Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTPM - Marshall - "Trump To Plead the De Facto 5th"
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/trump-to-plead-the-de-facto-5thThe Times is reporting that the Presidents personal lawyers are recommending that he refuse to be interviewed or questioned by Robert Muellers investigators under any circumstances. Lets be candid about what this means. The President is pleading the 5th while trying to avoid saying thats what hes doing. Lets call it the de facto 5th. The constitutional law is clear cut. Its not at all hypothetical. A sitting President has no blanket right to refuse to cooperate with a criminal investigation. Different dimensions of this question were litigated under Presidents Nixon and Clinton. The Courts were clear each time. The President has to comply with the law and with criminal investigations just like everyone else, though there may be certain areas of privilege. Presidents have been interviewed by special prosecutors, special counsels and independent counsels in numerous cases. The President is obviously guilty of obstruction of justice. Hes likely guilty of criminal conspiracy with a foreign power, though what if any statutes this would implicate is not clear to me. It makes perfect sense to refuse to talk. Perps do that all the time. Its their right.
There are two notable points in the Times write-up of the story.
First, the Presidents lawyers argument appears to be that the President is innocent of any crimes but that he is also a pathological liar. That could leave him vulnerable to a perjury charge. This isnt my gloss. According to the Times, thats their argument: His lawyers are concerned that the president, who has a history of making false statements and contradicting himself, could be charged with lying to investigators.
The other notable claim is that Trumps lawyers and advisors believe that if Trump refuses a voluntary request for an interview, which is his right, Mueller might lack the nerve to subpoena him. The lawyers and aides believe the special counsel might be unwilling to subpoena the president and set off a showdown with the White House that Mr. Mueller could lose in court.
I think its very possible that Mueller would not indict the President, even if he believes he has clear and convincing evidence that he committed a crime. (While I dont have entirely settled views on the matter myself, I actually think there are decent prudential, even not narrowly legal, reasons why a sitting President should be impeached before being indicted.) But I have a very hard time believing that if Robert Mueller believes questioning the President is necessary for his investigation that he wont subpoena him. That seems quite out of character for the man and inconsistent with what we know about the investigation.
Really this shouldnt surprise us. The President has gone to war with whole sections of the federal government to undermine the criminal probe which appears to be gathering vast evidence of his guilt. Its total war. We lose track of how many things the President has done just in the last few weeks which were heretofore unimaginable and which all would be credible and robust grounds for removal from office.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 1253 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (20)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
TPM - Marshall - "Trump To Plead the De Facto 5th" (Original Post)
NRaleighLiberal
Feb 2018
OP
procon
(15,805 posts)1. Trump is screwed.
He's spent the last 2 years publically bragging and boasting about EVERYTHING. He has no legal cover.
Poiuyt
(18,130 posts)2. Josh Marshall is one of the best political analysts on the web
Talking Points Memo is on my daily read list.
NRaleighLiberal
(60,024 posts)3. kick
dweller
(23,670 posts)4. just what will it take?
it boggles my mind to see daily the insanity described to the tangeranus.. and yet nothing is done ... 😳