Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

The headline makes it seem like Trump and his lawyer are sending conflicting messages. But they are not. Collusion may not be a crime. And for this reason (among others) the Mueller investigation may be illegitimate, and improperly formed.

But Trump wasn't likely to face criminal charges anyway. This is a political fight not a legal one. They are not arguing before a judge they are arguing in the court of public opinion. Assume for argument's sake that collusion is not a crime but that Trump did "collude with Russia" in some ways to help with his campaign. If Mueller could prove that collusion it would look very bad politically, it would derail his presidential agenda, and probably lead to impeachment. Impeachment is a political not a legal process and Congress decides what a "High Crime and Misdemeanor" is. Even still, they would not impeach him for a non-crime. They would say Mueller proved that he lied to the country about the collusion, and therefor he probably did obstruct justice or did use his office to intimidate witnesses and investigators, and was derelict of his duties as POTUS.

Mueller is behaving quite cynically. With regard to his investigation of Trump, Mueller is pretty much free to stretch, bend and break his legal ethics because as long he does not bring an indictment, there will be no presiding judge to rule on the legality of the evidence nor to sanction Mueller for breaking his oath. Mueller's raid on Cohen is a great example of Mueller stretching too far. A client has to be free to say almost anything to his attorney - he could even admit to a heinous crime - and these conversations cannot be used as evidence. Pretty much the only way to break atty-client privilege is if the client tells the attorney in advance that he is going to commit a crime, or if the attorney was involved in a crime with his client. But even then, it would only break the privilege with regard to evidence of the crime they did together. Any other activity the client told the attorney about unrelated crimes would remain protected.

In the case of Cohen I am hard pressed to understand what the crime is that allows him to break his legal duty to defend his client or how Cohen was involved in that crime. It would be a big stretch to argue that "knowing or agreeing that his son should attend a meeting to discuss Russian provided 'dirt'" is a crime. Even for DJTJ, just showing up, even if he expected to discuss "dirt", would be a stretch. Maybe DJTJ could be accused of some kind of conspiracy to break campaign laws, but he didn't know what was going to be presented before he got there, so there is no way he could know if it would be criminal. He'd have to go to find out what was on offer before he could know it was prohibited. And besides, we now know that there was no dirt to provide; the person who invited DJTJ to the meeting only told him they had dirt in order to lure him into a conversation about the Maginstky Act. So, no dirt, no quid pro quo, no crime.

This buzz about Cohen testifying Trump knew about the tower meeting is a violation of atty-client ethics. If Mueller took it before a judge both Mueller and Cohen would face possible disbarment. But Mueller isn't going to use Cohen's evidence in a courtroom. He is just trying to pressure Trump and make him look as bad as possible in the eyes of the public. It is mostly red meat for the anti-Trump zombies. Mueller can break the rules of evidence gathering, suppresses Trump's right to legal representation, intimidates Cohen into breaking his oath and more, and there is no way to sanction him for it and only one way to stop it: fire him. As far as investigating POTUS personally, Mueller is free to behave like a snake in the grass, without any accountability, as long as he doesn't use the improperly/illegally obtained evidence in a court of law.

1 posted on 07/30/2018 9:31:18 AM PDT by monkeyshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-24 last
To: monkeyshine

Collusion may not be necessarily in the legal codes and is being used as a catch all word for other potential crimes. And honestly, the President’s team has been advancing that collusion is not a crime since at least the time when Sekulow joined the legal team if not before. In other words, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.


42 posted on 07/30/2018 10:54:30 AM PDT by joesbucks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: monkeyshine

“CNBC - Slow on the Uptake ^ | 7/30/2018 | Tucker Higgins”

No sense reading more....


43 posted on 07/30/2018 10:54:31 AM PDT by litehaus (A memory toooo long.............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: monkeyshine
Now his lawyer Rudy Giuliani says: 'Collusion is not a crime'

Uhhh... they've been saying "collusion is not a crime" since Day One.

-PJ

47 posted on 07/30/2018 11:12:11 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (The 1st Amendment gives the People the right to a free press, not CNN the right to the 1st question.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: monkeyshine

I think since Trump first announced his plan to run for President, he has repeatedly employed a PR tactic that is widely misunderstood.

Namely, he lets potentially damaging information leak on his own terms and weathers the storm in such a way that inoculates him, politically.

The entire Mueller investigation may be an example of Trump using this strategy. He has complained about it numerous times but never once has he lifted a finger to stop it. He has never pushed his AG to stop it.

Most revealing is Trump’s reaction when legislators challenge Mueller or Rosenstien on his behalf - rather than support their efforts he backs off and expresses a desire to remain uninvolved.

Could it be that Trump likes being the subject of a witch hunt? I think he’s figured out that when people are inundated with allegations that Trump did this, Trump did that, Trump is a racist, Trump is a moron, Trump is dangerous, Trump promotes violence, Trump violates women, etc., etc.....

... people eventually come to the conclusion that nobody could be THAT bad - the fault must be with his accusers - Trump is the victim, the underdog - and Americans love an underdog.

If I’m right, Trump is playing this to a T. He purposely draws fire, he baits his enemies into telling lies about him, the people see him being unfairly attacked, and they rally around him.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

I wouldn’t be surprised if he has leaked “damaging” things or had others do it. I wouldn’t be surprised if he has at times behaved mysteriously in order to invite a scandal that will later be disproven. I bet he has sent Giuliani, Bannon, Cohen, and others to say things designed to appear contradictory or unsupportive - just so that he can lure his enemies down a rabbit hole.

For example, when Melania was hospitalized and there was some mystery surrounding her living arrangements and her reasons for not being seen in public or by her husband’s side. The MSM tried to spin it into a matter of marital discord. It seemed to me that Trump could have dispelled those rumors and ended such speculation, but that he chose to let the MSM dig themselves deeper and deeper into a hole. Then, a week later they are walking hand in hand, and the MSM looks nasty, petty and foolish.


50 posted on 07/30/2018 11:40:14 AM PDT by enumerated
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-24 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson