Trump slams disgraceful Mueller over leaked questions

Donnie "Two Scoops" leaked this material using his Steve Barron alter-ego or should it be his multiple personality disorder.

"That Orange Son of bitch always had ways to muddy the waters and weasels his ways out of problems...#basta biotches!"
\
c2eef922725a6dffb2ef6f3c9152eb27.jpg


:113:
 
Trump probably could not refuse Mueller subpoena to answer questions

Like anyone whose testimony is sought by grand jury subpoena in a criminal case, the president could cite his Fifth Amendment right not to testify against himself. Such a move, however, would carry significant political risk.

The White House has given no indication that the president would refuse to answer Mueller's questions. Trump said in June that he was "100 percent" willing to give Mueller his version of events. "I'd be glad to," the president said when asked at a news conference.

But suppose he changed his mind. Could he decline to respond to a subpoena from Mueller on some other grounds? The answer, in a word, seems to be no.
Wrong again, "probably" as an opinion by Leftard NBC fake news reporter just doesn't cut it. There is a reason for executive privilege. To protect a president from EXACTLY what the left is doing now.

It didn't protect Nixon or Clinton, what makes you think Trump is exempt? I suspect Trump will use the Ronnie Reagan defense," I don't recall, I don't remember" (actually it should be called the Reagan-Sessions Defense).

But then that goes against Trump's claim that he's a stable genius. Stable geniuses don't forget things like that.
So did the real genius Hillary break the law by having a private server in her home of which she sent and received classified govt. emails, did she commit obstruction by wiping her illegal sever, destroying 30,000 emails, smashing a dozen cell phones with a hammer, and allowing her classified emails to show up on convicted pedophile Anthony Weiner's lap top?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Hilary? Lol

Focus! Hilary isn't the one sitting the Whitehouse right now. Agent Orange is.

Nice try at deflection though.
 
Riddle me this. Stormy case sent to 10th District because it was out of scope of Mueller case, yet the leaked questions were on Stormy. LOL
 
"In a wide-ranging interview on Fox News' "Hannity" on Wednesday night, Rudy Giuliani told host Sean Hannity that President Donald Trump reimbursed his personal attorney, Michael Cohen, $130,000 that Cohen paid to adult film actress Stormy Daniels days before the 2016 election in exchange for her silence about a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006."

Trump's people leaked the questions so they could blame Mueller.

The American people continue to distrust Trump.

Polling Data
Poll Date Sample Approve Disapprove Spread
RCP Average 4/20 - 5/1 -- 43.5 52.6 -9.1
Monmouth 4/26 - 4/30 681 RV 45 48 -3
Economist/YouGov 4/29 - 5/1 1273 RV 44 53 -9
Rasmussen Reports 4/29 - 5/1 1500 LV 49 49 Tie
Gallup 4/23 - 4/29 1500 A 42 53 -11
Harvard-Harris 4/22 - 4/24 1549 RV 44 56 -12
FOX News 4/22 - 4/24 1014 RV 44 53 -9
Quinnipiac 4/20 - 4/24 1193 RV 39 54 -15
Reuters/Ipsos 4/20 - 4/24 1248 RV 41 55 -14
 
Trumpers and Alt Right: focus!

It's the liar in the office that concerns America, not Clinton or Obama.
 
Wong again, Hillary knowingly engaged in a transaction paying 12 million to a British spy who paid a Russian spy for a fake dossier.
Repeating you Limbaugh Lies does not make them any less of a lie. Hillary paid nothing to a British spy.
Notice how the liar went from Hillary paying the made up sum of $12 million to "Russians" to Hillary paying the imaginary $12 million now to a "British spy."
You know how you're fulla shit? Because here's Leftwing rabid hack anti Trump sources even admitting to it:

Clinton campaign, DNC paid for research that led to Russia dossier

Clinton campaign, DNC helped fund Trump dossier research, report says - CNNPolitics

Hillary Clinton's campaign 'paid for research that led to Donald Trump Russia dossier'
And the lies continue, in fact your OWN link exposes your Hillary paid the Russians $12 million lie.

