If Trump and his lawyer relied on what Downing passed on from meetings with Team Mueller, using it to shape the written answers to Mueller’s questions, this double-agent legal game may blow up in Trump’s face.

Police and prosecutors are allowed to lie to suspects. They do it all the time, planting fake facts to draw out criminal conduct and establish conspiracies. If they had indeed figured out that Manafort was not being straight with them they could easily frame questions to mislead, offer fake facts, withhold real facts and imply ignorance to flush out Trump.

Keep in mind that Trump is a terrible witness. That’s why he fought testifying before a grand jury and answering only written questions.

It is hard to believe fuck-up Manafort fooled a team of the world's best prosecutors with the full resources of US intelligence. Its highly unlikely they didnt set Paul and Don up. It would be funny if it werent tragic for all of us.

Guess its a team of worlds best lawyers vs. Trump's gut. Should be interesting to see which is smarter. Or in the words to Trump from his last real lawyer 'sorry I cannot help you.'

world's best prosecutors Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is hard to believe fuck-up Manafort fooled a
> team of the world's best prosecutors with the full
> resources of US intelligence. Its highly unlikely
> they didnt set Paul and Don up. It would be funny
> if it werent tragic for all of us.

Interesting theory. But it assumes that Mueller did not know Manafort was lying to them. That is highly doubtful. More likely is that Mueller waited until a moment of his own choosing to bring the hammer down. And remember, Manafort is only a means to an end. Trump is the end.

This will not end well for Manafort. And I wonder how well Trump is sleeping at night.

WRONG

they are allowed to however the lies turn up on court tapes (if they are not taped, they are THROWN OUT and the answers are also thrown out)

when a defendant is pressed by tactics such as lying, 12 hr interrogations, etc - the answers are thrown out of court for being "manipulated" and "extorted"

sometimes police can lie and a defendant will trip themselves up in their own lies, that part is true. however: use of this in court is tricky

lol, Mueller spent his career as a criminal investigator, he’s probably been lied to on a daily basis in that kind of job. the idea that he’s been duped by amateurs like trump or manafort is hilarious.

vwxx6 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WRONG
>
> they are allowed to however the lies turn up on
> court tapes (if they are not taped, they are
> THROWN OUT and the answers are also thrown out)
>
> when a defendant is pressed by tactics such as
> lying, 12 hr interrogations, etc - the answers are
> thrown out of court for being "manipulated" and
> "extorted"
>
> sometimes police can lie and a defendant will trip
> themselves up in their own lies, that part is
> true. however: use of this in court is tricky

Wrong.

Cops can lie all they want. A jury can take a cops lies into account, but no case gets thrown out because a cop lied to a suspected perp.

And here is the best part. If you look at SCOTUS decisions on this topic, they are all written by the conservative judges, with the liberal justices in dissent.

Conservatives did this.

Mueller had Flynn in the White House spying for two months wearing a wire. Even Trump said "I don't want to answer Mueller's questions because he might trap me." Mueller also caught Manafort trying to be sneaky with the WhatsitApp.

Mueller rips up the plea bargain because Manafort is lying right after Trump submits his responses? Come on, the timing says Mueller knew Trump would lie based on Manaforts communications.

vwxx6 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WRONG
>
> they are allowed to however the lies turn up on
> court tapes (if they are not taped, they are
> THROWN OUT and the answers are also thrown out)
>
> when a defendant is pressed by tactics such as
> lying, 12 hr interrogations, etc - the answers are
> thrown out of court for being "manipulated" and
> "extorted"
>
> sometimes police can lie and a defendant will trip
> themselves up in their own lies, that part is
> true. however: use of this in court is tricky

Wonder how a court would view a lie by prosecution that was illegally passed along to another party? For example Mueller could have complained that they had no concrete evidence Don Jr. or the President knew about the content of the Russian meeting in advance. Manafort tells POTUS this and POTUS feels safe denying it in answers to Mueller. All the while Mueller DOES have concrete evidence.

This would obviously be the 'perjury trap' Rudy is so fond of. Trump obstructs based on counter intelligence illegally passed to him. Not only perjury but obstruction as well. Prosecution reinforces intent to obstruct by the President.

What court would disallow such a tactic? Feed bogus privileged information to someone they suspected would breach the plea agreement to obstruct justice with another defendant.

Manafort was Mueller's useful idiot. Mueller already knew Manafort was dumb as a box of hammers when Paul tried to perform witness tampering under house arrest and FBI surveillance - Mueller knew Paul and Don would take the bait. Say what you will in defense of the clowns in the WH but Mueller is a patriot not some Deep State operative. Its just not believable.

dumb as a box of hammers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Manafort was Mueller's useful idiot. Mueller
> already knew Manafort was dumb as a box of hammers
> when Paul tried to perform witness tampering under
> house arrest and FBI surveillance - Mueller knew
> Paul and Don would take the bait. Say what you
> will in defense of the clowns in the WH but
> Mueller is a patriot not some Deep State
> operative. Its just not believable.

The fact that Manafort was still lying after being caught by Mueller the first time means could mean two things:

a) Manafort is dumb as a potato.
b) Manafort is trying to hide some serious shit that is worse than simple fraud crimes.

My guess is Manafort knows he could face treason charges and it doesn't matter if he caught lying. The penalty for getting caught lying is far less than treason so might as well take the risk with nothing to lose.

