I very much appreciate this question from Max.
I agree on his take re how the lawyering of written responses would presumably reduce Trump's exposure to perjury charges.
But here are ways in which I think it still spells trouble for Trump.... <thread>...
I agree on his take re how the lawyering of written responses would presumably reduce Trump's exposure to perjury charges.
But here are ways in which I think it still spells trouble for Trump.... <thread>...
1. Even a reduction in exposure does not mean it reduces it enough.
President Trump may also now be pinned, so that if Mueller (or a future prosecutor of a then-former president Trump) gets to interview Trump as follow-up under subpoena, the risks to DJT will be much higher.
President Trump may also now be pinned, so that if Mueller (or a future prosecutor of a then-former president Trump) gets to interview Trump as follow-up under subpoena, the risks to DJT will be much higher.
2. Trump lawyers may have overly trusted their client's word (as happened with Ty Cobb). And maybe we should believe Trump's bombast that he played oversized role in directing written responses
Here's what I mean about Cobb and his strategy to have Trump cooperate with Mueller…
Here's what I mean about Cobb and his strategy to have Trump cooperate with Mueller…
"The plan rests on the premise that Mr. Trump has done nothing wrong—something the president has repeatedly told his lawyers...some lawyers connected to the investigation say that Mr. Cobb has been too willing to take the president at his word.”
nytimes.com/2017/10/07/us/…
nytimes.com/2017/10/07/us/…
3. Finally, if there is evidence to implicate Trump personally in conspiracy with Russia-Wikileaks, grossly misleading responses to the special counsel would damage him in any case in which Trump is included as an indicted or unindicted co-conspirator.
