|
BRISTOL PALINS BABY posted:Help me understand, if Mueller subpoenas trump, does the president have an option of whether or not he testifies under oath? Or is that another thing the president gets to skip out on if he chooses? Past presidents have taken the position they can't be compelled to testify under oath in front of a special prosecutor based on constitutional concerns but have agreed to testify not under oath (Clinton and Bush II, iirc). Not that it technically matters, it's a crime to lie to the FBI even if you're not under oath.
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 02:42 |
|
|
Javes posted:Do you think he ever reads Twitter outside of his mentions? He randomly retweets Drudge Report. Hard to say if it's him or Dan Scavino on the account, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
I can't wait for Trump to be locked up, so that Ivanka can write a book about how she's just like a little black girl in Atlanta who's daddy has been locked up all her life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
being as charitable as possible what on earth is the strategy here? like, we have to assume trump is high on his own supply so what is it? Does he have tapes where he doesn't literally say the words "are you loyal to me" and he thinks that vindicates him? Like how deep does this rabbit hole go? is he trying to doctor tapes? does he think this goes away? I honestly do not fuckin understand
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Not that it technically matters, it's a crime to lie to the FBI even if you're not under oath. Unless you're the president.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
BRISTOL PALINS BABY posted:Help me understand, if Mueller subpoenas trump, does the president have an option of whether or not he testifies under oath? Or is that another thing the president gets to skip out on if he chooses? If Mueller wants to interview him, Trump would have to make a reasonable effort to find time in his schedule to talk, but of course Trump can always refuse to answer a question. He probably won't because he's an imbecile.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Fitzy Fitz posted:Unless you're the predisent. ftfy
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:being as charitable as possible what on earth is the strategy here? like, we have to assume trump is high on his own supply so what is it? Does he have tapes where he doesn't literally say the words "are you loyal to me" and he thinks that vindicates him? there is no charitable interpretation of trump's words and tweets that is consistent with any strategy whatsoever
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:being as charitable as possible what on earth is the strategy here? like, we have to assume trump is high on his own supply so what is it? Does he have tapes where he doesn't literally say the words "are you loyal to me" and he thinks that vindicates him? There is no strategy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
I want to know why the "tapes" haven't been subpoenaed yet. That at least, is settled case law, and the President must comply. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nixon
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:being as charitable as possible what on earth is the strategy here? like, we have to assume trump is high on his own supply so what is it? Does he have tapes where he doesn't literally say the words "are you loyal to me" and he thinks that vindicates him? I honestly think the tapes don't exist and he was trolling Comey. He probably had no idea that Comey would think "holy poo poo there are tapes! How do we get them!?!?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:being as charitable as possible what on earth is the strategy here? like, we have to assume trump is high on his own supply so what is it? Does he have tapes where he doesn't literally say the words "are you loyal to me" and he thinks that vindicates him? Trump is actually insane by the definition of 'does not have a solid grip on reality'.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:being as charitable as possible what on earth is the strategy here? like, we have to assume trump is high on his own supply so what is it? Does he have tapes where he doesn't literally say the words "are you loyal to me" and he thinks that vindicates him? He's an idiot. Don't over think it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Obama bugged the white house and when they find out how they will have the tapes. Is my best guess going by past claims.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:being as charitable as possible what on earth is the strategy here? There isn't one. Trump is a profoundly stupid man who does stupid things because he can't survive unless he is constantly getting immediate gratification. He is surrounded by people, some of whom are roughly as stupid as he is and some of whom are smarter, who have a million different agendas and are all warring with each other to enact them on their own. But Trump is a cipher who has no game plan beyond "me good. Feel good." Edit: Beaten like Trump's exes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
I'm not kidding, Trump talks like my 85-year-old grandpa used to. Same phrasing and everything. My grandpa died before Trump started running for president but god drat he would've loved him, like looking in a mirror.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Rigel posted:I honestly think the tapes don't exist and he was trolling Comey. He probably had no idea that Comey would think "holy poo poo there are tapes! How do we get them!?!?" I lean towards this, but there's a lot of evidence both that past presidents have continued to record the oval office and that trump personally was a fan of secretly recording people
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
So, who wants to bet the 'dissapointment' will be "Sorry, we did have tapes and they totally contradicted Comey, but they mysteriously caught fire so we don't have them anymore. No, they weren't computer files with backup, they were actual physical tapes and they spontaneously combusted. Sad!" ...all while his lawyer screams in the background.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:I want to know why the "tapes" haven't been subpoenaed yet. That at least, is settled case law, and the President must comply. Because the Congressional investigation doesn't want to actually find anything
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:I can't wait for Trump to be locked up, so that Ivanka can write a book about how she's just like a little black girl in Atlanta who's daddy has been locked up all her life. She and Jared would have something in common.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/markberman/status/873263604375707649 https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/873262783768481792  A reminder that at today's event at the Rose Garden, the NYT was specifically reserved a seat in the very very back row.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:being as charitable as possible what on earth is the strategy here? like, we have to assume trump is high on his own supply so what is it? Does he have tapes where he doesn't literally say the words "are you loyal to me" and he thinks that vindicates him? "Do not try to understand the strategy, that is impossible. Instead, try only to realize the truth." "What truth?" "There is no strategy. . ."
