There is no clarification required. I don’t know your education level but what part of “A ridiculous letter clearly done for political rather than legal purposes" is confusing to you?
What lawyer would put their name on this? Trump puts lawyers in a position of making ridiculous arguments all the time.
This one looks like it was cobbled together on a moments notice. Is there an actual legal argument in there somewhere?
If an actual complaint is filed this law firm better come up with a better argument. Else they could suffer a reprimand from the court.
If this were to go to court, then there would be the ability to develop evidence. That means CNN would be able to subpoena documents and testimony to show that their reporting was true correct?
Hey, if Trump is the one suing - could he claim Executive Privilege to not testify?
Ah wait, it would be a civil suit and the SCOTUS has already ruled that Presidents can be required to testify if they are a direct party based on the Clinton case. And since he would be the one suing he’d be a direct party.
Yep. A fact that Mueller looked into, didn’t he? And for numerous reasons concluded nothing illegal there.
IMO, the fact that the Russians would have to go through such a contorted process to meet with Don Junior is proof enough there was no system of communication set up the way some (Steele) liked to say. Why would that have met through that guy in Britain?
I could envisage some very interesting questions that could be put to D Trump under oath. Do you think that D Trump would have read QB VII by Leon Uris?