense bill. So if he could have vetoed it and did, it would have stopped funding for defense. Here is a selection of Obama's statement about the bill.

"The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists."

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/12/obama-makes-it-official-suspected-terrorists-can-be-indefinitely-detained-without-trial/333690/

 

[Jingthing]

There is talk that Mueller needs to look trump in the eye as he answers questions about his INTENTIONS in the possible obstruction of justice case against the golfing president.  That makes sense in the old normal world. There is discretion to prosecute or not based on INTENTIONS. But we're talking about trump here. He's an extremely abnormal bizarre narcissistic personality. There is objective evidence already that most of what comes out of his mouth are lies, and often really big lies at that. So not really sure what "truth" is to be had listening to a character like that. 

[Briggsy]

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

There is talk that Mueller needs to look trump in the eye as he answers questions about his INTENTIONS in the possible obstruction of justice case against the golfing president.  That makes sense in the old normal world. There is discretion to prosecute or not based on INTENTIONS. But we're talking about trump here. He's an extremely abnormal bizarre narcissistic personality. There is objective evidence already that most of what comes out of his mouth are lies, and often really big lies at that. So not really sure what "truth" is to be had listening to a character like that. 

Absolutely.

 

That is why I earlier posted that I hope the interview is a "Look what we got. Now would be a good time to resign" type.

 

Or simply to ask questions to which the answers are known in the hope Trump incriminates himself. He either answers and admits something or he denies something which can be proved so he is shown as a liar. Or he chooses not to answer and conclusions can be drawn from that.

[boomerangutang]

15 minutes ago, Briggsy said:

Absolutely.

That is why I earlier posted that I hope the interview is a "Look what we got. Now would be a good time to resign" type.

Or simply to ask questions to which the answers are known in the hope Trump incriminates himself. He either answers and admits something or he denies something which can be proved so he is shown as a liar. Or he chooses not to answer and conclusions can be drawn from that.

In Trumpworld, Trump cannot incriminate himself.  Even if Trump is caught in a lie, it's not a lie in Trumpworld.  For example: when a video is shown where Trump is clearly saying something (for example, "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you release the 30,000 emails........")  .....when Trump realizes later (when his aides tell him he self-incriminated himself), ....Trump can say he was joking, which is what he said soon after the "Russia, if you're listening...." quote.

 

Saying he was joking is just one of his defenses.  More often, he'll follow Session's playbook, which is to say "I don't recall."    

 

There are myriad ways Trump can slither away from getting nailed.  Recently, when Trump made a stupid self-incriminating tweet, ....an hour later Trump's lawyer lied by saying he (the lawyer) actually commandeered Trump's twitter account and made the tweet.  At that moment, the lawyer did several stupid things - not least: he became part of the conspiracy to obstruct justice. 

[boomerangutang]

I'm reading the book that Trump hates, "Fire and Fury."    

[janclaes47]

40 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

There is talk that Mueller needs to look trump in the eye as he answers questions about his INTENTIONS in the possible obstruction of justice case against the golfing president.

Don't they use torture any more these days when interviewing a US president?

[boomerangutang]

1 hour ago, janclaes47 said:

Don't they use torture any more these days when interviewing a US president?

Trump is already tortured, and much of that is self-afflicted.  How else to explain how he's angry and  lashes out in 28 directions each day.  I wouldn't want to play golf with him - not knowing when he might go postal and start swinging the 7 iron at head level.   

[selftaopath]

19 hours ago, smotherb said:

Would you have them end it because you are tired of hearing about it or because they had run out of legitimate reason for further investigation--I believe our taxes are well-spent finding out if un-American activities are being perpetrated against us

How much money has been spent of things like: Obama wire tapped Trump/Benghazi/Voter Fraud/ The Clintons etc.?

[Scott]

Inflammatory post reported and removed along with reply.  

[mrwebb8825]

You Trump haters really do believe that President Trump is going to give a face-to-face interview to the leader of a witch hunt?? I guess that would explain your failed support of HC.

He'll have a timeline set, a panel of lawyers present and will just sit there and smile while not helping the loser side. There will be NO grilling. There will be NO new revelations. There will be absolutely NO assistance. He'll just sit back, relax and think to himself; "screw you. Prove it on your own or crawl back under your rock.".

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, mrwebb8825 said:

You Trump haters really do believe that President Trump is going to give a face-to-face interview to the leader of a witch hunt?? I guess that would explain your failed support of HC.

He'll have a timeline set, a panel of lawyers present and will just sit there and smile while not helping the loser side. There will be NO grilling. There will be NO new revelations. There will be absolutely NO assistance. He'll just sit back, relax and think to himself; "screw you. Prove it on your own or crawl back under your rock.".

