Mueller told Trump’s attorneys the president remains under investigation but is not currently a crim

[upsideguy]

[h=1]Mueller told Trump’s attorneys the president remains under investigation but is not currently a criminal target[/h]
"Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III informed President Trump’s attorneys last month that he is continuing to investigate the president but does not consider him a criminal target at this point, according to three people familiar with the discussions.

In private negotiations in early March about a possible presidential interview, Mueller described Trump as a subject of his investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. Prosecutors view someone as a subject when that person has engaged in conduct that is under investigation but there is not sufficient evidence to bring charges.

The special counsel also told Trump’s lawyers that he is preparing a report about the president’s actions while in office and potential obstruction of justice, according to two people with knowledge of the conversations."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...5eac230e514_story.html?utm_term=.9c2588b203fb

So, it appears that he is not currently a "target" (at this point), but he is a "subject". Knowing that a subject can become a target pretty quickly, I'm not sure this means to much other than it provides some current clarity on Trump's legal situation.

Is Trump's current status surprising to anyone? Is Mueller trying to soften Trump into the interview chair by appealing to Trump's narcissism (you're not a target Don, we just want to ask you a few questions)? Is this even big news?

 

[Fletch]

So, it appears that he is not currently a "target", but he is a "subject". Knowing that a subject can become a target pretty quickly, I'm not sure this means to much other than it provides some currently clarity on Trump's legal situation.

If after a year and a half, Trump is not a target, hes not likely to become one. But, keep hope alive.

 

[Saladin4]

If after a year and a half, Trump is not a target, hes not likely to become one. But, keep hope alive.

I'm hoping he is charged and arrested

 

[MrMike]

I'm hoping he is charged and arrested

I'm hoping same for Hillary...

(bonus: if she ended up in an orange jumpsuit on a deserted Libyan beach with someone chanting behind her as they make a video of it that would be even more funny)

 

[JANFU]

So, it appears that he is not currently a "target" (at this point), but he is a "subject". Knowing that a subject can become a target pretty quickly, I'm not sure this means to much other than it provides some current clarity on Trump's legal situation.

Is Trump's current status surprising to anyone? Is Mueller trying to soften Trump into the interview chair by appealing to Trump's narcissism (you're not a target Don, we just want to ask you a few questions)? Is this even big news?

Yes, a subject is not a target who is generally charged, nor a witness who assists in the investigation. A subject can change from that to a target, depending upon his interview and be charged. That said, if he decides to an interview.
He may refuse and state, I am not a target, no need to sit for an interview

 

[Saladin4]

I'm hoping same for Hillary...

(bonus: if she ended up in an orange jumpsuit on a deserted Libyan beach with someone chanting behind her as they make a video of it that would be even more funny)

Hillary isn't being investigated, except in your dreams....

 

[Barnacle]

.....

 

[Exactice]

Not Surprised as usually a crime or an indication of a crime usually implicates someone.

But if someone loses an election you dont just say oh I lost because of Trump Russia interference because your opponent won when it was known Russians interfered.

A seemingly correlated reason doesnt automatically make that person a criminal LOL.


Anyways.... let me say it.... Trump is probably guilty of your standard white collar crimes like HRC, DNC, Clinton Foundation. No better or NO worse.... But I doubt any actual RUSSIAN collusion.


So if the Special Counsel sticks to the point about Russian interference, Yes that is Fact, Is there Trump Russia Collusion, unknown, but seemingly farther and farther from the truth.

Is Trump guilt of any other crimes? It would not surprise me... But has nothing to do with why he won the Presidency and at this point he has done nothing unconstitutional or anything the detracts from his ability in the capacity of the President. NOT the best representative of the position... But meh hes is fulfilling my political beliefs.


So press on Mueller.......stick to the job at hand, but if you are going to keep dinging you will find something.. just not RUSSIA Collusion related likely.

 

[PLizzy]

Mueller sounds close to wrapping things up.

Remember, this is not an independent counsel, as Ken Starr was, where the regulations allow the prosecutor to recommend impeachable offenses. The regulations back then placed Starr as working for the US Congress, where as the special counsel regulations put Mueller as an employee of the DOJ. That means its not Mueller's job to assess whether Trump abused his powers in an effort to obstruct the investigation, that will be up to the Congress.

It's doubtful there'll be something like the 'Starr report'. More likely Mueller is simply going to lay out the facts of the case, and let the Congress interpret Trumps actions (as Jaworski did in Watergate); which means nothing will happen.

