General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn my opinion, Trump will not testify before the Committee.
Just as he did with Mueller, he will blow hot air about how he can't wait to expose the "sham" Committee, that is as far as he will go. In the end, just like with Mueller, he will say that his lawyers will not let him testify. But, he really, really wants to.
He will likely fake some sort of negotiation with the Committee. Such as, none of it is to be made public. It will be virtual and he will have his lawyers with him. And so forth..
But, in the end, he is too chicken shit to tell the truth to the Committee or the American people. Just as Raskin said, he is a "snowflake".
Bettie
(16,110 posts)he won't be under oath....because all he does is lie and swearing he won't is a lie right there.
Irish_Dem
(47,116 posts)Trump will be a no show.
emulatorloo
(44,130 posts)C_U_L8R
(45,003 posts)Like ' President' Trump did with Mueller.
Scrivener7
(50,954 posts)Auggie
(31,173 posts)Chainfire
(17,542 posts)Trump is, in effect, a "super citizen," like it or not that is the practical reality.
Lovie777
(12,272 posts)I would think a subpoena would suffice for "under oath".
Emile
(22,780 posts)PuraVidaDreamin
(4,101 posts)And don't you eat that orange snow
Johnny2X2X
(19,066 posts)Dems need an organized campaign of calling him chickenshit for not being willing to testify. He can be baited.
KS Toronado
(17,249 posts)Dear......we would like to talk to you about how the election was stolen from you which enraged so many
patriotic citizens on Jan 6th. Please bring all your evidence of "Election Fraud" so this committee can
get to the bottom of this and ensure the 2024 election is not stolen from you.
gab13by13
(21,350 posts)This per Professor Raskin, last night. I don't believe the committee expected Trump to show. Raskin said we can call him a snowflake.
The big reason for the subpoena was because the final report of the committee was going to make assertions about Trump and then tell Trump if he disagrees to just show up under oath and refute what the committee asserts. In other words, the committee was going to treat Trump's no show just like his claiming the 5th and use his failure to show against him since the J6 committee is civil not criminal.
Trump must have a sharp lawyer now. He is considering showing up for the subpoena if it broadcast live. IMO, a brilliant move by Trump.
No way DOJ would want that scenario. I think that Trump just trumped the committee.
Just my take.
kentuck
(111,098 posts)Under oath, answering the questions that are asked. Not permitted to run off at the mouth. He cannot tell the truth.
Pobeka
(4,999 posts)"You see the mob takes the Fifth," he said during one rally in Iowa. "If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?"
Walleye
(31,028 posts)MineralMan
(146,317 posts)"IMO, a brilliant move by Trump."
Whose side are you on?
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,002 posts)kentuck
(111,098 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,002 posts)marble falls
(57,097 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,002 posts)chriscan64
(1,789 posts)I wish there were more posts like this, just one's experiences or thoughts on a subject. It is fine that DU is a consolidated repository of links to relevant articles and web content. Me personally, I like to know the poster's thoughts on what they just read or in general. Keep doing what you're doing.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,002 posts)chriscan64
(1,789 posts)I will be on the lookout for that.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,002 posts)Click on the number of people recommending the OP which gives you the recommenders user names, but also an edit history at the top.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,002 posts)It is interesting to read people's speculations, guesses, hypotheses, brainstorms, etc.
Vanity OPs, however, can be noxious, like the ones that go "THIS!!" and include a link to another OP.
Or "Just so you know" and post as text "Trump is fucked. That is all."
Paraphrasing them of course, but they express mindless blurts and just create clutter.
ProfessorGAC
(65,058 posts)There are opinions offered here in GD, constantly.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,002 posts)Opinions are very desirable in GD.
But it is not a big deal, and kentuck was gracious and edited the OP title from the original.
ProfessorGAC
(65,058 posts)I saw it the 1st time, post edit.
All good!
marble falls
(57,097 posts)jonstl08
(412 posts)If the GOP wins control of the house I predict by the end of next January he will go before a Jim Jordan run committee and spout all his lies about everything. Will present nothing new. His narcissitic personality will require it. BTW will not be under oath either.
agingdem
(7,850 posts)live in front of the full committee and not under oath..and when the committee says sorry asshole but you don't get to make the rules, he'll play the victim...
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)If he doesn't show the committee could hold him in contempt like they did with Bannon. Would Garland prosecute him for contempt? I don't know. Stay tuned.
kentuck
(111,098 posts)It would slow down the DOJ investigation and not accomplish a lot legally.
If he wants to answer questions, let him volunteer to come in. If he wants to take the Fifth, the American people can see it.
BlackSkimmer
(51,308 posts)themaguffin
(3,826 posts)GreenWave
(6,757 posts)But I smell a chicken!
chriscan64
(1,789 posts)He won't put himself in an environment where he is not in control. He would much rather criticize the process from the outside on his own terms. The committee would have to take the extraordinary step of indicting him for contempt and physically compelling him to be there. Otherwise, I don't think he would have any part of it despite the opportunity to tell them off to their faces.
Wounded Bear
(58,662 posts)So, yeah, his lawyers will tell him not to. And we'll have more ads of the "he wouldn't testify/chickened out" variety.
Vinca
(50,276 posts)niyad
(113,325 posts)Mr. Ected
(9,670 posts)The media reports his statements as if they were official and binding on him legally.
He would never step into a courtroom or the halls of Congress to testify to the same things under oath.
People don't understand that a person's words have no bearing if they're not uttered under oath (although a perjury charge is probably among the crimes that every one of these scoundrels could still get away with).
bluestarone
(16,959 posts)HE stated whoever takes the 5th. are GUILTY!! Wouldn't that be beautiful in a ad for the 2024 election!!