Yes. Because if Trump has demonstrated one characteristic over the course of his presidency, it's an icy sense of self-control.

[mikebike]

13 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

I'm reading the book that Trump hates, "Fire and Fury."    

Yep. Downloaded yesterday.

[smotherb]

2 hours ago, selftaopath said:

How much money has been spent of things like: Obama wire tapped Trump/Benghazi/Voter Fraud/ The Clintons etc.?

Well, it seems you are trying to use one of Trump's many little boy excuses, "Billy did it too!"  Don't you see, it makes no difference to this investigation whether Billy did it or not, the issue is did Trump do it. Also, I believe you will find there was not sufficient evidence to continue investigations into all of those charges. Unless, of course, you are willing to believe that the Republicans, who control all three branches of government and the majority of big business economic power, are somehow less adept than the Democrats at bringing charges which warrant investigations.

[boomerangutang]

2 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

You Trump haters really do believe that President Trump is going to give a face-to-face interview to the leader of a witch hunt?? I guess that would explain your failed support of HC.

He'll have a timeline set, a panel of lawyers present and will just sit there and smile while not helping the loser side. There will be NO grilling. There will be NO new revelations. There will be absolutely NO assistance. He'll just sit back, relax and think to himself; "screw you. Prove it on your own or crawl back under your rock.".

You're somewhat right.  Trump will continue to twist and cheat and act like a helpless baby re; the Russia probe.  He will use every trick and more - to avoid facing or telling the truth.  

 

BTW, it's not a witch hunt.  Mueller's team investigation is to find out to what extent an adversarial country interfered and skewed the national election.   ....and to what extend Republican dirty tricksters were aiding the Russians.  Note: it's not illegal for Republican dirty tricksters to lie and cheat and falsely denigrate political opponents.  The illegal part is whether there was active interference by an adversarial foreign gov't - with Republican assistance.  

 

Also:  A person can be guilty of espionage and/or treason if she/he cooperates with an adversary against the US - WHETHER OR NOT THAT PERSON KNOWS THEY'RE BEING USED.

 

 

 

[hstew]

"talk to my lawyer"

"plead the 5th"

 

Mueller, FBI, Justice Dept, Spec. council....all a bunch of crooked liars on a trump witch-hunt cuz he won the election.

 

Pathetic!

[ilostmypassword]

26 minutes ago, hstew said:

"talk to my lawyer"

"plead the 5th"

 

Mueller, FBI, Justice Dept, Spec. council....all a bunch of crooked liars on a trump witch-hunt cuz he won the election.

 

Pathetic!

Yes, it wasn't long ago the Mueller was on the 10 most wanted list and now he's fresh out of the penitentiary and back to a job at the Justice Dept.

[smotherb]

27 minutes ago, hstew said:

"talk to my lawyer"

"plead the 5th"

 

Mueller, FBI, Justice Dept, Spec. council....all a bunch of crooked liars on a trump witch-hunt cuz he won the election.

 

Pathetic!

You missed the House and the Senate investigations of Trump et al--and the fact the Republicans control both houses of congress. So, you really think Trump will not use "talk to my lawyer"? He is already up to his comb-over in doing exactly that. He wants his legal team to somehow avoid him having to answer Mueller's questions face-to-face. What is it the Donald is trying to hide? Why doesn't he want to blurt out his answers so the world can hear?

 

And, what is really pathetic is the supposedly patriotic Americans who like this buffoon and support his attempts to avoid investigation and stifle any anti-trump sentiment as fake news--as if the Trumpet is trying to install lèse majesté-type laws to save his  . . . .

[55Jay]

On 1/9/2018 at 6:37 AM, webfact said:

President Donald Trump could be interviewed within weeks

On 1/9/2018 at 6:37 AM, webfact said:

Citing three people familiar with the situation

On 1/9/2018 at 6:37 AM, webfact said:

according to the network.  (NBC)

On 1/9/2018 at 6:37 AM, webfact said:

The spokesman for the special counsel's office, Peter Carr, declined to comment

On 1/9/2018 at 6:37 AM, webfact said:

Earlier on Monday, a source familiar with the issue said discussions about Trump's possible testimony

But after all the WAPO's now typical anonymous attribution and sticky gum shoe detective work masquerading as newsworthy content only by those who are gagging for it on a daily basis,  Trump says....... 

 

On 1/9/2018 at 6:37 AM, webfact said:

Trump said on Saturday he was willing to speak with Mueller's team.

Total anti-climax.  Why not print the article "Trump willing to speak with Mueller".  Roughly 1 paragraph with relevant information, and that's that.

[ilostmypassword]

46 minutes ago, 55Jay said:

But after all the WAPO's now typical anonymous attribution and sticky gum shoe detective work masquerading as newsworthy content only by those who are gagging for it on a daily basis,  Trump says....... 