 

[Barnacle]

So, it appears that he is not currently a "target" (at this point), but he is a "subject". Knowing that a subject can become a target pretty quickly, I'm not sure this means to much other than it provides some current clarity on Trump's legal situation.

Is Trump's current status surprising to anyone? Is Mueller trying to soften Trump into the interview chair by appealing to Trump's narcissism (you're not a target Don, we just want to ask you a few questions)? Is this even big news?

Nope ...

Sounds more like the Washington Compost is Bezos' twitter version.

 

[Mach]

You're not currently a target, nothing to see here.



Mueller's team could be luring him, in general using disinformation, making it less likely he tries a Sat Night massacre/pardons, it could be anything, including nothing at all. That's the point, we will not know until they tell us or it concludes.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

So, it appears that he is not currently a "target" (at this point), but he is a "subject". Knowing that a subject can become a target pretty quickly, I'm not sure this means to much other than it provides some current clarity on Trump's legal situation.

Is Trump's current status surprising to anyone? Is Mueller trying to soften Trump into the interview chair by appealing to Trump's narcissism (you're not a target Don, we just want to ask you a few questions)? Is this even big news?

Listen, our side has put up with this nonsense long enough.

We have been more than toletant of all the non and anon sourced made up, yes, fake news, the two years of "more than circumstantial evidence is out there", the daily bombshells that would have destroyed Dresden by now were they even once real.

That with all the actual evidence of ongoing wrongdoing, that anyone with a true sense of Justice would recognize already known on Hillary, too many established breaches to list, Comey lying under oath, leaking, absconding without permission government property, Mc cabe lying under oath, Steele lying under oath...the list could go on and on and on with Lynch, Holder, Ohr and slenderman himself all included.

Trump has held his powder( sure he tweets, lets off steam, runs the media and foaming at mouth rabid libs deliciously crazy ), but since there are no whites of their goat eyes to be seen, he needs pull the trigger now.

Its gonna be a bloodbath, the left needs prepare itself. If indictments on your side were raindrops, the creeks gonna be rising to flood levels.

 

[trixare4kids]

I'm hoping same for Hillary...

(bonus: if she ended up in an orange jumpsuit on a deserted Libyan beach with someone chanting behind her as they make a video of it that would be even more funny)

An orange pantsuit would be much spiffier.

 

[Chomsky]

This is an interesting development, and I'm not sure what to make of it. He's a "subject", not a "target". But then a subject may become a target. And in addition, this may only be the first phase of the investigation, in regards to Trump.

I think it's a bit more ominous than it appears.

I also found the quote below interesting. It's in regards to whether Trump can refuse a Mueller interview.

However, Sekulow and Cobb gave the president the opposite advice as Dowd: that it would be politically difficult for Trump to refuse to answer questions after insisting for months there was no collusion or crime, according to three people familiar with their advice.

 

[Cardinal]

So, it appears that he is not currently a "target" (at this point), but he is a "subject". Knowing that a subject can become a target pretty quickly, I'm not sure this means to much other than it provides some current clarity on Trump's legal situation.

Is Trump's current status surprising to anyone? Is Mueller trying to soften Trump into the interview chair by appealing to Trump's narcissism (you're not a target Don, we just want to ask you a few questions)? Is this even big news?

This story is meaningless if you don't know what additional evidence Mueller requires in order to turn the "subject" into a "target." It's also meaningless because you don't know if what Mueller is saying is if he's indictable or not. It says so little, in fact, one must wonder what the point of telling his lawyers that at all must be, though it's easy to suspect that it's to lull Trump into a sense of confidence and agree to be interviewed without pleading the fifth.

*Shrug*. Angels on the head of a pin.

 

[Cardinal]

This is an interesting development, and I'm not sure what to make of it. He's a "subject", not a "target". But then a subject may become a target. And in addition, this may only be the first phase of the investigation, in regards to Trump.

I think it's a bit more ominous than it appears.

I also found the quote below interesting. It's in regards to whether Trump can refuse a Mueller interview.

And a subject may get a clean legal bill of health. Frankly, I suspect the only person who understands what this story means is Mueller.

 

[JANFU]

Mueller sounds close to wrapping things up.

