In my opinion, Trump will not testify before the Committee.

[kentuck]

Just as he did with Mueller, he will blow hot air about how he can't wait to expose the "sham" Committee, that is as far as he will go. In the end, just like with Mueller, he will say that his lawyers will not let him testify. But, he really, really wants to.

He will likely fake some sort of negotiation with the Committee. Such as, none of it is to be made public. It will be virtual and he will have his lawyers with him. And so forth..

But, in the end, he is too chicken shit to tell the truth to the Committee or the American people. Just as Raskin said, he is a "snowflake".

[Bettie]

1. You forgot one stipulation that will be in there

he won't be under oath....because all he does is lie and swearing he won't is a lie right there.

[Irish_Dem]

2. If I were a betting person, that is the bet I would make.

Trump will be a no show.

[emulatorloo]

3. He is extremely scared of Nancy Pelosi and Liz Cheney. He has good reason to be.

[C_U_L8R]

4. Ordinary citizen Trump can't weasel his way out

Like ' President' Trump did with Mueller.

[Scrivener7]

16. If we lose in November he'll have no problem doing so.

[Auggie]

21. Yep. Bet supporters are doubling-down efforts to flip the House.

[Chainfire]

17. Donald Trump is not an "ordinary citizen." An ordinary citizen would be in jail.

Trump is, in effect, a "super citizen," like it or not that is the practical reality.

[Lovie777]

5. He's too chicken to testify .....

I would think a subpoena would suffice for "under oath".

[Emile]

6. He is a traitorous COWARD! Dems need to pound that 24 7.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

7. Watch out where the Ruskies go

And don't you eat that orange snow

[Johnny2X2X]

8. Bait him

Dems need an organized campaign of calling him chickenshit for not being willing to testify. He can be baited.

[KS Toronado]

33. Would a subpoena like this bait him?

Dear......we would like to talk to you about how the election was stolen from you which enraged so many
patriotic citizens on Jan 6th. Please bring all your evidence of "Election Fraud" so this committee can
get to the bottom of this and ensure the 2024 election is not stolen from you.

[gab13by13]

9. The J6 committee had Trump by the balls.

This per Professor Raskin, last night. I don't believe the committee expected Trump to show. Raskin said we can call him a snowflake.

The big reason for the subpoena was because the final report of the committee was going to make assertions about Trump and then tell Trump if he disagrees to just show up under oath and refute what the committee asserts. In other words, the committee was going to treat Trump's no show just like his claiming the 5th and use his failure to show against him since the J6 committee is civil not criminal.

Trump must have a sharp lawyer now. He is considering showing up for the subpoena if it broadcast live. IMO, a brilliant move by Trump.

No way DOJ would want that scenario. I think that Trump just trumped the committee.

Just my take.

[kentuck]

11. No way.

Under oath, answering the questions that are asked. Not permitted to run off at the mouth. He cannot tell the truth.

[Pobeka]

23. And, start the questioning this quote from TFG:

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-quote-about-fifth-amendment-resurfaces-allies-use-it-jan-6-panel-1660741

"You see the mob takes the Fifth," he said during one rally in Iowa. "If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?"

[Walleye]

24. Hell he won't even give interviews to journalists that are going to ask real questions

[MineralMan]

44. So now you're cheering Trump on?

"IMO, a brilliant move by Trump."

Whose side are you on?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

10. Title sells OP as news but it's only speculation and title should be clear on that. . . nt

[kentuck]

12. Can we apply your rule to all posts in GD?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

13. I think it would be a good idea, but I don't see much prevalence of the issue at this time. . .nt

[marble falls]

15. For what it's worth, I think GD is a proper place for this.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

39. I agree. Opinions are well suited for GD. Perhaps you missed the OP edit that added "opinion". nt

[chriscan64]

25. Unless I am missing an edit history, the title starts with "In my opinion"

I wish there were more posts like this, just one's experiences or thoughts on a subject. It is fine that DU is a consolidated repository of links to relevant articles and web content. Me personally, I like to know the poster's thoughts on what they just read or in general. Keep doing what you're doing.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

38. You are missing the edit history. Originally it simply stated something as if it were a fact. . . nt

[chriscan64]

41. Okay, I stand corrected.

I will be on the lookout for that.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

40. How to get an OP edit history (doesn't always have the red lettering)

Click on the number of people recommending the OP which gives you the recommenders user names, but also an edit history at the top.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

43. Agreed. kentuck posts great opinions and should keep doing so.

It is interesting to read people's speculations, guesses, hypotheses, brainstorms, etc.

Vanity OPs, however, can be noxious, like the ones that go "THIS!!" and include a link to another OP.

Or "Just so you know" and post as text "Trump is fucked. That is all."

Paraphrasing them of course, but they express mindless blurts and just create clutter.

[ProfessorGAC]

35. GD Is Not LBN

There are opinions offered here in GD, constantly.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

37. Read my post. Opinions in GD is not the problem I was addressing

Opinions are very desirable in GD.

But it is not a big deal, and kentuck was gracious and edited the OP title from the original.

[ProfessorGAC]

42. Aha!

I saw it the 1st time, post edit.
All good!

[marble falls]

14. I think he'll glom the chance to get national press and the opportunity to try to co-opt the moment.

[jonstl08]

18. Only if it is a GOP run

If the GOP wins control of the house I predict by the end of next January he will go before a Jim Jordan run committee and spout all his lies about everything. Will present nothing new. His narcissitic personality will require it. BTW will not be under oath either.

[agingdem]

19. Trump will make two demands

live in front of the full committee and not under oath..and when the committee says sorry asshole but you don't get to make the rules, he'll play the victim...

[fightforfreedom]

20. Trump would take the 5th just like he did in his civil case.

If he doesn't show the committee could hold him in contempt like they did with Bannon. Would Garland prosecute him for contempt? I don't know. Stay tuned.

[kentuck]

29. I don't think they would hold him in contempt...

It would slow down the DOJ investigation and not accomplish a lot legally.

If he wants to answer questions, let him volunteer to come in. If he wants to take the Fifth, the American people can see it.

[BlackSkimmer]

22. I agree. nt

[themaguffin]

26. Not really a hot take, unless truly forced, there's no way he would do it.

[GreenWave]

27. He loves breaking rules/laws more than attention whoring.

But I smell a chicken!

[chriscan64]

28. I don't think he will appear, even if the commission is renewed in January and the subpoena extended

He won't put himself in an environment where he is not in control. He would much rather criticize the process from the outside on his own terms. The committee would have to take the extraordinary step of indicting him for contempt and physically compelling him to be there. Otherwise, I don't think he would have any part of it despite the opportunity to tell them off to their faces.

[Wounded Bear]

30. If he does, I imagine he'll go full Colonel Jessup...

So, yeah, his lawyers will tell him not to. And we'll have more ads of the "he wouldn't testify/chickened out" variety.

[Vinca]

31. I wouldn't be surprised if he demanded a primetime live interview. He can't resist an audience.

[niyad]

32. Stroke out already, you F'n, murdering, orange TRAITOR**.

[Mr. Ected]

34. Trump does all his testifying on social media and at his rallies

The media reports his statements as if they were official and binding on him legally.

He would never step into a courtroom or the halls of Congress to testify to the same things under oath.

People don't understand that a person's words have no bearing if they're not uttered under oath (although a perjury charge is probably among the crimes that every one of these scoundrels could still get away with).

[bluestarone]

36. Hell, he CAN'T take the 5th. because

HE stated whoever takes the 5th. are GUILTY!! Wouldn't that be beautiful in a ad for the 2024 election!!