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
Harrow posted:I'm not kidding, Trump talks like my 85-year-old grandpa used to. Same phrasing and everything. My grandpa died before Trump started running for president but god drat he would've loved him, like looking in a mirror. I seriously believe this was a non trivial fraction of his support.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:I want to know why the "tapes" haven't been subpoenaed yet. That at least, is settled case law, and the President must comply. How would such tapes exist anyway? Are we talking about some sort of hidden recording apparatus in the White House, with hidden microphones and cameras?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:I want to know why the "tapes" haven't been subpoenaed yet. That at least, is settled case law, and the President must comply. By who? the whole investigation has been the republicans trying to wrap up the investigation and end it then trump yelling "AND ONE MORE THING" so that they have to keep opening new things.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/baseballcrank/status/873260672557228032
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Spaced God posted:https://twitter.com/markberman/status/873263604375707649 jesus christ even his lawyers double down when they're caught in a lie
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
and you know the fat one always goes first
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:and you know the fat one always goes first Or the black guy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:I want to know why the "tapes" haven't been subpoenaed yet. That at least, is settled case law, and the President must comply. Someone did, I thought. Maybe Elijah Cummings? I don't recall. But they have officially been requested by someone. Or at least confirmation of their existence has been officially requested. And that's important because now, if they do actually exist, they can't be destroyed without risking additional charges, even if they still try to weasel out of handing them over. That's if they exist. They may not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
Spaced God posted:Because the Congressional investigation doesn't want to actually find anything According to that article, the subpoena to Nixon was from special prosecutor Leon Jaworski. I know Mueller is special counsel, not a special prosecutor, but I really haven't seen this talked about much. Maybe I just missed it. Maybe the House/Senate is able to slow that process down?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
what a weird thing where if they don't exist and he was just trying to troll comey like textbooks in the future will have to essentially say: and then the president fabricated the existence of tapes, to what end was unclear
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:How would such tapes exist anyway? Didn't Nixon have the recording equipment in his desk?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:Someone did, I thought. Maybe Elijah Cummings? I don't recall. But they have officially been requested by someone. Or at least confirmation of their existence has been officially requested. And that's important because now, if they do actually exist, they can't be destroyed without risking additional charges, even if they still try to weasel out of handing them over. That's if they exist. They may not. I remember Elijah Cummings's request, but from what I understand that is not a subpoena.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:Someone did, I thought. Maybe Elijah Cummings? I don't recall. But they have officially been requested by someone. Or at least confirmation of their existence has been officially requested. And that's important because now, if they do actually exist, they can't be destroyed without risking additional charges, even if they still try to weasel out of handing them over. That's if they exist. They may not. He asked for them but only Republicans have subpoena power. Chaffetz might have but I don't think so.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
LaserShark posted:So, who wants to bet the 'dissapointment' will be "Sorry, we did have tapes and they totally contradicted Comey, but they mysteriously caught fire so we don't have them anymore. No, they weren't computer files with backup, they were actual physical tapes and they spontaneously combusted. Sad!" I have no doubt that at some point the big scandal is going to be the Trump Administration destroying evidence of something. Like, I assume they've been covering their tracks (badly) since day one and it's just a matter of time before some investigator is all "where's the stuff we know should exist?" and the admin's all "never seen it, ignore the leaks we destroyed it".
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:Someone did, I thought. Maybe Elijah Cummings? I don't recall. But they have officially been requested by someone. Or at least confirmation of their existence has been officially requested. And that's important because now, if they do actually exist, they can't be destroyed without risking additional charges, even if they still try to weasel out of handing them over. That's if they exist. They may not. The official policy of the Trump administration is to ignore all requests for information from Democratic members of congress.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Obama bugged the white house and when they find out how they will have the tapes. Is my best guess going by past claims. This has got to be it. This is almost certainly it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/873226576883851269
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 02:42 |
|
|
cochise posted:Didn't Nixon have the recording equipment in his desk? Yeah, that's what I heard, but I don't know the details. Who set it up for Nixon? It must have been the FBI or a similar government agency. Right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 20:51
|
|