It is so simple...

[Nosmo King]

Let's go along with the notion that Mueller's investigation is indeed a witch hunt. Let's go along with the notion that there was no collusion, no obstruction and nothing was done that was illegal.

Let's accept all that for the purpose of this simple question: Why wouldn't Trump, or anyone so 'framed' not run to the offices of the Special Counsel and lay out everything so the investigation could be shown as illegitimate? Why not clear everything up by laying forth your case?

Some say that would be a perjury trap. Well, isn't the best way to avoid perjury is to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? It's really that simple.

So it boils down to this speculation that is not too tough to arrive at. Do you trust Trump to tell the truth?

He has a casual acquaintance with telling the truth. He is loquacious, hyperbolic and tends to exaggerate his accomplishments and qualities.

If you trust Trump to meet secretly with the likes of Putin and Kim without a written record, why can't he be trusted to tell his side of the story to Robert Mueller?

Pretty damn simple, for almost any other president.

 

[Indeependent]

All politicians are polite...polite liars.

 

[Nosmo King]

All politicians are polite...polite liars.

But the people say they voted for Trump because he is not a politician! He was elected to shake things up and bring integrity to politics.

Or is Trump a giant with clay feet?

 

[Indeependent]

All politicians are polite...polite liars.

But the people say they voted for Trump because he is not a politician! He was elected to shake things up and bring integrity to politics.

Or is Trump a giant with clay feet?

He’s not and he’s doing a great job...pissing off Liberals.
Face it, you feel sorry for “Darkie”.
You’re a racist.

 

[Nosmo King]

All politicians are polite...polite liars.

But the people say they voted for Trump because he is not a politician! He was elected to shake things up and bring integrity to politics.

Or is Trump a giant with clay feet?

He’s not and he’s doing a great job...pissing off Liberals.
Face it, you feel sorry for “Darkie”.
You’re a racist.

Is "pissing off Liberals" an article of governance?

And I don't follow you 'racist' slam. Are you trying to dilute racism in order to make a clumsy political point?

 

[OODA_Loop]

Why wouldn't Trump, or anyone so 'framed' not run to the offices of the Special Counsel and lay out everything so the investigation could be shown as illegitimate? Why not clear everything up by laying forth your case?

Absent charges there is no case.

 

[Nosmo King]

Why wouldn't Trump, or anyone so 'framed' not run to the offices of the Special Counsel and lay out everything so the investigation could be shown as illegitimate? Why not clear everything up by laying forth your case?

Absent charges there is no case.

So it's up to Mueller to go to the grand jury and indict the president in order to make a case? Couldn't Trump clear everything up by laying out his side to Mueller, thereby closing down the whole thing?

 

[OODA_Loop]

So it's up to Mueller to go to the grand jury and indict the president in order to make a case? Couldn't Trump clear everything up by laying out his side to Mueller, thereby closing down the whole thing?

No need absent charges.

A sitting president can’t be indicted. A sitting president can be impeached.

Mueller should complete the investigation and let Congress act.

 

[Tehon]

Why wouldn't Trump, or anyone so 'framed' not run to the offices of the Special Counsel and lay out everything so the investigation could be shown as illegitimate? Why not clear everything up by laying forth your case?

Absent charges there is no case.

So it's up to Mueller to go to the grand jury and indict the president in order to make a case? Couldn't Trump clear everything up by laying out his side to Mueller, thereby closing down the whole thing?

If we go along with the notion that there is no collusion, no obstruction and nothing was done that was illegal, then there is nothing to lay down before Mueller. This thread is pointless.

 

[Nosmo King]

So it's up to Mueller to go to the grand jury and indict the president in order to make a case? Couldn't Trump clear everything up by laying out his side to Mueller, thereby closing down the whole thing?

No need absent charges.

A sitting president can’t be indicted. A sitting president can be impeached.

Mueller should complete the investigation and let Congress act.

Clinton was indicted. And he testified. There is something about precedent that requires respect.

 

[Nosmo King]

Why wouldn't Trump, or anyone so 'framed' not run to the offices of the Special Counsel and lay out everything so the investigation could be shown as illegitimate? Why not clear everything up by laying forth your case?

Absent charges there is no case.

So it's up to Mueller to go to the grand jury and indict the president in order to make a case? Couldn't Trump clear everything up by laying out his side to Mueller, thereby closing down the whole thing?

If we go along with the notion that there is no collusion, no obstruction and nothing was done that was illegal, then there is nothing to lay down before Mueller. This thread is pointless.

Wouldn't Trump want to tell his side clearly, honestly and openly? In order to make all those assumptions of no collusion, no obstruction and nothing done out of legal bounds, wouldn't it be best for all concerned to clear this up?

