This was a serious miscalculation. It doesn’t matter for these purposes whether you believe your client has nothing to hide. What matters is whether the prosecutors believe this. Prosecutors, by their nature, seldom have that belief. In this case, moreover, it should have been obvious that Mueller and his partisan team never believed Trump has nothing to hide.
[clip]
Third, it seems unlikely that McGahn’s answers can form a valid basis for alleging criminality by Trump. The Times reports:
In the absence of truly extraordinary circumstances, asking the Attorney General to assert control over a crucial investigation, and threatening to fire him (but not doing so), is surely not obstruction of justice. Neither is firing Michael Flynn, regardless of how it was handled.
Apparently, Team Mueller sees possible obstruction of justice in the firing of Mueller’s former comrade-in-arms, James Comey. I don’t know how this exercise of presidential authority could be obstruction, given that (1) Comey told Trump he had found no evidence of unlawful conduct by the president and (2) the firing of Comey did not shut down the Russia investigation and was never likely to.
The Times says Team Mueller asked McGahn about his discussions with Trump regarding firing Mueller himself. No doubt. But Trump hasn’t fired Mueller. Thus, while the conversations about this subject must have been interesting, they are not the stuff of justice obstruction.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archi...e-house-counsels-cooperation-with-mueller.php
Trump is a fool for having ANY Engagement with Muller
[clip]
Third, it seems unlikely that McGahn’s answers can form a valid basis for alleging criminality by Trump. The Times reports:
Mr. McGahn gave to Mr. Mueller’s investigators, the people said, a sense of the president’s mind-set in the days leading to the firing of Mr. Comey; how the White House handled the firing of the former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn; and how Mr. Trump repeatedly berated Mr. Sessions, tried to get him to assert control over the investigation and threatened to fire him.
In the absence of truly extraordinary circumstances, asking the Attorney General to assert control over a crucial investigation, and threatening to fire him (but not doing so), is surely not obstruction of justice. Neither is firing Michael Flynn, regardless of how it was handled.
Apparently, Team Mueller sees possible obstruction of justice in the firing of Mueller’s former comrade-in-arms, James Comey. I don’t know how this exercise of presidential authority could be obstruction, given that (1) Comey told Trump he had found no evidence of unlawful conduct by the president and (2) the firing of Comey did not shut down the Russia investigation and was never likely to.
The Times says Team Mueller asked McGahn about his discussions with Trump regarding firing Mueller himself. No doubt. But Trump hasn’t fired Mueller. Thus, while the conversations about this subject must have been interesting, they are not the stuff of justice obstruction.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archi...e-house-counsels-cooperation-with-mueller.php
Trump is a fool for having ANY Engagement with Muller
