Should Trump agree to an interview with Mueller? (w/poll)

[Aldo Raine]

Then do not respond comrade!








How the fuck would you know? You like the Orange idiot lie like most breath!

I'm guessing English is not your primary language. Russian shill sent to sow discord, perhaps?

I really don't think I want to get into analyzing your fuckery of the English language, k?

The "comrade" says it all, baby!

Not your baby, I would kill myself after I killed you if you were my parent!

 

[Meister]

I wouldn't and would strongly advise Trump to refuse, and take the 5th if forced. Mueller already has all the information he needs to make a decision. Nothing Trump says will magically change his mind. The IG report has illustrated strong bias against Trump, with Mueller himself having to remove people from his investigation for that reason. If I were Trump, I take my chances in Court, or with the impeachment process.

It comes down to these 2 scenarios.

Trump is innocent and Mueller is on a witch hunt. If this is a case, Trump should refuse Mueller and demand his day in court, as every American has the right to do. Mueller is not judge, jury and executioner. Call his bluff.

If Trump is guilty, the decision remains the same. A Mueller interview has no upside and every attorney will tell you that testifying is almost always a bad idea for the defendant.

Whether he is guilty or innocent, Trump should not allow Mueller to dictate. Take it to court. This case has been being tried through leaks to the media for the past year.

His day in court starts with our next election Repubs lose stand by for impeachment process

For what?

 

[edward37]

I wouldn't and would strongly advise Trump to refuse, and take the 5th if forced. Mueller already has all the information he needs to make a decision. Nothing Trump says will magically change his mind. The IG report has illustrated strong bias against Trump, with Mueller himself having to remove people from his investigation for that reason. If I were Trump, I take my chances in Court, or with the impeachment process.

It comes down to these 2 scenarios.

Trump is innocent and Mueller is on a witch hunt. If this is a case, Trump should refuse Mueller and demand his day in court, as every American has the right to do. Mueller is not judge, jury and executioner. Call his bluff.

If Trump is guilty, the decision remains the same. A Mueller interview has no upside and every attorney will tell you that testifying is almost always a bad idea for the defendant.

Whether he is guilty or innocent, Trump should not allow Mueller to dictate. Take it to court. This case has been being tried through leaks to the media for the past year.

His day in court starts with our next election Repubs lose stand by for impeachment process

For what?

The emolument clause among a few other charges

 

[Mike473]

Clinton agreed to an interview. Did it stop the House from impeachment? Did it make a difference in the Senate?

Clinton should have refused as well. Cooperating gained him nothing.

We have heard in the media that Comey and much later Rosenstien both told Trump he is not a target of the investigation. We are over a year into this thing. If Trump is not currently the target, I see nothing an interview can do to improve that situation. Are we to believe that Trump is not the target, but will become the target simply because he refuses an interview? Absurd.

I know many here say it could take years for Mueller to complete the investigation. If that is the case, if I were Trump, I would tell him I am not agreeing to the interview and will await the completion of the report, whenever that might be. Trump might be out of office by the time the investigation is completed anyway.

 

[bripat9643]

Tell me ONE person that Mueller has indicted in regard to collusion by the Trump campaign and the Russians. Not Russians interfering with the election, but for collusion. When you can, I'll take your point of view seriously. Until then, stop wasting my time with your childish sarcasm.

Is that Mueller's charge, indictments "in regard to collusion by the Trump campaign and the Russians?" We already know some people 'colluded with Russian agents, but to and on what? Will you attack any evidence that says there was collusion to commit crimes?

" The Justice Department appointed Robert S. Mueller III, a former F.B.I. director, as special counsel on Wednesday to oversee the investigation into ties between President Trump’s campaign and Russian officials, dramatically raising the legal and political stakes in an affair that has threatened to engulf Mr. Trump’s four-month-old presidency."

Robert Mueller, Former F.B.I. Director, Is Named Special Counsel for Russia Investigation

Why would I attack such evidence?

That's evidence of nothing, you fucking douchebag.

 

[Meister]

I wouldn't and would strongly advise Trump to refuse, and take the 5th if forced. Mueller already has all the information he needs to make a decision. Nothing Trump says will magically change his mind. The IG report has illustrated strong bias against Trump, with Mueller himself having to remove people from his investigation for that reason. If I were Trump, I take my chances in Court, or with the impeachment process.

It comes down to these 2 scenarios.

Trump is innocent and Mueller is on a witch hunt. If this is a case, Trump should refuse Mueller and demand his day in court, as every American has the right to do. Mueller is not judge, jury and executioner. Call his bluff.

