"Imagine if a right-wing version of Robert Mueller, backed by a properly pro-Trump legal team, had sent former President Barack Obama the same sort of questions that Mueller allegedly delivered this week to President Trump.
The special counsel might dress them up in legalese, innuendo, and with perjury-trap IEDs, thereby casting suspicion with the mere nature of the questions.If so, the interrogatories might run like the following—
President Obama:
- What did you mean when you were heard, by accident, on a hot mic, providing the following assurances to outgoing Russian Prime Minister Medvedev: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space . . . This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility”?
- Did you and the Russian government have any private agreements to readjust Russian-American relations during your own 2012 reelection campaign? Were there other such discussions similar to your comments to Prime Minister Medvedev? If so, do you believe such Russian collusion had any influence on the outcome of the 2012 election?
- During the email controversies over the illegal use of a private email account and server by your secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, you stated publicly that you first became aware of her improper use of a private server through press accounts. Yet records show that you yourself communicated with Secretary Clinton over her unauthorized email account. How do you reconcile your public statements with your private actions?
- Did you ever at any time improperly transmit classified information over Secretary of State Clinton’s email server under a pseudonymous email account? Do you feel that you violated federal law by communicating with your secretary of state over an unsecured email server?
MUCH MORE, READ ALL!
*****
The point is not to embarrass President Obama, but to demonstrate that any president, past or present, could be forced to answer questions to a special prosecutor, both concerning his original mandate but also far beyond it, including matters of his own personal and business past.
His answers could then be used to collate both with public or even surveilled presidential statements to find evidence of inconsistency, false testimony, obstruction of justice, or collusion with a foreign government.
Give a special counsel the man—including Barack Obama—and his team of partisan investigators could find the necessary crime to charge him.
No comments:
Post a Comment