• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Giuliani says he is joining Trump's legal team to help bring Mueller probe to a conclusion

MovingPictures said:
I'm not so sure that Mueller has decided he doesn't want to interview Trump just yet. It seems hard to believe that the central subject of the obstruction of justice probe, would not have to give an interview at some point, or that the probe would be complete without one.

It seems Trump is desperate for the investigation to end, and might agree to an interview to do it. That would be absolutely stupid, but Trump doesn't like the fact that everyone around him thinks he's too much of a pathological lair/big mouth to sit with Mueller's team, so it wouldn't surprise me if he actually believes he's capable of outsmarting Mueller -- which he isn't.
Click to expand...

As I understand it from the opinions I've heard and read, they think that Mueller has enough without Trump to move on. It's not always the case that an investigator will talk to the subject of the investigation because all those who came before have pretty much told the tale. Flynn and Gates, among others, are co-operating. I'm sure Mueller would love to hear Trump's side of the story, but it may not be necessary to render his final conclusions.

I agree with your second paragraph. Trump absolutely believes in his ability to "charm" people. Only Mueller can't be charmed and it would be folly to go in to talk to him with that "battle" plan.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Excellent point. That is going to be fun to watch. Rudy has been out of the spotlight. You can only milk 911 so long.

Will Trump listen to Giuliani? Only for a short while, if at all. Once - and if, and that's a bigly if - Giuliani seems to have any positive affect on Trump's standing with the investigation Giuliani is going to be out there on Prime Time, in the spotlight, as much and a big as possible. Giuliani loves it almost as much as Trump. Trump will be pissed plenty. Next the Donald & Rudy Show will fall apart.
Click to expand...

We are simpatico. Rudy lives for the limelight and can't keep the lid on what he knows. Remember his "early surprise" comment:
Tireless if often wildly inaccurate in his attacks on Hillary Clinton’s ethics, health and work as a United States senator and as secretary of state, Mr. Giuliani has been spending every minute in the public spotlight as a surrogate for Donald J. Trump.

======

“Well,” he said, “I call them early surprises in the way we’re going to campaign to get our message out, maybe in a little bit of a different way. You’ll see. And I think it’ll be enormously effective. And I do think that all of these revelations about Hillary Clinton finally are beginning to have an impact.”

Three days later, James B. Comey, the director of the F.B.I., said agents were reviewing emails “that appear to be pertinent” to a closed investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a personal email server while secretary of state.
Click to expand...
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/...y-rudy-giuliani-hints-at-ties-to-the-fbi.html

Rudy won't be able to help himself and that will bug Trump, as you said.
 
Why would Rudy want to go down at Ground Zero with 45?
 
Gina said:
As I understand it from the opinions I've heard and read, they think that Mueller has enough without Trump to move on. It's not always the case that an investigator will talk to the subject of the investigation because all those who came before have pretty much told the tale. Flynn and Gates, among others, are co-operating. I'm sure Mueller would love to hear Trump's side of the story, but it may not be necessary to render his final conclusions.

I agree with your second paragraph. Trump absolutely believes in his ability to "charm" people. Only Mueller can't be charmed and it would be folly to go in to talk to him with that "battle" plan.
Click to expand...
I think Mueller's report is more likely to simply 'lay out the facts', rather than indict or exonerate Trump either way.. He might recommend the Congress "review" the presidents actions, given that he can't actually indict the president himself, so don't surprised if that happens.

Still, getting Trump under oath would be a major event, as any deceptive statements would constitute perjury, and give credibility to the other witness accounts.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Rudy in my opinion is suspect.

He supposedly has connections with the FBI branch division in New York, the same branch involved with the leaking of anti-Comey, anti-clinton messages days before the 2016 election.
Click to expand...

The Giuliani/Trump dynamic will be interesting. The hardest part will be managing Trump and hoping he doesn't put his foot in his mouth. Giuliani is a tough litigator, so I'm curious to see what "bringing the Mueller probe to a conclusion" really means. The aspect I find fascinating is how people would not be interested in what exactly transpired and be ok with trusting someone who wants an investigation ended despite there being plenty of open ended issues.
 
trixare4kids said:
Overall, this looks to be a very good day for the WH, and this also includes the breaking news this afternoon where Rod Rosenstein informed the president that he is not a subject/target of the Michael Cohen probe.
But to answer your question, Guiliani and Trump, afaik, are on the same team.
Click to expand...

