dagblog - Comments for "How Robert Mueller Outfoxed Donald Trump"

Michael, I saw this when it

Oxy Mora — Sat, 29 Sep 2018 19:08:56 +0000

In reply to How Robert Mueller Outfoxed Donald Trump

Michael, I saw this when it appeared in the Daily Beast. Well done.

Yep, another example of

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 05 Sep 2018 04:23:51 +0000

In reply to But this is Mueller's "you be

Yep, another example of Mueller sidestepping confrontation to give his investigation more rope.

On potential obstruction-of-justice issues, “he said he’d assess it down the road,” said one person familiar with Mueller’s letter who requested anonymity to discuss private communications. “They’re essentially saying, ‘We’ll deal with this at a later date.’”

Wrong! Children without

artappraiser — Wed, 05 Sep 2018 02:31:09 +0000

In reply to Yeah, Trump has a soft spot

Wrong! Children without parents get attention and affection that should be paid to me!

It is good that Trump feels

barefooted — Wed, 05 Sep 2018 02:07:56 +0000

In reply to But this is Mueller's "you be

It is good that Trump feels like he can chat with the likes of the Daily Caller and various Fox news folks, because he unwittingly gives Mueller ammunition every time he does- just like with his tweets. There's the transparency we've all learned to demand, and then there's the transparency that Trump offers up every given day.

That Mueller is calling Trump's bluff is a no-brainer, always has been. Of course he's dealing with the various and sundry attorneys representing Trump, so it's been a merry-go-lawyer situation from the start ... yet I doubt that the comings and goings of Trump's legal team has caused even a bead of sweat on Mueller's forehead. He's focused, and he's also pragmatic enough to know when to nod and when to punch. Bet'cha Hillary gets it.

But this is Mueller's "you be

PeraclesPlease — Wed, 05 Sep 2018 01:41:00 +0000

In reply to Now that Mueller has

But this is Mueller's "you be loving it" strategy that Michael writes about - keep Trump focused on obstruction, give him hope that a slick well-lawyered response to Mueller in writing will get him off the hook, while that forest inches steadily closer to Trump - legally and PR-wise, like with Woodward and his own gaffes. But good that the Daily Caller can chat with Trump, but not Mueller or Woodward. Most. Transparent. Administratiin. Ever.

ETA: Abramson thinks this is Mueller calling Trump's bluff, and doubts Trump will even answer in writing. https://mobile.twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1037112278229966850

Certainly doesn't look like

PeraclesPlease — Wed, 05 Sep 2018 01:33:43 +0000

In reply to Thanks, Doc. Nice to write

Certainly doesn't look like Kansas, Toto.

Now that Mueller has

barefooted — Wed, 05 Sep 2018 01:31:48 +0000

In reply to How Robert Mueller Outfoxed Donald Trump

Now that Mueller has apparently agreed to accept at least some answers in writing from Trump, does that change the calculous in any measurable way?

Notably, the concession (if it is one at all) deals strictly with the matter of the campaign and possible collusion with Russia, nothing else:

Mueller did not rule out interviewing the president as part of his wide-ranging inquiry. His Friday letter indicated that he may revisit his long-running request to pose questions to Trump directly about Russia’s activities during the campaign after reviewing his answers.

And the special counsel left open the possibility that he may still try to press Trump in person about a second piece of his investigation: whether the president has sought to block the probe since taking office.

I know a pizzeria...

PeraclesPlease — Wed, 05 Sep 2018 01:31:36 +0000

In reply to Yeah, Trump has a soft spot

I know a pizzeria...

Yeah, Trump has a soft spot

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 05 Sep 2018 01:07:40 +0000

In reply to NO COLUSHUN !! tHE tRUMPS

Yeah, Trump has a soft spot for children without parents.

Excellent point. I wish that

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 05 Sep 2018 01:02:42 +0000

In reply to Another slow roll out is the

Excellent point. I wish that I'd mentioned it.