Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 72
Thanks Tree55Thanks

Thread: Haul Trump's fat ass in front of a grand jury

  1. #51
    Veteran Member Eve1's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    18,850
    Thanks
    12894

    From
    My own world
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Morning Joe this morning is speculating that Mueller might agree to allow Trump to testify not under oath.
    I don't really understand how this would work?

    Either:
    Mueller's team is ok with giving Trump permission and a venue to further lie...

    Or

    Mueller knows that it is still a crime to lie to a grand jury in front of federal agents.....regardless of being sworn..

    Trump's lawyers know this so I don't see how Trump could lie without legal peril?
    Looks like the same deal they gave Don Jr and I think Kushner. They were not under oath but still it is subject to the same perjury law.


    Grassley is correct. The False Statements Act makes it a crime to “knowingly and willfully” give a false statement – written or verbal – to the federal government for a broad range of investigative or administrative matters. The falsehood must be relevant to the matter at hand, and the crime generally carries a sentence of up to five years, although it can be longer in certain circumstances.

    Giving a false statement is a different crime than committing perjury – the act of lying under oath – even though the sentences and standards for conviction are similar. “False statements, while it overlaps with perjury, it also covers more territory,” Andrew Wright, associate professor at Savannah Law School and former congressional committee lawyer, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

    Perjury generally applies to “official proceedings” under oath, while prosecutors can invoke the False Statements Act for offenses ranging from lying on a security clearance form to deceiving an FBI agent.

    The statute also applies to congressional interviews like the one Trump Jr. accepted. A court reporter will transcribe the committee interview for investigators and Trump Jr. will be warned against making false statements at the outset.

    “As an investigator, transcribed interviews or informal interviews would certainly be my preference before any congressional hearings on a matter,” Wright said. “You generally don’t want to go into court and not know ahead of time what the witness is going to say. Or if they go off script, you want to have a document that’s pinned them down so that you can impeach their credibility on the stand. And so the same thing is true for congressional investigations.”

    Both private interviews and public hearings are useful in congressional investigations, but in neither case are witnesses able to make false statements without violating the law.

    http://checkyourfact.com/2017/07/27/...ot-under-oath/
    Last edited by Eve1; 11th January 2018 at 06:31 AM.

  2. #52
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,827
    Thanks
    36355

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by kmiller1610 View Post
    They have nothing,
    You say that so confidently for someone who (like the rest of us) actually doesn't know anything about the yet private details of the investigation. If you've already come to your conclusion and make everything else fit that conclusion, your reasoning is circular. And you're the one who'd like to prevent the press from publishing stories you find inconvenient or troublesome. Geez.
    so they are trying to catch him in a misstatement of fact. Trump forgets what he said 10 minutes after he says it, so he does not want to be in a closed room with a bunch of lawyers bent on his destruction. I am assuming that the interview with the vampire (Mueller) is a worse option that appearing in front of a grand jury. Cue the process crime dancers!
    Obstruction of justice is a serious crime, particularly for the person most responsible for the enforcement of law. According to you, Trump is basically a goldfish, and yet you 1) support him as president and 2) think his lack of memory is a proper defense against having to answer questions about his possible guilt in a crime.

    WTF is wrong with you?
    Thanks from Devil505

  3. #53
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,827
    Thanks
    36355

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by kmiller1610 View Post
    There is nothing improper about looking for crimes, even if you have to create them! He's a lawyer.
    Creating crimes? What reason do you have to believe that Robert Mueller would create a crime? You have taken leave of your senses, sir, in the defense of someone you neither respect nor personally support in even the most perfunctory way. Were this case about someone you oppose, your position would be entirely different--polar opposite in fact. Which indicates to me that you have left your sense of justice at the door of your partisanship. How un-American. How disloyal to your country! All while pretending to be somehow morally superior and capable of judging the work of hundreds, even thousands of others in the press.

    You are a self-righteous scoundrel!
    Thanks from Devil505

  4. #54
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,827
    Thanks
    36355

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by kmiller1610 View Post
    All the lawyers I have heard from say that if Mueller has anything on Trump, snaring him in a misstatement in a private interview is highly likely.
    Why would you object to his doing this?

    I look forward to the Mueller report on how the Obama administration did or did not do its best to stop the Russian meddling.
    That's fine. It's a separate question, but it's fine. I'd like to know what kind of cooperation Obama got from Republicans in his attempts, whatever they were, to make Americans aware of that meddling. I'd like to know what he COULD have done that would not have been used against him and the Republicans during the election. They apparently threatened to take anything he said about this issue and use it as a weapon against Democrats. Call them liars. Discount the entire thing. How could Obama have effectively countered this attack without cooperation from others in the political system?

