Sat Jan 12, 2019, 06:29 PM

Yosemito (648 posts)

Trump personally took possession of interpreter notes after meeting Putin

WaPo.exclusive:
Mr. Trump swore his interpreter to secrecy and went as far as personally taking possession of his notes, because he had nothing to hide.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-has-concealed-details-of-his-face-to-face-encounters-with-putin-from-senior-officials-in-administration/2019/01/12/65f6686c-1434-11e9-b6ad-9cfd62dbb0a8_story.html

Please post on LBN someone.

19 replies, 2677 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

19 replies	Author	Time	Post
Trump personally took possession of interpreter notes after meeting Putin (Original post)	Yosemito	Jan 2019	OP
It's been posted here:	joshcryer	Jan 2019	#1
Its the same link and you have to pay $1.00 to read the article	Perseus	Jan 2019	#8
Send him a subpoena	rufus dog	Jan 2019	#2
They won't get the original notes. They'll get some made up notes.	ancianita	Jan 2019	#5
exactly.	orangecrush	Jan 2019	#6
Interview the interpreter too	rufus dog	Jan 2019	#9
Taking bets: Interpreter prolly has a really good memory. Oh, "sworn to secrecy".	UTUSN	Jan 2019	#3
Would a subpoena	Brawndo	Jan 2019	#4
Probably not, for two reasons	rpannier	Jan 2019	#10
Frustrating	Brawndo	Jan 2019	#12
I don't think exevutive privilege applies.	Adrahil	Jan 2019	#14
I hope it wouldn't apply	Brawndo	Jan 2019	#15
May also have a previously undetected, undisclosed "heart condition",	Totally Tunsie	Jan 2019	#16
There is a Russian spy in the oval office.	NurseJackie	Jan 2019	#7
Truth!	orangecrush	Jan 2019	#11
Treasonous Trump Hides Details Of Putin Meetings From His Own Government	Gothmog	Jan 2019	#13
Really bad optics for Trump. Anyone with even partially functional brain would understand this.	Sapient Donkey	Jan 2019	#17
In re the interpreter releasing his memorized notes --- I think it can happen	erronis	Jan 2019	#18
This is amusing	Gothmog	Jan 2019	#19

Response to Yosemito (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 06:32 PM

joshcryer (62,167 posts)

1. It's been posted here:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142242719

Reply to this post

Response to joshcryer (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:04 PM

Perseus (4,341 posts)

8. Its the same link and you have to pay $1.00 to read the article

Thank you

Reply to this post

Response to Yosemito (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 06:53 PM

rufus dog (8,419 posts)

2. Send him a subpoena

DC courts better being hiring.

Reply to this post

Response to rufus dog (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 08:23 PM

ancianita (30,177 posts)

5. They won't get the original notes. They'll get some made up notes.

Reply to this post

Response to ancianita (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:02 PM

orangecrush (16,113 posts)

6. exactly.

Reply to this post

Response to ancianita (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:09 PM

rufus dog (8,419 posts)

9. Interview the interpreter too

Yes, just another group of lies to add to the pile, but treat the MFer like shit.

Reply to this post

Response to Yosemito (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 06:57 PM

UTUSN (66,883 posts)

3. Taking bets: Interpreter prolly has a really good memory. Oh, "sworn to secrecy".

Reply to this post

Response to UTUSN (Reply #3)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 07:09 PM

Brawndo (535 posts)

4. Would a subpoena

to testify before the House override a claim of being a witness to a moment of executive privilege? I'd love a televised public hearing with the interpreter.

Reply to this post

Response to Brawndo (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:09 PM

rpannier (23,927 posts)

10. Probably not, for two reasons

1. The courts usually side with the executive on secrecy issues
2. It's the AG's office that would have to enforce any congressional order if the interpreter refused to answer any questions

Reply to this post

Response to rpannier (Reply #10)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:22 PM

Brawndo (535 posts)

12. Frustrating

Thanks for the answer though. They are our only chance of finding out what was discussed and I worry about that interpreter's longevity given the organised crime nature of this maladministration.

Reply to this post

Response to Brawndo (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:26 PM

Adrahil (13,340 posts)

14. I don't think exevutive privilege applies.

He was speaking to representatives of a hostile foreign power, not members of the executive branch.

Reply to this post

Response to Adrahil (Reply #14)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:28 PM

Brawndo (535 posts)

15. I hope it wouldn't apply

That testimony could go a long way towards being the final nail in tRumps coffin.

Reply to this post

Response to UTUSN (Reply #3)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:34 PM

Totally Tunsie (10,885 posts)

16. May also have a previously undetected, undisclosed "heart condition",

and you know how unpredictable those things can be...

Reply to this post

Response to Yosemito (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:02 PM

NurseJackie (42,862 posts)

7. There is a Russian spy in the oval office.

Reply to this post

Response to NurseJackie (Reply #7)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:19 PM

orangecrush (16,113 posts)

11. Truth!

Reply to this post

Response to Yosemito (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:25 PM

Gothmog (124,501 posts)

13. Treasonous Trump Hides Details Of Putin Meetings From His Own Government

Link to tweet

Reply to this post

Response to Yosemito (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:38 PM

Sapient Donkey (1,568 posts)

17. Really bad optics for Trump. Anyone with even partially functional brain would understand this.

Even Trump has to know how bad this would look. Despite this fact, he deemed the horrible optics of seizing these notes would be better than if they if they somehow became known. That really has to make someone wonder what the hell was said.

Reply to this post

Response to Yosemito (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:45 PM

erronis (12,114 posts)

18. In re the interpreter releasing his memorized notes --- I think it can happen

and I think these notes would be treated as public record, even tho executive privilege may be argued.

Remember the Pentagon Papers.

Instant hero. Just have protection for a while.

Reply to this post

Response to Yosemito (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 10:34 PM

Gothmog (124,501 posts)

19. This is amusing

Link to tweet

?s=20

Reply to this post

General Discussion (Forum)