 

[whitehall]

Tell the truth about what? When you consider that the former president managed to invoke an unusual form of executive privilege to prevent his IRS chief from testifying about using the IRS to punish political enemies and there wasn't a soul in the media or the liberal establishment who thought that was unusual, why in the world would it be unusual for the President to avoid testifying in a freaking witch hunt that has no bearing on the original allegations?

 

[OODA_Loop]

Clinton was indicted. And he testified. There is something about precedent that requires respect.

Clinton went through the same process of impeachment _ not indictment from a civilian jury.

Impeachment of Bill Clinton - Wikipedia

 

[OODA_Loop]

Wouldn't Trump want to tell his side clearly, honestly and openly? In order to make all those assumptions of no collusion, no obstruction and nothing done out of legal bounds, wouldn't it be best for all concerned to clear this up?

Nah. He isn’t losing voters over this.

 

[Tehon]

Why wouldn't Trump, or anyone so 'framed' not run to the offices of the Special Counsel and lay out everything so the investigation could be shown as illegitimate? Why not clear everything up by laying forth your case?

Absent charges there is no case.

So it's up to Mueller to go to the grand jury and indict the president in order to make a case? Couldn't Trump clear everything up by laying out his side to Mueller, thereby closing down the whole thing?

If we go along with the notion that there is no collusion, no obstruction and nothing was done that was illegal, then there is nothing to lay down before Mueller. This thread is pointless.

Wouldn't Trump want to tell his side clearly, honestly and openly? In order to make all those assumptions of no collusion, no obstruction and nothing done out of legal bounds, wouldn't it be best for all concerned to clear this up?

So we are not going along with the notion that he is innocent?

In that case, the onus isn't on him to prove his innocence. Innocent men get convicted by overzealous prosecutors quite frequently.

 

[jc456]

All politicians are polite...polite liars.

They’re just liars

 

[Nosmo King]

Tell the truth about what? When you consider that the former president managed to invoke an unusual form of executive privilege to prevent his IRS chief from testifying about using the IRS to punish political enemies and there wasn't a soul in the media or the liberal establishment who thought that was unusual, why in the world would it be unusual for the President to avoid testifying in a freaking witch hunt that has no bearing on the original allegations?

Let's set aside the Obama administration because there was not a Special Prosecutor or a Grand Jury impaneled. Instead, let's deal with the here and now and this president, his legal and considerable political issues with this Special Prosecutor Grand Jury.

 

[Nosmo King]

Why wouldn't Trump, or anyone so 'framed' not run to the offices of the Special Counsel and lay out everything so the investigation could be shown as illegitimate? Why not clear everything up by laying forth your case?

Absent charges there is no case.

So it's up to Mueller to go to the grand jury and indict the president in order to make a case? Couldn't Trump clear everything up by laying out his side to Mueller, thereby closing down the whole thing?

If we go along with the notion that there is no collusion, no obstruction and nothing was done that was illegal, then there is nothing to lay down before Mueller. This thread is pointless.

Wouldn't Trump want to tell his side clearly, honestly and openly? In order to make all those assumptions of no collusion, no obstruction and nothing done out of legal bounds, wouldn't it be best for all concerned to clear this up?

So we are not going along with the notion that he is innocent?

In that case, the onus isn't on him to prove his innocence. Innocent men get convicted by overzealous prosecutors quite frequently.

No. Let's grant Trump the cornerstone of American jurisprudence. He is innocent until proven guilty.

But given the fact there is a Special Prosecutor and Grand Jury, couldnyhe simply pour water on the whole thing by cooperating and tell his side of the story?

 

[Nosmo King]

Wouldn't Trump want to tell his side clearly, honestly and openly? In order to make all those assumptions of no collusion, no obstruction and nothing done out of legal bounds, wouldn't it be best for all concerned to clear this up?

Nah. He isn’t losing voters over this.

Why risk it? Lock up a landslide, a true landslide and a mandate?

 

[Tehon]

Absent charges there is no case.

So it's up to Mueller to go to the grand jury and indict the president in order to make a case? Couldn't Trump clear everything up by laying out his side to Mueller, thereby closing down the whole thing?

If we go along with the notion that there is no collusion, no obstruction and nothing was done that was illegal, then there is nothing to lay down before Mueller. This thread is pointless.

Wouldn't Trump want to tell his side clearly, honestly and openly? In order to make all those assumptions of no collusion, no obstruction and nothing done out of legal bounds, wouldn't it be best for all concerned to clear this up?

So we are not going along with the notion that he is innocent?

In that case, the onus isn't on him to prove his innocence. Innocent men get convicted by overzealous prosecutors quite frequently.

No. Let's grant Trump the cornerstone of American jurisprudence. He is innocent until proven guilty.

But given the fact there is a Special Prosecutor and Grand Jury, couldnyhe simply pour water on the whole thing by cooperating and tell his side of the story?

Has Mueller implicated him?