From YOUR link:
"The Clinton campaign paid Perkins Coie $5.6 million in legal fees from June 2015 to December 2016, according to campaign finance records, and the DNC paid the firm $3.6 million in "legal and compliance consulting'' since November 2015 — though it's impossible to tell from the filings how much of that work was for other legal matters and how much of it related to Fusion GPS.

At no point, the people said, did the Clinton campaign or the DNC direct Steele's activities. They described him as a Fusion GPS subcontractor."
Direct Steele's activities? Ha ha ha! The Clinton campaign KNOWINGLY paid an intermediary spy for a fake dossier prepared by Russians! This is irrefutable clear evidence of collusion with actual transactional evidence. There are other crimes that occured afterwards by the Obama officials with what was done with this fake Russian dossier.
 
Trump probably could not refuse Mueller subpoena to answer questions

Like anyone whose testimony is sought by grand jury subpoena in a criminal case, the president could cite his Fifth Amendment right not to testify against himself. Such a move, however, would carry significant political risk.

The White House has given no indication that the president would refuse to answer Mueller's questions. Trump said in June that he was "100 percent" willing to give Mueller his version of events. "I'd be glad to," the president said when asked at a news conference.

But suppose he changed his mind. Could he decline to respond to a subpoena from Mueller on some other grounds? The answer, in a word, seems to be no.
Wrong again, "probably" as an opinion by Leftard NBC fake news reporter just doesn't cut it. There is a reason for executive privilege. To protect a president from EXACTLY what the left is doing now.

It didn't protect Nixon or Clinton, what makes you think Trump is exempt? I suspect Trump will use the Ronnie Reagan defense," I don't recall, I don't remember" (actually it should be called the Reagan-Sessions Defense).

But then that goes against Trump's claim that he's a stable genius. Stable geniuses don't forget things like that.
So did the real genius Hillary break the law by having a private server in her home of which she sent and received classified govt. emails, did she commit obstruction by wiping her illegal sever, destroying 30,000 emails, smashing a dozen cell phones with a hammer, and allowing her classified emails to show up on convicted pedophile Anthony Weiner's lap top?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Hilary? Lol

Focus! Hilary isn't the one sitting the Whitehouse right now. Agent Orange is.

Nice try at deflection though.
I noticed you didn't deny any of the crimes that Hillary committed, Hillary isn't in the Oval Office, thank God for that. Now you can explain why she and her coconspirators clearly got away with obvious crimes of collusion, obstruction, and criminal conspiracy and coordination with a foreign power to disrupt the American election, what Trump is being falsely accused of, during the same election in question.
 
Considering that the OP is about Trump and Mueller, the comments about Clinton are a distraction and of no help.
 
Trumpers and Alt Right: focus!

It's the liar in the office that concerns America, not Clinton or Obama.
Wrong again, the investigation is about Russia interference and any COLLUSION during the last election, and bringing ANYBODY who coordinated and colluded with the Russians to justice. All arrows point to Clinton, ex Obama officials, and leadership of the justice dept., a criminal conspiracy that will soon be exposed.
 
Wrong again, "probably" as an opinion by Leftard NBC fake news reporter just doesn't cut it. There is a reason for executive privilege. To protect a president from EXACTLY what the left is doing now.

It didn't protect Nixon or Clinton, what makes you think Trump is exempt? I suspect Trump will use the Ronnie Reagan defense," I don't recall, I don't remember" (actually it should be called the Reagan-Sessions Defense).

But then that goes against Trump's claim that he's a stable genius. Stable geniuses don't forget things like that.
So did the real genius Hillary break the law by having a private server in her home of which she sent and received classified govt. emails, did she commit obstruction by wiping her illegal sever, destroying 30,000 emails, smashing a dozen cell phones with a hammer, and allowing her classified emails to show up on convicted pedophile Anthony Weiner's lap top?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Hilary? Lol

Focus! Hilary isn't the one sitting the Whitehouse right now. Agent Orange is.