Remember, this is not an independent counsel, as Ken Starr was, where the regulations allow the prosecutor to recommend impeachable offenses. The regulations back then placed Starr as working for the US Congress, where as the special counsel regulations put Mueller as an employee of the DOJ. That means its not Mueller's job to assess whether Trump abused his powers in an effort to obstruct the investigation, that will be up to the Congress.

It's doubtful there'll be something like the 'Starr report'. More likely Mueller is simply going to lay out the facts of the case, and let the Congress interpret Trumps actions (as Jaworski did in Watergate); which means nothing will happen.

Whether a sitting President can be indicted has never been settled in law. If one thinks he cannot, then they are placing the President above the law, and leaving it to a political process to unfold, Impeachment, before charges can be laid. Consider that in some cases the Statute of Limitations could be in play, dependent upon the charges, where if not indicted, the President avoids prosecution, making him/her above the law

Me, I believe a sitting President can be indicted, but if the GJ did indict, it would be appealed to SCOTUS, concurrent to evidence for the charges provided to Congress to consider Impeachment.

Mueller cannot publish a publicly available report. The Dep AG makes thedecision if a report, in full, partial or not at all will be published.

If he, Dep AG decides no report will be made public, I am not sure if Congress can or cannot compel the report to be made made public

 

[Athanasius68]

Mueller inherited Comey's investigation. Comey himself said that Trump is not under criminal investigation.

Nothing has changed in the past year. And remember, this is all about Trump conspiring with Putin to throw the 2016 election.

 

[SirGareth]

So, it appears that he is not currently a "target" (at this point), but he is a "subject". Knowing that a subject can become a target pretty quickly, I'm not sure this means to much other than it provides some current clarity on Trump's legal situation.

Is Trump's current status surprising to anyone? Is Mueller trying to soften Trump into the interview chair by appealing to Trump's narcissism (you're not a target Don, we just want to ask you a few questions)? Is this even big news?

I don't think the title of "Special Prosecutor" really does him justice, I should think "Grand Inquisitor" fits his work better.

Should Trump or a Republican presidential candidate lose an election to a Democrat I believe he should appoint a permanent Grand Inquisitor to investigate the incoming executive branch in an ongoing basis; think what we could have learned about the Clintons if we had one then?

 

[PLizzy]

An orange pantsuit would be much spiffier.

A few of these guys WILL wear orange.

 

[PLizzy]

Whether a sitting President can be indicted has never been settled in law. If one thinks he cannot, then they are placing the President above the law, and leaving it to a political process to unfold, Impeachment, before charges can be laid. Consider that in some cases the Statute of Limitations could be in play, dependent upon the charges, where if not indicted, the President avoids prosecution, making him/her above the law

Me, I believe a sitting President can be indicted, but if the GJ did indict, it would be appealed to SCOTUS, concurrent to evidence for the charges provided to Congress to consider Impeachment.

Mueller cannot publish a publicly available report. The Dep AG makes thedecision if a report, in full, partial or not at all will be published.

If he, Dep AG decides no report will be made public, I am not sure if Congress can or cannot compel the report to be made made public

Yes, the Congress can compel the DOJ to release a report, though I doubt Rosenstein wouldn't make it public himself.

 

[Chomsky]

Mueller sounds close to wrapping things up.

Remember, this is not an independent counsel, as Ken Starr was, where the regulations allow the prosecutor to recommend impeachable offenses. The regulations back then placed Starr as working for the US Congress, where as the special counsel regulations put Mueller as an employee of the DOJ. That means its not Mueller's job to assess whether Trump abused his powers in an effort to obstruct the investigation, that will be up to the Congress.

It's doubtful there'll be something like the 'Starr report'. More likely Mueller is simply going to lay out the facts of the case, and let the Congress interpret Trumps actions (as Jaworski did in Watergate); which means nothing will happen.

Actually, I think Mueller reports to Rosenstein, and Rosenstein determines what to do with the report.

 

[PLizzy]

Actually, I think Mueller reports to Rosenstein, and Rosenstein determines what to do with the report.

Exactly.

Although, it's the Congress that ultimately has the authority to compel the report, regardless of what the DOJ wants.

 

[Chomsky]

A few of these guys WILL orange.

Session is the guy I want. I'm sure he's dirty. He's too squirmy.

 

[JoeTrumps]

I'm glad he's laying the groundwork. That way when he totally exonerates the President the liberals won't collectively swallow every pill in their medicine cabinet.

Very decent of him really.