Mueller ‘pitbull’ Weissmann let slip they were trying to oust Trump by setting a perjury trap

Tell that to Coney, Clinton, McCabe, Lynch, Biden and even Obama if he has the guts to speak under oath.

 

They’ve all spoken under oath and not been charged with perjury lol
Except Obama, don’t know when that would have been

 

Did Comey lie under oath? How about Clinton? You damn well know they did.

I can’t help it that libs are given a pass.

 

He wasn’t talking about a perjury trap. He was saying that the president lies when he is not under oath, but if he were to be put under oath he would be forced to tell the truth.

 

Many of the 17 witnesses lied under oath and none of them have been charged with perjury yet.

 

Perhaps Trump’s DOJ doesn’t believe that they lied.

Anyway it is completely unresponsive to my post. The article you quoted does not say they were trying to catch Trump with perjury. Quite the opposite. It says the potential penalty of perjury would force Trump to tell the truth.

 

Try this one on for size. A guy steals parts and sells some of them. He then buys collectable black powder guns (antiques) and sells them to his supervisor. The supervisor of the person that stole the parts agrees to take a polygraph to prove that he had no knowledge where the thief got the money to buy the guns in the first place. Just before the polygraph an agent tells him that they have bank statements proving that the thief used funds from the stolen parts to buy the guns. During the polygraph they ask the supervisor, "Do you know that he used funds form the stolen government aircraft parts to buy the guns?" Of course he does. He was just told about the ill gotten funds JUST BEFORE the polygraph. If he said "no" he would have been guilty of perjury. If he says "yes" they use the statement to charge him with conspiracy. They would never admit that they told him about the dirty money just before the polygraph. He refused to answer the question. His attorney used the incident to file a formal complaint against the agent that told him about the dirty money. Those situations aren't always caught. Hell, look at the FIAS warrants that everyone swore were valid.

 

2 of 4 were valid. The original was obtained prior to the Steele dossier.

 

All it takes is one guy pissing in the punch bowl to make the whole batch pissy.

The original had nothing to do with Trump. The first FISA warrant for Page was in 2013/2014 and had nothing to do with Trump or the campaign.

"TAPPER: Can I talk about Carter Page for one second? Because "Time" magazine obtained a letter Carter Page wrote in 2013 boasting about his connections with Russia -- quote -- "Over the past half year I have had the privilege to serve as an informal adviser to the staff of the Kremlin in preparation, for their Presidency of the C-20 Summit next month where energy issues would be a prominent on the agenda."
In 2013, 2014, Carter Page was spied on by the FBI in a different FISA warrant."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1802/04/sotu.01.html

Former Trump adviser Carter Page under FISA warrant since 2014: Report
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ter-page-under-fisa-warrant-since-2014-report

So with all that, there might have been ONE warrant that involved the Trump campaign AND Page that wasn't tainted. That would have been the second warrant. So that leaves the question, which warrants is it okay that they (the FBI attorneys) lied about?

 

just when i thought they couldn't get any more batsh*t crazy, they believe wiki over us law code posted at cornell law...

 

Sure....you can get Sondlands and that other bloke Vindman to confirm that, for sure.

 

A polygraph test is not considered admissible evidence under federal jurisdiction(or virtually every other jurisdiction for that matter) hence why you don't see each and every witness who ever testifies get hooked up to a polygraph machine.

 

The wiki article merely explains what is already presented in the cornell law link, it does not contradict it. You are completely failing to understand the meaning of the term "material declaration" if you actually believe that the wikipedia description contradicts what was presented in the conrell law link. I'm actually unsure if you are genuinely oblivious to this, or if you are just being obtuse

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1623

and here's a description from the federal government itself on the materiality of perjury...

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1748-elements-perjury-materiality

Lying about things like the day of the week, or the sunset is only perjury if that information is material to the outcome of the ongoing legal proceeding. This isn't something that I'm debating, it is literally the federal government's legal definition of perjury. Again, I'm unsure if you genuinely aren't aware of this, or if you were making a joke. In either case I am moderately amused

 

Trumpers aren't stupid, they're conned. Everyone knows that con games don't work on stupid people.

 

Lol...Well, duh. We already know that trump can't open his mouth without a diarrhea of lies farting out, so it's obvious that he can't risk testifying under oath.
And you think that's a virtue, eh? trump certainly inspires coprophagia among his worshippers.

 

Con games work best on greedy, selfish people.

 

You sure? Witnesses claimed Trump was bribing another president until he wasn’t. Witnesses claimed Trump was colluding with Russia until he wasn’t. Witnesses claimed Trump was going to take women’s rights away until he didn’t. Witnesses claimed Trump was going to start WWIII until that didn’t happen either. Witnesses claimed Trump would immediately destroy the economy until he didn’t. Witnesses claimed he was going to put Black people back in virtual chains yet he’s done more for Black people than Obama did.
Witnesses claim Trump is Hitler, but they’re insane.

Sense a pattern?

Yes. Trump is a goof. He can’t control himself for long. He often is completely unpresidential and rude. BUT his policy is actually quite sound and he has helped ALL Americans and that’s nothing to complain about. But Leftists are just angry bitter people and deserve everything they get. Not Liberals exactly, but Leftists. Angry SJW resentful hateful Leftists who sow discord, spread violence and lies to cause chaos. And sadly we have them sprinkled all through our govt. some elected, and some still holding jobs, but ALL bent on destroying the president and in turn, the country....all because they lost and still can’t accept it. And it’s going to be another 4 yrs at this rate. Strap in folks!

 

Tell it to Mike Flynn and George Papadopoulos.

 

Y'all remind me of that "banjo swinger" with your take on justice.

 

My father was like that. So are a lot of hardworking men and women. However, their intent is always noble. It's not that he is really a goof. He is a graduate of the "University of Hard Knocks". When attacked he desires to eliminate the opposition.He can live and work with the opposition while they are civil however. A lot of Americans had fathers like my Dad. WWII veterans, and those that came up through a rough and tumble business experience (in Donald"s case). Not the elitist, know what is best for everyone, types that daily feed at the trough of government.

 

You purposely took the post to literally. They could ask Trump did you say such and such to so and so on this particular date and if Trump said no but so and so said yes or there was a record Trump said it then it's perjury. Very easy to ask someone to specifically remember a hundred things and find one thing they remembered wrong. That's a perjury trap.

 

If you lie under oath, it's perjury...

It's a really simple concept, for people accustomed to the truth...

Here's an easy example... If Trump were asked 'did you personally withhold the aid to Ukraine' and he said 'No', that would be a lie and considered perjury.

Trump wouldn't have to be trapped to commit perjury, merely sworn in and asked a few questions....

 

Mueller and company knew from day 1 there was no Russian conspiracy, they spent two years trying to set up a perjury or obstruction trap. They failed.

 

More like a few hundred questions one of which is bound to be a wrong answer. Perjury trap.

 

THAT was a jaw dropper.