Nice try at deflection though.
I noticed you didn't deny any of the crimes that Hillary committed, Hillary isn't in the Oval Office, thank God for that. Now you can explain why she and her coconspirators clearly got away with obvious crimes of collusion, obstruction, and criminal conspiracy and coordination with a foreign power to disrupt the American election, what Trump is being falsely accused of, during the same election in question.

Allegations ARE NOT crimes. In fact a number of allegations have been lodged against HRC and a number of investigations have been futile in finding any substance to these allegations. That assholes continue to claim HRC committed crimes, and never have any evidence of wrongdoing, we can conclude these assholes are perpetrating the BIG LIES, a typical tactic used by damn liars and biddable fools who chant "Lock her Up" with a total disregard for the moral imperative attached to American jurisprudence.
 
Considering that the OP is about Trump and Mueller, the comments about Clinton are a distraction and of no help.
If Mueller is doing his job, he should be hot on Clinton's trail. But once again, this is not about the truth or justice, it's a witch hunt to usurp our constitution and remove a duly elected president from office, based on false allegations. Exactly what the Founding Fathers created the seperation of powers for.
 
Trumpers and Alt Right: focus!

It's the liar in the office that concerns America, not Clinton or Obama.
Wrong again, the investigation is about Russia interference and any COLLUSION during the last election, and bringing ANYBODY who coordinated and colluded with the Russians to justice. All arrows point to Clinton, ex Obama officials, and leadership of the justice dept., a criminal conspiracy that will soon be exposed.

Idiot-gram, ignorant hack and mendacious variety.

The evidence of collusion with Russians, and Trump&Co and Trump's Family is a well known fact. There is no evidence that HRC, or her husband, or former Obama officials and/or the DOJ / FBI have engaged in a criminal conspiracy.

Once again the BIG LIE is afoot, and the poster of this criminal conspiracy is a damn liar.
 
It didn't protect Nixon or Clinton, what makes you think Trump is exempt? I suspect Trump will use the Ronnie Reagan defense," I don't recall, I don't remember" (actually it should be called the Reagan-Sessions Defense).

But then that goes against Trump's claim that he's a stable genius. Stable geniuses don't forget things like that.
So did the real genius Hillary break the law by having a private server in her home of which she sent and received classified govt. emails, did she commit obstruction by wiping her illegal sever, destroying 30,000 emails, smashing a dozen cell phones with a hammer, and allowing her classified emails to show up on convicted pedophile Anthony Weiner's lap top?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Hilary? Lol

Focus! Hilary isn't the one sitting the Whitehouse right now. Agent Orange is.

Nice try at deflection though.
I noticed you didn't deny any of the crimes that Hillary committed, Hillary isn't in the Oval Office, thank God for that. Now you can explain why she and her coconspirators clearly got away with obvious crimes of collusion, obstruction, and criminal conspiracy and coordination with a foreign power to disrupt the American election, what Trump is being falsely accused of, during the same election in question.

Allegations ARE NOT crimes. In fact a number of allegations have been lodged against HRC and a number of investigations have been futile in finding any substance to these allegations. That assholes continue to claim HRC committed crimes, and never have any evidence of wrongdoing, we can conclude these assholes are perpetrating the BIG LIES, a typical tactic used by damn liars and biddable fools who chant "Lock her Up" with a total disregard for the moral imperative attached to American jurisprudence.
That Clinton destroyed 30,000 subpoenaed emails, destroyed 12 cellphones, paid money for a fake Russian dossier to use against Trump and interfere with US elections, lied under oath about not sending or receiving classified emails, and allowing classified emails to be convicted pedophile Democratic operative Anthony Weiner are facts, not allegations. Now go ahead and give her a pass for it.
 
The alt right funnies are trying and failing to divert attention from the tenacious take down of Trump by Mueller.
 
Trumpers and Alt Right: focus!

It's the liar in the office that concerns America, not Clinton or Obama.
Wrong again, the investigation is about Russia interference and any COLLUSION during the last election, and bringing ANYBODY who coordinated and colluded with the Russians to justice. All arrows point to Clinton, ex Obama officials, and leadership of the justice dept., a criminal conspiracy that will soon be exposed.

Idiot-gram, ignorant hack and mendacious variety.

The evidence of collusion with Russians, and Trump&Co and Trump's Family is a well known fact. There is no evidence that HRC, or her husband, or former Obama officials and/or the DOJ / FBI have engaged in a criminal conspiracy.

Once again the BIG LIE is afoot, and the poster of this criminal conspiracy is a damn liar.
Crime one: conspiracy and collusion: she paid for a fake dossier which was turned over to a FISA court by coconspirators to spy on members of the opposing candidate. Crime 2: She destroyed 30,000 emails and cell phones, clear evidence of obstruction. Crime 3: She had a private server from which she sent and received classified emails, exposing our national security. Crime 4: mishandling classified information: classified emails were found on the lap top of outside individual without clearance, a convicted Democrat pedophile Anthony Weiner.

Just the facts and actual events, now go ahead and tell us why she and her coconspirators aren't behind bars.
 
Last edited:
The alt right funnies are trying and failing to divert attention from the tenacious take down of Trump by Mueller.
And that's exactly what the left wants, not justice or the truth. Like you said, a take down of a duly elected president of the US, by whatever means necessary.

Well, it won't happen, that light at the end of the Leftards tunnel is actually an oncoming train. Wait and see what happens.
 
Considering that the OP is about Trump and Mueller, the comments about Clinton are a distraction and of no help.

If Mueller is doing his job, he should be hot on Clinton's trail. But once again, this is not about the truth or justice, it's a witch hunt to usurp our constitution and remove a duly elected president from office, based on false allegations. Exactly what the Founding Fathers created the seperation of powers for.

Please explain what you mean by the Separation of Powers?

Then consider the number of EO's issued by Trump, compared with the number of EO's of recent presidents, here:

Trump has signed more executive orders than any president in the last 50 years - CNNPolitics
 
The Clinton campaign KNOWINGLY paid an intermediary spy for a fake dossier prepared by Russians! This is irrefutable clear evidence of collusion with actual transactional evidence.
LIAR!
Clinton paid nothing to Steele, but lying scum like you knew that already.
 
Trumpers and Alt Right: focus!

It's the liar in the office that concerns America, not Clinton or Obama.
Wrong again, the investigation is about Russia interference and any COLLUSION during the last election, and bringing ANYBODY who coordinated and colluded with the Russians to justice. All arrows point to Clinton, ex Obama officials, and leadership of the justice dept., a criminal conspiracy that will soon be exposed.

Idiot-gram, ignorant hack and mendacious variety.

The evidence of collusion with Russians, and Trump&Co and Trump's Family is a well known fact. There is no evidence that HRC, or her husband, or former Obama officials and/or the DOJ / FBI have engaged in a criminal conspiracy.

Once again the BIG LIE is afoot, and the poster of this criminal conspiracy is a damn liar.
Crime one: conspiracy and collusion: she paid for a fake dossier which was turned over to a FISA court by coconspirators to spy on members of the opposing candidate. Crime 2: She destroyed 30,000 emails and cell phones, clear evidence of obstruction. Crime 3: She had a private server from which she sent and received classified emails, exposing our national security. Crime 4: mishandling classified information: classified emails were found on the lap top of outside individual without clearance, a convicted Democrat pedophile Anthony Weiner.

Just the facts and actual events, now go ahead and tell us why she and her coconspirators aren't behind bars.

If what you say is true, why do you think the partisan Republican Caucus could not find enough evidence to conclude she had committed these crimes, and why didn't the justice dept,. lead by Republicans, not indict her?

[don't bother to answer, I'm sure you'll blame it all on this Deep State nonsense]
 
Considering that the OP is about Trump and Mueller, the comments about Clinton are a distraction and of no help.

If Mueller is doing his job, he should be hot on Clinton's trail. But once again, this is not about the truth or justice, it's a witch hunt to usurp our constitution and remove a duly elected president from office, based on false allegations. Exactly what the Founding Fathers created the seperation of powers for.

