On perjury traps: You can listen to a former federal prosecutor with over 20 years experience *or* Journalists with liberal arts degrees who bleat “just tell the truth!” in unison. Her is the empirical evidence in the cases of General Michael Flynn and George Papadopoulos that challenges the statements that there are no perjury traps. This is why the President should beware any ‘interview’ with the Mueller team. Here are the arguments that answers that question fully.
As Written and Reported By Andrew C. McCarthy for the National Review:
And it’s a legitimate reason for President Trump to decline to be interviewed.
Studies will someday be done on the deleterious effect Donald Trump has had on the brains of people who loathe him. It drives them to say things that are as palpably foolish as some of the president’s own doozies. This week’s winner: There is no such thing as a “perjury trap.”
Because some of the people making this nonsensical claim are very smart, let’s stipulate that the heated moment we find ourselves in is driven by politics, not law or logic.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller wants to interview President Trump. President Trump’s legal team is taking the public position that, although the president wants bigly to answer Mueller’s questions, the lawyers are discouraging this because it could be a “perjury trap.” That is, Mueller’s prosecutors could be plotting to trip the president up, to dazzle him into saying something inaccurate that could be grist for a false-statements prosecution.
Of course, this drives Trump antagonists to distraction. They point out that the president says many things that are not just inaccurate but knowingly false. In maintaining that there are no perjury traps, what they are really arguing is that Trump does not need to be “trapped” into perjury; that his lawyers’ claims about Mueller’s treacherousness are a smokescreen to hide their real worry: viz., that Trump will lie in the interview because that is……
KEEP READING THERE IS MORE ON THIS STORY AT THE LINK BELOW: