Reply With Quote
Well for one, he was the head of the transition team who oversaw everything and said he had no idea about Flynn’s dealings.
Second, why would he need to lawyer up if he wasn’t complicit?
What evidence do you have that Pence was complicit?
Well for one, he was the head of the transition team who oversaw everything and said he had no idea about Flynn’s dealings.
Second, why would he need to lawyer up if he wasn’t complicit?
Oh and let’s not forget. Pence begged Mueller for an interview and Mueller said no. Why would Mueller turn down his request? Hmmm unless he is a target...
Hmm a criminal defense lawyer too
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nyt...awyer.amp.html
wont happen
Being in charge of a transition team doesn't implicate him in any way. It could make him a person of interest, but it doesn't create instant su ion of guilt.
The second is circular reasoning. If you're a person of interest, especially at that level, you should have independent counsel. Having independent counsel doesn't make him a person of interest.
It will.
And he requested a sit down with Mueller. And was told no. Pretty much the entire White House including John Kelly has been interviewed by Mueller. Except Trump and Pence.
It will easier for Republicans to rally conservative voters by drumming up the "extremist Dems" taglines than by running a new candidate.
Most conservatives didn't vote for Trump because they liked him, they voted for him because they were more worried about liberals. Imagine any conservative who's scared to death of liberals in power, and then imagine if that person think Democrats might be able to impeach the President.
That's not to say they shouldn't impeach him if they find wrongdoing. I just don't think GOP cooperation is assured. Trump won't win re-election, but the GOP will lose a lot of Trump voters if they oust him before 2020. Instead, they'll use the threat of powerful Democrats to rally voters in House and Senate races.
Hyperbole is typically a sign of a weak point. (Pavlov and Philo scurry to copy this for later use against me)
Well he wouldn't hire a tax attorney during a criminal investigation.
Lawyers aren't only for the guilty.
You said it could make him a person of interest regarding the transition team. If that’s the case then Mueller would want to talk to him. Instead he refused Pence’s request to talk.
Volunteering to be interviewed should not indicate guilt. The bolded text is clear justification as to why Pence would hire an attorney. They aren't being questioned by the high school principal.
It strains credibility to think the GOP caucus will turn on Trump, but it's not impossible. Pence would still be there.
The hypothesis GOP will throw both Trump and Pence overboard and propel Nancy Pelosi to the White House, however, is coo-coo.
Giving the White House to the opposition wouldn't be politically survivable for anyone who voted to do it.
Most likely because he's not ready to go to that level because the evidence doesn't support it. It's not a small thing to interview the vice president of the US regarding criminal matters. You don't get there on step 1. Surely Philo or someone more versed in jurisprudence can provide a more solid answer (anyone is more versed than me I am sure).
djohn: nonstop wishcasting
He is on tape - on the record -
giving two accounts of Flynn - and one of those accounts is a lie.
So - he will have to make a choice;
Did he know about Flynn discussing sanctions with the Russians?
He has given conflicting accounts.
Once he was told about Flynn being possibly compromised - what did he do?
Flynn stayed on as NSA chief for 18 days after Trump team knew (Sally Yates - told them Flynn was lying and that the Russians KNEW he was lying and could compromise him)
Flynn attended classified briefings and had classified intel briefings alongside Pence - and now there is reporting saying that Flynn was wearing a wire.
So will Pence say he KNEW Flynn was compromised because Yates testified to this -
and that he did NOTHING -
or will he say he was in the dark and then have
Mueller show him proof? (tapes/memos/Pence on tape giving conflicting answers)
Pence has a lot to think about.
The scope of the investigation has to be taken into account. Mueller doesn't have carte blanche legal power to go anywhere he wants with the investigation.
what is the scope of the investigation?
be specific, if you can.
Agree.
Pence is the VP - and he was on the transition team - so that pretty much covers Mueller.
If Mueller has any reason to believe a crime involving Pence has been committed - or that Pence is a witness to any evidence -
so yeah -
Mueller has carte blanche actually! lol
It's whatever Rosenstein deemed to be appropriate. If there's anything to investigate there, it seems to fall in line with what is known he found appropriate.
The Senate has never convicted a President
You're asking me to see if I know, not because you don't. The answer wouldn't change the fact of what I said earlier.
You don't understand "carte blanche" obviously. Mueller can't just call Pence in for no reason to interview him. He cannot make special exceptions to interview people based on their requests.
This is past tense. It's set. It's not dynamic.
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)
Posting Permissions