Correction, Rosenstein said that he was not as of now a 'target' in the investigation. But he is a 'subject' of the investigation. I mean Mueller is investigating his campaign. So of course he has to be a subject. There is a distinct difference between being a subject and being a target. The question is where in the subject spectrum is Trump in as how close or far away he is to becoming a target.

Also Rudy thinks he can 'negotiate' an end to the Mueller investigation? Good luck with that Rudy! That's some wishful thinking there.
 
Last edited:
Atomic Kid said:
Correction, Rosenstein said that he was not as of now a 'target' in the investigation. But he is a 'subject' of the investigation. I mean Mueller is investigating his campaign. So of course has to be a subject. There is a distinct difference between being a subject and to being a target. The question is where in the subject spectrum is Trump in as in how close or far away he is to becoming a target.

Also Rudy thinks he can 'negotiate' an end to the Mueller investigation? Good luck with that Rudy! That's some wishful thinking there.
Click to expand...


Giuliani's always been a bit of a hammer, which is why I'm curious how he intends to bring the investigation to a close.
 
MovingPictures said:
I think Mueller's report is more likely to simply 'lay out the facts', rather than indict or exonerate Trump either way.. He might recommend the Congress "review" the presidents actions, given that he can't actually indict the president himself, so don't surprised if that happens.

Still, getting Trump under oath would be a major event, as any deceptive statements would constitute perjury, and give credibility to the other witness accounts.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there is won't be any indictments.

Wouldn't that be something? He can't stick with any of his stories. It would be a trap of his own making.
 
Subject of an Investigation: The term “subject of an investigation” has a particular meaning within the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). According to the DOJ Handbook[2], a “subject” is: “a person whose conduct is within the scope of a Grand Jury’s investigation.” A subject is somewhere between a target and a witness. A subject has engaged in conduct that may look suspicious or unethical, but the prosecutor isn’t certain that a provable crime has been committed and wants to do more investigating in order to be sure.

Target: The term “target of an investigation” is also specifically defined by the DOJ. A person is a target where the prosecutor or Grand Jury has substantial evidence linking him to the commission of a crime. Designation as a target provides a clear warning of a person’s criminal exposure.
Click to expand...

Huge difference legally between the two as stated above.

https://www.duffylawct.com/whats-the-difference-federal-target-subject-witness/
 
trixare4kids said:
Huge difference legally between the two as stated above.

https://www.duffylawct.com/whats-the-difference-federal-target-subject-witness/
Click to expand...
A subject of an investigation is someone who's conduct continues to be actively reviewed, whereas a target is a subject that a prosecutor has determined is close to indicting.

As Mueller has continued to interview more witnesses (including a plan to interview Trump) Trump would still legally be a subject. This says nothing of the fact that Mueller can't indict a sitting president.
 
Gina said:
Yeah, there is won't be any indictments.

Wouldn't that be something? He can't stick with any of his stories. It would be a trap of his own making.
Click to expand...
When Clinton sat down with Starr, he pretty much knew what Starr knew. Trump has no idea what Mueller knows, that's the danger, and he's a pathological lair that has been dishonest about this investigation from the get-go.

And there's this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...50d0b15f83b_story.html?utm_term=.b8db06f5cf46
The nation’s top intelligence official told associates in March that President Trump asked him if he could intervene with then-FBI Director James B. Comey to get the bureau to back off its focus on former national security adviser Michael Flynn in its Russia probe, according to officials.

On March 22, less than a week after being confirmed by the Senate, Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats attended a briefing at the White House together with officials from several government agencies. As the briefing was wrapping up, Trump asked everyone to leave the room except for Coats and CIA Director Mike Pompeo.

The president then started complaining about the FBI investigation and Comey’s handling of it, said officials familiar with the account Coats gave to associates. Two days earlier, Comey had confirmed in a congressional hearing that the bureau was probing whether Trump’s campaign coordinated with Russia during the 2016 race.
Click to expand...