Please explain what you mean by the Separation of Powers?

Then consider the number of EO's issued by Trump, compared with the number of EO's of recent presidents, here:

Trump has signed more executive orders than any president in the last 50 years - CNNPolitics

Irrelevant partisan BS! Executive orders have nothing to do with asserting executive privilege!

executive privilege


Also found in: Dictionary, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.
Executive Privilege
The right of the president of the United States to withhold information from Congress or the courts.

Historically, presidents have claimed the right of executive privilege when they have information they want to keep confidential, either because it would jeopardize national security or because disclosure would be contrary to the interests of the Executive Branch.

As the courts have ruled on these claims, their decisions have refined the notion of executive privilege and have clarified the instances in which it can be invoked. The courts have ruled that it is implicit in the constitutional Separation of Powers, which assigns discrete powers and rights to the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government. In reality, however, the three branches enjoy not separate but shared powers, and thus are occasionally in conflict. When the president's wish to keep certain information confidential causes such a conflict, the president might claim the right of executive privilege.

The term executive privilege emerged in the 1950s, but presidents since George Washington have claimed the right to withhold information from Congress and the courts. The issue first arose in 1792, when a congressional committee requested information from Washington regarding a disastrous expedition of General Arthur St. Clair against American Indian tribes along the Ohio River, which resulted in the loss of an entire division of the U.S. Army. Washington, concerned about how to respond to this request and about the legal precedent his actions would set, called a cabinet meeting. Although no official record was kept of the proceedings, Thomas Jefferson described the deliberations in his diary. The participants, Jefferson wrote, concluded that Congress had the right to request information from the president and that the president "ought to communicate such papers as the public good would permit & ought to refuse those the disclosure of which would injure the public." In the case at hand, they agreed that "there was not a paper which might not be properly produced," so Washington provided all the documents that Congress had requested. This event, though notable as the first recorded deliberation concerning executive privilege, did not carry precedential value until after 1957, when Jefferson's notes were discovered. In 1958, Attorney General William P. Rogers cited Jefferson's remarks as precedent for an absolute presidential privilege. Legal scholar Raoul Berger declaimed Rogers's arguments as "at best self serving assertions by one of the claimants in a constitutional boundary dispute." Instead, Berger argued, Washington's willingness to turn over the requested documents shows his recognition of Congress's right to such materials.

In subsequent incidents, however, Washington and his successors did choose to withhold requested information from Congress, citing various reasons. In 1794, for example, the Senate requested from Washington the correspondence of Gouverneur Morris, the U.S. ambassador to France, who was suspected of aiding the French aristocrats against the revolutionaries despite the United States' official stance of neutrality. Washington provided the letters, but he censored them first, acting on the advice of officials such as Attorney General William Bradford, who said that the president should "communicate to the Senate such parts of the said correspondence as upon examination he shall deem safe and proper to disclose: withholding all such, as any circumstances, may render improper to be communicated." The following year, Washington refused to provide the House with information relating to Ambassador John Jay's negotiation of a treaty with Great Britain, arguing that the House had no constitutional right to participate in the treaty making process and so had no right to request materials associated with it.

The judiciary, like Congress, can also request information from the president. When Aaron Burr was indicted on charges of Treason, for example, both Congress and the judiciary asked President Jefferson to provide correspondence from General James Wilkinson, a Burr confidant and aide. Jefferson argued that it was wrong to ask him to provide private letters, written to him, containing confidential information. Chief Justice John Marshall, presiding over the Burr trial, United States v. Burr, 25 Fed. Cas. 187, 191 (C.C. Va. 1807), did not ultimately force Jefferson to turn over each requested document, but he did maintain the right of the judiciary to request such information from the president, writing that "the President of the United States may be … required to produce any paper in his possession" and adding that "[t]he occasion for demanding it ought, in such a case, [to] be very strong, and to be fully shown to the court before its production could be insisted on."
 

Forum List

Back
Top