Oil the traitor hanging rope. Will it be televised?

Cool it with the hanging talk. That's how they roll.

Besides, with conspiracy to defraud the US, witness tampering, obstruction of justice, wire fraud, bank fraud, perjury, etc., there will be enough to put them under a federal prison for longer than you and I will be around. I would consider that to be a satisfactory outcome.

Mueller played Donnie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This would obviously be the 'perjury trap' Rudy is

There’s no such thing as a ‘perjury trap’.

You are either “lying”, or, “telling the truth”.

Imagine trying to defend yourself with that ridiculous term in front of your boss or wife?

A perjury trap is where a lawyer questions a witness over a prolonged period of time by asking the same question over and over again in slightly different ways, expecting the witness to give a mistaken answer. The idea is to physically wear down the witness. What is being done to Trump, et al, is not that. But Rudy G., etc., complaining about it satisfies Trump's worshipers, who don't know any better.

Hope that clears it up.

Cuckoo Rudy’s World of Nonsense Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mueller played Donnie Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > This would obviously be the 'perjury trap' Rudy
> is
>
> There’s no such thing as a ‘perjury trap’.
>
>
> You are either “lying”, or, “telling the
> truth”.
>
> Imagine trying to defend yourself with that
> ridiculous term in front of your boss or wife?

Wife: Are you fucking the baby sitter?
Husband: No

Wife: I have pictures and video!
Husband: Ok, yes - Im so sorry.

Wife: I dont have video or pictures - I hate you.
Husband: Perjury Trap! How dare you!






.

Perjury trap Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A perjury trap is where a lawyer questions a
> witness over a prolonged period of time by asking
> the same question over and over again in slightly
> different ways, expecting the witness to give a
> mistaken answer. The idea is to physically wear
> down the witness. What is being done to Trump, et
> al, is not that. But Rudy G., etc., complaining
> about it satisfies Trump's worshipers, who don't
> know any better.
>
> Hope that clears it up.

nope. Ever been deposed? I have. Thats what they do. Ask questions for hours. Often the same question dozens of different ways. If you are telling the truth its actually kind of fun to watch them try. I suppose if you werent too good at language or logic it would be effective.

Im good at both so I enjoy it. My side has never lost when I am deposed. Tell the truth and make them work for every single thing.

Cuckoo Rudy’s World of Nonsense Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mueller played Donnie Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > This would obviously be the 'perjury trap' Rudy
> is
>
> There’s no such thing as a ‘perjury trap’.
>
>
> You are either “lying”, or, “telling the
> truth”.
>
> Imagine trying to defend yourself with that
> ridiculous term in front of your boss or wife?

They think Bill "depends on what the definition of 'is' is" Clinton got caught in 'perjury trap'. Clinton was doing his best to lie without being caught. He got caught. How is that a 'perjury trap'?
All the shit they said they had on the Clintons with "White Water" didn't pan out...But they got him for lying about an affair under oath.

So we will have to see what they really have on Donald.

Perjury Trap! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cuckoo Rudy’s World of Nonsense Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Mueller played Donnie Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > This would obviously be the 'perjury trap'
> Rudy
> > is
> >
> > There’s no such thing as a ‘perjury trap’.
>
> >
> >
> > You are either “lying”, or, “telling the
> > truth”.
> >
> > Imagine trying to defend yourself with that
> > ridiculous term in front of your boss or wife?
>
> Wife: Are you fucking the baby sitter?
> Husband: No
>
> Wife: I have pictures and video!
> Husband: Ok, yes - Im so sorry.
>
> Wife: I dont have video or pictures - I hate you.
> Husband: Perjury Trap! How dare you!

That is precisely what is not a perjury trap. It may be unfair and unethical, although I suspect if a cop did something like that to Tyrone in relation to a car jacking, there are many here who would applaud.

People really should not discuss topics about which they are clueless.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> .

Perjury trap Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Perjury Trap! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Cuckoo Rudy’s World of Nonsense Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Mueller played Donnie Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > This would obviously be the 'perjury trap'
> > Rudy
> > > is
> > >
> > > There’s no such thing as a ‘perjury
> trap’.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > You are either “lying”, or, “telling
> the
> > > truth”.
> > >
> > > Imagine trying to defend yourself with that
> > > ridiculous term in front of your boss or
> wife?
> >
> > Wife: Are you fucking the baby sitter?
> > Husband: No
> >
> > Wife: I have pictures and video!
> > Husband: Ok, yes - Im so sorry.
> >
> > Wife: I dont have video or pictures - I hate
> you.
> > Husband: Perjury Trap! How dare you!
>
> That is precisely what is not a perjury trap. It
> may be unfair and unethical, although I suspect if
> a cop did something like that to Tyrone in
> relation to a car jacking, there are many here who
> would applaud.
>
> People really should not discuss topics about
> which they are clueless.

A perjury trap is created when the government calls a witness before the grand jury for the primary purpose of obtaining testimony from him in order to prosecute him later for perjury. When testimony is elicited before a grand jury that is attempting to obtain useful information in furtherance of its investigation, or conducting a legitimate investigation into crimes which had in fact taken place within its jurisdiction, the perjury trap doctrine is, by definition, inapplicable. [United States v. Chen, 933 F.2d 793 (9th Cir. Guam 1991)]