If Trump is guilty, the decision remains the same. A Mueller interview has no upside and every attorney will tell you that testifying is almost always a bad idea for the defendant.

Whether he is guilty or innocent, Trump should not allow Mueller to dictate. Take it to court. This case has been being tried through leaks to the media for the past year.

His day in court starts with our next election Repubs lose stand by for impeachment process

For what?

The emolument clause among a few other charges

Seriously? That's what you came up with? Emolument clause? Oh, "among a few other charges"? I'm laughing at you as I'm typing this

 

[bripat9643]

I wouldn't and would strongly advise Trump to refuse, and take the 5th if forced. Mueller already has all the information he needs to make a decision. Nothing Trump says will magically change his mind. The IG report has illustrated strong bias against Trump, with Mueller himself having to remove people from his investigation for that reason. If I were Trump, I take my chances in Court, or with the impeachment process.

It comes down to these 2 scenarios.

Trump is innocent and Mueller is on a witch hunt. If this is a case, Trump should refuse Mueller and demand his day in court, as every American has the right to do. Mueller is not judge, jury and executioner. Call his bluff.

If Trump is guilty, the decision remains the same. A Mueller interview has no upside and every attorney will tell you that testifying is almost always a bad idea for the defendant.

Whether he is guilty or innocent, Trump should not allow Mueller to dictate. Take it to court. This case has been being tried through leaks to the media for the past year.

His day in court starts with our next election Repubs lose stand by for impeachment process

For what?

The emolument clause among a few other charges

You're a delusional gullible snowflake. Trump hasn't violated the emoluments clause. You obviously don't even know what it says.

 

[bripat9643]

It sounds pretty innocent when you call it an "interview". Not many people would be willing to testify in a case where they were the targets of an investigation unless they were compelled by a subpoena. Congress couldn't even get Barry Hussein's IRS chief to testify even when she was subpoenaed

I seriously believe that IF Mueller interviews Trump, Trump should smile at each question and exercise his 5th Amendment rights as an answer to each question.

Why should he do that? Why not just tell Mueller that it's none of his business? That's his executive privilege. In fact, Trump is Mewler's boss. Why not just tell Herr Mewler he's not allowed to ask that question?

 

[bripat9643]

There were actual convictions based on criminal behavior in the Whitewater affair. So far, Mueller has found NOTHING concerning collusion. Therefore, the two investigations are nothing alike.

You do know there are guilty pleas and indictments with more coming, after only a year and a year and a half?

and we do know Donald Jr., colluded with others with the Russians, but collusion in and on what? That is how a crime will be looked at/.. Mueller and nobody credible ever claimed they were looking to indict people on 'collusion'

None of the guilty pleas or indictments have ANYTHING to do with Trump or with collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

The Democrats have wasted their opportunity to create a positive message to draw independents to support them. They wasted the first 2 years of Obama's Presidency to focus on health insurance, instead of dealing with immigration, DACA and and other issues that would have shored up support for them in 2010 and instead lost Congress to the Republicans. I am tired of the short sightedness Democratic Party. We need a real Progressive Party and to cast off these feckless "Dems" whose hate tares us all.

Wait till the shit hits the fan
Jeff Bonney shared a link.
1 hr


About this article

'This dude has all the tapes': Tom Arnold says he and Michael Cohen are teaming up to take down Trump
The comedian Tom Arnold says he's teaming up with President Donald Trump's longtime lawyer Michael Cohen to take down…

BUSINESSINSIDER.COM

That's what Arnold says. I'll believe it when Cohen says it.

 

[Meister]

It sounds pretty innocent when you call it an "interview". Not many people would be willing to testify in a case where they were the targets of an investigation unless they were compelled by a subpoena. Congress couldn't even get Barry Hussein's IRS chief to testify even when she was subpoenaed

I seriously believe that IF Mueller interviews Trump, Trump should smile at each question and exercise his 5th Amendment rights as an answer to each question.

Why should he do that? Why not just tell Mueller that it's none of his business? That's his executive privilege. In fact, Trump is Mewler's boss. Why not just tell Herr Mewler he's not allowed to ask that question?

He should tell Mueller to go pound sand.

 

[bripat9643]

I have a lot of integrity. I never lie. I have the class to apologize when i error. being able to say you are wrong is the greatest piece of integrity. ask any of the leftist in here, that I have and will always apologize when I am wrong.