  5. #55
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    63,895
    Thanks
    20593

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    Creating crimes? What reason do you have to believe that Robert Mueller would create a crime? You have taken leave of your senses, sir, in the defense of someone you neither respect nor personally support in even the most perfunctory way. Were this case about someone you oppose, your position would be entirely different--polar opposite in fact. Which indicates to me that you have left your sense of justice at the door of your partisanship. How un-American. How disloyal to your country! All while pretending to be somehow morally superior and capable of judging the work of hundreds, even thousands of others in the press.

    You are a self-righteous scoundrel!
    Unfortunately, kmiller1610 is not the only such scoundrel on PH or in this country.
    Most of such scoundrels are merely unintelligent enough to be conned into voting against their best interests while some are actively anti-democratic (small "d") without even realizing it in some cases)

  6. #56
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,827
    Thanks
    36355

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Unfortunately, kmiller1610 is not the only such scoundrel on PH or in this country.
    Most of such scoundrels are merely unintelligent enough to be conned into voting against their best interests while some are actively anti-democratic (small "d") without even realizing it in some cases)
    Kmiller is neither unintelligent nor likely to vote against his best interests. He is basing what should be patriotic, moral judgments on small-minded partisanship. It's the way we'll fall into the trap the Russians are setting for us. For a democratic republic to survive, it's citizens must put aside their particular interests sometimes to support the interests of the nation as a whole. If we can't do that, we're doomed. Our Founders created a careful balance of powers for exactly this purpose. Kmiller wants to further empower those elements of government held (at the moment) by those he favors and would even support prior restraint of the press to keep them in line with his particular politics. That's a massive failure of an educated and intelligent American. I weep for him--and for all of us, should his project succeed.

  7. #57
    New Member Pureinheart's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    609
    Thanks
    155

    From
    USA
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    President Clinton was subpoenaed by Ken Starr in the Lewinsky matter.
    No one has the legal right to ignore a grand jury subpoena...... including a sitting President.
    Trump deserves no deference to avoid justice.

    Therefore: ....When/if Mueller would find it useful.....haul Trump's fat ass in front of a grand jury and require him to either answer questions or plead the fifth Amendment like any other common organized crime thug.
    First- you guys are beyond obsessed. Second- President Trump eating 2 scoops of ice cream is not illegal (but dems are trying, as NY is a good example). Where. Is. Your. Proof. Third- Actually every Democrat in DC should be investigated.

  8. #58
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    63,895
    Thanks
    20593

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    Kmiller is neither unintelligent nor likely to vote against his best interests. He is basing what should be patriotic, moral judgments on small-minded partisanship. It's the way we'll fall into the trap the Russians are setting for us. For a democratic republic to survive, it's citizens must put aside their particular interests sometimes to support the interests of the nation as a whole. If we can't do that, we're doomed. Our Founders created a careful balance of powers for exactly this purpose. Kmiller wants to further empower those elements of government held (at the moment) by those he favors and would even support prior restraint of the press to keep them in line with his particular politics. That's a massive failure of an educated and intelligent American. I weep for him--and for all of us, should his project succeed.
    OK, then if not unintelligent enough to see their support as against their interests we are left with anti-democratic.

    The Trump scoundrels may think they support democracy over dictatorship......but they are sadly wrong.
    Trump's GOP is decidedly anti-democratic and even argues that a Republican president is above our laws.
    Let's not forget that Nixon was a Republican as well with the same obvious beliefs against democracy.

  9. #59
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    63,895
    Thanks
    20593

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Pureinheart View Post
    President Trump eating 2 scoops of ice cream is not illegal....
    True, but money laundering, obstruction of justice and treason are.
    I doubt Mueller's indictment will include scoops of ice cream.

  10. #60
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,827
    Thanks
    36355

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    OK, then if not unintelligent enough to see their support as against their interests we are left with anti-democratic.

    The Trump scoundrels may think they support democracy over dictatorship......but they are sadly wrong.
    Trump's GOP is decidedly anti-democratic and even argues that a Republican president is above our laws.
    Yes, yes he does.
    Let's not forget that Nixon was a Republican as well with the same obvious beliefs against democracy.
    Fortunately, in 1973 there were men strong enough and patriotic enough to put aside their partisanship and investigate a member of their own party effectively. It's sad we have so many Republicans who put their own politics over the rule of law.
    Thanks from Devil505

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Grand Jury Issues Subpoenas
    By MaryAnne in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10th May 2017, 05:41 AM
  2. The Grand Jury Never Even Voted
    By cable2 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 21st January 2016, 06:07 AM
  3. Ferguson Grand Jury....the Verdict is in!!
    By pragmatic in forum Current Events
    Replies: 164
    Last Post: 26th November 2014, 05:11 AM
  4. Wilson's Grand Jury
    By Sassy in forum Current Events
    Replies: 223
    Last Post: 19th November 2014, 12:42 PM
  5. Grand Jury Indicts Ex-NYC Top Cop Kerik
    By Defensor in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 9th November 2007, 04:09 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed