WashPo: McGahn does not believe he implicated Trump in any wrong doing.

[triron]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mcgahn-does-not-believe-he-implicated-trump-in-wrongdoing-in-special-counsel-interviews-his-attorney-tells-presidents-legal-team/2018/08/20/37209d28-a49f-11e8-a656-943eefab5daf_story.html?noredirect=on

What is going on?

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

1. For 30 hours?

What were they discussing then? Cold case files?

[roamer65]

2. Something's fishy.

I wonder if McGahn lied to Mueller.

[Adrahil]

3. Most likely, that's a bit of a cover story.

He's probably giving lip service to the idea that the President cannot obstruct justice.

[RockRaven]

4. McGahn is a) as sleazy as Trump and b) involved in everything Trump has done since election

so to implicate Trump would be to implicate himself as a co-conspirator. Of course he thinks he hasn't implicated Trump -- because doing so would be an admission of his own wrong-doing, which he would never want to do.

But he might be wrong, especially if he's as ignorant of constitutional/federal law as he's seemed to be at several points in this sad affair.

[Calista241]

5. McGahn is a partisan. His mission is to remake the courts, and shift them to the right.

He'll avoid saying anything in furtherance of that goal.

[enough]

6. McGahn is a long time GOP political operative. At this point he has one basic task,

getting judges and justices into position. He’s not going to jeopardize his relationship with Trump.

[triron]

7. Here's a recent CNN story that doen't really jive.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/20/politics/trump-mcgahn-30-hours/index.html

[triron]

8. He may have made ample use of pleading the 5th?

[dawg day]

9. It was just reported that his attorney was worried that he was being set up as the fall guy.

That would certainly indicate that the attorney at least was thinking there was some illegality.

I think probably McGahn-- who is still working at the White House, after all-- just said he'd said nothing implicating Trump to pacify "King Kong."

[triron]

10. Plausible. Not sure it's likely McGahn would deceive Trump. I'm open to debate on this.

Then again maybe he just wants to keep his job.

[pnwmom]

13. Why believe anything reported by someone with a source who is " a person

knowledgeable about the discussions"?

Unless it is McGahn or his lawyer, I see no reason to believe that.

[maxrandb]

11. One of the first things that needs to happen when sane

people take back our country is the absolute destruction of the Federalist Society.

[pnwmom]

12. "according to people knowledgeable about the discussions" means almost anyone

on Trump's team could have claimed to know what McGahn told Trump's lawyers. It's all spin.

[herding cats]

14. The wording leaves him an out with Trump.

When in actuality he doesn't know what dots he may have connected for Mueller in regards to other people's testimony.

If he went in and told the truth as he knew it to Mueller's teams questions, the odds are he did damage to those being investigated.

[triron]

15. knr