Read Trump’s words on the matter carefully – “I would love to” is not the same thing as “I will”. Trump loves to put out some grand statement, like “I’ll sign anything they send to me!” which of course turns into “well not that, of course” and “only if they add this!” and “well I always said it had to have that.”
That’s how New York real estates dealmakers operate.
I hope Tom Servo is right. Trump has accomplished a lot of things I like, but he talks (well) before he thinks. I doubt any amount if woodshedding could cure that. They’ll be out to nail him on a process crime, and if he testifies, my expectation is that they’ll succeed.
I think more before I speak, but I would not testify under the circumstances here. I’m too fearful they’d trip me up over some trivial detail I misremembered.
Mueller is not engaged in a good-faith search for truth. He’s out to get scalps however he can.
Now is the time to worry that Trump’s massive ego could really steer him into trouble, thinking that he can testify even under oath and not run into a problem because he is so much more savvy than his inquisitor, not to mention he’s sure he has nothing to worry about.
Mueller and his merry band of Trump-haters have piles of testimony from others of which Trump knows nothing; all that needs doing is to rack up inconsistent statements and thus create a basis for process crime charges (like making a false statement, a la Martha Stewart).
Trump has impressed me these last two years with his canny instincts, tending mostly in the right direction — pray they do not lead him astray now. He does not have to testify, and in my view he should simply decline.
If Trump lies to Mueller, it is a crime. If Mueller lies to Trump, is that also a crime? After all, both are ‘Federal officers’ for this purpose aren’t they?
Comments
Maybe maybe not… love the pic…
Exactly right!
Read Trump’s words on the matter carefully – “I would love to” is not the same thing as “I will”. Trump loves to put out some grand statement, like “I’ll sign anything they send to me!” which of course turns into “well not that, of course” and “only if they add this!” and “well I always said it had to have that.”
That’s how New York real estates dealmakers operate.
I hope Tom Servo is right. Trump has accomplished a lot of things I like, but he talks (well) before he thinks. I doubt any amount if woodshedding could cure that. They’ll be out to nail him on a process crime, and if he testifies, my expectation is that they’ll succeed.
I think more before I speak, but I would not testify under the circumstances here. I’m too fearful they’d trip me up over some trivial detail I misremembered.
Mueller is not engaged in a good-faith search for truth. He’s out to get scalps however he can.
Now is the time to worry that Trump’s massive ego could really steer him into trouble, thinking that he can testify even under oath and not run into a problem because he is so much more savvy than his inquisitor, not to mention he’s sure he has nothing to worry about.
Mueller and his merry band of Trump-haters have piles of testimony from others of which Trump knows nothing; all that needs doing is to rack up inconsistent statements and thus create a basis for process crime charges (like making a false statement, a la Martha Stewart).
Trump has impressed me these last two years with his canny instincts, tending mostly in the right direction — pray they do not lead him astray now. He does not have to testify, and in my view he should simply decline.
If Trump lies to Mueller, it is a crime. If Mueller lies to Trump, is that also a crime? After all, both are ‘Federal officers’ for this purpose aren’t they?
There might just be a hidden net above Herr Mueller’s head…
.
.
.
And Trump may have his finger on the release.
Trump would already have been warned that it was a TRAP if SJW’s hadn’t killed off Admiral Akbar.