THE WASHINGTON POST report on a conversation special counsel Robert Mueller had with the White House has people reaching deep.
President Trump thinks he’s in the clear or will be if he talks to Mueller.
Will his ego undo him?
Alternatively, Mueller could trigger a reporting requirement in the special counsel regulations under which the attorney general must inform “the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Judiciary Committees of each House of Congress” — both parties, in other words — at the end of the special counsel’s investigation, of any instance in which the attorney general vetoed a proposed action. Simply by proposing to indict Trump, Mueller could ensure that Congress gets the word. But this would be of only limited scope: instead of an evidence dump, it need only be a “brief notification, with an outline of the actions and the reasons for them.”
What all these scenarios have in common is that Congress, not the courts, will be the ultimate arbiter of whether Trump faces any direct consequences from Mueller’s investigation. Depending on the state of play come November, voters across the nation may be the ones who determine whether Congress decides even to consider that question. Elections have consequences, and one consequence of the midterms may be whether the American public finds out what Mueller has learned about Trump.
John Down quit because of the dangers of Trump walking into an interview with Mueller.
Now Trump feels vindicated, which explains his jubilant insanity over the last 5 days or so, and why he’s chomping to talk to Mueller.
Solomon Wisenberg, a former deputy independent counsel in the probe of President Bill Clinton, offered a warning.
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.
Wisenberg, who interviewed Clinton about allegations that he obstructed justice, said Trump has handled himself well in previous depositions but should be cautious.
“I think he would do much better than people think,” Wisenberg said. “But there are plenty of instances where a guy walks into a grand jury a subject. He gets out and is told: ‘Guess what, you’re a target now.’”
As I’ve written from the start of the Trump presidency, American voters must remove Donald Trump from office through voting, or by impeachment.
They are tied together.
In other words, he is under investigation. On the way out the door after an interview with Mueller, he could be informed that he has just become a target. In other words, the “subject but not a target” designation is at best for Trump meaningless and at worst a sign he’s in jeopardy at any moment of becoming a target. There is a further complication here. Under the Justice Department’s current Office of Legal Counsel memo, a sitting president cannot be indicted; in other words, he cannot be charged — hence is not a target — until he leaves office. Jed Shugerman of the Fordham University School of Law agrees that, most likely, “all it means is Mueller probably has no intention of indicting a sitting president (who thus is not a target).” – Jennifer Rubin