 

Total anti-climax.  Why not print the article "Trump willing to speak with Mueller".  Roughly 1 paragraph with relevant information, and that's that.

Because it's the Washington Post and not the tabloids you are clearly accustomed to reading.

[55Jay]

10 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Because it's the Washington Post and not the tabloids you are clearly accustomed to reading.

No, but I hereby award you 1 gold star for recognizing the correlation between them.  Witch wuz duh point.  Good job. 

[boomerangutang]

4 hours ago, hstew said:

"talk to my lawyer"  "plead the 5th"

Mueller, FBI, Justice Dept, Spec. council....all a bunch of crooked liars on a trump witch-hunt cuz he won the election. Pathetic!

Is Mueller's team pathetic because they seek to bust law-breakers?  

[mrwebb8825]

12 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

Is Mueller's team pathetic because they seek to bust law-breakers?  

No, they're pathetic because they're becoming desperate to find absolutely anything on anybody. A year into this whole thing and they have 0 convictions and the only 2 they could have prosecuted for something for quicky handed a free pass in hopes of catching a big fish with a minnow. 

[boomerangutang]

6 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

No, they're pathetic because they're becoming desperate to find absolutely anything on anybody. A year into this whole thing and they have 0 convictions and the only 2 they could have prosecuted for something for quicky handed a free pass in hopes of catching a big fish with a minnow. 

The Nixon imbroglio took 2 years and had less issues to deal with than Trump-Russia.

pbs.org/newshour/politics/complete-watergate-timeline-took-longer-realize

 

....and that was with a Republican-majority congress.

 

The Bill Clinton investigation, headed by Ken Starr, started with something minor (a biz loss of $40k in a real estate deal) in 1994. ....and went in to 1999 with the entire country focused on a sperm stain on a blue dress - the result of a few minutes of hanky panky in a closet. theguardian.com/world/1998/nov/18/clinton.usa

 

The Trump-Russia think is much bigger than Watergate or Clinton's stain on a dress.  Many heads will roll.  I'm worried that Mueller's team (Mueller's a lifelong Republican) will dilute the serious issues, and push many serious law-breaking episodes (by Trump and his cabal) aside.  Trump and all the other law-breakers should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

 

Trump shielders should at least know a little bit of history and the law.  Here's a good place to start:  Eliot Ness

 

 

 

[mrwebb8825]

48 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

The Nixon imbroglio took 2 years and had less issues to deal with than Trump-Russia.

pbs.org/newshour/politics/complete-watergate-timeline-took-longer-realize

 

....and that was with a Republican-majority congress.

 

The Bill Clinton investigation, headed by Ken Starr, started with something minor (a biz loss of $40k in a real estate deal) in 1994. ....and went in to 1999 with the entire country focused on a sperm stain on a blue dress - the result of a few minutes of hanky panky in a closet. theguardian.com/world/1998/nov/18/clinton.usa

 

The Trump-Russia think is much bigger than Watergate or Clinton's stain on a dress.  Many heads will roll.  I'm worried that Mueller's team (Mueller's a lifelong Republican) will dilute the serious issues, and push many serious law-breaking episodes (by Trump and his cabal) aside.  Trump and all the other law-breakers should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

 

Trump shielders should at least know a little bit of history and the law.  Here's a good place to start:  Eliot Ness

 

 

 

And the Trump lynch mob should take into account that one is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

[mikebike]

12 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

And the Trump lynch mob should take into account that one is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Are you referring to the FBI investigation or the media or the public?

 

Mueller has dogmatically followed the rule of law. The others aren't in court and can say and/or do whatever the heck they want. Are you having visions of mobs in hoods with torches surrounding the Whitehouse? I would suggest a mental health evaluation!! LOL!!

[ilostmypassword]

Trump Won’t Commit to Meet With Mueller

"President Trump declined on Wednesday to commit to being interviewed by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel investigating whether his campaign colluded with Russia to sway the 2016 election, backing off his statement last year that he would be willing to talk to Mr. Mueller under oath...

That answer was a marked change from June, when Mr. Trump defended his firing of the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, denying that it was related to his handling of the Russia investigation, and said he would be “100 percent” willing to give a sworn statement to Mr. Mueller.

It came as the president’s advisers have been discussing whether Mr. Trump should submit to what would be an extraordinary but not unprecedented instance of a president being interviewed by a prosecutor investigating him for wrongdoing."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/10/us/politics/trump-russia-election-interference.html

[boomerangutang]

The latest news shows Trump wants to avoid meeting with Mueller's team.  

Just weeks ago he said he would be glad to do so, "100%."

 

What a sniveling bag of shit Trump is.  Expect his dope-slapped cabal to follow in his cowardly footsteps.