dagblog - Comments for "Trump's Lawyers' Memo to Mueller"

Some good points here

artappraiser — Tue, 05 Jun 2018 14:15:55 +0000

In reply to Trump's Lawyers' Memo to Mueller

Some good points here

The Constitutional Crisis Is Already Underway

By Jonathan Chait @ NYMag.com, June 2

especially the summary:

Trump cannot obstruct justice, according to his official legal stance, because justice is whatever Trump says it is. Before this is over, either Trump’s sweeping claim will survive, or the rule of law will, but not both.

BTW he's bashing Sessions again on Twitter today, 3 hrs. ago.

P.S. Chairman of Senate

artappraiser — Tue, 05 Jun 2018 02:23:15 +0000

In reply to I think a more fruitful

P.S. Chairman of Senate Judiciary Committee also unimpressed by claims that the President can pardon himself.It's all a distraction.

When Twitter is fun:

artappraiser — Tue, 05 Jun 2018 02:17:33 +0000

In reply to Trump's Lawyers' Memo to Mueller

When Twitter is fun:

You also have the right to remain silent.

Try it. https://t.co/VsSai3JvYV
— Philippe Reines (@PhilippeReines) June 4, 2018

Robert Kuttner, to the point:

AmericanDreamer — Mon, 04 Jun 2018 20:20:39 +0000

In reply to Trump's Lawyers' Memo to Mueller

Robert Kuttner:

JUNE 4, 2018

Kuttner on TAP

L’État, C’est Moi. It is almost reassuring to learn that Trump truly believes he is above the law.

Arguing that the law does not apply to the president is the essence of dictatorship. It’s good to have that claim in black and white—reaffirmed by the even more bizarre claim by Rudy Giuliani that Trump could not merely fire James Comey but murder him and not be legally to called to account.

When Trump said that he could “stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody” and not “lose any voters,” people dismissed that as hyperbole. It turns out that he meant it literally.

This is the stuff of impeachment and removal. If it isn’t, we rapidly cease to be a democracy. ~ROBERT KUTTNER

I think a more fruitful

artappraiser — Mon, 04 Jun 2018 19:33:39 +0000

In reply to ......

I think a more fruitful question is: why did someone leak this letter now that was written four months ago partly by a team that no longer exists because the lead resigned in March?

As this June 4 piece @ Newsmax points out:

Even Rudy Giuliani on Sunday backed away from the Sekulow-Dowd assertion.

"Pardoning himself would be unthinkable and probably lead to immediate impeachment," Giuliani said. ''And he has no need to do it, he's done nothing wrong."

And I've seen elsewhere where others agree, like Chris Christie having said something like "if he did that, he will be impeached."

I went back to the original New York Times piece introducing the letter and the Times merely says they "obtained" the letter without a hint from who or why except this, my underlining

Mr. Trump complained on Twitter on Saturday before this article was published that the disclosure of the letter was a damaging leak to the news media and asked whether the “expensive Witch Hunt Hoax” would ever end.

Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump

There was No Collusion with Russia (except by the Democrats). When will this very expensive Witch Hunt Hoax ever end? So bad for our Country. Is the Special Counsel/Justice Department leaking my lawyers letters to the Fake News Media? Should be looking at Dems corruption instead?

1:43 PM - Jun 2, 2018

Though it should be noted that this reaction could have come from the Times informing him they were going to publish it.

I have seen several pundits I respect suggest that raising all this talk about pardoning is a distraction.

As to it being a legal argument back in January by a lawyer that resigned in mid March, I just see that as one thing that a lawyer defending this president might correctly try to see what the response might be. I also see that there was a hullabaloo about Dowd fiddling with that idea already in taking responsibility for a tweet by Trump in early December, see the update atop this Dec. 2 story at Washington Post

......

AmericanDreamer — Mon, 04 Jun 2018 17:17:31 +0000

In reply to Trump's Lawyers' Memo to Mueller

Greg Sargent at WaPo this morning offers this take:

...But, while all of these moves have stirred great concern that Trump is preparing to exercise near-dictatorial powers on his own behalf, they are better seen as a window into how weak and precarious Trump’s position — politically, if not legally — has become.

To see why, look at a specific point in the memo: the striking concession by Trump’s lawyers that he did, in fact, dictate that initial statement for his son Donald Trump Jr., which falsified the real rationale for the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Russians. As the memo puts it, “the president dictated a short but accurate response to the New York Times.”

As you’ll recall, the initial statement put out by Don Jr. claimed the meeting was about Russian adoptions. It was only after Times reporters obtained his emails showing that he anticipated the meeting would yield dirt on Hillary Clinton furnished by Russia that he was somewhat more forthcoming.

The admission by Trump’s lawyers that he “dictated” the false statement (no, it is not “accurate”) is important, because it comes after Trump’s lawyers and White House officials repeatedly denied in various forms that the president had played such a hands-on role. The question is, why did Trump’s lawyers suddenly admit this?

.........

"Secret memo to Mueller actually reveals weakness of Trump's position", Greg Sargent, WaPo today: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/06/04/secret-memo...