Never seen it, but I am willing to take you at your word. To say I have no integrity when you know nothing about me is well lying though.

I have a lot of integrity. I never lie. I have the class to apologize when i error. being able to say you are wrong is the greatest piece of integrity. ask any of the leftist in here, that I have and will always apologize when I am wrong.

Never seen it, but I am willing to take you at your word. To say I have no integrity when you know nothing about me is well lying though.

You have almost 3000 posts in here. He knows plenty about you, like how you lie all the time.

How the fuck would you know? You like the Orange idiot lie like most breath!

Your profile shows how many times you have submitted a post. I know you lie because every time you post to me it's a lie.

Crybrat, you do not know the truth, your whole life is a lie. Let your parents of the hook and no e in with the original tree! You fucking tarde can paint each other's nails and talk about how you would duck each other. It will be beautiful!

See, you lied again.

 

[bripat9643]

It sounds pretty innocent when you call it an "interview". Not many people would be willing to testify in a case where they were the targets of an investigation unless they were compelled by a subpoena. Congress couldn't even get Barry Hussein's IRS chief to testify even when she was subpoenaed

I seriously believe that IF Mueller interviews Trump, Trump should smile at each question and exercise his 5th Amendment rights as an answer to each question.

Why should he do that? Why not just tell Mueller that it's none of his business? That's his executive privilege. In fact, Trump is Mewler's boss. Why not just tell Herr Mewler he's not allowed to ask that question?

He should tell Mueller to go pound sand.

agreed.

 

[bripat9643]

You have almost 3000 posts in here. He knows plenty about you, like how you lie all the time.

How the fuck would you know? You like the Orange idiot lie like most breath!

Learn to use commas so people can understand what you write.

Commas are for pussies!

No, they are for educated people who want to be understood. But, kudos for the chuckle. ;-)

Rumpkins no follow commas, just not use. Ahhhhh shit!

Another lie.

See how good I know you?

 

[bripat9643]

I wouldn't and would strongly advise Trump to refuse, and take the 5th if forced. Mueller already has all the information he needs to make a decision. Nothing Trump says will magically change his mind. The IG report has illustrated strong bias against Trump, with Mueller himself having to remove people from his investigation for that reason. If I were Trump, I take my chances in Court, or with the impeachment process.

It comes down to these 2 scenarios.

Trump is innocent and Mueller is on a witch hunt. If this is a case, Trump should refuse Mueller and demand his day in court, as every American has the right to do. Mueller is not judge, jury and executioner. Call his bluff.

If Trump is guilty, the decision remains the same. A Mueller interview has no upside and every attorney will tell you that testifying is almost always a bad idea for the defendant.

Whether he is guilty or innocent, Trump should not allow Mueller to dictate. Take it to court. This case has been being tried through leaks to the media for the past year.

He should just refuse to answer, as is the right of every American.

and every american that has something to hide

The biggest criminals in our history took the 5th Let the POS trump join them

What about all those commies who took the 5th rather than answer McCarthy's question? Are they the criminals you're referring to?

 

[abu afak]

Should he?

I say yes, as the investigation is meant to get to the truth. Trump's interview will advance that goal.

Should he?
from whose point of view?

Trumpov is a Sociopath, and couldn't make it until lunch without telling at least 10 lies.
His team calls it a "perjury trap"...
but ANY questions to a pathological liar on any subject is a 'trap.'
`

 

[bripat9643]

I wouldn't and would strongly advise Trump to refuse, and take the 5th if forced. Mueller already has all the information he needs to make a decision. Nothing Trump says will magically change his mind. The IG report has illustrated strong bias against Trump, with Mueller himself having to remove people from his investigation for that reason. If I were Trump, I take my chances in Court, or with the impeachment process.

It comes down to these 2 scenarios.

Trump is innocent and Mueller is on a witch hunt. If this is a case, Trump should refuse Mueller and demand his day in court, as every American has the right to do. Mueller is not judge, jury and executioner. Call his bluff.

If Trump is guilty, the decision remains the same. A Mueller interview has no upside and every attorney will tell you that testifying is almost always a bad idea for the defendant.

Whether he is guilty or innocent, Trump should not allow Mueller to dictate. Take it to court. This case has been being tried through leaks to the media for the past year.

He should just refuse to answer, as is the right of every American.

and every american that has something to hide

Every American does have something to hide, especially lying leftwing douchebags like you.

 

[edward37]

I wouldn't and would strongly advise Trump to refuse, and take the 5th if forced. Mueller already has all the information he needs to make a decision. Nothing Trump says will magically change his mind. The IG report has illustrated strong bias against Trump, with Mueller himself having to remove people from his investigation for that reason. If I were Trump, I take my chances in Court, or with the impeachment process.

It comes down to these 2 scenarios.

Trump is innocent and Mueller is on a witch hunt. If this is a case, Trump should refuse Mueller and demand his day in court, as every American has the right to do. Mueller is not judge, jury and executioner. Call his bluff.

If Trump is guilty, the decision remains the same. A Mueller interview has no upside and every attorney will tell you that testifying is almost always a bad idea for the defendant.

Whether he is guilty or innocent, Trump should not allow Mueller to dictate. Take it to court. This case has been being tried through leaks to the media for the past year.

His day in court starts with our next election Repubs lose stand by for impeachment process

For what?

The emolument clause among a few other charges

Seriously? That's what you came up with? Emolument clause? Oh, "among a few other charges"? I'm laughing at you as I'm typing this

And then there's this
A lawsuit against the Trump Foundation filed by New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood has forged a path to felony criminal charges and civil charges against the president and his family, charity law experts said. Based on a review of the attorney general’s state court petition, the petition could open the door for prosecutors to pursue cases on the federal, state and local level.

A potential federal criminal case against the president “appears to be extraordinarily strong,” said Marcus Owens, who led the Internal Revenue Service charities enforcement division for 10 years. What the lawsuit alleges, including filing inaccurate federal tax returns and using charity funds for personal or business purposes, could be the basis of felony theft or fraud charges if prosecutors could show criminal intent.

While several of Trump’s children are named in the lawsuit – including Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump and Eric Trump – Owens said the strongest case would be against the president himself. “They even include photographic images of some of the documents signed by Donald Trump. It’s hard to put that into anything other than a negative light,” Owens said.

If federal prosecutors chose to pursue a case arising from this evidence, the next step would likely require both the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Justice Department working together on an investigation and potentially a referral to Justice Department prosecutors.

But Owens said he does not know if the federal officials would prosecute the president the way he has seen them prosecute others for similar crimes. “I’ve seen the government in action,” he said. “Now, the question is whether the government will have the backbone to take on the president.”

A spokesman for Geoffrey Berman, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, who was appointed by Trump in January, said, “We do not confirm or speak about ongoing investigations.”

An IRS spokeswoman declined to comment.

A request for comment from the White House also went unanswered.

A spokesperson for the Trump Foundation called the state attorney general’s lawsuit “politics at its very worst” and said the foundation had donated over $19 million to charitable causes, with over $8 million coming from Donald Trump or his companies. The foundation spokesperson also said it currently has $1.7 million – “which the NYAG has been holding hostage for political gain.”

“This is unconscionable – particularly because the Foundation previously announced its intention to dissolve more than a year and a half ago,” the spokesperson said in a statement. “The prior NYAG, who was recently forced to resign from office in disgrace, made it his stated mission to use this matter to not only advance his own political goals, but also for his own political fundraising. The acting NYAG’s recent statement that battling the White House is ‘the most important work [she] have ever done’ shows that such political attacks will continue unabated.”



But Sean Delaney, a former charities bureau chief for the New York attorney general’s office and current executive director at Lawyers Alliance for New York, which provides pro bono legal services to charities, said the lawsuit presented a stark picture of a charity that was nothing more than “a shell” used for personal and business advantage. “This is a remarkable lawsuit in a number of respects,” Delaney said. “It alleges that the Trump Foundation had no charitable purpose and was nothing more than a tool for Mr. Trump and his organization’s business and personal interests. That’s extreme and a new allegation.” Delaney said the allegations described in court documents were the most egregious charity fraud by a major public figure that he has ever seen.

 

[edward37]

I wouldn't and would strongly advise Trump to refuse, and take the 5th if forced. Mueller already has all the information he needs to make a decision. Nothing Trump says will magically change his mind. The IG report has illustrated strong bias against Trump, with Mueller himself having to remove people from his investigation for that reason. If I were Trump, I take my chances in Court, or with the impeachment process.

It comes down to these 2 scenarios.

Trump is innocent and Mueller is on a witch hunt. If this is a case, Trump should refuse Mueller and demand his day in court, as every American has the right to do. Mueller is not judge, jury and executioner. Call his bluff.

If Trump is guilty, the decision remains the same. A Mueller interview has no upside and every attorney will tell you that testifying is almost always a bad idea for the defendant.

