Articles of Entrapment

[Walter]

Aug 21, 2018 12:32:26 GMT -5 bgovolfan said:

Aug 21, 2018 12:14:08 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

This is going to sound off the wall, but you can tell the truth and still get charged with perjury.

questions can be worded so that the witness is damned no matter what he says.

Bg(have you stopped beating your wife Mr Jones)VolFan

That's what hot shot attorneys are for, and that's what the 5th Amendment is for.
You're making it sound like they're going to tie him to a chair and shine 500 watts into his eyes.

[arkon]

Aug 21, 2018 11:54:32 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 21, 2018 11:44:46 GMT -5 arkon said:

If you have nothing to hide, you don't need to lie.
Only guilty people and paranoids fear a "perjury trap." Which one is Trump?

Those needn't be mutually exclusive.

Isn't paranoia an "unfounded" fear that people are out to get you?

[bgovolfan]

Aug 21, 2018 12:35:34 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 21, 2018 12:32:26 GMT -5 bgovolfan said:

questions can be worded so that the witness is damned no matter what he says.

Bg(have you stopped beating your wife Mr Jones)VolFan

That's what hot shot attorneys are for, and that's what the 5th Amendment is for.
You're making it sound like they're going to tie him to a chair and shine 500 watts into his eyes

.No walt...I said nothing that would imply something like that

Bg(walt doing his usual dance...sooo boring)VolFan

[arkon]

Aug 21, 2018 12:14:08 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Aug 21, 2018 11:44:46 GMT -5 arkon said:

If you have nothing to hide, you don't need to lie.
Only guilty people and paranoids fear a "perjury trap." Which one is Trump?

This is going to sound off the wall, but you can tell the truth and still get charged with perjury.

Well sure, you can charge anyone with anything. Conviction is another story, and a billionaire should be able to buy a good enough atty to overcome it.
Do you really think Mueller would charge Trump with perjury if he told no lies?

[oujour76]

Aug 21, 2018 12:32:46 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 21, 2018 12:14:08 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

This is going to sound off the wall, but you can tell the truth and still get charged with perjury.

As the saying goes, a ham sandwich can get indicted. Unless you are telling me that you have no faith in the justice system to correctly get at the truth, what's the problem? Did they repeal the 5th amendment?
And by not being interviewed, Mueller is then free to draw any conclusions he wants from the evidence he has on hand and present it in an indictment, (assuming an indictment is in play).
Paul Manafort is about to find out how the idea of avoiding a "perjury trap" worked out.

Yes, you can indict a ham sandwich and that is exactly why I would not get in front of Mueller or a grand jury if I could avoid doing so. My faith in the justice system is that prosecutors are not seeking truth, they are seeking victory. We've had this discussion before. John Q. Citizen would have been subpoenaed a long time ago, I understand that...what makes this different is we're talking about a President and there is considerable legal debate on whether he can or can't be indicted or subpoenaed. Maybe Muelller wants to test that, maybe he doesn't, I guess we'll see in due time.

[oujour76]

Aug 21, 2018 12:45:23 GMT -5 arkon said:

Aug 21, 2018 12:14:08 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

This is going to sound off the wall, but you can tell the truth and still get charged with perjury.

Well sure, you can charge anyone with anything. Conviction is another story, and a billionaire should be able to buy a good enough atty to overcome it.
Do you really think Mueller would charge Trump with perjury if he told no lies?

No, I don't think he would knowingly do it. But, you can be wrongly accused of perjury, can't you? Even if you can afford the lawyers to avoid conviction, why go down that road if you don't have to do so? And one way to avoid that is by not talking at all, if you can get away with it. I would not talk to cops, a prosecutor or anyone else on that side of desk unless I absolutely had to, because in a criminal case they aren't my friend, they are my adversary.

[Walter]

Aug 21, 2018 12:55:09 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Aug 21, 2018 12:32:46 GMT -5 Walter said:

As the saying goes, a ham sandwich can get indicted. Unless you are telling me that you have no faith in the justice system to correctly get at the truth, what's the problem? Did they repeal the 5th amendment?
And by not being interviewed, Mueller is then free to draw any conclusions he wants from the evidence he has on hand and present it in an indictment, (assuming an indictment is in play).
Paul Manafort is about to find out how the idea of avoiding a "perjury trap" worked out.

Yes, you can indict a ham sandwich and that is exactly why I would not get in front of Mueller or a grand jury if I could avoid doing so. My faith in the justice system is that prosecutors are not seeking truth, they are seeking victory. We've had this discussion before. John Q. Citizen would have been subpoenaed a long time ago, I understand that...what makes this different is we're talking about a President and there is considerable legal debate on whether he can or can't be indicted or subpoenaed. Maybe Muelller wants to test that, maybe he doesn't, I guess we'll see in due time.

Agreed we've had this discussion.
I actually am starting to think that this stuff needs to be codified in an Amendment to The Constitution. The extent of Presidential power has always sort of resided as much in precedent as anything else, and a man like Trump as POTUS tests that idea to its limit. Perhaps it needs to be actually written down.

[oujour76]

Aug 21, 2018 13:08:22 GMT -5 Walter said:

Agreed we've had this discussion.
I actually am starting to think that this stuff needs to be codified in an Amendment to The Constitution. The extent of Presidential power has always sort of resided as much in precedent as anything else, and a man like Trump as POTUS tests that idea to its limit. Perhaps it needs to be actually written down.

I think it's already written down...."high crimes and misdemeanors" for example. Congress has the authority to act and, if necessary, remove a President. That is why I want Mueller to make his case (or not) to Congress and then we can all move on accordingly. We're talking about the Office itself, not the individual. But, no doubt Trump will push things to the limit, that's his personality and his M.O.

[arkon]

Aug 21, 2018 13:06:10 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Aug 21, 2018 12:45:23 GMT -5 arkon said:

Well sure, you can charge anyone with anything. Conviction is another story, and a billionaire should be able to buy a good enough atty to overcome it.
Do you really think Mueller would charge Trump with perjury if he told no lies?

No, I don't think he would knowingly do it. But, you can be wrongly accused of perjury, can't you? Even if you can afford the lawyers to avoid conviction, why go down that road if you don't have to do so? And one way to avoid that is by not talking at all, if you can get away with it. I would not talk to cops, a prosecutor or anyone else on that side of desk unless I absolutely had to, because in a criminal case they aren't my friend, they are my adversary.

I wouldn't talk to them either, not without a lawyer. If I had info that I thought would help solve a case, I'd be happy to talk to them.
But that's me as a private citizen. I think, and it's just my opinion, that a public official should be held to a different standard, and definitely where national security is concerned...and foreign interference in our electo system is absolutely a national security issue.