If this account is accurate then Trump has a lot to worry about. It would demonstrate that it wasn't just Comey that Trump harassed, and that the president has been inserting himself into a federal investigation in an improper manner.
 
MovingPictures said:
When Clinton sat down with Starr, he pretty much knew what Starr knew. Trump has no idea what Mueller knows, that's the danger, and he's a pathological lair that has been dishonest about this investigation from the get-go.

And there's this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...50d0b15f83b_story.html?utm_term=.b8db06f5cf46


If this account is accurate then Trump has a lot to worry about. It would demonstrate that it wasn't just Comey that Trump harassed, and that the president has been inserting himself into a federal investigation in an improper manner.
Click to expand...

I should think this is old news at this point.
 
MovingPictures said:
It's important news that slipped into the background.
Click to expand...

Let's just face facts, as far as corruption goes, this administration takes top honors. We've never seen anything like this. It is truly unprecedented. So far we have guilty pleas and indictments in just over a year.
 
leekohler2 said:
Let's just face facts, as far as corruption goes, this administration takes top honors. We've never seen anything like this. It is truly unprecedented. So far we have guilty pleas and indictments in just over a year.
Click to expand...

It's incredible that there are still enough suckers out there that will make a take over of the House in November difficult.
 


Giuliani sure acted like he knew Comey was going to reopen the Clinton investigation three days before he announced it. Giuliani's only alibi seems to be that he only talked to former FBI officials, not current ones....as if former FBI officials didn't keep in touch with their friends still currently working for the FBI.

Which begs the question, did Trump know before hand as well...and was Giuliani ever investigated?
 
Gina said:
I would think it's been a long while since he's been involved in a case like this (from the other side). IMO, Rudy is a grand stander. I don't see how he won't put his foot in his mouth with Trump. Either because his public profile becomes greater than Trump's or Rudy, and the comment you quoted is a good example, says something Trump will dislike or view as being disloyal.
Click to expand...
I see Rudy as being brought-on for his PR and personal counsel value, rather than any specific litigator value.

I do despise the guy though, and consider him a rat. In fact, this may be the first time I've heard of the rat jumping aboard the sinking ship!

:mrgreen:
 
Chomsky said:
I see Rudy as being brought-on for his PR and personal counsel value, rather than any specific litigator value.

I do despise the guy though, and consider him a rat. In fact, this may be the first time I've heard of the rat jumping aboard the sinking ship!

:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

He can PR all he wants...but his inside knowledge of the FBI email investigation will always be a distraction to anything he has to say...and hopefully he'll incriminate himself in the process.
 
Last edited:
Moot said:
He can PR all he wants...but his inside knowledge of the FBI email investigation will always be a distraction to anything he has to say...and hopefully he'll incriminate himself.
Click to expand...
Hopefully. I do very much like the imagery of a rat jumping aboard a sinking ship though ...
 
Mycroft said:
Speculation abounds about exactly what Rudy is going to do for Trump.

Here is one such speculation that I find interesting:



Me? I have no real idea why Rudy is joining Trump except for what Rudy, himself, has said. I'm content to wait and see.
Click to expand...

LOL Conservative Tree house huh..They do sound like the live in a tree. Indictments don't come from " nothing factually unlawful or illegal" and Mueller has 22 to of them so far.
Everyone Mueller Has Charged in Russia Election Probe, All 22 of Them
 
Gina said:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/19/politics/giuliani-trump-legal-team/index.html

Interesting development. Can Rudy work with Trump where others could not? There is no mention of Trump being interviewed by Mueller. There are also to other lawyers joining the Trump legal team, Jane Serene Raskin and Marty Raskin, out of Florida.
Click to expand...

Not sure how this is going to bring this along. We have seen that plenty of other investigations have lasted pretty long in retrospect. With Watergate being the shortest if I remember correctly. That is if we are omitting the whole Email deletion fiasco as well.

Hell, even the Benghazi investigation lasted the better part of two years.

I think the Reps are just tired of all the chest beating and are ready to tell Mueller's committee to either play or fold.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom