Mueller to Question Trump

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump ain’t sitting down with nobody. Not happening. They can send him their questions, or they can proceed without him. Nothing good can happen from a numbskull like Trump talking to professional investigators.

Then grand jury it is.

With no lawyers.

See above. Trump will never do it. He’d rather fall on his sword and scream about how the FBI’s Secret Society in unfairly out to get him. With cover from a unexplainablly friendly Congress, he will get away with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump ain’t sitting down with nobody. Not happening. They can send him their questions, or they can proceed without him. Nothing good can happen from a numbskull like Trump talking to professional investigators.

Then grand jury it is.

With no lawyers.

See above. Trump will never do it. He’d rather fall on his sword and scream about how the FBI’s Secret Society in unfairly out to get him. With cover from a unexplainablly friendly Congress, he will get away with it.

He won't have a choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I completely understand the need to ensure due process and protection of all citizens, even that idiot Trump. I realize these things take time. However, in the meantime, Trump and his minions are making significant inroads in judicial appointments that will negatively affect the lives of my children, long after I am gone.

So I just have to ask again why this is taking so long? I am a not a lawyer, so please don't flame me. Moreover, if Trump/Pence and others are potentially removed from office at some point, do these judicial appointments still stand? If the election of this administration was achieved through treasonous acts, will the actions of this administration be allowed to stand?

These are serious questions I have. I honestly want to know what is taking so long and what recourse do Americans have if our president has committed treason?

His judicial appointments can be impeached, I believe. And should be.

Woah. Liberal lawyer here. And I’m pissed about the appointments. And any judicial nominees that get caught up in probe should be. But you garden variety super conservative judge who has themselves done nothing wrong? No they can’t be. And shouldn’t be. The standard is high crimes and misdemeanors. By the judge. Not Trump. I get. The anger. And I feel the anger. But going down the path of impeaching judges who have been confirmed by the Senate and not committed a crime is unconstitutional.

I doubt you’re really a liberal.

Moderate lawyer. If trump is proven by clear and convincing evidence to have won the election by fraud, I would support removal of his judges. Pence can re-nominate if he chooses. I doubt the Republicans in Congress would have the guts to go that direction though.

No. I’m an actual liberal. But the only provision in the constitution is impeachment. And impeachment requires the Judge to have committed a crime. Remember that Rrump didn’t unilaterally appoint these guys. The Senate was supposed to serve as a check on the president, in exactly this type of situation. The problem here is that Congress didn’t do their job. But the constitutional process was followed to put these guys on the bench. And there is a constitutional process to remove them. You can’t make up your own process as you go along.

I can be liberal and still strongly believe that you don’t violate the constitution.

Also, you may doubt I a liberal. But I doubt you are a lawyer. If you were, you would know that the criminal burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. Way IG her than clearly and convincing. In fact, if you watch Law and Order you should know this. And you would also know that we will never know whether Trump won this election by fraud. Fraud isn’t really the crime at issue. And we will never know if collusion with an enemy power swung the election. If no votes were actually changed, the Truth is we don’t know how people would have voted without Russian interference.

And I think that if he is proven guilty of treason, that is reason enough to undo as much as is legally possible. It is arguably the only ethical thing to do, especially if it is proven that votes were changed. I’m not a lawyer, I don’t claim to be one, but treason must not be rewarded. (And it's "whoa," by the way.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump ain’t sitting down with nobody. Not happening. They can send him their questions, or they can proceed without him. Nothing good can happen from a numbskull like Trump talking to professional investigators.

Then grand jury it is.

With no lawyers.

To quote Seinfeld: “this oughta be good."

[Anonymous]

By saying he would answer Mueller’s questions under oath, Trump said he would face a grand jury, since interviews are not under oath. Hee!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump ain’t sitting down with nobody. Not happening. They can send him their questions, or they can proceed without him. Nothing good can happen from a numbskull like Trump talking to professional investigators.

Then grand jury it is.

With no lawyers.

See above. Trump will never do it. He’d rather fall on his sword and scream about how the FBI’s Secret Society in unfairly out to get him. With cover from a unexplainablly friendly Congress, he will get away with it.

He won't have a choice.

Who’s gonna stop him?

[Anonymous]

Ty Cobb is already walking back Trump’s promise to talk to Mueller under oath. Must be hard counseling a genius who is smarter than you.

