so the entire subpoena battle, even if the mueller team won it would be a hollow exercise. it might look like a public relations victory because everyone would look at the president and say, it s unconscionable he is invoking a fifth amendment privilege. bob mueller is not playing for publish i lick relations victories. he is playing for ultimate court hearings or impeachment hearings. i want to ask you about matt whitaker. you have been following him. he was up here in new york this week and he gave a speech in which he talked about a man involved in the chelsea bomber and matthew whitaker invoking in a speech that there were co-conspirators. pacific, there western in that days. your reaction to him giving what were basic facts wrong in a speech to his colleagues here in new york? you know, david, if you have to undertake to head up the department of justice, you should at least be right on your facts with respect to some of
if the president were to answer, yes, well, now he has admitted potentially to obstruction of justice. if the president answers no, he has probably earned himself a false statements charge. sos it is pretty transparent that the reason that the president s defence team is not letting him answer questions about obstruction of justice is because he would be boxed in, he would incriminate himself. it has nothing to do with an exercise of any legitimate executive privilege. in that interview, rudy guiliani said if they were reasonable, they would answer them from robert mueller. he said robert mueller s team, they re very circumspect. let s talk about the subpoena battle that might be shaping up. rudy guiliani expressing confidence if robert mueller were to threaten that, president trump wouldn t comply and they would win that victory
presumably in the supreme court eventually. give us the read of where that process would take us if we were to see the back and forth of a subpoena. sure. on the law, mr. guiliani is wrong. i sa i that, because the supreme court twice has taken up issues in the nixon case and clinton v. jones, both times the supreme court has come down in favor of saying, you know what, no president is above the law. i think if they were to fight a subpoena battle trying to acquire the president s testimony before the grand jury via a subpoena, the supreme court would side with the prosecutors. again, what mr. guiliani says and means are two different things. when he says the president wouldn t cooperate and that he believes that they would win the subpoena battle. what i think we should all hear is that if the president was subpoenaed, he would invoke his fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
Detailed text transcripts for TV channel - MSNBC - 20181122:13:24:15 archive.org - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from archive.org Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
d.c. have noticed a few sealed cases from, that involved the special counsel s office. one of them intriguingly went today to the court of appeals. so it is perceived that there is a holding in the district court, and proceeded to the court of appea appeals, and it must be involve some sort of subpoena battle, because that is going to make it sealed under the rules, because it is grand jury material. is it trump? i tend not to think so, because as kristen says, this is first playing out at the level of the questions which as expected were fairly useless in their responses. of course mueller will need more and there is no substitute for eye-to-eye spontaneous questions. and the parry back from team trump and giuliani is that it is impossible for president to obstruct justice and so therefore we don t have to answer. that is the position that i don t think that it will h hold up if it goes to court, and