Whether he is guilty or innocent, Trump should not allow Mueller to dictate. Take it to court. This case has been being tried through leaks to the media for the past year.

He should just refuse to answer, as is the right of every American.

and every american that has something to hide

Every American does have something to hide, especially lying leftwing douchebags like you.

Maybe a pos like you does,,,,,not I Matter of fact I'm sure a scumbag like you does

 

[Care4all]

Not after the IG report....he would be crazy to sit with that snake Mueller and his den of vipers...

Exactly what did the IG report have to do with Mueller?

 

[Meister]

I wouldn't and would strongly advise Trump to refuse, and take the 5th if forced. Mueller already has all the information he needs to make a decision. Nothing Trump says will magically change his mind. The IG report has illustrated strong bias against Trump, with Mueller himself having to remove people from his investigation for that reason. If I were Trump, I take my chances in Court, or with the impeachment process.

It comes down to these 2 scenarios.

Trump is innocent and Mueller is on a witch hunt. If this is a case, Trump should refuse Mueller and demand his day in court, as every American has the right to do. Mueller is not judge, jury and executioner. Call his bluff.

If Trump is guilty, the decision remains the same. A Mueller interview has no upside and every attorney will tell you that testifying is almost always a bad idea for the defendant.

Whether he is guilty or innocent, Trump should not allow Mueller to dictate. Take it to court. This case has been being tried through leaks to the media for the past year.

His day in court starts with our next election Repubs lose stand by for impeachment process

For what?

The emolument clause among a few other charges

Seriously? That's what you came up with? Emolument clause? Oh, "among a few other charges"? I'm laughing at you as I'm typing this

And then there's this
A lawsuit against the Trump Foundation filed by New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood has forged a path to felony criminal charges and civil charges against the president and his family, charity law experts said. Based on a review of the attorney general’s state court petition, the petition could open the door for prosecutors to pursue cases on the federal, state and local level.

A potential federal criminal case against the president “appears to be extraordinarily strong,” said Marcus Owens, who led the Internal Revenue Service charities enforcement division for 10 years. What the lawsuit alleges, including filing inaccurate federal tax returns and using charity funds for personal or business purposes, could be the basis of felony theft or fraud charges if prosecutors could show criminal intent.

While several of Trump’s children are named in the lawsuit – including Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump and Eric Trump – Owens said the strongest case would be against the president himself. “They even include photographic images of some of the documents signed by Donald Trump. It’s hard to put that into anything other than a negative light,” Owens said.

If federal prosecutors chose to pursue a case arising from this evidence, the next step would likely require both the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Justice Department working together on an investigation and potentially a referral to Justice Department prosecutors.

But Owens said he does not know if the federal officials would prosecute the president the way he has seen them prosecute others for similar crimes. “I’ve seen the government in action,” he said. “Now, the question is whether the government will have the backbone to take on the president.”

A spokesman for Geoffrey Berman, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, who was appointed by Trump in January, said, “We do not confirm or speak about ongoing investigations.”

An IRS spokeswoman declined to comment.

A request for comment from the White House also went unanswered.

A spokesperson for the Trump Foundation called the state attorney general’s lawsuit “politics at its very worst” and said the foundation had donated over $19 million to charitable causes, with over $8 million coming from Donald Trump or his companies. The foundation spokesperson also said it currently has $1.7 million – “which the NYAG has been holding hostage for political gain.”

“This is unconscionable – particularly because the Foundation previously announced its intention to dissolve more than a year and a half ago,” the spokesperson said in a statement. “The prior NYAG, who was recently forced to resign from office in disgrace, made it his stated mission to use this matter to not only advance his own political goals, but also for his own political fundraising. The acting NYAG’s recent statement that battling the White House is ‘the most important work [she] have ever done’ shows that such political attacks will continue unabated.”



But Sean Delaney, a former charities bureau chief for the New York attorney general’s office and current executive director at Lawyers Alliance for New York, which provides pro bono legal services to charities, said the lawsuit presented a stark picture of a charity that was nothing more than “a shell” used for personal and business advantage. “This is a remarkable lawsuit in a number of respects,” Delaney said. “It alleges that the Trump Foundation had no charitable purpose and was nothing more than a tool for Mr. Trump and his organization’s business and personal interests. That’s extreme and a new allegation.” Delaney said the allegations described in court documents were the most egregious charity fraud by a major public figure that he has ever seen.

You sure this isn't the Clinton Foundation?
Seriously, the guy even says that the feds may not prosecute....code talk that this is a bogus suit made for optics.