[Anonymous]

No. I’m an actual liberal. But the only provision in the constitution is impeachment. And impeachment requires the Judge to have committed a crime. Remember that Rrump didn’t unilaterally appoint these guys. The Senate was supposed to serve as a check on the president, in exactly this type of situation. The problem here is that Congress didn’t do their job. But the constitutional process was followed to put these guys on the bench. And there is a constitutional process to remove them. You can’t make up your own process as you go along.

I can be liberal and still strongly believe that you don’t violate the constitution.

Also, you may doubt I a liberal. But I doubt you are a lawyer. If you were, you would know that the criminal burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. Way IG her than clearly and convincing. In fact, if you watch Law and Order you should know this. And you would also know that we will never know whether Trump won this election by fraud. Fraud isn’t really the crime at issue. And we will never know if collusion with an enemy power swung the election. If no votes were actually changed, the Truth is we don’t know how people would have voted without Russian interference.

Go back to ConLaw 1, you fake liberal lawyer. You must not have been paying attention in class. A few easy examples where you’re totally wrong:

1. There is no “criminal burden of proof” in impeachment.
2. The Constitutional standard of high crimes and misdemeanors isn’t referring to actual criminal activity.
3. There absolutely is a constitutional process to remove the judges; it’s called impeachment, and all it takes is a majority of votes in the House and 2/3 of votes in the Senate. All your bullshit about “we will never know” is totally irrelevant because this isn’t a court case but rather a political process.

My advice: Less Law & Order, and more classroom time for you.

“Liberal lawyer,” my flat ass. Go back to sucking up to Kirkland partners at the next Federalist Society meeting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump ain’t sitting down with nobody. Not happening. They can send him their questions, or they can proceed without him. Nothing good can happen from a numbskull like Trump talking to professional investigators.

Then grand jury it is.

With no lawyers.

See above. Trump will never do it. He’d rather fall on his sword and scream about how the FBI’s Secret Society in unfairly out to get him. With cover from a unexplainablly friendly Congress, he will get away with it.

The thing about talking to a grand jury it is done under supoena. So not optional.

And I believe has been established that a sitting POTUS can be compelled to testify. It was, ummmm, let me think. Oh year. Jones v. Clinton. So you can thank Ken Starr for that one.

Anyway, he can scream about the secret society or whatever. He can still be compelled to testify.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump ain’t sitting down with nobody. Not happening. They can send him their questions, or they can proceed without him. Nothing good can happen from a numbskull like Trump talking to professional investigators.

Then grand jury it is.

With no lawyers.

See above. Trump will never do it. He’d rather fall on his sword and scream about how the FBI’s Secret Society in unfairly out to get him. With cover from a unexplainablly friendly Congress, he will get away with it.

He won't have a choice.

Who’s gonna stop him?

Are you asking who is going to make him? The federal court enforcing the grand jury supoena would hold him in contempt. So— the US Marshals. Different branch of government from Trump. LEOs in no way, shape or form under his jurisdiction. You know checks and balances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ty Cobb is already walking back Trump’s promise to talk to Mueller under oath. Must be hard counseling a genius who is smarter than you.

It’s even harder counseling a stable genius.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump ain’t sitting down with nobody. Not happening. They can send him their questions, or they can proceed without him. Nothing good can happen from a numbskull like Trump talking to professional investigators.

Then grand jury it is.

With no lawyers.

See above. Trump will never do it. He’d rather fall on his sword and scream about how the FBI’s Secret Society in unfairly out to get him. With cover from a unexplainablly friendly Congress, he will get away with it.

He won't have a choice.

Who’s gonna stop him?

Are you asking who is going to make him? The federal court enforcing the grand jury supoena would hold him in contempt. So— the US Marshals. Different branch of government from Trump. LEOs in no way, shape or form under his jurisdiction. You know checks and balances.

The US Marshals are part of the Department of Justice, which is the same branch of government as Trump and very much under his jurisdiction, although he is not supposed to politicize it.

[Anonymous]

If Trump ignores a supoena that a federal judges declines to quash, that is an actual constitutional crisis. Not that I expect Trump to care about creating a constitutional crisis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Trump ignores a supoena that a federal judges declines to quash, that is an actual constitutional crisis. Not that I expect Trump to care about creating a constitutional crisis.

And then what?

[Anonymous]

Anybody know the name the reporter chick that kicked trumpy’s ass by getting him to practically demand that he b quesstioned under oath. Just listened to the transcript. Someone she buy her flowers.